David Brauer says: -"Another problem - with historical roots - is that neighborhoods don't realize their opinion must give way to legally supportable procedures." -"Ultimately, as always, the power rests with our duly elected City Council, within the bounds of the law."
He continues: -"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." David is correct about neighborhood opinion giving way to legally supportable procedures. Unfortunately David does not include that the same rule is also true for the City Council and Mayor. Of course David Brauer is not the only one who conveniently forgets this; so does the City Council. The lawsuits that are now being waged against the City of Minneapolis are because the City Council has done things outside "legally supportable procedures". David is correct "ultimately, as always, the power rests with our duly elected City Council within the bounds of the law." That power does NOT include arbitrarily applying the law in a capricious manner. When it comes to concentrating "Supportive Housing" that is just what the City, including this Council, is doing. Breaking the law! Breaking the Council and City's own laws and ordinances in a discriminatory manner. Hopefully this Council and Mayor will begin to be more "careful". They have previously shown that they have as great a distain for the law as the previous Council, but there is yet hope. Perhaps Neighborhood Boards and residents need to be (will start being) "more proactive" about letting the Minneapolis City Council "KNOW what the ground rules are". The ground rules are that the City Council must stop breaking its own ordinances and must stop discriminating against "Impacted Neighborhoods". There should not be a need for Minneapolis residents to go to Federal Court to force their own City to abide by the law. Residents of poor neighborhoods should be able to expect the same justice as the "better neighborhoods". The example of the "UnBank" in a neighborhood is a joke. Look at what it takes for a "good fortress" neighborhood to prevent a legally permissible "Supportive Housing" or affordable housing project that actually complies with the zoning law. All it takes is for that neighborhood to say "NO"! The Council Member exercises a little "Ward Privilege" and BOOM, no more MCDA funding or support for Hennepin County, MHFA, or other funding. All the fortress neighborhood people have to say is NO! What happens afterward? Most of the time the non-profit gets the message and moves the project to an Impacted Neighborhood where laws and ordinances forbid it! When that neighborhood says no the LAW does not allow it to be sited there what happens? Nothing, the City Council instructs the Planning Department and the City Attorney to help the project as much as possible and they force it through even if it violates the City's own ordinances. Anyone spot another law broken by the Council here? It's called an institutional pattern of discrimination. David, please compare Kingfield Neighborhood's Prodigal House and Ventura Village's experience with PPL's CVI project. I do have to compliment Davis and his neighborhood. I also have to admit that we in poor neighborhoods are more than a little envious of that ability to hint at opposition to dry up financing. That same City Council person, Brian Herron had no impact on the siting of CVI in our neighborhood though he advised against it. Brian even thought it was against the 1/4 mile ordinance and should NOT be allowed in an "Impacted Area". The Council Member who had himself co-authored the 1/4-mile rule, Jim Niland, (so there is no excuse for ignorance) helped engineer that CVI crime. But this succeeded only with the help of the present City Council Members including our good friends Gary Schiff, Dean Zimmerman, and even Robert Lillegren. All conveniently forgot that law when they discriminated against the residents of an "Impacted Neighborhood". The present Council Members could plead ignorance because they had just come to office and were to busy juggling for power to listen when residents tried to have them read the law. I even pleaded that if they wanted to concentrate supportive housing and poverty in impacted neighborhoods they should just be up front and change the ordinance. But no, they wanted to keep the ordinance to protect "good" neighborhoods not poor neighborhoods. In poor neighborhoods they simply ignore the law. After all the new Council Members had just been anointed by God, and felt they had been give the power to interpret the law. Hopefully they will start remembering that they are in office by the grace of the people not the grace of God, and as such will begin to listen a little more attentively to those "people". At least until the next election is behind them! That is the very reason we need to go back to two-year terms. It is astounding how much the CM's and Mayor gain in humility and hearing ability when the elections are only a couple of years away. If history is looked at you will find most arbitrary, arrogant, and capricious acts by the City Council's Members occur during the first two years after an election. As the new election draws near you will find CM's and the Mayor will develop a great deal better hearing. Shame we had to live through the last two years. For the good of the City we REALLY, REALLY need to start a referendum to change back to two-year terms. Jim Graham, Ventura Village >"The people are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." - Thomas Jefferson >"Why is it the Mongols of this world always tell us they're defending us against the Mongols?" 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
