HomeMy WebLinkAboutHeritage Preservation - 01/26/2026Meeting Agenda
Eden Prairie Heritage Preservation Commission
7 p.m. Tuesday, January 26, 2026
Heritage Rooms City Hall
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
ATTENDEES
Commission Members: Steve Schumacher (Chair); Paul Thorp (Vice-Chair); Rod Fisher; George
Maxwell; Robert Bowes; Andy Ludowese; Catherine Lau, Prima Sisinni, Lisa Rude
Student Members: Annika Rice, Fiona Rohde, Jaya Agrawal, Kadie Crider, Nico Allen,
Saloni Siddavatam, Tatum Hesby
City Staff: Beth Novak-Krebs, Staff Liaison, Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
I. Call the Meeting to Order
II. Reading of Land Acknowledgement Statement
III. Approval of Agenda
IV. Minutes
A. Heritage Preservation Commission meeting held December 15, 2025
V. New Business
A. Update on the presentation of the Work Plan to Council
VI. Old Business
A. Update on Book project
B. Update on Birch Hall project
VII. Reports
A. Reports of Subcommittees
B. Reports of Commission Staff
C. Reports of Students
Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting Agenda
January 26, 2026
D. Reports of Historical Society
VIII. FYI Items
IX. Next Meeting - February 23, 2026
X. Adjourn
Unapproved Minutes
Eden Prairie Heritage Preservation Commission Meeting
7 p.m. Tuesday, December 15, 2025
City Center Heritage Rooms
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
ATTENDEES
Commission Members: Steve Schumacher (Chair); Paul Thorp (Vice-Chair); Rod Fisher; George
Maxwell; Robert Bowes; Andy Ludowese; Catherine Lau, Prima Sisinni, Lisa Rude
Student Members: Annika Rice, Fiona Rohde, Jaya Agrawal, Kadie Crider, Nico Allen, Saloni
Siddavatam, Tatum Hesby
City Staff: Beth Novak-Krebs, Staff Liaison; Kristin Harley, Recording Secretary
MEETING AGENDA
I. Call the Meeting to Order
Chair Schumacher called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commission member Thorp
and student representatives Crider, Siddavatam, and Hasby were absent. Paul Maravelas,
Zack Mohlis, Mayor Ron Case, and Historical Society President Kathie Case joined the
meeting.
II. READING OF LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATEMENT
Rohde read the land acknowledgement statement.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Sisinni moved, seconded by Rude, to approve the agenda. Motion
carried 7-0.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION: Fisher moved, seconded by Sisinni to approve the minutes of the
November 17, 2025 meeting. Motion carried 7-0.
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. DISCUSS RESEARCH REPORT AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR BOOK
Maravelas stated he and Mohlis were pleased to submit the report. He stated so
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
December 15, 2025
Page 2
far they were not able to find the cultural and/or religious significance of Miller
Spring to the Dakota, and they wished to find more evidence. Fisher suggested
perhaps it did not figure largely in the culture, which Maravelas stated was
possible. Mohlis stated Cold Water Spring, for example, had a lot of significance,
as did other springs in the area, and of course any spring near a village, and this
information could be used for comparison, but no oral history had been found so
far on Miller Spring. The Dakota certainly knew about it, and it figured in
European settler history, of course, but so far they had found no documentation.
[Maxwell arrived at 7:07 p.m.]
Maravelas stated he had added to the bibliography, but the latest report was the
same as the one distributed in November. Schumacher asked how much of the
research was completed. Maravelas replied the question of what percentage of
the research was completed was a difficult one, but he thought they had at least
touched on all main themes and had a good foundation for the book. It was to
his mind better to wait and have a tangible deliverable and then solicit feedback
from local indigenous communities. Mohlis stated he was in conversation with
staff at SMSC regarding the goal of being “socialized,” i.e., in an open dialogue.
He stated they were getting closer to a decision on official involvement, sharing
sources and ideas. The tribe had a quarterly magazine giving the history of the
tribe as well as a YouTube channel. One video gave the history of the tribe, and
another provided information on Otherday. So far the communication had been
productive. Mohlis stated there were discussions on possibly including
indigenous voices as contributors during the writing phase. He had a list of
people would be good resources for an informal feedback process. It was
possible to include specific topics such as botany, Big Island, Lake Minnetonka.
Drafting chapters would help identify gaps. Discussion followed on the size of the
book.
Maxwell asked if the Thomas Otherday letters already translated were the tip of
an iceberg, and Maravelas replied those had survived because they had been
printed in newspaper. There were Otherday relatives who did not wish to talk
about history; many had gone to Prairie Island. Maxwell asked why these were
chosen to be printed and Maravelas stated no one knew. There could be
information with relatives of his recipients who were in South Dakota.
Schumacher stated he found the work in progress incredibly comprehensive and
thanked the consultants. He remarked the question of how to bring in
indigenous voices was a “chicken and egg” question. Discussion followed on the
inclusion of maps and specific Eden Prairie sites with the text. Mohlis gave The
Street Where You Live as an extreme example, which was a street-by-street
history, or like cultural resource reports, as opposed to topically or thematically.
He stated there would be photographs and maps exploring the city and
especially descriptions of the prairie.
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
December 15, 2025
Page 3
Fisher commended the annotated bibliography and suggested it be made
available online for those readers who wished to go deeper. He agreed with the
inclusion of illustrations and maps. He added there were other great historical
references in the City, mostly in the form of interpretive panels done by the 106
Group, especially in Richard T. Anderson Park, and asked if it was possible to
reference these interpretive panels in the text to encourage readers to visit
them. Maravelas replied Mohlis and he had discussed this idea.
Fisher reiterated the need for the commission with the Historical Society to
decide which stories were and were not included; or this could be left to the
authors. Discussion followed on how the stories could be woven together similar
to the DeCarlos report for the City of Bloomington. Maxwell encouraged the use
of a QR code to promote tourism within the City. Bowes stated the last battle of
the Dakota once had a commemorative sign by the Lion’s Tap, which had been
removed when Highway 169 was reconstructed. Discussion followed on the
number/percentage of photographs and maps in relation to the text.
Sisinni asked what demographic was being targeted, and Mohlis replied this was
a question for the commission. Lau stated the idea was this would be for the
general public as a teaching tool but not having a specific school-level
curriculum. Discussion followed on managing the 150-page limit. Sisinni asked to
hear more about how to consult indigenous feedback, especially where different
tribes disagreed. Mohlis reiterated the history of indigenous people was a major
traumatic diaspora and not a story of one group. There was a perception of
domination by the Ojibwa tribe which the people did work behind the scenes to
surmount by sharing as much information as possible. He and Maravelas would
generate lists of who next to contact. Much of it was figuring out next steps,
being clear with specific and big asks, and being mindful of not speaking for
elders or subject specialists. This was an iterative and respectful process.
Lau stated others had already raised her questions. She had enjoyed reading the
documents, and was excited to see finished product, and commended the
inclusion of botany.
Bowes stated the location of Murphy’s Ferry had probably been determined
based on indigenous use. Mohlis replied this seemed to make sense but they as
yet did not have documentation for it; a comment could be in the book that this
was likely in lieu of evidence. Bowes commended the work so far. Discussion
resumed on the limits of the information based on the page limit. Fisher
suggested North Country: the Making of Minnesota and DeCarlo’s book on Fort
Snelling as models for the finished product. Maravelas replied finding physical
comparables was a good solution.
Mohlis stated there was a lot of indigenous history in the railroad era, not
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
December 15, 2025
Page 4
necessarily pertaining to railroads; it was the same with Murphy’s Ferry, with
indigenous people using that space. Fisher speculated on what steamboat traffic
did to indigenous river traffic.
Rude expressed her concern about the use of narratives by white people
interpreting Dakota practices and asked what the process was to approach these
texts in a balanced way. Mohlis replied this was always an interesting question.
One solution was to look for agreement with other accounts. For example, much
of what Samuel Pond stated was supported by Dakota accounts. Also, outlier
and/or alternative accounts could be mentioned. There would always be
information missing or contradictory, or misperceptions such as explorers or
missionaries mistaking natives out hunting as having moved or fled an area.
Rude asked for and received confirmation the intent was to build on this in a
public history with information built off corroborated evidence. Schumacher
interjected the commission had talked about this difficult tightrope issue for
years and this was one of the biggest challenges the commission had
encountered, especially when some tribal members did not want their stories
told. He reminded everyone of the letter to the editor in Eden Prairie News
criticizing the idea of whites telling these stories.
Maxwell echoed the others’ comments, commending this as a great start. He
asked if the book cover the entire narrative arc of the right of return. Fisher
replied this was not meant to be a comprehensive history, but would include
interesting stories that fit close to Eden Prairie. Maxwell objected and stated
nearby history such as that in Shakopee had to be addressed to avoid
whitewashing. Discussion followed on the possibility of the recipients of
Otherday’s letters filling in some of the gaps.
Kathie Case commended the project and offered her help. She offered to
introduce the consultants to Sheldon Wolfchild, Siever Peterson and Betty Curle
as resources. She added Miller Spring was not the only spring, as there had been
many in Eden Prairie but were not tapped as Miller was. Maravelas and Mohlis
agreed to meet with her. Schumacher asked for and received confirmation the
authors were connected to the Historical Society.
Ludowese asked how the authors would approach religion and ceremonies,
some of which were secret. Mohlis replied this was a great question, and
reiterated finding narratives that agreed. There, of course, would be different
interpretations in religion, so finding agreement was important. One approach
was to emphasize the importance of the ceremony, describing differences in
terms of time and place. He added Wolfchild was more open than others about
sharing such information. She added there had been an exhaustive number of
meetings regarding one sentence on an interpretive panel about dogwood,
birds, pollinators, and sacred medicine to Dakota people, so this process was
iterative and sometimes difficult to navigate. These were questions that would
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
December 15, 2025
Page 5
be answered throughout the drafting process.
Fisher suggested Westerman’s book Native American Inroads as a source to be
cited.
Discussion followed on finding a translator for the Otherday letters.
Schumacher thanked the authors. Novak-Krebs announced unfortunately the
commission did not get the grant from the State Historical Society for
$36,600.00. There had been no feedback, but SHPO staff recommended the
commission members watch the video and apply again. There had been 76
applications. There were also small Legacy grants up to $20,000.00.
B. DISCUSS DRAFT 2025 ANNUAL REPORT AND 2026 WORK PLAN
Novak-Krebs displayed a PowerPoint and stated she had not yet received a date,
but the presentation would be in January or early February, 2026.
MOTION: Maxwell moved, seconded by Bowes to approve the 2026 Work Plan.
MOTION CARRIED 8-0.
VII. REPORTS OF SUBCOMMITTEES
A. NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORY OUTREACH
B. NEW HERITAGE PRESERVATION SITE DESIGNATIONS
C. RENOVATION/MAINTENANCE DEVELOPMENT
D. DOCUMENTATION/HISTORICAL RECORDINGS/OUTREACH
VIII. REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND STAFF
Allen stated the student committee was in a better place for the student project than
last year. He did not anticipate any challenges and had LeBlanc as a contact.
IX. REPORTS OF HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Bowest stated Santa would be at the Cummins Phipps Grill House through December.
The Boy Scouts had sold all the trees.
There would be no meeting this month.
The Prop Shop made over $4,000.00 for the two-day sale.
Sheldon Wolfchild was pursuing a lawsuit against the Mdewakanton Tribe near Lake City
along Lake Pepin.
HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
December 15, 2025
Page 6
X. FYI ITEMS
Fisher recommended Ken Burns’ recent documentary about the American Revolution
which also covered indigenous history.
Lau asked for an update on the bookstore at the Dorenkemper House. Bowes stated the
construction was ongoing, and the store was slated to open in the spring.
XI. NEXT MEETING
The next HPC meeting will be held on Monday, January 26, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. at the
Heritage Rooms, City Hall.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Fisher moved, seconded by Sisinni to adjourn. Motion carried 8-0. The
meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.