Gregory Luce wrote:
WM: Nor do I wish to rehash the issue. However, I am saying that the work of CVI will require contending with the fact that a huge pool of resentment has been raised by the method of obtaining the site and that will adversely affect the project's goals.My overall point was the model of supportive housing, not the locale, and I'm not sure most folks disagree with the overall model provided by CVI: four anchor families in market rate units who are involved in various ways in helping 16 other families in the remaining units, plus supportive services.
WM: Actually, I think the model itself has more than a little hope of succeeding. However, the resentment already created may skewer the model out of shape, so that measuring the results gets more difficult and less reliable.I guess now we'll have to see if CVI works where it is located or if, according to its opponents, it is a colossal failure waiting to happen.
WizardMarks, Central ________________________________
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
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.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
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
