Thank you David Brauer for your insight on supportive housing, I believe what you wrote was very helpful. The most informative part is the way it illustrates the difference in treatment of two neighborhoods. Everything you describe your neighborhood doing, Ventura Village did with the PPL Collaborative Village. In Addition the Ventura Village neighborhood had several neighborhood wide meetings. In each of these several meetings there was an overwhelming vote against the CVI project, and an overwhelming opposition to it from churches, police, other social service agencies, businesses, and most of all by the very same group of residents who have championed the creation of affordable housing citywide. The City of Minneapolis continued on in violation of City ordinance and Federal Fair Housing Law. There were even attempts by Hennepin County funded Family & Children's Services staff to have meetings to destabilize the neighborhood organization because residents opposed the CVI project. Fortunately their efforts at a secret meeting failed and all the people who showed up, who were not someone's staff, were residents who overwhelmingly opposed both the CVI project and any attempt to destabilize the Neighborhood Organization.
David writes: > I don't know what the building cost in Phillips, but I'm betting it's > far less. Fewer beds for PH, too? Actually property is going for more in the area because of the proximity to downtown Minneapolis. Particularly on Commercial corridors. Dirt and parking lots were going for $23.00 to $29.00 per square foot two years ago. An out of the way lot next to the freeway recently went at auction for $42,000 for a developer to build a duplex. I am sure Commercial Corridor property is even more now. > 2. Supporting Jim's thesis: city zoning rules put our neighborhood in > the game. Although my knowledge is not definitive, it's my understand > that the city's 32-bed limit only applies in outlying neighborhoods; I'm > not sure where the border is, but areas closer to the city don't have > the 32-bed limit. Again David should be corrected. The zoning rules limiting supportive housing to 32-beds apply equally everywhere in the City. BUT, David is absolutely correct however in the City's application of the rules. The City only applies this rule to those neighborhoods NOT closer in to the Southside of Downtown Minneapolis. Phillips, Ventura Village, Whittier, and Central do not have the same rules applied to them as David's neighborhood, even though such is against City Ordinance. Since this practice has gone on for sometime is so accepted that Neighborhood Leadership as fact when it is not true, then there appears to be a PATTERN of DISCRIMINATION. Most fair people, (say a jury), would say this is discrimination and not equal treatment under the law. > > If I'm right that this bifurcated zoning exists, Jim is right - the city > needs a full debate. (There were also suggestions at the time that > federal law trumped city zoning, but it never got that far - see point 1 > and also the rest of this response). Yes David, the City does need a full debate. Even more so because the law is supposed to be applied equally. Federal Fair Housing Law says that a handicapped person must be granted a Reasonable Choice of Accommodation. If the City concentrates such housing in one area and follows the pattern you describe of your neighborhood's process, to in practicality not allow them in other areas then how is a CHOICE provided. If your choice is to live supportive housing in a safer neighborhood, you are out of luck. The City's application of its zoning laws actually violates Fair Housing Law. > > In any event, the zoning rules meant Prodigal needed a variance, and > since most council members typically toss the toughies to the > neighborhood first, that's why they came to us. You are absolutely correct David; council members typically toss such to the neighborhood first. In our case it came to us almost last and the Council members totally ignored the neighborhood's input. MCDA had already assured PPL that funding for the project was assured even before the project came for variances and zoning changes. Both Jim Schiebel and Barb McCormick from PPL announced this in meetings prior to the Neighborhoods votes on the project. Neighborhoods have a great deal of power over MCDA funding because of Citizen Participation contracts, unless that neighborhood is one of the concentration areas. Then Citizen Participation means nothing. David: > After that, I think PH went east of the highway to 46th & 3rd, but I > don't know what happened there because it's another neighborhood. You are absolutely correct David, and again Prodigal House failed in that neighborhood as well. Prodigal House finally appears to have gotten the City's message and are trying to place Prodigal House where the City has quietly decreed all such housing should be placed. They are bringing it to the fertile soil of the southern crescent, to Phillips. The Prodigal House People previously seem to have not been aware that Minneapolis has a caste system for its neighborhoods. Prodigal House probably wanted to situate the project where it would be most healthy and supportive for the people living there. Instead of butting their heads against the "Iron Curtain" of the Fortress Neighborhoods Prodigal House is now attempting to go to the spot the City has decreed, (through its pattern of behavior), as the proper ghetto for such. The City of Minneapolis has brought up the fact that this brings chemically dependent people closer to services for them. I assume the rationale is that chemically dependent people should be concentrated in the same areas as they concentrate their drug dealers, makes it more convenient for everyone. Also I assume the City feels this policy is good transportation planning. In these inner-city neighborhoods people do not need to drive to get their drugs, there is curb service in front of their own buildings. David says: > Again, Prodigal House pulled out for at least a couple of reasons, but > it never got to the point that this neighborhood had to engage in an > "endeavor." I'm not saying we wouldn't have, but in this case, we > didn't. Ventura Village has found that the pattern of discrimination against poor neighborhoods, and the poor needing supportive housing, has reached the point where we must "engage in an 'endeavor". On behalf of our neighborhood residents, but also the people in need of supportive housing in Minneapolis, we are taking the City to Federal Court to seek the end to such discrimination and the opening of other neighborhoods of the City for supportive housing. I expect the City to fight this fight even if it is in the wrong. Council people whose wards include outlying neighborhoods cannot accept poor people in those neighborhoods, even if they are "good liberal democrats". As Chief Dan George said, "Endeavor to Persevere. After we had thought about this for a while we declared war on the United States". After we in Ventura Village had thought about the injustice done by the City of Minneapolis, we filed suit in the Federal Courts. We will "ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE" Jim Graham, Ventura Village _______________________________________ 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
