We actually did more than this in our recommendations. 

The Policy Board spent a great deal of time yesterday discussion the future of 
NRP and approved several recommendations for the Council. These were strongly 
supported with only three members abstaining (Ostrow, Fey and Mullory). I 
supported them as well.

I beleive that, if acted upon, they represent a  compromise that will allow the 
neighbrohdoods to continue to amek and implement plans with community 
developemnt dollars and allow the City to have funds to perform its more 
centralized community develop projects.  I do have mny doubts about the Council 
accepting them in totality, but I think they represent a strong, yet 
cooperative, stance on the part of the Pilcy Board. 

As an aside to Lisa M. and concerns about Common Project adminstration costs we 
did discuss  shifting the administration to City finance staff to free up some 
additional dollars for NRP and asked for a full accounting of costs to see if we
couldn"t save some money there. 
 
I don't have the full text of the resolution, but here is the jist of the seven 
major points we approved:

1. We supported the Lane amendments as a way to recolve the competing claims on 
the Common Projhect revenues;

2. We are asking the City to Commit to using all of the Common Project revenues 
as projected in Finance Officer Born's Common Project review of 6/4/03 for NRP;

 
3. We recommend using  Community Development Block Grant (CDGB) funds for CDGB 
eligible neighborhood plan expenditures to supplement the Common Project 
revenues committed annually to NRP;

4. & 5. Maintain an independent NRP "Joint Powers" Policy Board with an 
independent NRP staff;

6. We basically agreed to Lane's proposal to �Advance� $3 million annually of 
the Brookfield repayment for City Council/MCDA discretionary economic 
development projects by waiving any claim to Brookfield proceeeds over $20,000 
in 2009

7. We clarified that any interest earning on any unexpended NRp appropriated 
funds in addition to the Common Project funds in #1 goes to NRp. 


================

More was discussed during the productive session. 

UNfortunately I need to run, but I wanted to make sure folks we care about this 
got the info as soon as possible. 



Cam Gordon

Seward Neighborhood, 
Minneapolis, Ward 2
SD 59

(612) 332-6210, 296-0579, 339-2452

TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject 
(Mpls-specific, of course.)

________________________________

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

Reply via email to