Annie you are right. The state DID seize bank
accounts from Board members of People of Phillips to
pay for I believe payroll taxes which should have been
paid to the state but were not. People of Phillips did
not carry Directors and Officers Insurance.
I worked with the MCDA attorneys and NRP attorneys and
Bob Miller worked with Karen Clark to get this
situation resolved and get the ex-POP Board members
funds unfrozen and returned to them. Karen had to
write special legislation that was narrowly focused to
the Phillips situation in order to do it. Thank God
for Karen Clark and her dedication to the Phillips
neighborhood.
It was unclear to me at the time whether the state had
the real authority to actually seize peoples accounts.
There is existing legislation that protects
volunteers from being sued in some capacity. I just
don't believe that legislation applied in this case.
This happened in late 98' so my institutional memory
is a little vague.
I am not trying to make people think there is
absolutely no liability for volunteers on neighborhood
boards. The D & O insurance doesn't cover absolutely
everything. The things that are not covered are
listed on the policy.
There are inherent responsibilities that come with
being a neighborhood board member or a board member of
any other non-profit or for-profit for that matter.
That is why we strongly encourage attendance at the
NRP trainings and that people take these board
positions seriously.
It is also why we have put the State Audit policy in
place. The State Auditors work with NRP and the
neighborhoods to insure all the appropriate documents
are filed with the State, Feds, and Attorney Generals
office to keep them in good standing and away from
fines. We demand certificates of liability insurance
before we fund any neighborhood. It is also why the
NRP negotiated the group rates for D & O insurance and
why we make sure our neighborhoods sign up for it. NRP
wants to limit volunteer exposure to legal liability
stuff.
Mike Atherton was right, not every neighborhood
volunteer that should be attending training is
attending them. We cannot force people to come. I
guess we could get heavy handed and tie training
session attendance to funding, but, we have no
precedence with which to do that. As I said, most
neighborhoods receive very good audits so there is no
mandate calling for the NRP to be so regulatory. I can
assure you that such heavy handedness would not be
well received by most of the volunteers. Most
neighborhood folks already think we jump them through
too many hoops.
As far as neighborhoods investing money in programs
that didn't work or what would seem to some a waste of
money, that has happened. Part of the charm of NRP
was that it allowed neighborhoods to push the envelope
and think out of the box in their plan development.
In most cases, the programs were very successful. In
some cases it wasn't. And what would be successful to
one person in a neighborhood might seem a big waste of
money to another.
Do you think the government or private sector is any
less vulnerable to programs that don't work? Many
times when these entities fail, it is a lot bigger and
more costly to either you as a consumer or you as a
tax payer. So the fact that some neighborhood
association tried something by themselves or in
partnership with a non-profit agency and it didn't
work is certainly no reason to throw the baby out with
the bathwater. You have to look at percentages here.
The "failures" are relatively small in comparison to
the successes.
Within the next few years, all the neighborhoods will
have completed their Phase I evaluation documents. It
should provide some interesting information with
regards to how successful people felt Phase I of NRP
was to their neighborhood.
And finally, Mike Atherton commented on the statement
I made that "NRP hopes that neighborhoods will hire
competent staff". Mike, neighborhood associations are
corporations. NRP as a government entity has a
contractual relationship with these corporations. We
do not run them or administer them. That is the job
the corporation agreed to do when they contracted with
the NRP to conduct NRP planning and implementation
activities on behalf of a given neighborhood. These
groups convinced the people in their neighborhoods
they were capable of managing this effort. In order to
become the selected group, they had to receive votes
from neighborhood stakeholders at an all neighborhood
meeting. A neighborhood has the option to replace
it's representative group at any time. It has been
done in Sheridan. So if your not happy with the way
your neighborhood association is conducting it's
business, you have the option to change it. You can
either organize and bring forth a new group of
directors which has happened in many neighborhoods, or
you can organize an another neighborhood association
and work to get support from your neighborhood to be
selected as the chosen group. Either way, the power
is yours.
Barb Lickness
Whittier
Ward 6
City Council Candidate
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
