1 responses, total.

Adding value to the neighborhood
(01-21-03)

There are perhaps only a handful of volunteers still active with NENA who remember what it was like before NRP funding. We received $2K a year from MCDA and guidance. Additionally we received modest donations and support from businesses, churches and individuals. While we didn't have much, we were perceived as having given value to our neighborhood. Small projects were accomplished by the volunteers, leveraged with sweat equity. One of our "big" projects was supporting the establishment of the Healthy Seniors program--a program which is thriving today. At that time, about all we could give was written support and volunteers. Since NRP funding kicked in, NENA has been able to contribute financially--including additional contributions when the Feds severely reduced this group's income.

Without our NRP dollars, the ability of this group to serve "the greatest generation"--and to help keep them in their homes--would have been severely impaired. Without NRP dollars, will this group be around to serve those of us who are fast approaching a "certain age"? This is VALUE to the neighborhood.

A few of us remember when the NENA office was operated from the President's living room; our "mailing center" operated from my neighbor's kitchen and I did the executive secretary's job from a table kindly donated by a local small business. Other volunteers (dedicated but far from wealthy) bought their own office supplies, paid transportation costs and provided refreshments for large groups. Minnehaha United Methodist church offered photocopying help and a room for our meetings. As quaint and nostalgic as this all sounds, do we really want to return to that era? There is no going back. A neighborhood needs a physical focalpoint and the welcoming, friendly support and information it provides. Severe reductions in NRP funding will spell the death knell for smaller offices such as ours.

Without the big bucks NRP provides, we would not have been able to accomplish our area's big environmental projects, playground equipment, Keewaydin School computer media center, etc. This past summer, my neighbors commented that this was the first time they or their kids could swim in a cleaned-up Lake Nokomis without getting skin rashes. NRP money was a big component of this--funding for which the neighborhood approved when setting environmental priorities.

Would this have happened without the power of a neighborhood vote and the money to make it a priority? Without a physical presence, we would not have been able to notify neighbors of the [work at] Lake Nokomis, rally the neighborhood during crime alerts and "urge" the police hierarchy to return one of our patrol cars, or provide a clearing house for low-interest housing improvement loans. On the lighter side, without an office, it would have been very hard to coordinate area events like our annual Night Before New Year's Eve party and hayride. Again: VALUE provided to the neighborhood. Ordinary (and extraordinary) neighbors would not have been able to come forward to suggest and/or work on these and smaller, more personal projects.

As important as the money is, the basic philosophy of CITIZEN PARTICIPATION in a democratic republic is the real PAYOFF for NRP funding. As in any "democracy", there have been missteps; but we don't abolish our national republic because of mistakes. We try to do better and that takes both time and vigilance. The Minneapolis NRP has been studied and applauded internationally (e.g., British Columbia's comprehensive study). The bureaucracies we all love to complain about have been nudged toward more responsiveness to citizens, but only to those citizens who have an association [clout] behind them.

Several years ago, I was told that some of these agencies would like to see NRP funding eliminated (this occurred at one of our town meetings). The reasons why? 1) the process took too much time; 2) too many citizens were interfering in the preset planning processes of those bureaucracies; and 3) the process was too contentious (agencies were being asked to explain and justify their decisions on who gets the projects and whose priorities do these projects reflect).

Should NRP funding go, I fear it will be a return to "business as usual" on their part. We "watch dogs" will have been euthanized. Strong neighborhood associations promote accountability in government agencies. Again, providing VALUE to the neighborhood.

Inclusive neighborhood associations are a learning process and, without some level of financial support, could fail. Our version of these small "emerging democracies" needs lots of support, nurturing and TLC. Given the dismal budget situation, it would be unfair to ask our fellow citizens for full NRP funding. I would hope, however, that funding would not fall below some psychological "break-even point" that could result in the demise of effective neighborhood associations. Assuming we survive this budgetary nightmare, I would hope our neighborhood associations would aggressively explore obtaining outside funding sources, grants and private partnerships. For years many of us have been warning of the financial dangers of not diversifying our revenue sources. It's no longer "laissez les bon temps rolle".

I would hope those interested in saving THE PROCESS would write or speak with both our local elected officials and our state legislators. I would also urge you to be realistic in requesting funding; others are also being asked to sacrifice. Thanks to all of our neighbors during this crisis. With best wishes,

- Cheryl Luger, Minnehaha Neighborhood

Top of page

|  NRP Funding  |  Index  |