Those involved with Minneapolis neighborhood organizations may be interested
in a Minnesota House bill (HF 404) introduced by Minneapolis reps Jean
Wagenius, Karen Clark, Len Biernat, and Wes Skoglund. I think this state
action is germane to Minneapolis-issues because it is a response to the
disputed election in the Central neighborhood.
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/bldbill.pl?bill=H0404.0&session=l
s82
Based on my first read-through, the bill mandates specific, extensive
procedures for publicizing neighborhood meetings.
According to the bill, "Thirty days before a meeting of the members of the
neighborhood organization is to be held, notice of the date, time, and place
of the meeting and any other information required by this chapter must be:
(1) posted at all libraries, schools, park board, and other public buildings
located within the geographic boundaries of the neighborhood organization,
and (2) published in the community newspaper having the largest circulation
within the geographic boundaries of the neighborhood organization or in a
neighborhood organization newsletter that is distributed to all occupied
buildings in the neighborhood."
The bill also sets specific guidelines for who can vote at such a meeting:
(b) In the case of a neighborhood organization, members with voting rights
are individuals who, at a meeting of the neighborhood organization, can
produce:
(i) a Minnesota driver license, Minnesota identification card, or some form
of residency verification issued by a public agency that indicates the
individual resides within the geographic boundaries of the neighborhood
organization; or
(ii) proof of ownership or lease of a business or property or proof of being
employed by a nonprofit organization or government entity located within the
geographic boundaries of the neighborhood, if such members are authorized by
the bylaws of the neighborhood organization.
Comment: Since the reps didn't publicize their own bill very well to those
of us in the neighborhoods (hint, hint), I'm wondering what people think of
it?
>From this neighborhood board president's perspective, I think the
meeting-publicity requirements look good. My only concern is that the
language is restricted to annual meeting/elections - it would be an all-out
drag to publicize our monthly neighborhood board meetings this way (that's
why we have 'em at the same date, time, and place every month).
As for the voting requirements, they also look rational, if a bit onerous.
Here in good ol' King Field, we've never checked driver's licenses or
residency verification, but maybe we should - a la Florida, you never know
when a disputed election will hit.
I'm not sure exactly what constitutes "proof of ownership or lease of a
business or property," etc. In King Field, most of us know the business
owners by sight. We're trying to get these folks more involved in the
neighborhood association, and I'd hate to make them produce tough-to-find
business documents to vote in our meeting. (Our bylaws allow business owners
to be members of the neighborhood association.) Then again, if you're going
to require residents to produce a driver's license, you need some
verification for business owners - but is there an easier way?
I do hope the Minneapolis reps behind the bill took the time to stop by
their local neighborhood organizations to let them know this was coming and
get feedback. Publicity good for the neighborhood goose is also nice for the
elected-official gander...
David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10
President, Kingfield Neighborhood Assn.
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
