Dear Minneapolis,
"So, for the edification of us all, I'd like to hear,
outside of the context of this campaign, what are
listmembers perceptions relative to color based bias
in Minneapolis? How much of a problem is it and what
can or is being done about it in our community?"
I offer my observations and some commentary,
First of all, much of one's perception would seem
to center around one's ancestry; therefore, it would
seem reasonable to point out that I am of Norwegian,
Scots-Irish, French, Welsh, etcetera...point being
is that I appear quite Northern-European. In order
to achieve some semblance of objectivity I believe
it is necessary for me, as a person, to ask people
of color who are my friends what their perceptions
are of racial bias in our City. I have then, over
time, tried to examine the empirical data (the
considerable number of studies) centering around
this issue: The Racial Profiling Traffic Stop studies
done by Law Enforcement in our State from 2000-2001,
various studies done at the Institute on Race and
Poverty at the University of Minnesota and at the
Council on Crime and Justice (collectively known
as the, "Racial Disparity Initiative"), the findings
of the Minnesota Supreme Court, various position
papers on the issue from a variety of sources.
Well, the overwhelming concensus would seem to
be that there is a very definite inequity at work
in our City. This would be buttressed, again, by
people of color.
In more than one comment on the list, the removal
of Lt. Arrondondo from the PCRC process has been
seen as unrelated to the neglect of the Federal
Mediation Agreement. In truth, I don't know for
sure...perhaps no one outside of the MPD does.
I do know, however, that some of the signatories
of the original Mediation Agreement seem to feel
that this has not helped the PCRC process at all.
Add into Lt. Arrodondo's removal, the removal of
Glenn Burt as well and-if nothing else-these moves
would not seem to serve the interest of diffusing
the tension in our City.
In the current issue of the Observer, Mark
Anderson wrote an article entitled, "The Mayor
and Mediation". In this article (from one of the
original signatories of the Mediation Agreement)
the following quote may be found,
"However, Mayor Rybak's lack of involvement has
been a frustration to many. He has refused to meet
or respond to letters and has attended only one
meeting since negotiation began more than two years
ago. In recent weeks he agreed to take the calls
of the co-chairs of the PCRC in response to
community members' initative to bring the Federal
Mediator back in from Chicago to bring him to the
table."
Ok. So, in light of the extant research, the
observations of those involved directly in the
process (PCRC), and many members of the communities
of color in our City, I would say there is a
definite sense that a level of inequity exists
relative to "color based bias" in our City. I, for
one, am
going to take what I consider to be evidence of
bias at face value. The question then becomes: If
inequity exists, what are we going to do about it?
We can listen to the people who are directly
impacted, read the research and then decide if
we will work to change the situation.
These issues are at the very heart of the PS & RS
meeting scheduled to occur next Wednesday at 1:30
in City Council chambers. The specific issue at
hand, it would seem, is section 4 of hiring practices
in the MPD from the Mediation Agreement.
To lecture members of the African-American, Native-
American, Asian, GLBT, Latino communities to the
effect (poorly-veiled) that their pereceptions are
erroneous would seem to be extremely arrogant. To
contest that there are no problems with the
implementation of the Mediation Agreement flies in the
face of what would seem to be incontrovertible
evidence to the contrary.
So, are we still the State that produced Hubert
Humphrey and Senator Wellstone...or have we become
something else? Personally, it troubles me that our
electorate has become so disengaged when matters that
rest at the very heart of Social Justice are viewed
as ancillary to the subject of community relations.
This is, for me, an intolerable State of Affairs.
We can either unite around such issues and actually
take definitive action, or we can rationalize the
problems away...we can continue to deny that problems
exist. While such avenues for inaction are an option,
they would seem anti-progressive.
I think that everyone who is either running for
office or who is already an elected official should
attend next Wednesday's meeting and try to understand
the basis of frustration from those who are directly
involved. People with vision need to step forth and
put an end to the gridlock that prevails around these
issues...people need to quit fighting over scraps
and put the pie back together. This is not,
historically, who we have been...we have always been
in the vanguard of Social Justice in this country...
what the Hell have we come to?
Guy Gambill
(Uptown)
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
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
