NRP Policy Board Action I served as a neighborhoods representative on the NRP Policy Board in 2001 and 2002. I did not attend the February 24 Policy Board meeting, but found it very interesting to note how differently two respected persons (Gretchen and Jim) attending the same meeting reacted to the actions taken.
I look forward to reading more from Policy Board members, such as Cameron Gordon's post. Folks may recall the dialogue at the time of the March 2002 release of $3.994 million from the NRP AHRF that included much concern over high per unit subsidy costs in some of the projects. Remember some list member coined the term "non-profiteers" as I recall. I tend to agree with Jim Graham's analysis of this latest matter. While serving as vice chair on the Policy Board last year I had endeavored unsuccessfully to build a consensus to lay the groundwork for orderly release of an amount of AHRF monies to get into the pipeline in 2003 commensurate with the reduced annual NRP funding levels. For the record, here is a link to the November 18, 2002 Policy Board meeting minutes showing the details of the resolution adopted that dealt with reserve funds for affordable housing and commercial corridors: http://www.nrp.org/r2/AboutNRP/PB/PBMinutes2002/PBM20021118.pdf To assist those who wish to research the details, the general guidelines document for Affordable Housing/Commercial Corridor Reserve Fund was approved by the Policy Board on 7/24/2000. The program criteria for Affordable Housing Reserve Funds were approved by the Policy Board on 12/18/2000 (for the 2001 RFP process that was frozen, then unfrozen and funds released in 2002). As adopted in the 11/18/2002 resolution, the matter of the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund was scheduled for consideration by the Policy Board after 2/15/2003. Thus, the argument seems kind of soft that this topic was dropped on the city representatives who sit on the Policy Board (and who sat on the Policy Board last year). True, the process ordinarily would call for review of funding proposals by the Management Review Team (MRT) of the NRP. While I have been a very small $ contributor to Center for Neighborhoods, I think it is worthy of note that C4N's fundraising letter dated 12/10/2002 contained the following, "Planning for Growth-Envisioning Change In 2002 the City of Minneapolis has embarked on a journey to reconfigure community development and the relationship between city and neighborhood planning. To help demonstrate models for how it could work better, the Center for Neighborhoods joins forces with the Minneapolis Mayor's office in 2003 to launch a citywide campaign that focuses on major corridors to plan for how we will absorb the population growth projected for the city. The question is no longer "if"---it's "how." And in that same C4N letter a quote from Mayor R. T. Rybak, Minneapolis, "The most powerful assets great cities have are strong, engaged neighborhoods, especially at times like these when resources are limited. The Center for Neighborhoods know better than anyone how to harness that citizen energy to build communities far stronger than anything government can do alone." So I was not surprised to read Ms. Nicholl's harsh criticism of the NRP Policy Board Action to support home ownership opportunities coming from C4N when clearly Mayor Rybak and C4N are so closely "aligned." One can fairly argue that the Mayor ought to have worked with the Policy Board colleagues on the commercial corridor proposal, especially in light of the reserve program established for that purpose. I agree with Cameron Gordon, from my firsthand experience, that the tensions on the Policy Board the past year have been tremendous and are a detriment to the functioning of the board. I hope the public officials on the Policy Board can achieve more consensus, but this is going to require some compromise from all sides including advocates for affordable housing. Home ownership is not a dirty word after all, rather it historically is a big piece of the American dream that this latest action may serve to extend to more people of modest incomes... Jeffrey L. Strand Shingle Creek =================================================================== Gretchen Nicholls, Center for Neighborhoods, 612-339-3480 submitted through the list manager: Message: 4 From: "List Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 06:57:55 -0600 Subject: [Mpls] NRP and city affordable housing fund Forwarded with permission of the author. - David Brauer, list manager "I sat in disbelief Monday night as the NRP Policy Board voted 6 - 3 to=20 approve a request to reassign $2 million of the $4 million dedicated to=20 affordable housing to a mortgage insurance program that was handed out = and=20 introduced at the meeting..... The fact that it was considered and APPROVED was an affront to the =I simply couldn't believe it. Six people, none of them city officials,=20 authorized the transfer of $2 million of city funds to a proposal that =was=20 seen for the first time that evening. No thought given to whether it=20 aligned with city goals or how it compared to other private sector =financing mechanisms.....The Mayor even urged the board to first revisit the =affordable=20 housing fund criteria, make changes if needed, and permit other =proposals to compete for the funds. And Ostrow drew attention to the divergence from = the intent of the fund. To no avail. With the drop of a hat $2 million that was dedicated for affordable =housing=20 was redesignated for home ownership purposes. Almost thumbing their =nose at the City, in one fell swoop the Policy Board refused to play by any =rules -=20 even their own. Do we still need to wonder what will happen to the NRP=20Policy Board?" ******* Jim Graham posted the following message: Message: 6 From: "JIM GRAHAM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "mpls issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 13:28:24 -0600 Subject: [Mpls] NRP AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND GIVES POOR PEOPLE A CHANCE FOR HOMEOWNERSHIP "I also sat in disbelief when the NRP Policy Board approved the two million for the guaranteed loan program. I could not believe that the Board would be so wise that it would take such an action. Especially in the face of elected City officials who might have made commitments to political supporters. Commissioners Peter McLaughlin and Mark Stenglein are to be commended for their thoughtfulness, their wisdom, and for their resolute behavior to get the best for Minneapolis. These two political representatives put the interests of poor people in Minneapolis above politics as usual." 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
