Dang! I really wish I knew where this Star Chamber
that Mr Luce speaks of is located, cause I know I've
been involved in the Mpls DFL on and off for the last
12 years and haven't been able to find it. To
reiterate what Brian stated in his previous post, the
Mpls DFL presented the Charter Commission with a list
of candidates to be members of the Redistricting
Commission, only one of which was chosen. Not quite
the performance of the machine that everyone claims
we are.
If the DFL members of the commission are talking with
council members and collaborating with each other to
create a plan, they are doing so without any
authorization or knowledge of the party. Period.
And, frankly, I'd be happy if they reject the NAACP
plan. As those of you who read my posts know, I live
in the Marshall Terrace neighborhood in northeast
Mpls. Were this plan enacted we would be added with
two other small neighborhoods to a new Third Ward
which would be largely dominated by the Camden
community of neighborhoods. If you want to talk about
gerrymandering, there it is. I cannot imagine how
marginalized we could potentially be should this come
to pass, no matter who the council member is.
I don't agree with everything the tentative plan does
(what IS with that new Third Ward anyway), but I do
know that three small neighborhoods in NE would be
feeling the effects of it rather harshly for the next
decade. Call me parochial but I am not about to see
this happen.
Loki Anderson
Marshall Terrace
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Gregory Luce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Mpls] NAACP Redistricting PlanGene 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)
>
=====
"In their styes with all their backing
They don't care what goes on around
In their eyes there's something lacking
What they need's a damn good whacking"
-George Harrison
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.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
