Thanks to Jim Bernstein for reading the Journal and the piece on the Unbank.
(For those who haven�t seen it or don�t get the journal, the story is at: http://www.swjournal.com/display/inn_news/news01.txt) One of the reasons we wrote the piece is that there seems to be confusion among neighborhood board members (and probably residents) about how much power their boards legitimately have. In the story, Councilmember Scott Benson mentions using a "Zoning 101" to teach neighborhood board members their limits. That's a good idea; because neighborhood boards frequently turn over, new members may think they have the power to "approve" or "disapprove" projects. (More experienced board members should tell them, but sometimes the "old pros" don't share their knowledge because hoarding it lets them retain intra-board power.) In truth, any vote neighborhood boards take is purely advisory to the City Council and Planning Commission. That's why in the Journal, we always try to say a neighborhood board "voted to recommend approval of Project X" rather than "voted to approve Project X." Another problem - with historical roots - is that neighborhoods don't realize their opinion must give way to legally supportable procedures. For example, the Tangletown board may decide they don't like Unbank, but they need to know that legally, that's not enough to stop anything. When I was Kingfield board president (after navigating the new-member learning curve), I always tried to caution our board that our comments only mattered if they were in the context of zoning and city law. That way, we wouldn't issue opinions that were worthless, or be surprised if they were discarded. In the past, I think some councilmembers used neighborhood groups as foils to derail a project when legal roadblocks were lacking. That's not good, and can expose the city to lawsuits. I think this council is more careful � which is good, it will save us legal damages � although perhaps councilmembers need to be more proactive about letting each new neighborhood board know what the ground rules are. Fundamentally, it's the councilmember's discretion to send developers to neighborhoods, so they have the responsibility to make sure those boards know what they're doing at the beginning. Personally, I believe it's still good to have neighborhoods review projects. The folks living closest to the developments often know details city staff and others might miss. However, those details only matter if neighborhood boards know what the legal rules are. The only time opinion matters is if a developer says they won't go ahead without neighborhood support. But that's the developer's choice. Ultimately, as always, the power rests with our duly elected City Council, within the bounds of the law. David Brauer Kingfield Former prez, Kingfield neighborhood association Current editor, SW Journal and Skyway News REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
