All:
Some recent postings talked about NRP and neighborhood nonprofit
corporations that are the NRP's fiscal agents. All the arguments for
change in the nonprofits push them away from what they are (private
affinity groups using corporate nonprofit form) and toward what they are
not (government) at least right now. Rather than tinkering to make
nonprofits a little bit like "itty-bitty governments" and a bit like a
corporation, maybe we should, as the saying goes, "take the bull by the
tail and face the situation."
Should a formal "neighborhood government" be created? That means
that just as there are city and county governments within state
government (or states under the federal), should there be neighborhood
government under the cities, counties, or state? If so, what are its
powers, duties, and limitations? What is the relationship to city,
county, and state government?
I'm not so sure that "neighborhood government" has a place. It is
"another layer" to start off with. In areas like the Twin Cities we
already have a "Metro" government, counties, and cities. And there are
few obvious bright lines between them. Adding another may just make it
worse.
But maybe there should there be neighborhood government but at the
expense of eliminating one or more of the other layers?
On the other hand, if there should NOT be neighborhood government,
what's the point of trying to push neighborhood nonprofits to being
"government-like" and perhaps combining the most problematical features
of government with the most problematical features of nonprofit
corporate existence.
It's all a thought experiment, but if any others want to think
about it with me, I am interested in your views.
Steve Cross
Prospect Park
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
