The merger issue of North Longfellow has been afloat
for quite some time. I would like to provide some
information to clarify the decisions to be made with
regards to this issue.

The planning department adopted a new policy regarding
neighborhood boundaries sometime this past summer. In
short, it requires a public meeting with stakeholders
affected by this decision. In this case, the
stakeholders would be the entire Longfellow
neighborhood which includes the portion south of Lake
Street to 34th street and the entire Seward
neighborhood.  

The Longfellow neighborhood would have to agree to
split the neighborhood along Lake Street.  Seward
would also need to hold a public meeting and vote to
approve the acceptance of North Longfellow into
Seward, changing its geographic boundaries.  In
reading the planning department policy on this issue,
the groups are required to flyer all those affected
with 30 day notice.  There is no funding provided by
the planning department to pay for this notice.  It is
unclear to me at this time whether NRP funds or
Citizen Participation funds can be used to pay for
organizing around this issue. It is also my
understanding that the planning department is
encouraging the applicant group to meet with
surrounding neighborhoods in addition to direct
stakeholders.  

The other issue at hand in this discussion is whether
North Longfellow wishes to be represented by Seward
Neighborhood Group for it's Citizen Participation and
NRP functions.  Again, all of Longfellow would have to
agree as would Seward. And in this case without Lake
Street being a true geographic boundary for
Longfellow, the MCDA would have to waive it's policy
to allow for this to happen as would the NRP as both
our policies speak to geographic boundaries.  

In terms of NRP funds for Longfellow and Seward, any
geographical boundary changes would not affect Phase I
NRP funds as they have been nearly all contracted or
expended in both Seward and Longfellow.  Only the
Phase II allocations would be affected by this change.
And right now what Phase II will be is not clear.
(Will be shortly I hope)

The other option is for Longfellow as a neighborhood
to break free from the Longfellow Community Council
and operate as an independent neighborhood
association. Again, the neighborhood would have to
vote whether to allow the new group to represent them
or to continue with the Longfellow Community Council.

The Phillips neighborhood voted to operate for
purposes of NRP and Citizen Participation as four
separate regions.  Phillips is the largest geographic
neighborhood in Mpls. and has the largest population
(19,000+) Ventura Village has applied to be considered
as a neighborhood separate of Phillips. I think a
pretty good argument can be made that Phillips is just
too big and has to many issues to remain as one
neighborhood any longer.  The VV application is moving
through the approval process as we speak, albeit
slower than molasses in January.  This neighborhood
also had no neighborhood association representation
from the time People of Phillips was decertified until
the new regional associations were formed and
recognized.

Recently, the North Loop neighborhood voted to break
away from the Downtown Minneapolis Neighborhood
Association (DMNA) and form their own new neighborhood
association.  They are now called the Warehouse
District North Loop Neighborhood Association.(WDNLNA) 
Both DMNA and WDNLNA held meetings and voted on the
issue.  WDNLNA will recieve a portion of NRP funds
from Phase I because there is not currently an
approved NRP action plan in DMNA. (They are meeting
tonight to approve the DMNA Phase I NRP plan)

Sorry this is so long. Hope the information helps. 

Barb Lickness
NRP Neighborhood Specialist to Longfellow   

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to