Re: [Mpls] NAACP Redistricting Plan

[Gregory Luce]

Title: [Mpls] NAACP Redistricting Plan

Gene Martinez wrote: . . . I agree completely that the NAACP plan is superior to the DFL 'incumbent protection plan'. Does the DFL Central Committee plan on weighing in on this issue? Does the party consider the opinions of the NAACP important in determining what plan will best serve people of color? I hope there is a vigorous effort to get the DFL majority on the Commission to adopt the NAACP plan. It is time to raise some hell!" Brian Melendez responded: I am aware of no current plans for the City DFL Central Committee's consideration of redistricting, and the Party has not taken a view in favor of or against any proposed plan. What has been labeled the "DFL" plan is not the product of the Party organization, but rather of DFLers who serve as commissioners, only one of whom was nominated through the Party organization. Those commissioners, including the one commissioner whom the City Party nominated, are all free to act according to their conscience and do not answer to the Party organization. Frankly, I am discouraged by Mr. Melendez's response because it raises directly and indirectly to me one of the most frustrating things in politics:  the politics of "plausible deniability."   Brian plausibly denies that the DFL party has anything to do officially with the development and approval of any plan, stating that the "Party has not taken a view in favor of or against any proposed plan," and that the DFL folks on the Commission "are all free to act according to their conscience and do not answer to the Party organization."  True indeed.   C'mon. I'm no party insider (in fact, I'm an outsider) but everyone who knows something knows that there is considerable back-room dealing and hobnobbing to assure that the party is protected, particularly incumbents.  Plus, folks are not appointed to the Commission without some real political party connection.  To say that the Commissioners are free to act their conscience is very true, but it certainly does not reflect reality, and Mr. Melendez's political statement of plausible deniability truly reaffirms to me why I left the DFL--it is a party of insiders whose mission is to protect those insiders, often by excluding and punishing others who do not conform.  Often, because of its narrow mission, it begins to exclude or actually does exclude the interests of perceived "outsiders," such as the well-thought out (but necessarily open to change) NAACP plan.  But the DFL party is a whole 'nother issue, as I digress.   As a test of the Commission's "conscience," I challenge it to truly open the public hearing to the public and to spend the night if necessary hearing from the public.  Politics is messy, public hearings are messy and tiring, but to shortchange a necessary mess and process through back-room deals and limits on the ability of the public to participate fully is unacceptable.  So, my question to Commissioners:  what process will be available to the public to participate on April 11?  What changes will be considered to existing plans and how do we best prepare to suggest those changes, or even propose other plans? How much time will we have?    Gregory Luce Project 504/Minneapolis (North Phillips)