Post in Mayor Rybak Statement on NRP/Community Engagement

Nov 02 16:21 UTC

Thanks to Mayor Rybak for having his aide post the text of the document where
he lists ideas on community involvement. It is not as bad as we may have
thought.  Though it does demonstrate some truly profound ignorance on the part
of the Mayor about how Neighborhoods and NRP work. The Mayor admitted this in
his comments at the "Committee of the Whole".  Mayor Rybak stated that when NRP
was going on he was too busy with his children to participate in the planning
process his own community engaged in. The same is probably true with involvment
with his Neighborhood organization, but his staff should certainly advise him
better on these subjects.

  So perhaps Mr. Jeremy Hanson can pass along to Mayor Rybak that NRP 'central
administration' has NOTHING to do with neighborhood groups communicating
directly with the City. The Mayor says:

  "Direct relationship between the City and neighborhoods. A resident working
in their community should be able to speak directly to their City government,
and the City government needs more direct communication with neighborhood
organizations. The current system makes that difficult by having the NRP
central administration sitting between these groups and the City. Whether the
NRP continues to have a central administration, we need to have a more direct
link between the City and the citizens it serves. This includes having the City
build and support financially community engagement staff at the City, and a
more formal in put from neighborhoods into City spending, i.e. a neighborhood
role in the Capital Long Range Improvement (CLIC) Process."

  RT Rybak has his Bobs mixed up.  He is talking about Bob Cooper, NOT Bob
Miller.  Bob Cooper is the "Citizen Participation" arm of the City not NRP or
Bob Miller.  Neighborhoods have "Citizen Participation" agreements through that
arm of the City.  NOT through NRP.

  If RT had actually participated with NRP at any level he would understand
that what he is talking about is "Citizen Participation" and the City.  NOT
NRP!  RT sadly does not comprehend that his suggestion, "This includes having
the City build and support financially community engagement staff at the City",
is presently being implemented through existing City "community engagement
staff". NOT NRP!  Hiring more "Citizen Participation Staff" would only create
even more bureaucracy to "get between the Neighborhoods and the City".

  The only place NRP might possibly get "between" the City and Neighborhoods is
that Neighborhoods have discretionary funding that THEY get to decide where it
goes, rather than the City Council and Mayor simply taking the funds to use as
their private slush fund.

  The City already makes "Micro Grants" to organizations and neighborhoods.  It
has always had that power.  That power once also came from MCDA, but the City
dissolved that entity and made CPED, so the City has complete control of that
function.  The Mayor's staff must be keeping him in the dark on that ability
that his administration created.

  I choose to believe that RT Rybak is sincere in his wish to have the
Neighborhoods more heavily engaged in City decision making policy and has a
staff that has purposefully kept him ignorant of how "Citizen Participation"
and NRP function.  As such I think it is important for Neighborhoods to help RT
with his stated interest in making them more specifically involved in
decision-making.  As such I make the following suggestions:

   Have Neighborhoods give specific input on any and all development projects,
as well as zoning and land-use decisions, then require a "super majority" of
the Council, upheld by a vote of the Mayor, to overturn such a "Neighborhood
Decision".
   Decentralize "Citizen Participation". Have a minimum of hired "Citizen
Participation Staff at the City but fund Citizen Participation staff at the
neighborhood level, or "Community Planning District" level, where they are
answerable to the Neighborhoods and "Citizens" NOT the City.  Otherwise they
are directing citizen participation to what their bosses want to hear, NOT what
the "Citizens" want to give as input into decision making.
    Any City wide policy should be ratified by a majority of Neighborhoods or
it should not become policy.

  5.
  6., ---- I will leave room for others to make suggestions of how we can all
help RT to make a reality his "Commitment" to having Neighborhoods and
residents more involved in the decision making process.  Having Neighborhoods
and "Citizens" more deeply involved in the decision-making about "Citizen
Participation" process is where he should start if his is sincere about this
and it is not just throwing up a smoke screen to cover another naked attempt to
kill NRP.

For now let's all just take Mayor Rybak's intentions as honorable and attempt
to help and educate him about the process.  To start we need to convene
neighborhood lead planning sessions about how to include neighborhoods more
fully in the City decision-making process.  That engagement should start
immediately and I invite neighborhood leaders from around the City to come
together to "plan" such a meeting.  Perhaps we can get the Neighborhood staff,
and perhaps NRP staff, to assist with this activity since they are certainly
far more involved with neighborhood and community residents than any "City
staff".

  I am truly glad that Mayor Rybak has opened the door to this possibility,
which can dramatically make decision-making more transparent and honest.  So
Neighborhoods should look at this as an opportunity, not just another attack by
City bureaucracy.

  Jim Graham,
  Ventura Village

  Wise sayings:

  We can only be what we give ourselves the power to be    A Cherokee Feast of
Days
  The people are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com