I have long supported the concept of reorganizing the geopolitical distribution of duties and responsibilities within this metropolitan area.
Long time readers of this list may remember my advocacy of our metro area as an economic city-state in competition with the world. It is critical that we work to establish a much broader view of our region as a whole. This is especially true now that political power has shifted to suburban demographics and republican sensitivities. City folk need to learn to present our urban problems to our suburban neighbors in language, perspectives and values that they can identify with, discarding some of our traditional rhetoric. Our future depends on our ability to be seen not as their poor step children, but rather on our ability to share a greater vision of the region that requires attention to our mutual regional interests. We may be stuck for some time with many of the geopolitical boundaries we have inherited based on the political realities of over 100 years ago (Such as our currently irrational county boundaries, which in turn have dictated our metro council boundaries, to the detriment of effective regional planning.) As I've monitored this list over the past many months, I've become increasingly dismayed with the suburb bashing that runs not very far under the surface of many of our posters. This appears to be particularly frequent among some of the transportation and housing commentaries discussed on this list. The portrayal of the suburbs and suburbanites as evil is rude, silly and damaging. No man is an island, and nor is any city not even a large one. While there is a lot to be said for consolidation of functions, such a move will be opposed by those who will fear surrendering local control. If you doubt the tenacity with which locals will fight to defend their local prerogatives all one needs to do is monitor the NRP discussions of the past month or so on this list. (I will follow this epistle with another specifically addressing the NRP situation) I applaud the suggestions that we move to more coordinated and rational distribution of governmental functions and stand ready to assist in launching a serious discussion of the parameters that need to be considered in such an effort. I recognize that significant change will not be easy. I fear any serious plan for such reform will attract exponential greater opposition the sounder and more rational the plan is. For the better and more comprehensive the plan, the greater the disruption of the existing status quo. This in turn will increase the inherent opposition to change. My guess is that such a change will require either a devastating crisis, or a lot of careful partial steps implemented over a lot of time. We need a vehicle to discuss these changes, the criteria and considerations that should be involved. I've some suggestions and idea as well as a fistful of cautions. I wish we had an effective forum in which to discuss and advocate the requisite changes. Earl Netwal Happily living in the Nokomis Village portion of the urban forest, soon to be served with light rail providing direct access to the world through our international airport. TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
