Heather Martin writes: >>"To Jim Graham -- About your request for alternatives to a lawsuit against the city: How about mediation? Maybe that federal mediator who is already coming can stay on for a little extra time to deal with this case. If not, maybe other mediators will step forward."<<
Heather, in an earlier post I asked that the City consider "Federal Mediation" of the supportive housing issue, and the failure to provide adequate police protection for poor neighborhoods of color in Minneapolis. Your suggestion is a good one, please forward it to RT Rybak and your City Council Rep. Federal Mediation of these issues would save a lot of tax payer dollars. For just cause the neighborhoods would be reticent to trust Minneapolis or Hennepin County Government. We were promised things that have not come to fruition. So Federal Mediation is a good idea. We would trust the State Legislature. RT asked that we hold back on our lobbying efforts until the City has its lobbyist attempt to get some TIF changes for NRP and housing. If the purpose of the State housing funding is more concentration of Supportive Housing and the discrimination against poor neighborhoods of color, then perhaps we should start our lobbying efforts early to insure the money comes "with strings" that require Randal Bradley's Holman Decree Language be included. Linda Berglin, Karen Clark, Scott Dibble, and few others, perhaps can help us out a little. Perhaps Dee Long could give us some advice on the matter. Dee, who should we be concentrating our lobbying on? Our own Democratic Legislators or the Republicans from the burbs? By the way Michael Homann is incorrect about the vote being close on passing Bradley's Language. I have to admit that Gary Schiff and Michael Krause seemed to be whispering "just pass it and let the Z&P change it". (one of the few benefits of a hearing loss is a better ability to read lips) Hopefully other City Council members will not be as uncaring about the implications of the "Spirit" of the Holman Decree. I wonder why any council person would be against rewarding developers for building affordable housing in different neighborhoods from the poor communities with large minority populations? Why would any Councilperson want to discriminate against economically disadvantaged areas and areas with concentrations of minority people? Randal Bradley remembers why there was the need for a Holman Decree, perhaps Michael Homann should look it up and study it. Minneapolis lost because of a pattern of discrimination. I also am amazed by Michael Homann's prejudice about land values in near downtown neighborhoods. Believe it or not Mr. Homann, land along the Franklin Avenue Commercial Corridor probably rivals your "Fortress Community" of Linden Hills. Last year it went for in excess of $23.00 per sq. ft. for dirt. One empty residential lot, a block off of Franklin, went for $42,000.00. So very clearly the real reason for the concentration of Supportive Housing is the inability to crack the steel curtain that "Fortress Communities" have erected. By the way Mr. Homann, how many Supportive Housing projects do you have in Linden Hills? Which Supportive Housing Developer have you personally invited to your neighborhood? If you really wish to have one, I will be glad to provide the phone number for PPL or Prodigal House. I also was absolutely amazed by a comment at the Planning Commission about how depressed Franklin Avenue was. Also Michael, I was amazed at how Planning Commissioners supported PPL being given a variance for parking that would allow PPL to have 75 employees, and who knows how many clients, park in a residential neighborhood without even ONE off street parking spot. The ignorance to the development activity going on along Franklin Avenue and the parking issues was amazing. Michael, I wonder if you would also support a business in your Linden Hills neighborhood with seventy-five employees having ZERO parking? If you would, I can still get you that number for PPL. Michael, in the future try to remember that anything that the Planning staff recommends to NOT do, and which a neighborhood Organization votes unanimously to NOT do, is probably a real bad idea! Even if a politically powerful Non-Profit wants to force it into a neighborhood. Planning Commissioners voting to ignore so many RED FLAGS is what causes Lawsuits. The City's own staff report against such actions make great legal foundation for class action suits. Anytime both City Staff and the Neighborhood is strongly opposed to something, there is probably something wrong about it! It's a good thing to remember! The place to start relieving the City taxpayers of the burden of needless lawsuits is the Planning Commission. We need a planning commission that is elected, and not politically appointed. Otherwise it is appointed for political reasons and may owe allegiance to someone other than the residents of Minneapolis. Of course so are the City Council people, hummm - so perhaps I need to re-think this. Everyone needs to be aware that the Zoning & Planning Committee of the Minneapolis City Council will meet on Tuesday the 12th of November at 1:30 PM. Everyone who has a concern about the equal treatment of neighborhoods and the discrimination against some neighborhoods should be there. Anyone who has a concern about the City Council starting actions that will result in lawsuits also needs to be there or watching it on Television. Please call your City Council Representative and ask them to please not discriminate against poor neighborhoods. We would do it for you. Jim Graham, Ventura Village and other places in Minneapolis P.S. Jim Mork look up 8th Circuit Court ruling on Lifestyle vs. City of St. Paul, (the prevailing Federal Law for this area) _______________________________________ 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
