As Bob Miller pointed out, the neighborhood associations that are under
contract to implement NRP programs/activities at the local level are not
covered by the state Open Meeting laws. As hard as it may be sometimes, we
must remember that these neighborhood groups are largely volunteer
organizations with members elected in a public election process. Most have
limited paid staff positions that handle daily business. The NRP programs
are defined and agreed to by neighbors taking time to participate in the
many meetings required, and plans must be approved by a public vote within
the neighborhood. Sometimes these programs/votes get contentious, and
arguments ensue. (So what's new? I complain about what the City Council
does on many occasions and if I'm not happy with my elected CC member I work
to get a replacement I feel will do a better job). I suggest that if Mr.
Atherton is dissatisfied with the NRP program in his neighborhood, he work
to get new people elected to the group and get neighbors with similar views
more involved in neighborhood meetings and elections. We all know that
these programs are run and operated by 'those that show up'-- it's the
American way... like it or not. And you are always free to contact your CC
representative to complain about a given issue.
Just remember, for good or bad, these neighborhood volunteers have varied
skill sets, education and experience (just like all of us) and they devote
literally hundreds/thousands of hours of their time trying to make their
neighborhood a better place... many become exhausted and burn out...
turnover can be high, and it is often difficult to maintain the momentum
needed to successfully implement activities in a timely manner. I know the
process can be very frustrating and tedious for many people involved... on
all sides of issues. I'm not taking sides pro or con regarding NRP (every
organization has its unique problems), but they do have pretty elaborate
control mechanisms in place to keep everyone honest, including recommended
methods to keep meetings open and functioning. It's always nice to have a
local news reporter at the regular monthly neighborhood meetings, so that
contentious issues can get a fair hearing. Good luck Mr. Atherton.
Michael Hohmann
13th Ward
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Michael Atherton
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 7:54 AM
> To: Mpls List
> Subject: [Mpls] Why the NRP Sucks, Part 1
>
>
> Do you believe that neighborhood organizations which
> contract with the NRP should be able to exclude
> individuals who disagree with their decisions, even
> though these decisions may affect them financially?
>
> Bob Miller the director of the NRP apparently does
> (see text of letter below).
>
> I have been one of a number of individuals who have
> been opposed to the actions of our neighborhood
> organization (PPERRIA). My wife and I began tape
> recording meeting after I were misquoted in the
> organization's newsletter. We also wanted to be able
> to accurately state the facts as they occurred at meetings.
> I believe that I have the right to do this because PPERRIA
> acts as a surrogate in budget decisions normally made by
> the city council and is thus subject to the open meeting law.
>
> At one meeting PPERRIA's president tried to have me
> physically ejected from the police because I refused to
> stop recording. Bob Miller apparently believes this
> would be perfectly acceptable.
>
> It is time that the legislators reading this list pass laws insuring
> that the NRP and neighborhood organizations handing
> public funds provide individuals with the same rights that
> they would have when dealing with other government agencies.
> It is time to make the NRP and its contractors accountable.
>
> Mike Atherton
> Prospect Park
> Ward 2
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> February 21, 2001
>
> Mr. Michael Atherton
> 156 Orlin Avenue Southeast
> Minneapolis, MN 55414
>
> Dear Mr. Atherton,
>
> Last fall you wrote to me expressing concern about a vote taken
> at a Prospect Park East River Road Improvement Association
> (PPERRIA) meeting. The vote was to limit video and audio
> recordings at PPERRIA's monthly meetings. You state that
> PPERRIA is subject to the state Open Meeting laws (Minnesota
> State Statute Section 471.705).
>
> The statue you have referenced applies to government bodies.
> It does not apply to neighborhood organizations. Although the NRP
> contracts with over 50 neighborhood organizations, all of which
> make it a practice to hold open meetings, these organizations are
> independent bodies operating under their own Articles of
> Incorporation, Bylaws, and state statues governing the operation
> of non-profit corporations. The assertion that PPERRIA or any
> other Minneapolis neighborhood organization is an arm of City
> government is incorrect.
>
> Our records show that this information was previously provided
> to you in a memorandum date April 7, 2000. A copy of this
> memo is enclosed for your convenience.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Robert D. Miller
> Director
>
> cc: Joan Campbell, 2th Ward Councilmember
> Steve Cross, PPERRIA President
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
