Citizen participation as exemplified in the Minneapolis NRP process provides
a significant feature that was missing prior to the NRP program except for a
brief period in it's very ancient precursor, the Minneapolis Model City
program.  Most citizen particpation/advisory venues that have existed in the
city have been relatively prescribed in their focus and usually, have little
ability for "out of the box" inititatives.  The CLIC Board for example can
propose priorities for bonding and have influence on how bonding gets done.
It has little power to create a new project for which bonding may be used.
(I suppose they could, but as a general rule they do not.)  In contrast, the
NRP project empowers activists within a community to coallesce around a
concept that has support within their local area, that might not otherwise
garner the attention of a city staff neccesarily focused on ongoing
operations.  It is this power of intiative that makes NRP valuable in the
long run.  The second significant contribution of NRP that can serve as a
two edge sword for elected officials, is that it provides a mechanism for
those who desire to be active to get involved in the proverbial sandbox.
Not a few city leaders past, present and future learned at least some of the
nuts and bolts via the process.  This is a good thing. A Poly Sci 101 course
does not equip anyone to run for and serve in office.  Activity in a
neighborhood can however acquaint folks with people and process not to
mention issues.  Its true that neighborhood groups can sometimes get a
little out of line in their self importance and from time to time believe
they speak for their neighborhoods. In fact they speak for a segment of
their neighborhoods, that set of activists that choose to participate in
their arena. That may not include other activists who are more focused on
national state or international issues or who choose to be involved via
political parties or by writting blogs or essays on the Mpls issues list.
Others may seek to improve society via other civic groups or churches or by
volunteering their services in other ways.  The number of potential venues
for involvement are extensive, but few are as geographically based as the
neighborhood.  Within a city it makes sense to consider geographical
interests.   What makes the NRP process democratic small d, is that they are
by rule and practice open to any and all that choose to engage themselves.
The fact that some groups tend to be underrepresented is an issue, but not
in and of itself a reason to gut the mechanism.  In my opinion it is still
any Americans right to go home from work, kick of his/her shoes, grab a beer
and the remote and not go to any meetings.  That however, should not
disenfranchise those who for whatevever purpose decide they will.  In my
neighborhood, I am leading a project to explore the possibilities of some
alternative bus routing within our community. It may or may not make sense,
but it's getting looked at. Without NRP the concept wouldn't ever get the
time of day.  That's the power, and the value. There are countless other
examples throughout the NRP experience. 
 
Earl Netwal
Past Policy and Planning Council Member Model Cities (1971-3)
Subsequenlty Alderman Ward 6 (1973-7)
Curently Board Member NENA 
 
 
 
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to