Remember: our rules allow pointed disagreement, but require respectful discussion.
--
Apparently congratulations are in order to Greg Abbott
for brokering a deal on the 53rd and Lyndale project.
I don't know if Nikki traveled from Linden Hills to
attend the lunch meetings and saw all of the
communications involved in this brokering of a deal,
but apparently she did because she is able to tell us
that "Everything Greg tells us is TRUE."
I am willing to make the assumption that Greg played a
role in this process. I am willing to accept at face
value his claim that had he "intended to milk this for
political gain to the exclusion of public interest, he
would have never talked to the developers." From this
I am willing to accept that everything Greg did was
for the public interest, not political gain.
For point of discussion I am even willing to agree
that in all of the meetings the developers had with
the four neighborhood groups of Lynnhurst, Kenny,
Windom and Tangletown including monthly meetings at
Lynnhurst in April, May, June and July, along with the
general informational meeting on August 15th, that in
all those meetings the developers were so out of touch
with the neighborhood folks, board members and
business owners that they did not know what to do.
>From that point I am willing to accept that on August
27th, the developers through the brokering ability of
Greg finally understood the issues they had to agree
to.
Imagine how foolish Barret Lane must feel. After all,
he was the one who told the developers to have all
those meetings with the neighborhood groups in the
first place. And then Barret's staff wasted all that
time keeping a web site up to date on the progress of
the proposed project. Come to think of it, think of
all the wasted effort of the people in those four
neighborhood associations as they listened, asked
questions and made comments to the developers.
Apparently all they really needed to do was have a
leader like Greg in City Hall. A lunch, a few e-mails
and with only the public interest in mind he is able
to clearly guide the developers as to how to respond
to public opposition.
Am I in favor of this type of leadership.
Not quite.
I kind of like the months of meetings where the
developer has to keep making their case to the people.
I like that the neighbors had opportunity after
opportunity to make their case to the developers. I
liked that I got to sign a petition at the liquor
store against the threat of eminent domain. I liked
that Barret's web site let me know that he wouldn't
support eminent domain without a "clear public purpose
and SIGNIFICANT public support." It made my signing
that petition meaningful.
I was at the September meeting at Lynnhurst and I
liked that the gym was packed, with folks strongly
advocating for or against the project. I liked that
the Lynnhurst Association President had to tell the
crowd to hold down the cheering and noise when someone
they liked finished speaking. I thought it was cool
that the Board, after having these developers hanging
around since April, in response to the huge turnout
and the amount of opinions expressed verbally and in
writing said that they would take a month to weigh
what they had heard and formulate their response. I
like that I was able to obtain a list of the Board
members to contact if I had further questions or
comments. I like that when I had questions Barret's
web site did not answer that his staff found the
answers for me.
And to think all we had to do was let Greg broker the
deal.
Were the business owners and neighbors opposed
concerned about what might happen. Yes they were, and
they let the neighborhood association and Council
Member Lane know what those concerns were. Are the
supporters of the development and its affordable
housing component feeling their voices were heard?
They should. They also spoke loud and clear at the
meeting.
Now, how would they all feel knowing their council
member was elected on his ability to "broker" deals,
how to help developers "respond to public opposition."
How would they feel if deals happened in their
neighborhood after a developer lunched with the
council member and e-mailed each other a few times.
They'd probably feel real good if they were the ones
at lunch. Not so good if they weren't invited.
I'm willing to believe that Greg did provide a role in
helping the developers finalize their proposal. I
think he did represent the voice of some of those
concerned with the project. I go so far as to accept
that perhaps it was his voice alone that the
developers finally understood. With that said, I think
he has a future role in the neighborhood speaking out
for groups that are concerned about their voices being
heard. That is a necessary and vital role to play in
any neighborhood.
I do not feel however that he is ready to assume the
role of council member. I fear perhaps he is a little
too proud of his brokering ability. I'll take "the
good, the bad and the ugly" of the neighborhood
process any day over having leaders broker deals over
lunch.
Bob Gustafson
13th
__________________________________________________
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
Donate cash, emergency relief information
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
