I must admit to no small amount of humor I had when reading Michael Atherton's post that read, "And, as I pointed out in a previous post: Minnesota Niceness seems to be used to suppress opposition, not only during NRP meetings, but now here as well."
This post starts out with the words Jim Graham. Michael seems to be saying he wants to deal with NRP on a more emotional level when he says: "It is also interesting that these posts seem to imply that being upset or angry diminishes the credibility of one's experience or the value of their opinion. But, this isn't "Leave it To Beaver" and it's no longer the 1950s when emotions were left out of polite conversation. I believe that in order to understand the worthiness of someone's perspective you need to know what lead up to their emotional state, not to claim that a person's emotional state invalidates their viewpoint. Well Michael anyone that knows me will tell you that dealing with issues in a less than "Leave it to Beaver" method is just my cup of tea. Unfortunately, David Brauer has admonished me to treat folks in a gentler manner. In fact he has absolutely demanded it! And David, I do try! I have to admit that I also get a little emotional when I hear people put down NRP because their neighbors and fellow community members prioritize things differently than they do. In fact, I probably get more than a little irate at someone with such self-righteousness as to label "criminal" an act of citizen participation when those citizens honestly express opinions that might differ in someway from the righteous path that person has imagined. Either the folks showing up for the meeting were fraudulently voting because they were not from that neighborhood, or it was neighborhood residents taking part in a decision making process and honestly voting for their preferences. Michael Atherton seems to be saying they were neighborhood residents, but that it was in some way "criminal" to not vote the way he thought correct. I am sorry Michael, but exactly who died and made you either God or the Emperor. It is not criminal, or even sinful, for people to vote the way they prefer. It is probably criminal if people are coerced into voting some way other than what they prefer. It is not criminal to pack meetings with residents; it's what NRP is supposed to be about. Even if he does not agree with the outcome Michael should be celebrating the democracy and resident involvement. The beauty of NRP is that individual residents get to vote on what their priorities are, and vote for what measures best address those priorities. Michael, if you truly wish to change those priorities I would suggest you follow NRP accepted procedure. Get together enough residents, sharing your opinions, and go force a new reallocation. You just need to get a few more than the 250 who showed up to the last meeting. Go to your Prospect Park meeting and take the darn thing over, do the required notification and then reallocate that money to the proper priorities. My question for you is why didn't you do that before the last reallocation meeting? At the same time could you please get enough people together in Florida to call for a recount, I did not like that vote either. I, like David Brauer, understand why Prospect Park would take the short view and get their priorities funded now. The uncertainty that has been created by a City Hall intent on attacking Phase II NRP is part of the reason. Politicians promised to fully fund NRP when running for election. Politicians promised to fight to insure NRP would remain in the control of Neighborhoods when running for election. Now some of those same politicians are using false information and innuendo to attack NRP, and to not fund NRP. So what should a neighborhood believe? Prospect Park was only reacting to a need to secure funding for their own priorities; while they still can. Before the capricious powers that be also grab those funds. Some neighborhoods might willingly attempt to fill an inside straight by waiting for future NRP, but Prospect Park is just playing the cards on the table. Not a bad bet since most neighborhoods will beat the housing percentage and deliver the 52%. Prospect Park takes this money off the table for its highest priorities, and is still in the game if Phase II money comes through. It was only two years ago that elected officials and residents worked together to establish the goals for phase II of NRP and strengthen the program. That very public and actively supported process established certain goals. Some of those goals were: 1) Create a greater sense of community so that the people who live, work, learn and play in Minneapolis have an increased sense of community and confidence in their neighborhood and their city. 2) Sustain and enhance neighborhood capability in order to strengthen the civic involvement of all members of the community. 3) Ensure that neighborhood based planning remains the foundation of the program, is informed and leads to creative and innovative approaches. 4) Ensure that government agencies learn from and respond to neighborhood plans so that public services ultimately reflect neighborhood priorities. I believe Prospect Park has done just these things. Its priorities, and planning to address those priorities, are not what I would have voted to do. I happen to believe my neighborhood's priorities are Housing and Crime & Safety. I do, however, fully support Prospect Park's defining its own priorities and support Prospect Park's decisions. Just as I would hope Prospect Park residents would support decisions that my neighborhood might make, (even if different from their own). We need for all of us to remember that the small amount of money those Prospect Park residents were deciding upon was THEIR money. It was theirs to decide, and it had come from THEIR taxes. "Centralized" Down Town made "Centralized" decisions and "Centrally" controlled information about those decisions. Many of those investment decisions were faulty, and many were opposed by neighborhoods. Hundreds of millions of dollars were squandered by such centralized planning and decision-making. The neighborhoods are now paying for decisions that they had no role in making and those they often opposed. Neighborhoods will not go back to a time when residents had little say in what happened in and to their neighborhood, or how they were serviced by the government THEY PAY FOR. Jim Graham, Ventura Village >"We can only be what we give ourselves the power to be" - A Cherokee Feast of Days >The people are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. - Thomas Jefferson 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
