RE: [Mpls] The City's Financial Management
Before responding to Mr. Brauer's points individual I would like to stress that the major problem with the NRP is that there are no standardized procedures related to voting that are uniformly enforced. There are no serious checks and balances to detect fraud. And, there are no realistic ways for individuals to challenge improper actions. A government agency without true accountability is a dangerous entity. Mr. Brauer writes: > And the average city voter can do that about how city > processes work? When > the temps rise, I will ask someone random passersby to explain the > weak-mayor system and the relationship of the MCDA to City Hall. This discussion centered around the benefits of the NRP as a direct democracy. I have been arguing for the superiority of representative democracy. One of the benefits is that in a representative democracy one does not have to know the intimate details of governmental processes, but in a participatory democracy one should. > Probably true, but anecdotal. I could counter with my neighborhood's > neighborhood-wide mailings about NRP elections, NRP updates > and NRP meetings are more voluminous, over time, than Park Board, > Library Board, School Board races and perhaps even some council seats. However, the Park Board, the Library Board, and the School Board are not based on a mandate that requires neighborhood participation, they are representative bodies. And as I understand it Park Board and School Board members (I'm not sure about the Library Board) are selected during municipal elections. I would ask you how many residents participated in your last board election. In my neighborhood it is rarely more than 4% (if that). I'd say that's a pretty poor level of participation. > The latter claim is overblown. Our neighborhood voted on its > Action Plan at the Annual Meeting - yes, it was a few hours, > on one night, but hardly a backbreaker. Those who wanted to > get more involved did have to come to more meetings - but life > is like that. This is participatory government as well as > democratic, Michael, not merely representative. But a participatory requirement for representation (other than voting, taxes, jury duty, and military service) is counter to the laws and conventions of our country. I would point out, once again, that the NRP has no standard requirements or procedures for notifying residents of elections or decisions. Such a system is ripe for abuse. Just because your association does a reasonable job does not mean that others do. > And if someone "missed the meeting," they can volunteer > anytime and have a significant effect on future decisions > - which you can't after leaving the city voting booth for four > years. Is this some kind of required involuntary government servitude to obtain representation? Again, I don't see any Constitutional or legal standing for such an argument. > We allow mail surveys (we're conducting one now) to help us > guide how to spend money. They are taken seriously by a Steering > Committee supervised by elected neighborhood leaders. So you don't allow absentee voting? A survey! That's great. We just had one in our neighborhood about light rail. It was done by mail and over the Internet. When I asked the organizers what methods they intended to use to avoid selection bias I got no answer. In fact, they didn't have any way of knowing that residents didn't send in multiple responses. There are ways to insure that surveys have a small margin of error, but they are seldom adhered to. > Believe me, the problem with NRP is finding the people to implement > democratic decisions - not excluding anyone who is interested > on any level. But, the NRP inherently excludes many classes of people who do not have the time, ability, or inclination to participate. > Hmmm...our own Secretary of State, Mary Kiffmeyer, has > repeatedly said there is too much fraud in the voting system. > And did you hear about the burned ballots in the Austin, > Minnesota state senate election? If there is fraud in a system that is covered by laws and has criminal penalties, just what do you think is going to occur in a system without such protections? > Our board elections are all secret ballot. The board governs the NRP > Steering Committee. Our elections are overseen by the League of Women > Voters. Forget Athens; have you looked outside Prospect Park? > (And here, I assume Prospect Park does not use secret ballots.) As you should know, elections of the boards of NRP contractors are not subject to NRP procedures (if there were any). I was referring to Plan development and reallocation votes. > Are you really claiming that there are significant checks on campaign > claims? That misleading and distorted info dries up in campaigns? This is > where a little cynicism can be properly applied. I'm claiming that the Election Laws of the State of Minnesota provide legal penalties for false statements made dur
RE: [Mpls] The City's Financial Management
Michael writes: > I can and do claim that city government is more democratic. > > 1) Knowledge. > Residents must understand the function, purpose, > and process of the NRP to vote wisely. I doubt very seriously > that a citizen picked at random could you very much at all > about the NRP process. And the average city voter can do that about how city processes work? When the temps rise, I will ask someone random passersby to explain the weak-mayor system and the relationship of the MCDA to City Hall. > 2) Opportunity. > a. Residents must be aware that voting is taking place. > I don't believe that this is true. I've proposed a number > of methods to obtain greater participation in the NRP process > all of which were rejected by my neighborhood association. > I believe that municipal elections are much more widely publicized > than NRP meetings. If you live in the 3rd ward it is very > likely that someone has knocked on your door to inform you about > the election and if not I'm sure you received quite a bit of junk > mail. Probably true, but anecdotal. I could counter with my neighborhood's neighborhood-wide mailings about NRP elections, NRP updates and NRP meetings are more voluminous, over time, than Park Board, Library Board, School Board races and perhaps even some council seats. By the way, I'll bet the 3rd Ward folks are door-knocking frequent voters only; that's one way candidates win. Our publicity goes out to every household in the neighborhood. > b. In city elections I can normally vote in a few minutes and have > a wide choice of times at which I can vote. In NRP decisions I > have to sit for hours at a particular meeting, set at a particular > time, and on a particular date. The latter claim is overblown. Our neighborhood voted on its Action Plan at the Annual Meeting - yes, it was a few hours, on one night, but hardly a backbreaker. Those who wanted to get more involved did have to come to more meetings - but life is like that. This is participatory government as well as democratic, Michael, not merely representative. And if someone "missed the meeting," they can volunteer anytime and have a significant effect on future decisions - which you can't after leaving the city voting booth for four years. > And, since there is no absentee voting, > this process excludes a large number of people. We allow mail surveys (we're conducting one now) to help us guide how to spend money. They are taken seriously by a Steering Committee supervised by elected neighborhood leaders. Believe me, the problem with NRP is finding the people to implement democratic decisions - not excluding anyone who is interested on any level. > 3) Validity > a. State and local election procedures have gone though > a hundred years of refinement to prevent corruption and > inaccuracies. Votes at NRP meetings are left up to the > good intentions of the contactors (which I have good > reason to question). Hmmm...our own Secretary of State, Mary Kiffmeyer, has repeatedly said there is too much fraud in the voting system. And did you hear about the burned ballots in the Austin, Minnesota state senate election? OK, voting IS more established, and I think Kiffmeyer is overdramatizing. But I'll remember Michael's argument - it's only good if it has 100 years of refinement - when he proposes his next reform. In other words, this point is convenient, not eternal. > b. A number of traditional voting procedures are not used, > namely secret-ballots, and rules against undue intimation > or bias (even the Athenians used secret-ballots). Our board elections are all secret ballot. The board governs the NRP Steering Committee. Our elections are overseen by the League of Women Voters. Forget Athens; have you looked outside Prospect Park? (And here, I assume Prospect Park does not use secret ballots.) > c. Campaign reform laws have targeted the use of misleading > and distorted information. The NRP has no such checks and > balances. Are you really claiming that there are significant checks on campaign claims? That misleading and distorted info dries up in campaigns? This is where a little cynicism can be properly applied. As for NRP, sure, it can be subject to chicanery. But let me tell you, as a former neighborhood board president, living next to the folks whom your decisions affect is a powerful check and balance. It is grassroots participatory democracy in a way that big-money campaigns (even now at the Council level) lack more and more. > d. There are no procedures to prevent special interest groups > from buying votes or packing meetings. Please. Example? And surely you are not claiming there are no special interests who significantly influence electoral politics? As for vote-buying, I suspect you wouldn't see it in an election, but that doesn't mean it does not happen. > In general, representative democracies function well because of > the establishme
RE: [Mpls] The City's Financial Management
Jim Mork wrote in regards to the NRP: > Um, it is the most DIRECT democracy offered anywhere in the > world. Unlike voting in Florida, you CANNOT be removed from > a list by the Secretary of State with no recourse. I would > be in favor of ID checks in order to vote (so strangers from > another neighborhood could not sway the vote) but no one can > claim that city government is more democratic. I can and do claim that city government is more democratic. 1) Knowledge. Residents must understand the function, purpose, and process of the NRP to vote wisely. I doubt very seriously that a citizen picked at random could you very much at all about the NRP process. At least in high school there is some attempt to explain the process and duty of voting in governmental elections. 2) Opportunity. a. Residents must be aware that voting is taking place. I don't believe that this is true. I've proposed a number of methods to obtain greater participation in the NRP process all of which were rejected by my neighborhood association. I believe that municipal elections are much more widely publicized than NRP meetings. If you live in the 3rd ward it is very likely that someone has knocked on your door to inform you about the election and if not I'm sure you received quite a bit of junk mail. b. In city elections I can normally vote in a few minutes and have a wide choice of times at which I can vote. In NRP decisions I have to sit for hours at a particular meeting, set at a particular time, and on a particular date. And, since there is no absentee voting, this process excludes a large number of people. 3) Validity a. State and local election procedures have gone though a hundred years of refinement to prevent corruption and inaccuracies. Votes at NRP meetings are left up to the good intentions of the contactors (which I have good reason to question). b. A number of traditional voting procedures are not used, namely secret-ballots, and rules against undue intimation or bias (even the Athenians used secret-ballots). c. Campaign reform laws have targeted the use of misleading and distorted information. The NRP has no such checks and balances. d. There are no procedures to prevent special interest groups from buying votes or packing meetings. In general, representative democracies function well because of the establishment of basic individual rights, a series of checks and balances, and a system to adjudicate complaints. In reality the NRP lacks all of these basic protections. Michael Atherton Prospect Park TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. 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
[Mpls] The City's Financial Management
Michael Atherton: "Let's not forget that it's the people who show up that run the NRP programs and that participation and representation have been and still are an ongoing problem (or in my opinion an inherent flaw of the NRP)." Um, it is the most DIRECT democracy offered anywhere in the world. Unlike voting in Florida, you CANNOT be removed from a list by the Secretary of State with no recourse. I would be in favor of ID checks in order to vote (so strangers from another neighborhood could not sway the vote) but no one can claim that city government is more democratic. * Regarding the Stimson Building: How about selling city-owned real estate on E-Bay where the whole WORLD can get involved. Um, but on a more serious note, I don't think this will be a big problem with the current dire financial situation. The debt load won't ALLOW our government to step in and take over stuff that require deep pockets. *** As regards a leaner approach to city government, maybe my insider experience would be helpful. I was a member of the ITS staff for three years. I made carping remarks about the fact that groups of my area would sit around in full view of department patrons, doing NOTHING and complaining loudly about the people (primarily the Finance Dept) we were supposed to serve. That bought me enmity from the lifers, leading to discipline for being a "disruptive influence". Which is probably predictable enough. But I then turned to Kathy Thurber and told her in letters NOT to believe department managers when they reported how things were going in their departments because I knew firsthand what was wrong in my area. It was a contest to exploit the advantages of civil service certification. Two of us did not exploit that because we felt it was wrong. The result was that we did all the unwanted hours and work. This unnamed individual told me "you will be missed" on my last day. And it was sincere. Now he was the ONLY conscientious person in that area. As one of the few city taxpayers in my area, I acted the way I knew taxpayers would want us all to act if they only knew the insides of their government. But the management of the area was hard at "work" managing customer expectations. We generally would produce the least results possible to make sure they didn't expect too much of us. As I say, I told Thurber that government could cost less than it did if ONLY the management could be made to manage. But she called that "micromanagement". I came to regard Thurber as a protector of the status quo and longed to see her replaced. The last time she ran for election, her percentage of the vote was the lowest for a DFL CM citywide. I think she saw the handwriting on the wall and chose not to run again. That made me more optimistic. I hope Gary Schiff has a better attitude because the city can no longer AFFORD the hands-off approach Thurber subscribed to. They are in office to MANAGE the services that we pay for, and Schiff and the others have to know those civil service people won't do it without serious political management. By going to work for the city, I lost my illusions. And I'm quite confident that budget cuts do NOT have to compel equal service cuts. But it is up to the political leaders whether they will let that happen. -- Jim Mork--Cooper "War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our Country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out." Gen. William T. Sherman (1864) Letter to the Mayor of Atlanta. Get your free Web-based E-mail at http://www.startribune.com/stribmail TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. 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
