I also agree with Doug Grow and Gregory Luce, that one of the negative consequences of the NRP program is an increased focus on the neighborhood fiefdom rather than a broader overall city perspective. This intense inward looking by so many of our city's civically active people may be good for individual neighborhoods. But it may also be diversionary.
I believe the greatest advantage of such citizen participation processes such as NRP lies in the new leadership opportunities and leadership created. I fear on the downside that many one time or would be leaders may have been burned out in the same process attempting to resolve 'global' issues within a microcosm of 10-20 people at weekday night neighborhood meetings. Some will argue that NRP exists because the city is too big and cannot effectively deal with neighborhood issues. I disagree, mostly. There may be issues appropriate to neighborhood control, but more of what matters in the long run to the health and vitality of our neighborhoods and the people who live there now and in the future depends on how the region as a whole deals with macro issues. I would argue that the city is not too big to deal with these issues, it is too small. Housing, transportation, post secondary and continuing education, economic and community development issues all require a larger political framework than currently exists in our metropolitan region. Effective political discourse is hampered by a lack of appropriately sized and charged institutions. Political thought in our region is organized in the final analysis by our layers of political institutions: cities, counties and other bodies. Most of these bodies were initially formed and boundaries set according to that which was prudent and wise in the 1880's or thereabouts. Is it any wonder that as institutions they do not serve our current needs well? This forum itself is an example. While I support its Minneapolis centric nature, the most frequent post by our ever watchful moderator is to keep things local. The frustration for many, of course, is that much of what matters to the people who live in the city occurs on a plane beyond municipal borders. The upside of the Minneapolis issues forum is its focus. The downside is the vacuum created by the absence of active dialogue with our counterparts in other areas of the metro. I for one already devote (I almost wrote, waste) too much of my time on this forum. This is not to criticize the forum, only to show that this too confines thinking about issues to a subset of the universe in which the real issues could be more effectively debated and acted upon. My solution is radical, but sometime in this millennium it will happen in one form or another. The entire twin cities metropolitan geopolitical area should be reorganized. More effort needs to be made to look at our common problems not as one neighborhood against another but from a more holistic approach. We need to understand that while fighting a NIMBY in one community does involve the balance of the community as well. And if one were to substitute city for neighborhood, the argument holds true. I would propose redefining the twin cites metro area into three competing blocks: East and West of the Mississippi, and South of the Minnesota. I would take the seven metro counties and redraw their boundaries and rewrite their charters. I would consider doing away with cities within the metro area completely. (I see no reason for 160(?) police and fire chiefs, and planning directors and zoning administrators etc.) I propose three rather than one, because I do believe competition from one to the other will assure that all three areas keep alert to changes within the region. Imagine the change of political dynamics when debate and politics within the West metro requires transportation and housing issues be addressed from the common perspective of suburban and urban needs. The dialogue alone would change the thought processes of elected and aspirant leaders. Local issues that were truly local could still be handled on a neighborhood level with some form of mega NRP, while accountability for the larger regional issues would be based on a far broader democratic base, more appropriately sized and situated to be effective in dealing with them. I know I face an uphill battle on this one. But I am convinced that we as a region are loosing ground as a result of our being inappropriately organized politically to deal with the issues that confront the region. In the meanwhile, I feel compelled to finally mention one reaction I had to a post of one of our newly elected council members a few weeks ago. The individual suggested that they were eager to get on with the job of representing their constituents in accordance with their oath of office. I understand the sentiment, but contend that the position of city council member is not and should not be one of merely advocating for their ward. Rather, council members should see themselves as being on the board of directors of the city of Minneapolis, with special responsibilities for their ward. On occasion it may be proper to vote against majority opinion of ones constituents, a concept John F Kennedy wrote about in Profiles of Courage. Granted it may cost an election now and again, but in hindsight some of my best votes in the olden days were against the grain. I'd like to believe some of our existing leaders are willing to do what is proper, and not just see their job as one of reflecting predominant if not fully informed opinion of their constituencies. That's why we call it a representative democracy. At 04:47 AM 2/6/02 -0800, Gregory Luce wrote: >Interesting column, and one paragraph stood out: > >There are other political differences [between Minneapolis and St. Paul]. > >For example, the Neighborhood Revitalization Program in Minneapolis has turned the city into a maze of little neighborhood fiefdoms, each clamoring for dollars for local projects ects. Seldom do the activists in these organizations see the city as a whole. > >[GDL] Although Grow understandably uses columnistic color to make the point, I think it is a good point--the fragmentation that results through the promotion of NRP and its neighborhood system. It's the downside to NRP, and I'd like to see more "city-wide" thinking from neighborhood groups in the future. Earl Netwal 5344 36th Ave S. The twin cities economic city state Minnehaha neighborhood Mpls., MN 55417 _______________________________________ 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
