Re: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget...
Dyna Sluyter wrote: NRP has been one of the city's most successful programs- perhaps instead of being gored it should be the model of how city services are delivered. How can the NRP be a successful program when it failed to meet its budget target for housing expenditures and is susceptible to racial bias? The housing target was over the life of the program...which is only half over (there were no interim targets), even if the second half is minimal. As I recall, the housing expenditures didn't miss by much in the first 10 years. Second, the allegation of racial bias is far from proven. The one statistical summary alleging has not presented a detailed view of its methods to be able to peer review, which, as Michael often asserts, is a necessary component for judging validity. (A side point: even if certain groups received more than their share of expenditures, that does not inherently connote bias. Or, as many a stat prof has said, correlation does not equal causation.) I would argue that opinion polls showing Minneapolis residents consistently, overwhelming supporting NRP, plus the success of many candidates supporting NRP in the last election, are a good evidence that the program has succeeded. Of course, that may be a problem for those same politicians now. ;) David Brauer King Field ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget...
David Brauer wrote: The housing target was over the life of the program...which is only half over (there were no interim targets), even if the second half is minimal. As I recall, the housing expenditures didn't miss by much in the first 10 years. 40.2% vs. the 52% target is not much? And, it is unlikely that the program will ever meet its intended goal. I think this just shows how inefficiently the NRP has been managed. Even when we are so far behind, a reallocation procedure in my neighborhood has no explicit directions to correct this problem. I believe that it's because there never was any intention of meeting the housing goal (at least that's the impression that I got from Bob Miller). Second, the allegation of racial bias is far from proven. The one statistical summary alleging has not presented a detailed view of its methods to be able to peer review, which, as Michael often asserts, is a necessary component for judging validity. Great, let's hear the statistics from the NRP! My hunch is that they don't exist. From my personal observation, in a neighborhood with approximately 8% African Americans, it is extremely rare to see any Black faces at our meetings. The one African American I know who use to attend meetings left in disgust. (A side point: even if certain groups received more than their share of expenditures, that does not inherently connote bias. Or, as many a stat proof has said, correlation does not equal causation.) If the purpose of the NRP was to provide neighborhood involvement in tax revenue decisions and if African American do not participate, then the decision making process may not representative. An inherent flaw and continual problem with the NRP. I would argue that opinion polls showing Minneapolis residents consistently, overwhelming supporting NRP, plus the success of many candidates supporting NRP in the last election, are a good evidence that the program has succeeded. Of course, that may be a problem for those same politicians now. What polls showing that residents overwhelming support for the NRP? Even though it appears that many residents think that they have heard of the NRP, I have not seen any evidence that people actually known or understand what the NRP does. I thought that you just mentioned that correlation does not imply causation, so why do you claim that the success of candidates is linked to their support of the NRP? It could have nothing to do with it. It didn't seem to do much for Cherryhomes and Campbell Politically that is, Cherryhomes did get a home improvement loan from the NRP and Biernat applied for one. I don't know if he ever got it. The NRP has succeeded in creating, what I think, is the biggest pork trough in the city's history. In a time when were are considering cutting basic services, I don't see how people have the nerve to suggest moving funds away from the basics to fund superfluous projects. It might be wiser to decommissioning the NRP until we have a budget surplus again and concentrate on correcting the city's financial woes in the meantime. I think that the only reason the NRP has the support that it does is that the people who run and implement it are politically active and well connected. I can see no other reason for supporting an organization that does not understand representative government, due process, or minority rights (and shows no inclination in learning). Michael Atherton Prospect Park ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget...
Perhaps one's perspective of NRP depends upon from where it is being viewed. Living in Jordan, I can assure you that NRP has been a most valued tool in fighting urban blight. We used 98 % of our funds on housing. And yes, we had minorities working on the process. We did not get as much involvement from minority and renters as we wanted, but it wasn't because we didn't try or that they were not welcomed. NRP funds helped us get rid of and rehab many substandard housing units in our neighborhood. As a result, we have many new homeowners who are participating in the neighborhood. That's the good news. The bad news is that the city seems to be putting less emphasis on listening to the neighborhoods and more emphasis on making changing that could be detrimental to our poorer neighborhoods. This is not giving much hope to our new residents, or to those of us who have lived through the hard times and were looking forward to some progress and innovation. Anne McCandless Jordan - Original Message - From: Michael Atherton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 4:38 PM Subject: RE: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget... David Brauer wrote: The housing target was over the life of the program...which is only half over (there were no interim targets), even if the second half is minimal. As I recall, the housing expenditures didn't miss by much in the first 10 years. 40.2% vs. the 52% target is not much? And, it is unlikely that the program will ever meet its intended goal. I think this just shows how inefficiently the NRP has been managed. Even when we are so far behind, a reallocation procedure in my neighborhood has no explicit directions to correct this problem. I believe that it's because there never was any intention of meeting the housing goal (at least that's the impression that I got from Bob Miller). Second, the allegation of racial bias is far from proven. The one statistical summary alleging has not presented a detailed view of its methods to be able to peer review, which, as Michael often asserts, is a necessary component for judging validity. Great, let's hear the statistics from the NRP! My hunch is that they don't exist. From my personal observation, in a neighborhood with approximately 8% African Americans, it is extremely rare to see any Black faces at our meetings. The one African American I know who use to attend meetings left in disgust. (A side point: even if certain groups received more than their share of expenditures, that does not inherently connote bias. Or, as many a stat proof has said, correlation does not equal causation.) If the purpose of the NRP was to provide neighborhood involvement in tax revenue decisions and if African American do not participate, then the decision making process may not representative. An inherent flaw and continual problem with the NRP. I would argue that opinion polls showing Minneapolis residents consistently, overwhelming supporting NRP, plus the success of many candidates supporting NRP in the last election, are a good evidence that the program has succeeded. Of course, that may be a problem for those same politicians now. What polls showing that residents overwhelming support for the NRP? Even though it appears that many residents think that they have heard of the NRP, I have not seen any evidence that people actually known or understand what the NRP does. I thought that you just mentioned that correlation does not imply causation, so why do you claim that the success of candidates is linked to their support of the NRP? It could have nothing to do with it. It didn't seem to do much for Cherryhomes and Campbell Politically that is, Cherryhomes did get a home improvement loan from the NRP and Biernat applied for one. I don't know if he ever got it. The NRP has succeeded in creating, what I think, is the biggest pork trough in the city's history. In a time when were are considering cutting basic services, I don't see how people have the nerve to suggest moving funds away from the basics to fund superfluous projects. It might be wiser to decommissioning the NRP until we have a budget surplus again and concentrate on correcting the city's financial woes in the meantime. I think that the only reason the NRP has the support that it does is that the people who run and implement it are politically active and well connected. I can see no other reason for supporting an organization that does not understand representative government, due process, or minority rights (and shows no inclination in learning). Michael Atherton Prospect Park ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget...
Just to respond to a couple of Michael's points. I'll let others carry on the debate. David Brauer wrote: The housing target was over the life of the program...which is only half over (there were no interim targets), even if the second half is minimal. As I recall, the housing expenditures didn't miss by much in the first 10 years. 40.2% vs. the 52% target is not much? No, it's not. It's all relative, but housing was still by far the biggest chunk of NRP spending...to within 80% of the target. And everyone - thanks in part to the press doing its job - knows that the first half fell short. City leaders and neighborhood leaders all know the 52 percent must be hit - it's state law. I'd say even if NRP is mortally wounded, the money must be found to meet the housing goal. Certainly, the falloff (from majority to plurality) is not enough to pronounce the program a failure. From my personal observation, in a neighborhood with approximately 8% African Americans, it is extremely rare to see any Black faces at our meetings. The one African American I know who use to attend meetings left in disgust. Hey, so did one conservative grad student, but I'm not sure that's statistically significant. Seriously, I do think that the hurdle for NRP involvement is huge. There's no doubt that the time requirements needed to sit on any board - neighborhood, NRP, or elective office - are tougher on the poor, who are disproportionately minority. HOWEVER, this is a problem throughout society. The Minneapolis City Council, elected by the people, is disproportionately white. Voting is disproportionately white - but is voting (except in Florida) biased? I'd say not - there are no racist barriers to entry, no poll tax, no lack of registration drives, no unequal treatment whatever. I think in other contexts, Michael would oppose a quota system, since it denies individual initiative. Yet he appears to be advocating this here. What's your preferred system of decision-making, Michael? What would have all groups equally represented? What polls showing that residents overwhelming support for the NRP? From the Star Tribune pre-election poll, 9/23/01, page 1a: Voters were overwhelmingly supportive of continued funding for the Neighborhood Revitalization Program (NRP), with 77 percent saying it should be continued and only 15 percent saying the money could be better spent elsewhere. Even though it appears that many residents think that they have heard of the NRP, I have not seen any evidence that people actually known or understand what the NRP does. I'm sorry, I think this statement is yours to prove. The rest of the pro-versus-anti NRP debate has happened many times on the list before, so I'll listen to others. David Brauer King Field ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Saturday NRP session- Sly Di takes her sawzall to thebudget...
In a message dated 1/13/03 6:07:23 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: City leaders and neighborhood leaders all know the 52 percent must be hit - it's state law. I'd say even if NRP is mortally wounded, the money must be found to meet the housing goal. For information only: The housing % is a target, not a mandate inasmuch as there is no consequence defined for not hitting the target. This is not my opinion, but is actually the formal legal opinion of the city attorney. Concerning hitting the 52% target or not: the legislation that established the housing target did not define what "housing and housing-related expenditures" were - for the purpose of NRP. A working definition of acceptable "housing etc." expenditures was established a couple of years later by the NRP Policy Board. The Policy Board could modify the definition of qualifying expences and the compliance/non-compliance level would change - not that I'm suggesting this. Ann Berget Kingfield (Past Policy Board Chair)
