Re: [Mpls] Community Policing for Mpls?
Matthew Dufresne writes: > I would also be very > interested to see what the candidates for Mayor and City Council have to > say on this issue. If elected or re-elected, would you not only > support, but push for, community policing in Minneapolis? Yes. I agree with Matthew and this is a very high priority for me. Community based and oriented policing ought to part of a comprehensive plan to reform and improve policing in our city. I am convinced that we first need to clearly define what we mean by comminuty policing and be sure that residents, community organizers, neighborhood associations, police and the city have a common understanding of what it is and how we want it to work in Minneapolis. I would also like to see a full review and a community discussion of our CCP/SAFE program. We need to determine if this is working the way people want and if it is possible to improve it to meet the needs and expectations residents have for real community-oriented policing. If it is not, it may be time to move to better model that is more founded on community-oriented policing principles. I applaud Matthew for opening the discussion and I look forward to hearing more comments. In additon to broader ideas on community oriented policing, I am especially interested in hearing views on the effectiveness of CCP SAFE and if and how people feel it could be made more effective. Cam Gordon Candidate for Minneapolis City Council, Ward 2 914 Franklin Terrace Mpls. MN 55406-1101 (612) 332-6210 http://www.camgordon.org ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] affordable housing
I have a couple responses to both the ideas within Mr. Miller and Mr. Gustafson's threads. I'll start with Mr. Gustafson. I think that his comment that often bulldozing and not restoring, but building new affordable housing is often a good idea in its platonic form, unfortunately the reality seems to be that affordable housing gets destroyed and doesn't get replaced. This leads to the ironic situation where housing advocates block the destruction of housing that frankly is substandard. Unfortunately, all too often bad housing is the only option. Also I think that I need to challenge a general thread within Mr. Gustafson's discourse, the dichotomy between personal income for 'self' and taxes for 'other.' The purpose of redistributative taxing is that often when we pool our resources to produce something, it's cheaper than everyone doing it on their own. This is accepted as commonsense with roads and schools, why can't it be used for housing. I don't think its the ultimate solution, but I would rather see my tax money go for that than say... another Target. The truth is that the wealthy get much in the way of subsidies from the government (for instance, I get much of my education paid for...) but all to often in their blindness to this think that it is only the miniscule droppings that the poor get that constitute subsidies. The need for shelter is a societal need not an individual one. As to Mr. Miller, I assume your good faith in this instance, and believe that your probably genuinely interested in creating affordable housing, but for the most part putting developers and landlords in charge of such an operation would be the equivalent of putting the goat out to guard the cabbage patch. Most of the experiences around landlords that I have heard of or experienced have been negative. Tenants are the most important element of the relationship as far as I am concerned... they live in the dilapated constructs. They have to live with the holes in the walls and lack of heat... not the landlords and developers. I don't have concrete solutions to my own problems, but may I make one modest suggestion, perhaps in the planning of affordable housing, the people who will live there perhaps should have a say in where and what this housing will look like. I don't trust the developers and I don't trust the government on its own to make these decisions. Robert Wood femino-marxist, green party member St Paul resident AFL-CIO intern (soon to go to Syracuse...) PS to Mr. Brandt, I lost your address, but while having no problem with interviewing, I don't plan on moving any time soon. ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] between the lines
Russell Peterson wrote: <> Round up the usual suspects. Dennis Schapiro Linden Hills ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Community Policing for Mpls?
I have only been on this chat line for a few months so forgive me if this issue has already been worked over, but how do you all feel about idea of having the Minneapolis Police Dept. begin following a truly community based model of community policing? I would also be very interested to see what the candidates for Mayor and City Council have to say on this issue. If elected or re-elected, would you not only support, but push for, community policing in Minneapolis? I feel that it would be a win-win situation. The police dept. could do a better job, the citizenry would be much more involved, we would know and trust our officers and they of us, crime would most likely go down considerably and maybe we could avoid some of the issues that have plagued the dept. and the City of Minneapolis for so long. I'm not quite sure why Mayor Sayles Belton or Chief Olsen have not worked towards this up to this point, but maybe it's time to try something different since what they have done before doesn't seem to do the job the way many of us would like to see it done. I don't think this is asking too much or being too unreasonable. Maybe it's time to make it a priority for our elected officials so that they do implement it? So let the discussion begin. Respectfully, Matthew Dufresne Central ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Civic Engagement and the U of Minn.
As Minneapolis enters this campaign season and perhaps develops new energies for renewed civic participation, it might look to alliances with this civic engagement effort and the University of Minnesota. Steven Clift Carag Resident See: http://www1.umn.edu/civic/index.html Welcome to the Civic Engagement Project Management Site Welcome Statement A newly-formed University-wide Task Force on Civic Engagement has been charged with strengthening our civic mission across the full range of University activities, and to make practical proposals for institutionalizing civic engagement as a continuing priority. Come to this web site for continuous updates, to communicate among committees and advisory panels, and connect with programs, and activities at the University of Minnesota. We all have a stake in reaffirming and renewing the public purposes of our land grant institution. Use this web site for: Working Committees to communicate with each other and the Task Force Working Committees to communicate with Advisory Panels Task Force members to communicate with each other Advisory Panels to communicate with Working Committees Communicate with Chair of Task Force Find out the latest civic engagement updates We all have a stake in reaffirming and renewing the public purposes of our land grant institution. ^ ^ ^^ Steven L. Clift-W: http://www.publicus.net Minneapolis- - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota - - - - -T: +1.612.822.8667 USA- - - - - - - ICQ: 13789183 ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] RE: public vs private schools
David Brauer wrote: > Finally - and I do mean this sincerely -- I hope Michael runs for the school > board. It would be wonderful to give the voters a choice of a district > critic who has so much obvious passion, but is not a wing nut. > I'm flattered, but I lack one of the basic requirements of a politician: the ability to compromise my values in order to cut a deal. Besides, I find discovering how the brain works more interesting than administration. > Michael Atherton writes: > > >I'm particularly frustrated that I propose reasonable short term solutions > >with empirical references and I get no response. > > What are those reasonable short-term solutions exactly? I scoured Michael's > last several emails criticizing the school system. I came up with: It's not just the last few emails, it goes back several months. I don't write these posts as I would a research review article. If you'd like you can send a consulting fee to the email address above. I think that I provide enough information so that if someone is curious they can obtain the source. Ms. Shreves has cited several articles and I've taken the time to read each and found them informative. I would hope that the BOE members would do the same. > Are they things MPD doesn't do? Yes. They don't do quality vocational training. They don't have a comprehensive parent outreach program. And, they don't have a solution to the minority dropout problem (other than to arrest students for truancy). > And why would we want to do something without "the necessity of seeking > political or community approval" in one breath...and then in the very next > sentence talk about involving parents? That seems somewhat > contradictory...they are members of the community. Effective reforms that are within the power of administrators and don't need legislative or parental approval should be implemented. For example, the creation of a parent outreach program can be implemented without legislative or parental approval. Once the program is underway then parents can become involved. In other words there are some reforms that cannot even get off the ground without prior approval. For more information you can request the Shipps paper from the author. > As for the Johns Hopkins study, the conclusion - involve parents more -- > sounds like "no-duh" to me. But do they suggest anything that MPS doesn't > do? If they actually suggest remedies, have they been tested empirically? It's a seems to be a "no-duh," but in reality it is much more complex. If education was truly valued in our society, then parents would convey these values to their children and intensive parental involvement in the schools would probability be unnecessary. I'm sure that there are parental involvement programs all over the country that do not work, the idea is to find one that does. If anyone is interested in the Johns Hopkins study, let me know and I can give you the author's email address. I believe that there are remedies that have been tested, but I'm not going to do a literature review just for the list server. Even if none had been tested, I'm suggesting that MPS can test their own on a small scale; in say two or three schools. You could match these with other district schools in a quasi-experiment to see if there is a difference. I think that a good program can be inexpensive and tested cheaply. Use parents as organizers, either volunteer or paid. A good example is in the study I cited. > Also, if parent involvement is key, I would suggest Michael's response to > Linda Picone's comment about tutoring at Lyndale was off the mark. You > responded: > > >Although I think that parents should be commended for volunteering in the > >schools, the fact their presence might be necessary for a student to > >succeed is reflection of the systems' failure. This type of parent involvement should not be necessary in a quality school system. Parents should not have to come in and help with other people's kids. I believe that parent involvement at home is the most important factor. > 1. Get rid of teachers unions. I think this is implied by: > > >Because of the unions it is almost impossible to move incompetent > >teachers out of the system. > > Empirical evidence, please? Have we clearly measured competency and know > what percentage of incompetent MPD teachers the unions protect, or is this > just "anti-union correctness?" Also, is there empirical evidence of any > American school system canning its union and improving teacher quality? It > strikes me that you ignore the benefits unions provide in attracting good > teachers - workplace rights, stable pay, etc. The historical record shows that both teachers unions have, at one time or another, opposed standards and testing of teachers. This has been a major obstacle to improving the quality of teaching. A union's primary responsibility is to its members. What's best for teachers is not necessarily best for education as a w
[Mpls] Affordable Housing
I am responding to a comment posted by Craig A. Miller, "Affordable housing is never pretty, rarely is it desirable." I don't believe that and think that we can build/rehab affordable housing with realistic expectations, and keeping in mind that there needs to be a range of housing options spread throughout the metro area. There is a lot of housing, and a lot of housing needs, between a shelter and a home for $150,000. Mary Jamin Maguire Marshall Terrace Neighborhood (where you can still buy a great house or duplex for well under $100,000) ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Re; Affordable Housing
Robert Gustafson wrote: > >Why rent control in these circumstances would be a > >bad thing. > > It doesn't work. It is a short term feel good policy > of the far left who can feel virtuous by showing how > concerned they are for the poor by spending other > peoples money and controlling other peoples assets. I would disagree with that statement. Rent control works very well for one generation. It worked very well in New York, but it hung on about two or even three generations too long and that created the mess. Housing built here 20 years ago was rent controlled for 20 years. However, when the 20 years were up, people did not have other affordable housing to go to. That doesn't work either, or maybe we didn't plan ahead so that it continued to work. WizardMarks, Central ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Affordable Housing Crisis
I am following the thread about the mixed use developments with interest. I attended the Urban Land Institute Conference a couple weeks ago and saw several presentations from other cities that showed revitalization of their core city neighborhoods through a variety of high density, mixed use,village oriented development. Those neighborhoods are now fully occupied and thriving. I was energized by what I saw because it affirms that the development plans currently being drawn all along Lake Street in addition to the plans already drawn for Ventura Village and parts of Stevens Square and Whittier are following a proven path and are headed in the right direction. All of these development plans call for high density, mixed use, village type development with commercial and retail at street level. Pedestrian friendly, transit oriented, bicycle friendly, green space considerate, community gathering places. The plans add one element I didn't see in the other city plans that makes us unique. The micro commercial spaces. The Nicollet and Lake Street redevelopment plans call for flanking the K-Mart and grocery store block buildings with 20x20 micro commercial space to accomodate the new entreprenuer. A great feature in the South Minneapolis neighborhoods that line Lake Street. It also softens the big block building look. While I think 70,000 units with 14,000 affordable is a pretty aggressive goal, I do think that the projects currently drawn for Lake Street and other parts of Phillips, Whittier and Stevens Square are realistic. Four of the plans along Lake Street already have private developers attached to the projects. Ventura Village just received the go-ahead to proceed with their carriage house program. Between these 9 different development plans we are adding well over 15,000 units of mixed use housing with about 3,700 of those being affordable at the 30% - 50% of metro median income range. I feel confident that the neighborhoods are headed in the right direction with their plans. In the early 90's the theme I heard in neighborhoods was to lower density. I sense that thought has changed now because people are aware there is a housing crisis and not just for lower income people. I sense people are taking the problem seriously and for the most part are willing to work toward solutions. I know the crisis is far bigger than can be solved in 3 or 4 neighborhoods in Minneapolis. I do think that neighborhoods can be great catalysts to doing something about the problem and are much more creative about addressing it in a way that fits well within their community. The bigger question for me is what investment in the solution will the different branches of government make? This is going to take all levels of government to address. While we will be successful at finding private developers who are willing to invest in these projects, I don't believe they can be done without investments of tax dollars whether it be through TIF or out right appropriations. The public private partnership is essential in bringing real solutions to this problem. We can't all be fighting for crumbs. The investments have to be real. This to me should be an important reason to keep TIF and NRP alive and well. It's also going to take some incentives to get private people interested in being in the rental property business again. The Feds took away the tax credit for owning rental property in the 80's and I am convinced that played a major role in the problem we are facing today. The profit in individual rental properties is marginal. For most people it is a part time business unless you own a large portfolio of properties. Between property taxes which are assessed at a much higher rate, operating costs, and the time required to manage the properties, there just isn't much incentive to be in the business for many people. We saw a lot of rental property owners leave the business in the late 80's. Without providing some incentive to be in the business we are not going to see the kind of private market investment that will be required to bring a real solution to this problem. Barb Lickness Whittier Ward 6 City Council Candidate __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Re; Affordable Housing
Robert Yorga wrote: >Were redefining the governments role of providing for >the common welfare of the people to I got mine, screw >you. In no way in my post did I mean to infer that attitude. I did ask that when discussing how to solve the affordable housing issue that we consider how taxes imposed on others affect the affordability of their housing. >Why rent control in these circumstances would be a >bad thing. It doesn't work. It is a short term feel good policy of the far left who can feel virtuous by showing how concerned they are for the poor by spending other peoples money and controlling other peoples assets. Its effect on people with money to invest is to tell them to invest it anywhere but affordable housing. Keep in mind that everyone who invests in housing is not a Bill Gates. In the eighties I worked with several groups of teachers who each invested 5-15 grand, pooled their money and bought apartments. My companies specialty was rehabs. Our investors were interested because there were short term tax advantages and potential for long term growth of their assets. Put in rent controls you screw investors. Put in rent controls they invest elsewhere. They invest elsewhere you screw tenants. >Do not take what is not yours seems to be a tenet of >all religions. So what is mine and what is yours? That is good question. If government decides that everything I own and earn really belongs to society, why work and take risks. If on the other hand government says we are on our own,we have no obligations to the common good, that is not a place I would like to live. Seems like we should meet in the middle somewhere. Bob Gustafson 13th __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] demonizing the schools & TIF financing
Thanks Tim for your post. I've also gotten a few explanations offline - some from informative lurkers. Thank you all. What I'm starting to see is that homeowners are getting upset about the amount of subsidy going to commercial projects through TIF which results in an increase in residential tax burden for schools. And if a community is growing and TIF is used there is a likely hood that the growth in school can outpace the growth in tax base causing schools to continue to go after referendum for financing, especially if the State reduces it's share of school funding. Looks like a big problem brewing for growing communities. Russ Peterson former Standishite [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re:[Mpls] Affordable Housing
I wanted to add my two cents in here, but I'll try to make it short and sweet. I believe that everyone has a right to decent and affordable housing. I don't believe too many people disagree with that idea. What concerns some, typically middle to upper class folks, has more to do with how renters and/or lower income individuals/families live or how they behave. So now it becomes more of a class issue and values issue between these two groups. To preface my background; I grew up for a good part of my life as a renter and on welfare due to various life circumstances. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of that fact. It's just my life experience. Then, 2 years ago, my family and I were lucky enough to be in the position to purchase our own home in Central Neighborhood. My personal attitudes have never changed as to how I took care of my home (meticulously, being a rather anal-type of person with a very orderly mother) either as a renter or a homeowner, although I probably do put a bit more time into trying to make my home look more like who I feel I am, which as a renter I was not able to do many times. What I have come to learn is that what the fear of "affordable housing" is has more to do with the fear that those who live in it will not or do not take care of it as well as others might like them to. I believe that there are enough examples of this for all to agree on and at the same time there are as many reasons behind why people chose to live the way they do that are just as valid. I believe we could bridge this gap for the most part if we would be able to get more people to take more pride, ownership and responsibility in their homes whether they be apartments, townhomes, single family homes etc...When our values start to come together the things like class, race, ethnicity, culture don't seem so far apart. Until we reach that point we will continue to have the very debate we are having right now though and each side will feel equally right and virtuous. This will take some time and flexibility on the part of us all, but we can do it if we so chose. Matthew Dufresne Central Neighborhood ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Fwd: History made in Santa Monica
A model for economic justice from Santa Monica, CA... the local tie-in is that the discussion of affordable housing in Minneapolis is inextricably tied to the living wage. -- Holle Brian Bancroft (612) 822-6593 With two Green Party elected officials casting decisive votes, the Santa Monica City Council early this morning passed the country's first living wage ordinance to affect businesses other than city contractors and lessees. The Santa Monica Living Wage Ordinance sets pay at $10.50 an hour for employees of businesses grossing over $5 million in the beachfront city's coastal tourism zone. Health benefit compensation is additionally mandated, at $1.75 per hour the first year and $2.50 an hour thereafter. All amounts will be adjusted annually in proportion to the Consumer Price Index. Despite fierce business opposition, which included an unsuccessful million-dollar hotel-financed initiative campaign to stop the ordinance, the Santa Monica City Council voted 5-1 (with one member absent) to pass the pioneering legislation. An inclusive task force of business, community and labor representitives will be convened to hammer out hardship administrative details, and the wages and benefits will take effect July 1, 2002. Ralph Nader himself had campaigned for the ordinance during visits to Santa Monica, calling for worker justice on the beach outside the opposing luxury hotels. In the end, the law that passed came very close to the original proposal from a community group, Santa Monicans Allied for Responsible Tourism (SMART), which was closely allied with the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees union (HERE) and the city's 22-year-old progressive powerhouse, Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights (SMRR). "Recognizing both worker needs and business concerns, we made moderate compromises that will very significantly improve the lot of low-wage service workers in Santa Monica's tourism zone while protecting a vibrant business environment," Green Party Councilmember Kevin McKeown told the Los Angeles Times. Santa Monica Mayor and Green Party leader Mike Feinstein presided over the history-making meeting. ___ Kevin McKeown| Santa Monica, CA (USA) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 310 393-3639 /-3609 FAX http://www.mckeown.net | "Choose to be conscious" ~~~
[Mpls] RE: TIF and NRP- lets keep the calls and visits comming!
Message sent by Sean Gosiewski, Corcoran Neighborhood Please see new action alert below Rep. Kelliher's message. THANKS Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 11:27:23 -0500From: "Margaret Kelliher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: [Mpls] TIF and NRPGreetings list members,A bit of feedback on the TIF e-mails and phone calls, I have heard =positive comments from my colleagues on the Tax Conference Committee who =have received many concise and polite contacts on this issue. Keep up =your good work. We will keep working on getting the people's business =done here in St. Paul.My best,Margaret Anderson KelliherDistrict 60A, State Representative May 23, 2001 Update/ Action Alert from the Minneapolis Center for Neighborhoods, 612-339-3480 (with some text provided by NRP) RE: The Ombibus Tax Bill, Tax Increment Financing and future funding for NRP & Affordable Housing Included in this message BACKGROUND UPDATE KEY MESSAGE TO CONVEY WHO TO CALL, FAX or VISIT DETAILED LOBBYING MESSAGE FROM NRP OTHER THINGS YOU CAN DO WHERE TO GET MORE INFORMATION A. BACKGROUND In 1990, the Legislature mandated the reservation by the MCDA of $20,000,000 per year in TIF and other revenues for 20 years for the establishment and implementation of the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP). Minneapolis, its neighborhoods and residents kept their end of the bargain, identifying neighborhood priorities, completing plans, developing solutions, and implementing Phase I of the Program. The Minnesota State Senate and State House have now both recently passed tax bills which will radically alter the structure of Tax Increment Financing, or TIF. As you may know, TIF is the primary funding source for NRP, and these changes may dramatically alter the future of NRP funding for neighborhoods. Fortunately, supporters of NRP in the state legislature have been able to add provisions to the Omnibus Tax Bill (a comprehensive bill which essentially combines all tax alterations being considered) which will preserve the NRP. But Anti-tax groups are lobbying hard to remove these provisions, and the future of NRP is in doubt. The State House and State Senate have assigned a small number of their members to a Conference Committee which will work out differences between the Senate and House versions of the Omnibus Tax Bill. This small committee will have a tremendous influence on the outcome of this future of TIF and the future of NRP. B. UPDATE The Senate and House failed to work out their compromises during the regular session. The Governor will be calling a special session (probably later in May or in early June.) Senate and House leaders will be working over the next week to work out the language which they will bring into the special session for approval by the House and Senate. C. KEY MESSAGES TO CONVEY Neighborhood leaders can make a difference by contacting the key people from the Senate, House and Executive Branch, who will be involved in negotiations for the Omnibus Tax Bill. We need to continue to send clear information to these negotiators on the Benefits of the Minneapolis Neighborhood Revitalization Program Need for more affordable housing in the Twin Cities, and the Importance of maintaining the TIF funding for NRP and for Affordable Housing (for both cities & suburbs) When calling or visiting legislators, and the Executive Branch please... Keep your message brief and to the point. Do not talk about other issues. Do not get angry or vindictive--these are all potential supporters. Thank them for their time and work on this issue. D. WHO TO CALL, FAX or VISIT KEY EXECUTIVE BRANCH LEADERS to contact Commissioner Matt Smith, Department of Revenue, Revenue Dept, 600 North Robert St, 4th Floor St Paul, MN 551467100 Phone 651/296-3403 , Fax 651 297-5309, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Governor Jesse Ventura Governors Office, 130 State Capitol, 75 Constitution St Paul, MN 55155 Phone 651/296-3391, Fax 651/296-2089 [EMAIL PROTECTED] KEY SENATE LEADERS to contact Roger D. Moe (DFL- Erskine) Majority Leader , District 2, 208 Capitol, 75 Constitution Ave St. Paul, MN 55155-1606 (651) 296-2577 [EMAIL PROTECTED] John C. Hottinger (DFL-Mankato) Assistant Majority Leader, District 24, 205 Capitol, 75 Constitution Ave St. Paul, MN 55155-1606 (651) 296-6153, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Very influential with Republicans, very knowledgable on TIF Lawrence J. Pogemiller (DFL- NE Mpls) District 59, 235 Capitol, 75 Constitution Ave St. Paul, MN 55155-1606 Phone (651) 296-7809 Fax 651-296-6511 [EMAIL PROTECTED] , Legislative Aide- Patty Reichert Senate Tax Committee Chair, has been working closely with Bob Miller to ensure the TIF funding base for NRP is maintained in the Senate Omnibus Tax Bill. Is lead negotiator to ensure that the final Omnibus Tax Bill keeps the language that maintains the TIF funding base for NRP. Ann H. Rest (DFL-New Hope) Dist
Oops re [Mpls] Affordable Housing
Apologies! I forgot to sign the previous post. One supplemental thought: Becky Yanisch warned us in 1998 that there is an inexorable gap between cost of production and ability to pay that amounts to about $7,000 per unit. The headscratching begins when one thinks about how to close that gap at the point of production and then how to sustain the built environment over time. HUD is cutting back on modernization dollars, so even Minneapolis' existing MPHA inventory, albeit improved by $75 million in modernization contracts in recent years, is in long-term jeopardy. Fred Markus, Horn Terrace, Ward Ten ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re[Mpls] Housing Crisis
Last month the MPHA Board voted to authorize their staff to explore the notion of having that agency be a full-boat developer of affordable housing, not just a caretaker agency for the - ballpark figure - $500 million public housing stock extant and wholly owned in Minneapolis. New federal rules also permit MPHA to undertake substantial partnerships with private entities. Both MPHA and MCDA have looked closely at what turns out to be a promising market potential for senior housing in particular and MPHA is meeting with housing advocates June 1 to go over the agency's current one-year and five-year draft plans prior to the MPHA Board's public hearing on June 27. The Minneapolis High Rise Representative Council (MHRC) will have some heavy-duty comment finalized for inclusion in MPHA's annual message to its federal overseers and other interested parties. Stephen Seidel, the Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity, an agency participant in the Consortium of Nonprofit Developers, argues that economies of scale will once again have their day in the production of affordable housing stock. Warning against unthinking reliance on the current "mixed-income" formulation he says: "In mixed-income developments, the standard approach is to reserve 20% of the units for households with very low incomes (i.e. incomes below 50% of area median). This means that in order to produce 20 units of affordable housing a development needs to produce a total of 100 units. Based on this 20% formula (and using the figures produced by the Minneapolis Affordable Housing Task Force which in 1999 determined that the city of Minneapolis alone needed 14,000 additional units of affordable housing), relying entirely on the mixed-income development approach would mean 70,000 total units of housing would need to be produced in order to create the 14,000 units of affordable housing needed just in the city of Minneapolis. Seventy thousand units of housing equals approximately one-third of all the housing units that currently exist in the city of Minneapolis. Clearly, producing 70,000 of units of housing in Minneapolis is not going to happen in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, tens of thousands of households are living in sub-standard housing -- housing that is overcrowded or housing that consumes too large a share of their modest incomes." Cradle to grave collateral costs of inadequate housing on a massive scale are there to be noted. Ask the service professionals who deal with family crises. Ask the law enforcement community. Ask the families and individuals themselves, especially renters. Ask the neighborhood associations across the city. Ask small businesses about the destabilizing effects of too little housing for too many people. Ask our tourist and convention visitors and our suburban commuters about their personal comfort levels once the sun goes down. Large businesses and relatively advantaged homeowners might well consider the cost of the "pounds of cure" required when our elected officials and public agencies duck "ounces of prevention" strategies - specifically the vote in Minneapolis to move the definition of "affordable" from 30% to 50% of metro median income. Such a patent avoidance strategy deserves the attention of all the city's voters because more of the same will mean sharply increased public costs in the years ahead. One may hope that a more resolute mayor and city council (aka the MCDA Board) - will abandon economic handwringing and get on with some major housing production for the gazillion Minneapolis households who bring in less than $20,000 annually. This is a large city and we don't - we can't - all live in $150,000 to $200,000 bungalows with little lawns out front. ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Housing Crisis
Wizard raised good points. They need to be addressed and/or challenged. The point of taking >housing down is to make it impossible for the poor to find >housing within the city and the value of homes to rise so >taxes can as well. I call this the boutiquing of the city. "Please no poor people, or their jobs or their housing, can't we make the whole city look like 50th and France?" Some people call it class cleansing. Whole families wind up in shelters (same >as the poor house, grim, grim, grim). The Dickensian poor house is hear already folks. Mary Joe runs it. DISCLAIMER MJ RUNS A FAB SHOP I question a society that causes a need for this. > >This is a terrible bind, but in this housing crisis all the >stake holders--which means everyone with shelter--need to >help find a solution. Policy makers need to start listening to and doing what the stake holders ask. One current example would be at the legislature this year. The Gov and House had a 33% cut in rental prop tax. I doubt this would lower rent. It would stem the current spiral upwards. But it was a casualty in the Senate. That would be one SMALL step. I agree with Gustafson, that it does >mean taking down marginal houses--and maybe the two houses >next to them, to build multi-unit buildings. This is how we built the "modern" 2 1/2 (11-12 units) story walk up. We built a bunch of these from 1960-1970 in the city. Then the neighbors and the neighbors said " we don't like them or what goes on there" that kind of hot zoning stopped. BTW most of those buildings are now approaching 40 years of age. I have three of them. They have housed thousands over the years. They have stood the test of time quite well. >--a nod to neighbors who don't want to have to >look at some of the infamous multi-unit buildings which have >been built in the past. We have a couple in my neighborhood >so ugly they make your eyes bleed to look at them. Above is an excellent example of what I mean. Infamous 1030 Morgan Ave. N. will forever stand out as the symbol of how Minneapolis dealt with crime and criminal behaviour in the '80s and the '90's. Does anyone remember the front end loader crashing into the buiding on Golden Valley Road? That was crimefighting at it's worst. Affordable housing is never pretty, rarely is it desirable. But it is needed. Now lets get it build with minimum distraction. Lets stop punishing those who currently provide it. Lets stop discouraging those who might try it. Craig A. Miller Former Fultonite [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] demonizing the schools & TIF financing
>Lynell talked about the hard time at the legislature for >Minneapolis schools. One of the things that seems more and >more puzzling to me is how TIF financing seems to be tied to >our school resources. I've heard a number of comments out >here in exurbia about how schools are having to dismantle >programs because TIF financing is depriving schools of their >fare share of tax base. Is this happening in Minneapolis >too and come anyone explain this to me? > >Russ Peterson > >former Standishite I think what people are referring to is that a couple of years back, the Legislature passed some changes to tax policy that, in effect, cause any tax increases voted in by referendum (like the Minneapolis Schools referendum to increase taxes to pay for smaller class sizes) to apply only to residential property, not to commercial property. (This is a rough generalization of it -- former Senator Carol Flynn can explain it in more detail if you want specific details.) So then elected officials, bombarded by the constant conservative opposition to taxes, avoid the difficult task of raising taxes to fund needed improvements, instead turning to referendums. And these referendums pass, because the public recognizes the need to invest in these needed facilities. But because of this change in tax policy, the self-imposed higher taxes from these referendums fall mainly on residential homeowners, rather than on commercial property. The net result -- a shift in the tax burden: away from commercial property and onto the residential homeowner. Tim Bonham, 12th Ward ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
