Tim Meyer is a Duluth architect and community builder. Reach him at tim.meyer@meyergroupduluth.com
For those wondering why I have not written about the future of the former Lester Park Golf Course lately, trust me, it has not been because the questions stopped coming. I still get asked about it almost daily.
The latest development involves the release of survey results tied to the Lester Park Golf Course Land Use Plan process. About 1,400 responses were submitted earlier this year, but the most noticeable thing about the survey was not what it said — it was who largely did not participate.
The golf community has checked out.
After six years of closure, endless meetings, political maneuvering and uncertainty, many people in Lakeside and Lester Park simply appear exhausted by the process. Frankly, I am not surprised. There was once tremendous energy behind reopening portions of the course and preserving recreation opportunities, but fatigue has clearly settled in.
That matters, because while the survey may have followed a legitimate process, I do not believe the response numbers represent a broad enough cross-section of the community to justify major redevelopment decisions.
During my City Council and legislative primary campaigns, I spent countless hours knocking on doors throughout Duluth’s 1st District. The overwhelming sentiment I heard was not complicated. Residents largely supported affordable housing. They also largely supported bringing golf and recreation back to the property in some form.
Both ideas can coexist.
Duluth faces a severe housing shortage, which makes it difficult for me to understand proposals that focus entirely on conservation or recreation without seriously addressing housing needs. At the same time, returning the entire parcel to untouched conservation land ignores one inconvenient fact: this property has already been developed for decades.
The land has operated as a golf course since 1938. Preliminary soil investigations already show contamination from fertilizer products and golf course maintenance chemicals. This is not pristine wilderness. It is previously disturbed land adjacent to city infrastructure and utilities.
That is why I continue to support a balanced redevelopment model — one that includes housing, recreation, some golf opportunities and a limited amount of commercial development designed to complement businesses in Lakeside and Lester Park, not overwhelm them.
Now comes the latest political wrinkle: a petition drive seeking to place the future of Lester Park Golf Course on a citywide referendum ballot during the next City Council election.
The “Our Park Our Vote” group deserves credit for building an organized grassroots effort. The group reportedly has gathered roughly 1,700 signatures so far and needs about 7,000 to qualify for the ballot.
I support giving voters a say if the referendum honestly presents multiple options, including housing redevelopment, recreation and conservation. That would be a fair and democratic way to finally resolve this issue.
What I do not support are claims that the Sunnarborg redevelopment framework was somehow transferred to the Duluth Economic Development Authority through a “secret vote” or quietly handed to a developer for $1.
That is simply not true.
The transfer process occurred publicly and through official meetings. People may disagree with the outcome, but let us at least stay grounded in facts.
I openly advocated for transferring the land to DEDA because I believed — and still believe — the city needed a structured redevelopment strategy built around what I have described as a 50-30-20 framework: housing, recreation and limited commercial development.
I also consider myself an environmentalist. I strongly support the city’s larger efforts to restore native plants and conservation areas throughout Duluth’s thousands of acres of public land. But Lester Park Golf Course is different because it is already developed property located beside existing city infrastructure.
That distinction matters.
At the same time, another housing opportunity sits stalled while the city argues endlessly about Lester Park.
The former Central High School property remains largely untouched despite its enormous redevelopment potential. Fifty-three acres. Existing infrastructure. Stunning Lake Superior views. Cleared land ready for housing and commercial development.
Instead, it sits vacant under a failed private redevelopment effort that has deteriorated for years.
To me, that site represents one of the clearest and most sustainable housing opportunities in Duluth. I would strongly support the city exploring ways to reclaim the property and move a real development plan forward.
Another interesting moment in this debate came recently when I was approached by the developer behind Hawk Ridge Estates — one of Duluth’s most successful modern residential developments.
The developer explained how a phased approach, low startup costs and mortgage assistance programs helped make that project successful. In other words, there is already a local model for how thoughtful residential development can work in eastern Duluth.
I attempted to organize an educational session so City Council members, planning staff and city leadership could hear directly from someone who has successfully developed housing in the neighborhood before.
A few councilors responded positively. The mayor’s office did not respond at all.
Even more discouraging, I was told by one city official that this was “not the right way” to approach the issue because the formal land-use planning process remains ongoing. I disagree completely. Educating decision-makers is exactly what this process has lacked from the beginning.
That, more than anything, explains why this debate continues to spiral into frustration and mistrust. Public officials should not fear open discussion, competing ideas or expert insight from people who have already succeeded locally.
This should be a moment for more dialogue, not less. More public discussion. More transparency. More willingness to challenge assumptions. Instead, too much of this process has felt defensive, closed-off and unnecessarily political. And after six years, people are tired of it.
