[MPLS] MPRB highlights 8-3-05 part 4
Planning Committee 6:32 pm 4.1 Reciprocal Agreement with DeLaSalle Commissioner Hauser makes a motion for amendments to be included in the agreement 1) That the agreement include language to abide by city labor requirements 2) That a formal public hearing is held on August 17th ( when this will be before the full board) 3) That a minimum of 150 hours of gym time and 350 hours of field time be list in the agreement Liz's comment... Here is where I missed some stuff.There was a question of it being seconded by someone who made an original motion or something but a vote was never taken so I have no idea if these were added or if they were accepted as friendly amendments or what. Anybody catch this at home There is some disagreement between Commissioner Erwin and Commissioner Hauser over a Citizen's Advisory Committee to which Commissioner Hauser is adamant will take place after the vote on the Agreement Commissioner Erwin makes a statement that both sides have issues and that there should have been a Citizen's Advisory Committee and a Plan before a Reciprocal Use Agreement was ever discussed, but he feels that the MPRB is bound by the 1983 agreement to build a field. He will be voting NO. Commissioner Young asks for clarification of a few items in the agreement from GM Siggelkow and then makes the following statement (graciously provided in its entirety) August 3, 2005 10 Reasons why I am voting "NO" on the Reciprocal Agreement today: 10. The people living on the island, though mighty privileged ( and so lucky, I might add), do not own the land under their homes, the MPRB does. Why is DeLaSalle, an institution, being treated with such privilege? DeLaSalle is a private school for those who can afford the tuition ( along with scholarship kids). Not much different than the diversity in our public schools or other private and charter schools throughout the City. It's boosters are asking for the privilege of breaking the covenant between the board and the citizens set out in 1983. 9. In a letter from Roger Martin ( architect and urban planner) - who has worked on planning many a park project including Nicollet Island: "I found that working with the Schools' administration and community residents in the process of master planning the Island to come to reasonable compromise resulted in a good plan and I hope that this process can be continued in this manner." Commissioner Erwin has literally promised me, he can negotiate a compromise if we could just get all the parties together. Something I and Commissioner Berry Graves have been asking to have happen for months. I honestly believe is could happen if we would take the time to do this- and do it right. 8. I have recently learned of the need for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet necessary for redevelopment projects within Historic Preservation Districts. I think this will show us some of the impacts this development might have on the Island as a whole. There are also the hurdles of the Met Council, the City Planning Commission and the City Council vacating Grove Street, positive actions from many agencies-almost too many to name. 7. I am very concerned about perceived perceptions regarding some Commissioner's conflict of interest in the issue. May I note that Commissioner Erwin who has worked hard on building our relationship and mutual services with the University has still stepped aside when it is time for an actual vote. 6. I am concerned about the mixed messages of whether this votes takes 5 or 6 votes. I know that there are two people in the audience who have not missed a Board meeting waiting to see if we change the rules depending on the situation. They stand waiting for us to make a mistake. This is a mistake. 5. I am concerned about a lawsuit from either party. The costs could certainly be astronomical in our current state of very little money for the maintenance and operations of our current needs and services. 4. I believe that we paid outside counsel to give us an answer that our own counsel would not have given. The outside counsel did not even answer some of the deeper questions of this debate. Even though our own counsel is a DeLaSalle graduate he has continued to give us objective ( in defense of the Park Board) opinions of what is needed for this case. 3. It is my deep concern about the relationship stated in the Constitution about the separation of Church and State. I, for one, still believe that principle stands even if not carried out by many in our society today. 2. I have not seen a plan. 1. And, very embarrassingly, I must say, " Our process has been lousy- to say the least. Commissioner Mason then states she will be voting NO if this comes before the full board on the 17th. Commissioner Hauser poses a couple of questions one being is this unprecedented ? Director of Planning Reitkerk mentions ma
[MPLS] MPRB Highlights 8-3-05 Part 3
New Business Commissioner Fine asks that the Board acknowledge the passing of Frederick Brown Wells with a moment of silence. Mr. Wells generously donated $4,000,000 to the Neiman Complex for the Tennis Center and spent the years since creating an endowment to keep the center funded ( including asking that his memorials be donated to the center). A moment of silence is observed. Commissioner Young presents her idea for Heat Bonuses. With the record number of days over 90 degrees and the high humidity the MPRB employees have been getting the brunt of summer with exposure to the weather and for the lifeguards etc... increasingly larger crowds at the pools and beaches. She suggests a motion that becomes a staff direction that ends up being a couple of questions...1) What would it cost to give the staff some sort of heat bonus? and 2) Would it be possible to do some sort of thank you event and what would that cost? Next the MPRB passes resolution 2005-111 Recognizing the contributions of Todd Pufahl to the MPRB and its members of city employees' local no.363 Mr. Pufahl has apparently moved on in the union to the state level. Reports of Officers Paul Hokeness ( Lakes District Manager ) He relates the story of how he and staff found a way to paint the garbage bins on site so they can do an entire park at one time Gives kudos for the dedication of Armatage's new skate-park and mentions the mayor's attempts at skateboarding mentions the concerts and movies in Loring Park as well happenings at various parks throughout the city coming in August ( www.minneapolisparks.org ) Sara Ackman (sp) filling in for Jon Oyanagi (River District Manager) Mentions the 2900 tickets Commissioner Dziedzic passed on from the folks at Ameriquest Mortgage for Twins games this week for the kids at the parks and rec centers Talks about the Cooperative at Folwell/Farview and North Commons creating a day camp ( 30-80 kids participating) and are hoping to continue it for after-school this fall. Gives a PEACE GAMES update and mentions upcoming ice cream socials in the parks 8/10 at Webber and 8/11 at Audubon both are from 6-8pm Eileen Kilpatrick ( Minnehaha District Manager) Mentions how well the Festival of Neighborhoods went during the Aquatenniel Mentions upcoming events in the parks (Powderhorn Art Fair is this weekend ) Describes how her district is handling some events that happen during the usual end of summer 2 week shutdown by flexing some schedules Working to inform the public about the new scooter laws that have gone into effect by offering a scooter school Recessed to the Planning committee at 6:32 Liz Wielinski Columbia Park ( who has to work the night of the Audubon Ice Cream social... rats) 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] on homelessness part 2
Tangible #4: re- The Mayor compared to Commissioner McLaughlin on homelessness. For the past 3 plus years I and other advocates have contacted the Mayor and his office to try to get the Mayor to become involved with the work of the Community Advisory Board on Homelessness. (*I am not a member of this board. I served for 2 plus years on the Decriminalization Task Force of the Board.*) The Mayor would not respond. He would not assign a staff person to come to the meetings or be part of the Decrim Task Force's research and work. Guy Gambill has mentioned in a earlier post about the Mayor's lack of concern or interest in efforts to engage him in the effort to make positive, practical steps to address homelessness in ways proven to be cost effective in other cities across the country. Other City Officials offered great assistance and support, but not the Mayor. The Mayor did not attend the Study Session on June 10th where the Decrim Task Force presented its finding and recommendations. To be fair his aide Erik Takeshita attended for most of it...but never spoke to the issues at hand. The work of the Decrim Task Force and the presentation to the City Council was a wonderful opportunity for the Mayor to step up and collaborate and work with advocates. He continued to ignore the issues instead. The work of the Decrim Task Force has been noted by the National Coalition for the Homeless as a model for other cities to follow in working with local officials and entities to partner to end homelessness and the criminalization of homelessness. In contrast Commissioner McLaughlin responded to an e-mail I sent him with the recommendations of the Decrim Task Force Atteached. The Commissioner met me to talk about the recommendations (He read them!) and asked insightful, good questions. He then took the step to have advocates meet with the Chair of the Downtown Council and ultimately the Commissioner set up a Livability Task force Chaired by Judge Hopper that is a working group to address ways to not criminalize people living homeless and/or with mental health issues. The Mayor could have assigned one of his staff to attend the Hopper Task Force, but he has not. There are City Council members who attend or have their aides attend...but the Mayor does not make this effort to come himself or appoint an aide. My biased opinion is that the Mayor was hoping he could paint myself and perhaps other advocates as simply "rabble rousers" whom he could marginalize. My biased opinion about Commissioner McLaughin is that he can take criticism from advocates, listen and work together on common ground with us. The Commissioner through his concrete actions has proven that he is far ahead of Mayor Rybak on issues related to homelessness. The fact that Mayor Rybak still ignores those of us who have proven to be committed and diligent in our work,research and willingness to collaborate only tells me that he does not take the suffering of our homeless residents very seriously. #5 The Effort to License Panhandlers: The Mayor never should have allowed this ridiculous, punitive idea to be shopped around. Commissioner McLaughin (and I have it on film) stated that licensing panhandlers in a bad, bad idea and only serves to further punish the most vulnerable people among us. Margaret Hastings Kingfield 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Doing a John Stewart re- homelessness
Here is my offering of tangibles regarding the Mayor and Commissioner McLaughlin. I will start with the "little items" and move up: 1. Over 3 years ago, to kick off efforts to decriminalize homelessness in Mpls, advocates, and persons who were or had been homeless camped out on the Lawn of the Hennepin County Government center. Several times I invited the Mayor to just show up...he didn't even have to stay out in the cold. He never came. Commissioner McLaughlin showed up later that night after a full day of meetings to offer support. 2. That same 3 years ago, the Mayor initially agreed to a filmed interview on homelessness in Mpls, then led me on a merry chase (actually not so merry) over the course of 2plus months to finally get him to do a filmed interview. Me and my film crew had to go without sleep for almost 36 hours in order to make sure we held him to a promise of an interview. He is like greased lightening when he wants to be. Last month, Commissioner McLaughlin agreed to do a filmed interview on homeless. I only had to ask once...he set a time and stuck to it. He answered all of my questions. 3. In late December of 2003, I recieved an e-mail from the Mayor asking me to send him my suggestions on steps to address homelessness -- and the criminalization of homelessness in Mpls. He said he would take action to at least get answers to the issues I raised. Despite my followup e-mails to him regarding this, I never heard a word from him or his aides again. Stay tuned for e-mail # 2 so you don't have to wade through a long post. Margaret Hastings Kingfield 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] I love the new song smoking ban for me, smoking ban for you-
Hey great post Brandon! Its so nice to know that you can dine without having to leave with your hair smelling like smoke!! My comparison-where I really would like to fire warning flares; is the use of nail polish on airplanes...same as lighting up in a Bar. UCK. What I would like to see banned in Mpls next in Fireworks starting in June. Maybe we should suggest that to the city council. Gina Palandri Standish wanting a website called www.keepyourstinkyhabitoutofmynose.com -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Help update the master Minneapolis candidate list
I've been spending time here looking at the candidate info: http://www.e-democracy.org/wiki/Minneapolis_election_2005_candidates Looks good, and many have taken the initiative of adding their information... Volunteers may be needed to contact candidates who haven't filled in a profile yet. Here's an example of candidate info that I find the most valuable and informative...not sure how it could be linked to or integrated with the wiki... It would be interesting to know how this is done...perhaps phone or email contact, some research. lots of effort...anyway this is the best most comprehensive candidate info available...and the print version has graphics, images etc. The SW journal may do one of these indepth profiles for each ward. http://www.swjournal.com/articles/2005/08/01/news/news02.txt Madeline Douglass Kingfield 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Cops union calls new police deployment "rushed"
Will this mayor stop at nothing!!! If there are rules for hiring and training new police officers, why would the mayor go outside of the rules for 6 officers. Why do we need the 6 new officers right this moment? Crime will be here in 11 weeks. Assistant Chief Dolan should be ashamed of himself, agreeing to such nonsense. How did he come up with the opinion that Federation President Delmonico was "being political to aid Peter McLaughlin?" If Assistant Chief Dolan wasn't in an appointed position, himself, I wonder what his opinion would be? Mayor Rybak said: he consulted with police officials, who back the move. I hardly believe that the "police officials" could have told the mayor not to do it and he would have accepted that. Didn't Chief McManus say that the STOP Program wasn't ready and the mayor called a press conference to implement the program...and we all know what a success that's NOT! I'm sure that the 6 officers, if they came from other departments, were told the training rules when they were hired. To go outside of that will only cause hard feeling between the 6 new officers and the rest of the police force, which will probably spilled into the community. So I say to the mayor...Get out of the police departments business and into the business of the city as a whole. If my vote counts Mayor Rybak, I can wait 11 more weeks for those 6 officers to be properly trained. Oops!!! I forgot, Mayor Rybak doesn't listen to his constituents. I hope the 6 officers are not women or minorities. Michelle Hill Cleveland 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Nicollet Island - Closing Another Street?
Here are a couple maps/images of Nicollet Island that may help people understand how the island is accessed today and where the proposed stadium could be built: Here's an image of the island from the SE with street names (we're talking about the Eastern 1/2 of Grove St. and possibly East Island Ave close to Grove St., right?): http://www.4factors.com/pics/maps/island-map.jpg This one is from the NW, and shows how the Northern 1/2 of the island is accessed from Hennepin Avenue. It looks like Nicollet St (center of island running vertically in image) is the only access to the Northern (residential) end of the island without crossing a railroad track. It looks like getting to Nicollet Ave would be tedious to access by emergency vehicles if Grove St. was closed: http://www.4factors.com/pics/maps/island-map-north2.jpg Here is a closer look: http://www.4factors.com/pics/maps/island-map-north.jpg - Ed Kohler Not a fan of plastic coated park land. 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] In Ballot Box: A week's worth of election notes
In Ballot Box: A week's worth of election notes Go to: and click on "Ballot Box" -- Craig Cox Founder/Editor The Minneapolis Observer www.mplsobserver.com 612/721-0285 Support the independent media! Pick up your neighborhood newspaper! 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Cops union calls new police deployment "rushed"
Six new cops get one week's training, not 12 weeks. Police officials say it's ok because the all have at least five years' experience in other departments; cops union head John Delmonico says it's not enough and calls it "political" to help Mayor Rybak's re-election; assistant chief Dolan says Delmonico is being political to aid Peter McLaughlin's bid. McLaughlin says it's indicative of Rybak's "slapdash" approach to public safety; Rybak said he consulted with police officials, who back the move. http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5546091.html David Brauer List manager 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Land heist details? Ask the DeLaSalle Parents and Alumni; Avoid the Middleman
Nikki Carlson(DeLaSalle parent)Linden Hills said: 3. If someone is coming from the school side up to the railroad tracks on foot and a train comes, if they don't want to wait for the train, they can cut through the weeds around the tennis courts up to the bridge. After the field gets built, they will have a nice path instead. 4. Don Siggelkow made a mistake in saying crossing at grade would no longer be available. 5. When a human makes a mistake, I think the best thing to do would be to ask that person for a clarification directly. I think a less than best thing to do is broadcast the mistake on the internet, malign the person and the entire organization he/she represents and stir up fear among concerned parties. Fred, Barry and others, please be assured East Island Avenue will not close. Nikki Carlson (DeLaSalle parent) Linden Hills Reposted by Keith Reitman NearNorth 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Spokesman-Recorder: city weakest link in NW Corridor development
Controversy over the development of a Northwest transit corridor, featuring the list's own Keith Reitmann. http://tinyurl.com/aw9kb (will take you to the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder Web page). David Brauer List manager 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Article: One Nation News: 8th Ward Race is civilized...
Koran Addo and the One Nation News really do their readers a disservice with this article. Although very complimentary to the two candidates profiled, it fails to mention that there are 10 candidates on the ballot for the 8th Ward city council race, and if the intent was to profile African American candidates Addo neglected Don Bellfield, Zach Metoyer, and Darrell Robinson. And in the interest of equal time here, I should mention that Elizabeth Glidden, Marie Hauser, Dennis Tifft and Doug Mann also wish to represent the 8th Ward. Kelly O'Brien Kingfield 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Three cheers for the Uptown art fair
I'm walking it right now ... lot's of fresh material I haven't seen before. Steven Clift Ericsson 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Another Park Board Mess
I would assume there will be a lawsuit regarding this. Loki Anderson Marshall Terrace Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Posted at the request of Arlene Fried of Bryn Mawr: The Star Tribune had a brief article about the August 3 Park Board meeting in Thursday's paper, but the real story behind the DeLaSalle stadium project is how certain Park Board commissioners and administrative staff have been moving this project forward in violation of the Park Board's own laws. On a scale of one-to-ten for outrageous behavior of a public body, the August 3 Park Board meeting scored a ten. It was as outrageous as the night last year when Commissioner Walt Dziedzic nastily threatened Commissioner Vivian Mason and as outrageous as the infamous night in 2003 when the majority coalition arrogantly hired Jon Gurban as superintendent without interviewing him. To regular Park Board observers, it's become quite clear that certain members of our Park Board and administrative staff are leading our Park Board into what could become very dangerous and expensive territory. It's been apparent that they have been on board with and in support of the DeLaSalle stadium project very early on. It has all the hallmarks of a backroom deal. At no time since the DeLaSalle issue first surfaced publicly at an open time presentation on January 19 of this year has the Park Board been in compliance with its own protective public participation ordinances as they apply to the DeLaSalle stadium project. The Park Board has circumvented the entire democratic process which was designed to protect its constituency from corrupt influences and pressures. According to Ordinances 99-101 governing Public Participation Relating to Park Facility Construction and Redevelopment, the Park Board was MANDATED to follow a course of action which it has blatantly ignored. The following sequence of events should have occurred: 1. A Citizens Advisory Committee should have been created when the DeLaSalle stadium project was first proposed by DeLaSalle in January. 2. Then, the Citizens Advisory Committee--based on extensive public input--should have made its recommendations to the Planning Committee. 3. Then the Planning Committee should have held a Public Hearing on the project. 4. Then--and only then--should the Planning Committee have voted on the DeLaSalle stadium project, either killing it or passing it on to the full board for its approval. But last night, WITHOUT creating a Citizens Advisory Committee, WITHOUT a recommendation from the Citizens Advisory Committee, and WITHOUT a public hearing, the Planning Committee voted three to two to approve the DeLaSalle project. Commissioners John Erwin and Annie Young pointed out that the public participation process had been bungled and voted against the project. But Commissioners Walt Dziedzic, Bob Fine and Marie Hauser all chose to ignore the Board's failure to follow its own legally mandated public participation process and voted in favor of the DeLaSalle stadium project anyway. It is this kind of bureaucratic bungling that can lead to costly legal involvement. It is disheartening to witness such arrogant disregard of our democratic process by the very individuals who are charged with protecting that process. Arlene M. Fried Member and co-founder of Park Watch mplsparkwatch.org Chris Johnson Fulton -- http://www.MplsParkWatch.org/ 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls - Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Nicollet Island - Closing Another Street?
Nikki Carlson, DeLaSalle parent and Linden Hills resident, claims the DeLaSalle plan for use of public parkland on Nicollet Island will not change East Island Avenue in any way. We will leave the tall concrete wall which will line the Avenue out of the discussion for the moment. Other than her statement, what evidence do we have? There is no plan which has been presented to the public yet. The claim is the plan will all be worked out with citizen input -- after the Park Board has foolishly obligated the public to giving away valuable park land with a reciprocal use agreement with DeLaSalle. If one wanted the facts on what was going to happen to East Island Avenue, who would one go to -- a parent of a student at DeLaSalle, or Park Board General Manager Don Siggelkow, who presumably was directly involved in the negotiations? Carlson gives some sugar-coated and misleading descriptions of how one might get across the railroad tracks when they are occupied by a train, once DeLaSalle has taken the land and closed east Grove Street. The traffic route to the Nicollet Avenue bridge over the tracks from the now-severed and half-sized Grove Street is quite circuitous. I just drove it myself a couple of weeks ago specifically to explore this question. I sure would not want to be the driver of a large pumper or hook and ladder fire truck trying to make that route. Nor would I want to be pedestrian in front of DeLaSalle as emergency vehicles screamed down Hennepin, onto East Island Ave, made the very tight and uphill left onto Oberpriller Way, passed completely from East to West on the island between DeLaSalle and its parking lot, made a right onto West Island Ave, another right onto Grove Street and then left onto Nicollet Avenue, having circled DeLaSalle 270 degrees. It's a lot further than the "few yards" that Carlson dreams up. Lastly, Carlson claims Siggelkow made a simple, one-time error and that posters to this list were maligners simply trying to vilify and stir up fear. She says that Siggelkow should have been asked to clarify directly. But that's pretty much what had already happened. Siggelkow was asked specifically about the discrepancies. His clarification answer is the one quoted. He may still be in error, but the public has right to be alerted, if there is a good chance commonly accepted beliefs about this project are other than what in reality is planned. Chris Johnson Fulton -- http://www.MplsParkWatch.org/ 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Another Park Board Mess
Posted at the request of Arlene Fried of Bryn Mawr: The Star Tribune had a brief article about the August 3 Park Board meeting in Thursday's paper, but the real story behind the DeLaSalle stadium project is how certain Park Board commissioners and administrative staff have been moving this project forward in violation of the Park Board's own laws. On a scale of one-to-ten for outrageous behavior of a public body, the August 3 Park Board meeting scored a ten. It was as outrageous as the night last year when Commissioner Walt Dziedzic nastily threatened Commissioner Vivian Mason and as outrageous as the infamous night in 2003 when the majority coalition arrogantly hired Jon Gurban as superintendent without interviewing him. To regular Park Board observers, it's become quite clear that certain members of our Park Board and administrative staff are leading our Park Board into what could become very dangerous and expensive territory. It's been apparent that they have been on board with and in support of the DeLaSalle stadium project very early on. It has all the hallmarks of a backroom deal. At no time since the DeLaSalle issue first surfaced publicly at an open time presentation on January 19 of this year has the Park Board been in compliance with its own protective public participation ordinances as they apply to the DeLaSalle stadium project. The Park Board has circumvented the entire democratic process which was designed to protect its constituency from corrupt influences and pressures. According to Ordinances 99-101 governing Public Participation Relating to Park Facility Construction and Redevelopment, the Park Board was MANDATED to follow a course of action which it has blatantly ignored. The following sequence of events should have occurred: 1. A Citizens Advisory Committee should have been created when the DeLaSalle stadium project was first proposed by DeLaSalle in January. 2. Then, the Citizens Advisory Committee--based on extensive public input--should have made its recommendations to the Planning Committee. 3. Then the Planning Committee should have held a Public Hearing on the project. 4. Then--and only then--should the Planning Committee have voted on the DeLaSalle stadium project, either killing it or passing it on to the full board for its approval. But last night, WITHOUT creating a Citizens Advisory Committee, WITHOUT a recommendation from the Citizens Advisory Committee, and WITHOUT a public hearing, the Planning Committee voted three to two to approve the DeLaSalle project. Commissioners John Erwin and Annie Young pointed out that the public participation process had been bungled and voted against the project. But Commissioners Walt Dziedzic, Bob Fine and Marie Hauser all chose to ignore the Board's failure to follow its own legally mandated public participation process and voted in favor of the DeLaSalle stadium project anyway. It is this kind of bureaucratic bungling that can lead to costly legal involvement. It is disheartening to witness such arrogant disregard of our democratic process by the very individuals who are charged with protecting that process. Arlene M. Fried Member and co-founder of Park Watch mplsparkwatch.org Chris Johnson Fulton -- http://www.MplsParkWatch.org/ 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Stewart/Mpls
On Aug 5, 2005, at 11:59 AM, David Tilsen wrote: The purpose of this post is not to fully explore anything, only to say that to those people who really care about how our city government works, how children are served, then there are a lot of important issues between all of the candidates. It just requires people to think, and, at the risk of being called an elitist like John Stewart, most of the media believes their readers and watchers don't. [He says, hoping not to sound too defensive...] I actually think more than a few local media outlets are into policy to (some say) a fault. I know Steve Brandt has to fight the overlords at the Strib for substantive stuff, but he does a much better than average job of getting nuance into School stories. I think both papers I edit (Skyway News and Southwest Journal) are sometimes so dense with policy that light actually has trouble escaping. (I'm actually very proud of our commitment to substance - if anything, my papers err on the side of earnestness. Our biggest challenge to embrace complexity and detail and make it readable.) Craig Cox is of course doing great work at the Observer. The paper's interviews with policy leaders has allowed them to flesh out their vision. When City Pages turns its megatonnage on a city issue (witness the police-legal-payouts story), it can go quite in depth. I don't think they do it enough, but the same can probably be said of the rest of us. I don't want to suggest there are outlets that focus too much on ephemera; there are. But I think the quality outlets exist here, too. All that said, David's questions about Peter's education stands are wise and frankly, better framed than anything I've come up with so far. I will, of course, rip them off at the first opportunity. I, too, feel a lot of the recent chatter on this list has been campaign surrogates engaged in hyperbolically assertive defenses of their guy or gal. I value open-mindedness and those who embrace complexity. I applaud David's post for asking questions that can generate open-ended answers that inform us better, rather than bludgeoning us with overly hardened conclusions. I hope we all follow his lead. David Brauer Kingfield PS, a little thing, but it's Jon Stewart, no "h" in the first name. 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Stewart/Mpls
I'm in the camp that says not all the candidates' positions are worth digging into. But the original suggestion to really analyze some issues (using facts, not just feelings, which is what's made the smoking ban discussions so tiresome and why a study of actual numbers from the past five (?) months would be at least somewhat interesting) is something that is clearly on the minds of many listers. It's come up a lot recently. A quick once-over of the candidate's sites shows that the two who have substantial public track records focus on specific accomplishments and specific goals (more cops, more responsive government, more services, less money, etc.) but don't present much of a philosophical platform. It is my sense that there are substantial differences among the three leading candidates in their views on the role of government, the role of the mayor in this city, the relationship between the private sector and government, the value of democratic action and citizen participation, to name a few - all the things for which party affiliation would normally be a useful guide. A lot of this can be culled from specific accomplishments and goals - and how they were or might be achieved - if they're presented in context. For example, the background of the issue, one candidate's belief of how this should be handled and why people (not just the candidate, because like many of us they don't always know why they believe what they believe, but people who have put forth rationales for such policies) think that's a good idea, and the same for the other candidate(s). Just expanding on Arthur Himmelman's thought... Becca Vargo Daggett Seward 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Stewart/Mpls
Hold on, I need to catch my breath that Art Himmelmann watches The Daily Show - whheww - that brings the average age of their demographic down a few points!. Just kidding Art, honest. I am responding to Arthur's request, but motivated by the comment made by Matthew Philip, to wit: "The real issue about all the bickering about little issues and lack of truly substantive debate is that there isn't much difference between the two candidates that they can debate. They agree on most things. So it then becomes about who you like more. Then each has to convince us that they do it better than the other. And that really is the problem." I could not disagree more. In governing, the devil (or angel) really is in the details, in what you actually do, think, believe, and are capable of. These are the kinds of things that the newsmedia simply does not want to get into. They believe that it is MYGO (My eyes glaze over) detail that is only interesting to the three real policy wonks in their subscriber base. This is even more true for the national issues, which makes John Stewarts request all the more important, and unlikely to be fulfilled. I will give an example from one of my areas of obsession - Education. Peter says he wants to work on improving education. He floated the idea of an "Education Cabinet" board to assist and "Provide real leadership for better schools from the Mayor's office" R.T on the other hand has restricted his import to the way Mayors have traditionally worked with the Board. On the various collaborative projects and as a supporter and lobbyist on issues that he/she cares about. Well this raises a number of questions, the foremost is, "Is this a preemptive attack on the independence of the Minneapolis School Board?" Does Peter believe that the Independence of the board is part of the problem. There are a number of cities where the Board, the Superintendent or both are appointed by the Mayor, in whole or in part. Is this better, worse. In Minneapolis' weak mayor system, the Mayor's "bully" pulpit is one of the major tools available, but what exactly does it mean to "Provide real leadership". There are a lot of important issues here. The reform movement over the last couple of decades has been moving in the other direction, towards less centralization. Charter Schools, neighborhood boards, more independence from partisan and entrenched interests and more (some would even say ultra and anti-intellectual) democratic. Is Peter calling for a change of course. Peter has labor endorsement, does he see the Teacher's Union playing a role in his "Educational Cabinet". What about the elected school board, the Archdiocese? I have only scratched the surface of the very real questions that are raised by only one of the issues facing the candidates, and I have not even given my personal answers to them. The purpose of this post is not to fully explore anything, only to say that to those people who really care about how our city government works, how children are served, then there are a lot of important issues between all of the candidates. It just requires people to think, and, at the risk of being called an elitist like John Stewart, most of the media believes their readers and watchers don't. 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Smoking Ban for You...Smoking Ban For Me...So that my lungs stay Nic Free!
Well well, First of all let me begin by saying that although I was a youngster...I did grow up in the 80s and early 90s, so I am well aware of the early years of the AIDS crisis. I was in middle-school in the mid-to-late 80s, so I certainly remember hearing the debates, etc. on AIDS. But thanks Michael for attempting to instruct all of us on what portions of history I may or may not remember. But I digress. There is a definite difference between public health and writing overbearing repressive morality into law. For example, in the 80s I would have been tip top gung ho in support of closing the bath houses in Minneapolis. Too little was known about the transmission of HIV and not enough education had happened (thank you very much Mr. Reagan)...to ignore the fact that wild amounts of unsafe sex were taking place in the bath houses. Not because folks had devil may care attitudes but because education was lacking...and while I personally believe that with education today bath houses could (and perhaps should) be allowed to re-open, I believe at the time it was a necessary public good to shut down bath houses. Now, much of the reasoning, unfortunately, behind shutting down the bath houses revolved around moral judgment and right-wing uber-conservative Christian sentiment. That reasoning---unacceptable for use in public policy decisionspublic health and helping to halt the spread of HIV---that was indeed, I believe, a judicious use of law making in the interest of the public. Of course, I know that there are many folks that don't agree with that statement in the queer community. But that's why we get to have these lovely discussions, as you pointed out. (please also note that I am making no judgment here about anyone's choice of sexual practices now or in the past...many of my own could/would come under fire by various segments of the community...but then again...whose wouldn't?). Let me be super duper clear for you Mr. Atherton...I'm not defining public spaces as edifices that contain a specific air volume. I'm defining public places as places where the general public gathers together for a variety of activities that is enclosed or at least tight quarters. So...restaurants, bars, stadiums, airplanes, movie theaters, port-o-potties, dance clubs, art galleries, amphitheaters, kennel clubs, tennis courts, bus shelters, greenhouses, and the Tilt-a-Whirl at Valley Fair. In those places it may be possible to get alcohol...but the distribution and use of alcohol is at least regulated, policed on occasion, the supply can be controlled, and individuals are choosing to use themselves without also intoxicating their neighbors by proxy. Now, in those same places...one can not regulate exactly where the air currents are going to take second-hand smoke carrying carcinogens into the lungs of innocent bystanders...for example...toddlers on the Merry-Go-Round, Grandmothers with emphysema at the Arboretum, or house wives that choose to exercise and stay fit that want to go out and have a cocktail with the girls on Friday night without worrying about rampant melanoma and the like. Now here's the part where things get funjust doing a quick survey of the web...I found this tid bit of information about second-hand smoke...and it's not even about cancer...it has to do with heart attacks...here we go ladies and gents: In June, 2002, the citizens of Helena, Montana, voted to ban smoking in all public buildings-including restaurants, bars, and casinos. Soon after, doctors at the local hospital noticed that heart-attack admissions were dropping. So they, in conjunction with the University of California-San Francisco, did a study to measure the potential short-term effects of a smoking ban. First, there was no change in heart attack rates for patients who lived outside the city limits. Second, for city residents, the rates plummeted by 58 percent in only six months. "We know from longer-term studies that the effects of second-hand smoke occur within minutes, and that long-term exposure to second-hand smoke is associated with a 30 percent increased risk in heart-attack rates," said Stanton Glantz, a professor of medicine who conducted the study's statistical analysis. "But it was quite stunning to document this large an effect so quickly." It was a shock to witness what happened next. The Montana state legislature, under pressure from the Montana Tavern Association and tobacco lobbyists, rescinded the ban in December, 2002. As a result, heart-attack rates bounced back up almost as quickly as they had dropped http://www.wordsources.info/words-mod-capnophobiaPt4.html (check out this site for more fun info...wooohoo). But don't take just that sights word for it...check out this one too http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13 Now the fact remains that there are very FEW studies on the planet that someone somewhere hasn't come up with another study saying...well...that one just don't work...cuz...well...
[Mpls] Stewart/Mpls
Darrell Gerber posts: Everyone on this forum seems to fall into the same 'horse-race' mentality as the mainstream press does: early on anoint a couple people as the front runner then spend all the time focusing on who's ahead. Let's dig deeper into the ballot and really look at what all of the candidates are saying. Brandt: Okay, Darrell, as long as you volunteer to do Franson. Steve Brandt Kingfield 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics
I don't recall any Commissioner saying they would favor repealing or amending the ban if Minneapolis did the same thing. It sounds like the county board is far away from repealing their ban. It sounds like some of the commissioners voted for the smoking ban because the county is responsible for public health through HCMC. Others maybe just voted for the ban because at the time it was a common perception that their ban would help facilitate a "domino effect," as McLaughlin put it, leading to more cities and eventually the state passing smoking bans. Commissioner Opat stated support for amending the county's ban to include exemptions because there is no statewide ban. He says the current patchwork ban is unfair, especially to the 'border bars.' But he did say a smoking ban in restaurants, regardless of where they are, is appropriate. Brandt Williams (enjoys sitting through hours of county board debates on smoking bans for MPR news) Jordan My response: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember at least one Commissioner (maybe even Peter M.) saying that the only way they'd repeal or amend the ban was if Minneapolis also did the same thing. Does anyone know who said this or if I'm making a fake memory? Thanks. Matthew Philip The Wedge 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Nicollet Island - Closing Another Street?
1. The MPRB-DeLaSalle reciprocal use agreement includes the vacation of a section of Grove Street. It does not change East Island Avenue in any way. 2. If someone is coming from the school side up to the railroad tracks in their car and a train comes, they have to wait for the train. Or they can back up, and go to Grove Street and cross the bridge. When that portion of Grove Street closes, they will have to go a few yards further and cut through the school, or go around the Nicollet Island Inn. Or they can still wait until the train passes. 3. If someone is coming from the school side up to the railroad tracks on foot and a train comes, if they don't want to wait for the train, they can cut through the weeds around the tennis courts up to the bridge. After the field gets built, they will have a nice path instead. 4. Don Siggelkow made a mistake in saying crossing at grade would no longer be available. 5. When a human makes a mistake, I think the best thing to do would be to ask that person for a clarification directly. I think a less than best thing to do is broadcast the mistake on the internet, malign the person and the entire organization he/she represents and stir up fear among concerned parties. Fred, Barry and others, please be assured East Island Avenue will not close. Nikki Carlson (DeLaSalle parent) Linden Hills -Original Message- From: Barry Clegg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: mpls@mnforum.org Sent: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 07:51:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Mpls] Nicollet Island - Closing Another Street? I am attaching below my e-mail of this morning to Park Commissioners and staff. General Manager Siggelkow of the Park Board staff is now advising the public that not only will Grove Street be closed if the DeLaSalle project proceeds - but so will East Island Avenue - the road that runs around the Island. The email string containing this news follows my e-mail to the Park Board. Either he's right - and the Park Board is pulling a fast one (no one has even mentioned the possibility of closing Island Ave), or he's wrong demonstrating that staff doesn't really understand the proposal at all. Barry Clegg East Island Avenue (soon to living on a cul-de-sac on a dead end street? ) Nicollet Island My e-mail to Commissioners follows: Commissioners and All: General Manager Siggelkow has advised a questioner that the DeLaSalle project would close not only east Grove Street but East Island Avenue - see his e-mail and the e-mail string below. I think and hope he just has it wrong. If he's right, that is appalling. No schematic or description of the project has ever contemplated that East Island Avenue would be closed. There has been absolutely no public discussion of this because it's never been raised or proposed - even by DeLaSalle, at least not publicly. I'm asking for confirmation as to whether or not this is actually part of the proposal. If he's wrong, and I hope he is, that's just as disturbing. It demonstatres that this project has moved so fast, that the draft Reciprocal Use Agreement is so vague, and project descriptions are so nebulous, that not even senior Park staff have a basic understanding of the most significant elements of the proposal. Please get back to me and confirm wheter or not East Island Avenue will remain open. Barry Clegg e-mail string follows Looks like East Island Avenue will be blocked off, as well as the east portion of Grove Street. So the drive around the island will no longer exist as before. all cars will have to drive in and out of the residential area via West Island Avenue on the west side of the school. --- Dave From: Don Siggelkow Date: August 4,2005 > yes > From: [deleted to protect identity] Date: August 03, 2005 > Mr. Siggelkow, Thank you very much for the information. So getting a little more specific. Are you saying that East Island Avenue would be blocked to car traffic on the south side of the RR tracks? Also, I assume the eastern portion of Grove Street would be blocked off to cars - is this correct? > - >From Don Siggelkow: Date: August 3, 2005 > Dave, The bridge access to the Island will remain, the crossing at grade near the school would no longer be available. > - Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 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: mailt
Re: [Mpls] Does anyone want to try a Jon Stewart re the Minneapolis mayor's race?
Arthur T. Himmelman wrote: I realize that this may be an unrealistic request, but I am wondering if anyone would like to try to do more of what Jon Stewart asked of CNN's Crossfire crowd: Would you analyze, discuss, and debate the substantive issues of the politics that you are discussing rather than simply attacking the political strategies and personal qualities of those that you oppose? Specifically, I am wondering if more of our mpls.mnforum commentators might be willing offer analysis and discussions of important issues relevant to the major's race by dispassionately comparing and contrasting R.T's. and Peter's stated (written if available) positions on -- you select the issues. Thanks. My response: The real issue about all the bickering about little issues and lack of truly substantive debate is that there isn't much difference between the two candidates that they can debate. They agree on most things. So it then becomes about who you like more. Then each has to convince us that they do it better than the other. And that really is the problem. RT did an ok job with what he had. Some people disagree with what he has done. Peter has done an ok job as County Commissioner, but there is no gaurantee that he can go from a board to a leadership position. Each candidate has good and bad points in my opinion. I've not decided which one I'm going to vote for at this point, but I must say that I'm not sure RT has done anything SO poorly that it warrants his removal. Matthew Philip The Wedge 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Does anyone want to try a Jon Stewart re the Minneapolis mayor's race?
I would like to further Arthur's request to also include the other candidates involved in the race. Everyone on this forum seems to fall into the same 'horse-race' mentality as the mainstream press does: early on anoint a couple people as the front runner then spend all the time focusing on who's ahead. Let's dig deeper into the ballot and really look at what all of the candidates are saying. What is Farheen Hakeem saying about police and public safety? What do any of the candidates think is the best approach to transportation in the city? What are proposals for the city to meet the Kyoto Protocol like RT pledged we would do? Democracy and politics is only going to benefit. The City of Minneapolis website lists the following candidates having filed for the mayor's race (in order of the website which appears to be order of filing): Mark Koscielski "Dick" Franson Peter McLaughlin Don Johnson David A. Alvarado Gregory A. "Ernie" Brown Farheen Hakeem Gregory Groettum Gerald James Savage R. T. Rybak Marcus Harcus Tim Nolan Darrell Gerber Kingfield -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Aug 5, 2005 9:22 AM To: mpls@mnforum.org Subject: [Mpls] Does anyone want to try a Jon Stewart re the Minneapolis mayor's race? I realize that this may be an unrealistic request, but I am wondering if anyone would like to try to do more of what Jon Stewart asked of CNN's Crossfire crowd: Would you analyze, discuss, and debate the substantive issues of the politics that you are discussing rather than simply attacking the political strategies and personal qualities of those that you oppose? Specifically, I am wondering if more of our mpls.mnforum commentators might be willing offer analysis and discussions of important issues relevant to the major's race by dispassionately comparing and contrasting R.T's. and Peter's stated (written if available) positions on -- you select the issues. Thanks. Arthur T. Himmelman Loring Park 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics
Brandon Lacy Campos wrote: > Megan is absolutely correct. You are NOT allowed to drink alcoholic > beverages in public. We seem to be confusing definitions. Drinking and (previously) smoking do take place in "public" establishments, as Mr. Bernstein has fervently argued. Bars and restaurants are certainly not "private" spaces. But to follow Mr. Lacy's apparent definition of large open spaces being the only "public" ones, then alcoholic beverages are illegal in SOME cases (e.g., public streets, but not Twins games and some music events), and cigarette smoking is legal in "public" spaces. The ban has had no effect on public smoking under Mr. Lacy's definition. Conversely, (to follow the same argument) cigarette smoking is banned in private, but alcohol is not. Ms. Goodmundson's and Mr. Lacy's posts only cloud the issues related to the smoking ban (no pun intended). At least from my perspective, the discussion revolves around local governments actions to ban cigarette smoking in bars and restaurants. There haven't been any attempts to ban smoking in Mr. Lacy's "public" spaces. > And since second hand smoke kills more people every year > than...say...gun violenceI think it is right on to ban > smoking in public venues. Period. The guy drinking right > next to me isn't going to intoxicate me against my > will at a bar...the guy smoking next to me can sure as heck > help me along the way to cancer against my will (and the > diatribes about choosing to be in a place where there is > smoking are old and tired...smokers can choose to > smoke at home, or in their cars, etc. etc. etc. rights are > accorded based on those that are most adversely affected... > therefore my right to live free of second hand smoke and > potential deadly harm trumps the right of a smoker to > smoke in a public space where he or she can put another at > risk). There is no unequivocal evidence showing a strong link between health and the effects of secondhand smoke in bars and restaurants. If there is, please cite the study. If rather than "public health," we use spiritual purity or moral turpitude as justifications we could just as easily ban homosexuality (as many evangelicals would like to do). If you don't wanted to be offended by homosexuality you shouldn't go to gay bars. If you don't want to be exposed to secondhand smoke you shouldn't go to bars that permit smoking. Different people have different inclinations and preferences, just because some of them offend you that's not a justification for legally prohibiting other people from enjoying them. Mr. Lacy is too young to remember, but at the beginning of the AIDS crisis "public health" was used to advocate all kinds of irrational and oppressive restrictions on homosexuals. It was "God's Curse" (just to illustrate the interrelationships between spiritual purity, moral turpitude, and public health). Steven Clift wrote: > All I know is that I loved my bowling league in St. Louis Park after the > ban and I'll never go back to stinking on a Sunday night (other than on > the lanes). Sure there are benefits from the imposition of injustice on others. I'm sure that many Germans were happy to see Jews confined to ghettos. Limiting the choices of others may support your preferences, but not others. But that's my major point, how do we determine fairly what others should be allowed to do? Keep in mind that the ban not only provides you smoke free bowling lanes, but it also prevents people who like to smoke from having ANY "public" choices in Minneapolis. Why is it so unreasonable to allow bowlers who smoke to have a few bowling lanes where they can? You can always lobby your bowling league to only hold events in lanes that are non-smoking. WizardMarks wrote: > I should say here that I'm thoroughly tired of this thread. People, both > pro and anti, are cemented into their positions, there is not one > scintilla of movement either way. Everything is just a boring repetition > of previously expressed opinion. The fact that there is movement (on the county board) is the reason this issue has flared up again (pun intended). Your Delete Key is located in the upper right side of your keyboard. What bores you may not bore everyone. Which is kinda the issue here. Michael Atherton Prospect Park 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] ICE (In Case of Emergency) An idea to increase your personal safety
Forwarded on behalf of the brilliant Fifth Precinct Lt. Piontek: Subject: ICE (In Case of Emergency) There is a good article out on MSN regarding this concept, under Technology and Gadgets. How Brilliant and smart to do this. Paramedics will turn to a victim's cell phone for clues to that person's identity. You can make their job much easier with a simple idea that they are trying to get everyone to adopt: ICE. ICE stands for In Case of Emergency. If you add an entry in the contacts list in your cell phone under ICE, with the name and phone no. of the person that the emergency services should call on your behalf, you can save them a lot of time and have your loved ones contacted quickly. It only takes a few moments of your time to do. Paramedics know what ICE means and they look for it immediately. ICE your cell phone NOW! For Example.ICE Dad, ICE Jonathon Barb Lickness Whittier Feeling proud to be in the 5th Precinct. "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics
Brandt Williams wrote: I think Barb is correct here. The vote was to study the economic impact of the ban, however the originator of the idea to conduct the study, commissioner Mark Stenglein, would like the county to at least make Hennepin's ban more like the Ramsey county ban (with exemptions for bars and private clubs). Ideally, he'd like the whole thing repealed. As far as McLaughlin's role - many see him as the swing vote on the board. But keep in mind, even if he went along with a board vote to alter the County's smoking ban, it wouldn't change Minneapolis' ordinance. My response: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember at least one Commissioner (maybe even Peter M.) saying that the only way they'd repeal or amend the ban was if Minneapolis also did the same thing. Does anyone know who said this or if I'm making a fake memory? Thanks. Matthew Philip The Wedge 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Nicollet Island - Closing Another Street?
I am attaching below my e-mail of this morning to Park Commissioners and staff. General Manager Siggelkow of the Park Board staff is now advising the public that not only will Grove Street be closed if the DeLaSalle project proceeds - but so will East Island Avenue - the road that runs around the Island. The email string containing this news follows my e-mail to the Park Board. Either he's right - and the Park Board is pulling a fast one (no one has even mentioned the possibility of closing Island Ave), or he's wrong - demonstrating that staff doesn't really understand the proposal at all. Barry Clegg East Island Avenue (soon to living on a cul-de-sac on a dead end street? ) Nicollet Island My e-mail to Commissioners follows: Commissioners and All: General Manager Siggelkow has advised a questioner that the DeLaSalle project would close not only east Grove Street but East Island Avenue - see his e-mail and the e-mail string below. I think and hope he just has it wrong. If he's right, that is appalling. No schematic or description of the project has ever contemplated that East Island Avenue would be closed. There has been absolutely no public discussion of this because it's never been raised or proposed - even by DeLaSalle, at least not publicly. I'm asking for confirmation as to whether or not this is actually part of the proposal. If he's wrong, and I hope he is, that's just as disturbing. It demonstatres that this project has moved so fast, that the draft Reciprocal Use Agreement is so vague, and project descriptions are so nebulous, that not even senior Park staff have a basic understanding of the most significant elements of the proposal. Please get back to me and confirm wheter or not East Island Avenue will remain open. Barry Clegg e-mail string follows Looks like East Island Avenue will be blocked off, as well as the east portion of Grove Street. So the drive around the island will no longer exist as before. all cars will have to drive in and out of the residential area via West Island Avenue on the west side of the school. --- Dave From: Don Siggelkow Date: August 4,2005 > yes > From: [deleted to protect identity] Date: August 03, 2005 > Mr. Siggelkow, Thank you very much for the information. So getting a little more specific. Are you saying that East Island Avenue would be blocked to car traffic on the south side of the RR tracks? Also, I assume the eastern portion of Grove Street would be blocked off to cars - is this correct? > - >From Don Siggelkow: Date: August 3, 2005 > Dave, The bridge access to the Island will remain, the crossing at grade near the school would no longer be available. > - Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics
megan goodmundson wrote: Peter's openness to 're-visit' the smoking ban is just one more reason to support RT. Smoking is a public health concern bottom line and it is becoming more and more socially un-acceptable to smoke in public all over the world. Who wants a 're'-gressive mayor or county commissioner for that matter. Considering that the ban was passed as a stealth attack to open the silly season and without time to hear from the public and without considering the consequences of passing a ban higgledy-piggledy, rather than, say, throughout the metro, there is ample reason to revisit the issue. The ban in restaurants won't be lifted, but the ban in bars could be lifted until such time as all the metro area passes a joint ban so as not to disadvantage some businesses over others. Even you rabid anti-smokers have to concede that the ban was passed in haste and without due consideration. I should say here that I'm thoroughly tired of this thread. People, both pro and anti, are cemented into their positions, there is not one scintilla of movement either way. Everything is just a boring repetition of previously expressed opinion. WizardMarks, Central Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Does anyone want to try a Jon Stewart re the Minneapolis mayor's race?
I realize that this may be an unrealistic request, but I am wondering if anyone would like to try to do more of what Jon Stewart asked of CNN's Crossfire crowd: Would you analyze, discuss, and debate the substantive issues of the politics that you are discussing rather than simply attacking the political strategies and personal qualities of those that you oppose? Specifically, I am wondering if more of our mpls.mnforum commentators might be willing offer analysis and discussions of important issues relevant to the major's race by dispassionately comparing and contrasting R.T's. and Peter's stated (written if available) positions on -- you select the issues. Thanks. Arthur T. Himmelman Loring Park 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics
I think Barb is correct here. The vote was to study the economic impact of the ban, however the originator of the idea to conduct the study, commissioner Mark Stenglein, would like the county to at least make Hennepin's ban more like the Ramsey county ban (with exemptions for bars and private clubs). Ideally, he'd like the whole thing repealed. As far as McLaughlin's role - many see him as the swing vote on the board. But keep in mind, even if he went along with a board vote to alter the County's smoking ban, it wouldn't change Minneapolis' ordinance. Brandt Williams (covering Hennepin county smoking ban debate for Minnesota Public Radio) Jordan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Barbara Lickness Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:40 PM To: megan goodmundson; mpls@mnforum.org Subject: Re: [Mpls] Smoking Ban Politics Just to clarify here I do not believe there was any vote to "re-visit" the smoking ban. I believe the vote was to study the negative impact the smoking has had on businesses in Hennepin County. With factual information it may be possible to make recommendations that could help mitigate those who are negatively impacted. What kind of elected body would we have if they were never willing to take an informed look at those that were negatively impacted by the legislation they pass? Barb Lickness Whittier "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Constricting traffic flow on Nicollet Island?
Another interested citizen shared with me an e-mail he received from Don Siggelkow, a spokesperson for the Park Board, that indicated that the grade crossing on East Island Ave. would no longer be available should the De LaSalle ambitions be realized. Oh, my. the perimeter road around the Island is a favorite drive for countless people. It's a pleasant Sunday drive through a rural setting and people often stop along the way to appreciate the quiet scene, to take a stroll, to have a casual look at the restored houses without intruding on the neighborhood's need for a modicum of privacy. This has been a stable feature of the Island's ambiance probably ever since motor cars made their appearance. Cutting off the second grade crossing would require folks to drive through this little neighborhood arriving/leaving via the bridge over the tracks on Nicollet St. Remember that a number of Minneapolis neighborhoods asked for and received cul-de-sac treatments for residential streets in order to discourage intrusive vehicular traffic. I also know that there are heavy vehicles that occasionally take advantage of the "back road" - drivers take their lunch breaks in this woodsy setting. This traffic would also be forced through the neighborhood and up and over the rather modest bridge on Nicollet St. Talk about mission creep! The public likes to drive. Some folks are elderly or have other mobility challenges and appreciate being able to "drive around the Island" - to circumnavigate the entire Island using the perimeter road and in recent years being able to take advantage of the bridge that connects to Main St. This is handy, easily understood, and dependent in part on the stretch of East Island that crosses the RR tracks and continues on past the De LaSalle campus and parking lot and connects with both Hennepin Ave. and the facilities on the South Tip of the Island. It's a good way for parents to show their kids what the old houses are like. It's a direct shot from Main St. to the pedestrian path in the old rail bed that leads to Boom Island and/or to the steps that connect from Island Ave. to the bridge across the back channel to Boom Island park. For Pete's sakes, folks, this is a unique little park setting. Let it be! Fred Markus, Ward 6, Phillips West 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Article: One Nation News: 8th Ward Race is civilized, focused on issues
I truly hope the media can start asking more candidates about the issues. We already know that candidates are in competition with each other. http://www.onenationnews.com/assets/currentversion.pdf (Article) Posted by Shawn Lewis, Minnetonka -- ___ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm 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:mpls@mnforum.org Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
