Barb wrote:

"Tom, are you saying R.T. supports repealing the quarter mile spacing
requirement? I attended a meeting with Nicollet Avenue businesses last fall
when R.T. was campaigning. I specifically asked the Mayor if he supported
the quarter mile spacing requirement. He gave a very strong and emphatic
"yes" to that question."


I was at the same meeting Barb and can't explain the Mayor's apparent
reversal. But, here's the proof from the Shelter Advisory Board's minutes of
their meeting with Rybak aid Erik Takeshita (6-21-02):

"Discussed the removal of Supportive Housing as a category..."

"Erik stressed the importance of getting our recommendations included in the
consolidated plan work currently underway in the City"

"Erik offered to get us on Schiff's calendar soon and he will attend if we'd
like."

So apparently the Mayor, without input from the public, let alone the
high-impact neighborhoods, has endorsed, and is pushing the SAB's re-writing
of the parts of the zoning code that regulate their own projects,
particularly chapter 536.20 that deals with spacing of supportive housing.
Erik Takeshita is a professional. He wouldn't be doing this on his own.

If this interpretation is all wrong, I'd be thrilled to be corrected.

What is the Mayor's position on concentration of supportive housing? And
where is the opportunity for public discourse on this most important public
policy issue?

If the City workings don't allow for public input, I'd again urge the
foundation community or the city churches to sponsor a forum to air this
specific issue. It does us little good to get all pumped up about 'doing
something about affordable or supportive housing," if we're not willing to
face up to the hard political choices involved in the placement of the
sites. Further concentration surely can't be the only solution to our
housing challenges. Wealthy neighborhoods may prefer to continue to shift
their civic responsibilities to poor ones, but they shouldn't be able to do
it in the dark. This needs real public discussion.

In fairness, given the fact that our City's leadership seems to be unwilling
to challenge the fortress neighborhoods to do their part, and prefers
instead to load up the few heroic ones, I can understand the SAB's
frustration with getting their important work done. They must figure that
there is no other option but to keep going back to the same struggling
neighborhoods like Phillips, Whittier, Stevens Square, Central, Elliot Park,
Harrison. I disagree with this truly tragic strategy, but it has a certain
heartbreaking logic to it. This can't be their preferred solution either.

Tom Berthiaume
Whittier, Stevens Square, Loring Park, Navarre



_______________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
  • [... dain lyngstad
  • [... j c harmon
  • [... Richard K. Anderson
  • [... Richard K. Anderson
  • [... Borger, Judith Yates
  • [... Casey, Julie A
  • [... Craig Miller
    • ... Mark Snyder
      • ... Susan Maricle
  • [... sentto-1059565-2045-1035391866-mary . griffiths=arts . monash . edu . au
  • [... Tom Berthiaume
  • [... Alexandra Ellison
  • [... Dennis Plante
  • [... Michael Hohmann
  • [... Borger, Judith Yates
  • [... Shawn Lewis
  • [... Michael Hohmann
    • ... Andy Driscoll
  • [... Shawn Lewis
  • [... Annie Young
  • [... Leurquin, Ronald

Reply via email to