Anne Young is correct in her description of the problem with NRP. It is not
a problem of citizen participation. It is a problem of who gets to make
decisions about development and dollars. Neighborhoods sometimes decide
that they wish to correct a blight problem and spend NRP funding to that
solution. This may be in direct conflict with the plans of some politicians
and their Developer Cronies.
Anne is correct, "NRP isn't so bad". If fact it is just the best investment
Minneapolis has ever made. It put revolution into minds as well as houses
over those heads. Those "minds" are going to make Minneapolis a better
safer place for both babies and elders. NRP Neighborhoods are "Lifecycle"
communities that value all people in them, and seek the best solutions for
all their people. Something that seems to scare "Down-Town" interests who
are so busy patting themselves on the back with their self-righteousness
that they seem to not care about real people and real solutions in real
communities.
I have said in the past that NRP is not the perfect solution; you have some
groups deciding to spend their allotment in ways some may find foolish. It
is not the perfect solution, but like Democracy it just happens to be the
best one we have right now. Decision-making is far easier and cleaner with
an Emperor and his Court, unfortunately thought such decisions only serve
the interest of that Emperor. We can go back to that more centralized
system of politics and that more centralized system of deciding on
revitalization needs. But not without a fight.
Sure there is bickering about what direction to go with NRP dollars. It is
usually fierce, because the parties care deeply about their community. It
is the reason they give so much of their time. Anne Young and I, I am sure
would agree about the depths of those fights. She and I have had some
dozzies. The reason was that we both cared and had a commitment to our
community and City, and were willing to fight for what we viewed as the best
way! Those arguments, as frustrating and maddening as they often can be,
are what is good about NRP; people end up sorting things out and choosing
what is best for them and their communities. People make a lasting
commitment and identification with their communities.
It is not about just the money. The NRP money is the carrot that gets
people to the meeting and involved. The important thing is the organizing
around solving community problems. If the City of Minneapolis paid these
people even minimum wages there would probably be more dollars than they get
from NRP. It's the difference between vegetables bought at the Cub Market,
and those you raise in your own garden. The Cub veggies will keep you
alive, but which ones taste better and fulfill your actual desires and
needs? Sure the hand grown variety take huge amounts of time and you may
argue with your partner about the best way to fertilize and water them, but
they are worth more and more valuable because of their quality. NRP
projects are the same. Sure they take more time, but they build community;
so they are far more valuable than just the dollars they bring.
The neighborhoods that are most impacted by the attack on NRP are also those
that are most impacted by the Cities "development" ambitions for zoning
changes. They are also those neighborhoods that suffer from concentrations
of poverty in higher minority communities. The reason the "powers that be"
wish to attack NRP autonomy is that such "Impacted Neighborhoods" have been
empowered to begin to fight the City's plans to continue this pattern of
discrimination. Neighborhoods are of course fighting for decision-making
autonomy and also to free themselves from such discrimination. It is little
wonder that the City Council Members most interested in attacking NRP are
also the ones who want such a concentration. Because of the organizing
experience of NRP, Neighborhoods have started to organize for mutual defense
and improvement. The Coalition of Impacted Neighborhoods will be hosting a
City Wide meeting on February 20th to address such concentration issues.
Concentration of poverty, concentration of Level Three Sex Offenders,
concentration of crime, concentration of supportive housing, concentration
of criminals on supervised probation.
To see a flyer for the meeting and material on "COIN" go to, and look at,
the site www.pnn.org/coin/index.htm
I certainly hope those interested in the pattern of discrimination on
Impacted Neighborhoods and the possible attack on NRP come to the meeting on
February 20th at 6:30 PM. The meeting will be at the MCDA -NRP headquarters
building - The Crown Roller Building. It will be for "Impacted
Neighborhoods" and their friends.
----- Original Message -----
From: Annie Young
To: Tim Bonham ; mpls-issues
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 6:16 PM
Subject: [Mpls] NRP isn't so bad!
I don't believe political parties are the same type of non-profit or citizen
participation programs that Barb is referring too. Tim, you are mixing
apples and coconuts here.
And how soon we forget the Rapson, Belton convention. But,admittedly, the
longest ones tend to be the state conventions (of any party).
And let's get down to some of the facts, folks ... this is really about
power - the power of making decisions about the money to be spent in the
neighborhoods. Over the years there have been councilmembers who have not
really liked (putting it mildly) all the bother and dither of relating to
the neighborhoods and citizens (the grassroots) meaning they wanted to make
the financial decisions themselves. For most citizens NRP has been a very
positive, empowering sort of thing - makes you feel connected to your
neighborhood, to those who live, work and play there. That brings safety
and security along with sharing the knowledge of what goes on in our
government to the citizens - they like that.
With the dollars tightening and tightening there are going to have to be
lots of no's, no expansion, no new programs and get more efficient and
better at what you do. It is not going to be pretty! And some people will
never like the decisions that will have to be made.
But I don't think anyone can deny that the NRP has engaged the citizens in
caring even more about this City than one already does just by living here.
Annie Young
CODE PINK - East Phillips
At 02:05 AM 2/6/03 -0600, Tim Bonham wrote:
While I agree the meetings can be cumbersome, so can
the political conventions that go on for 8 - 10 hours
to endorse candidates. Talk about family unfriendly.
Barb, you are exaggerating here.
The longest DFL endorsing convention in the city council races was yours, in
the 6th Ward. It convened at 10:30, and finished business at 3:37, for a
length of 5 hours & 7 minutes.
Even the City Convention, with a multi-candidate mayoral endorsement
and many other school board, library board, park board, board of estimate &
taxation candidates to endorse finished in just over 6 hours.
It may have felt longer to you, but in reality no Minneapolis
endorsing conventions have taken 8-10 hours.
I want you to show me one other Minneapolis program or
process that has been successful at engaging over
5,000+ citizens into the process in a sustainable way
for over 10 years. Name one.
Elections? They involve about 10 times that number of people, and
have been held at least every 2 years for the last century or so here in
Minneapolis.
Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson
Barb Lickness
Whittier
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
