NCEC Approves/Recommends to City Council the One Minneapolis Fund Committee Request for Proposals Document--How best to continue the unfinished dialogue.

[Jeff Strand]

NCEC Approves/Recommends to City Council the One Minneapolis Fund Committee Request for Proposals Document--How best to continue the unfinished dialogue.

Thank you NCEC colleagues for your patience and perseverance in working through the One Minneapolis Fund Request for Proposal (RFP) at the December 2013 meeting. In my view this remains innovative work that we must continue to support and nurture. I have been so impressed by the interim project reports presented by the Lao Assistance Center, the Conflict Resolution Center, and the Pillsbury United Communities Waite House programs.

I apologize to commissioner colleagues who felt that the motion to close debate shut down additional valuable dialogue. I dislike "calling the question" and feel that often the action is done when debate has already concluded, thus merely causing additional delay to determine the vote on closing debate on an issue. In this instance, I was concerned that the meeting would conclude without the commission having completed its task to approve and recommend the RFP outline to the City Council. So the action was taken for pragmatic reasons to help ensure the RFP was progressed for City Council consideration. Again I apologize to any colleagues who felt as though the action to end debate and vote the matter up or down shut down their voices.

OMF Committee Chair Wetjen, I would like for the One Minneapolis Fund Committee to continue the dialogue about sustainability and nurturing projects funded in 2013, whether and to what extend additional funding should be considered for those projects. Once again the severely limited funding, far short of demand, places additional stress on the process. I appreciate Director Rubedor and Mr. Blin from the NCR Department working to identify additional resources to raise the anticipated available funding from $62,000 to about $80,000. I want to continue the dialogue on the above topics as well as how to leverage additional financial and technical resources for future One Minneapolis Fund projects and believe Google Groups is the identified vehicle for doing so, to ensure transparency and openness.

Thanks again. I highly value working with remarkable colleagues on the NCEC.

Respectfully,

Jeffrey Strand

District 1

[Tessa]

Absolutely, I think this ongoing dialogue is very important!

Sent from my iPhone

--
--
To post to this group, send email to
neighborhood-and-communi...@googlegroups.com
 
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/neighborhood-and-community-engagement-commission?hl=en?hl=en
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Neighborhood and Community Engagement Commission (NCEC)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to neighborhood-and-community-eng...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[DENIS...@comcast.net]

jeff - no offense taken here.

denis

---

From: "Tessa" <tessa...@gmail.com>
To: neighborhood-and-communi...@googlegroups.com
Cc: neighborhood-and-communi...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 6:24:54 AM
Subject: Re: [NCEC] NCEC Approves/Recommends to City Council the One Minneapolis Fund Committee Request for Proposals Document--How best to continue the unfinished dialogue.

[Saciido Shaie]

I agree with you Denis! I mean this is the reason we are all part of this commission, to advocate, and represent our neighborhoods by working, advocating, and recommending best possible policies. And in doing so, it is imperative for us, the commissions to analyze, study, debate and come up with best solutions and policies collectively for our communities. Therefore, that is exactly what happened in our last meeting! My friend Jeff, you are great and hard working and I personally learned from you. 

Saciido Shaie

Saciid...@gmail.com

612-203-0829 cell

Founder and the President of Ummah Project

Neighborhood and Community Engagement Commission

Member of the MN Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee

Member NRP Policy Board

Parent Leadership for Child Safety and Permanency

[Andres Hortillosa]

Happy Holidays! All,

We are in this together to serve by way of our unique contribution - to work and realize a united community without sacrificing cultural diversity. 

We also are a busy bunch who are committed to other concerns. Time is an important resource that I, for one, do not wish to squander. Let's work hard and long in committee meetings where all meaningful work should be. That is where all debate should occur and where differences of opinion settled or respected. But once we have agreed on a work, let's be mindful of the effort invested in that work so that we can try our best to present a unified voice when a committee work is presented to the entire body. This way we keep committees running efficiently. Otherwise, why meet as a committee. Let's be aware that a number of agenda items were not attended to because of the misspent time on a committee work. If we need more time, let's then agree to meet longer so we have time for every discussion. 

There are items in the RFP guidelines that I do not fully support.

If there are questions or debate, let's afford the time to commissioners who are not in the committee. And committee members should patiently explain and ease the mind of the questioning commissioner. Being a person of color and in the minority, I am particularly sensitive over any force which disallows the voicing of differing opinions in all discussions and debates. I serve 20 years in the military to protect the voice of one - yours.

Please note that Kenya and I had a good talk offside after the meeting and we capped that talk with a warm embrace.

If I ever quit this commission or any committee, it is because I will find the commission or a particular committee disrespectful of my time, of which I have a diminishing supply.

Our work as a committee is not finished as we still have to debate and finalize: the Decision Factors, the weighting, and the scoring protocol.

I would like to personally thank the following Committee members: Tessa - for your dedication and work as Chair; Kenya - for your advocating work; Jeff - for your pragmatic concerns; Ishmael - for your leadership; Howard - for your tireless support.

Andy

Very Respectfully,

Andres D. Hortillosa, MBA, MS

Fellow, American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE)
President
Smart Learning, Inc
www.playsmartchess.com

Developer: SmartChess! – The App for the touch screen generation.
Author: Improve Your Chess at Any Age
Publisher: Everyman Chess

[Kenya McKnight]

Greetings all,

I hope everyone had a great Holiday,

Commissioner Strand, thank you for the follow up! 

I actually was a bit offended at how and when the rules were used. Calling the question is legal and within the bounds of Robert Rules however the timing of it was a bit concerning for me as 1. The executive committee facilitated and managed the conversation accordingly and moved us to the end, so I didn't see the need for intervention  2. We were one motion away from closing the discussion. So while calling the question is part of the rules, it made more sense to me to just allow for the last motion to be herd and voted on... Both calling of the question and completing the last motion took about the same amount of time. 

According to what I understand, calling the question blocked/restricted any further discussion and amendments to the RFP document. I don't know if people really understood what actually happened, I think folks were just tired so we moved forward. So while many ppl wanted to extend one mpls funding to previous grantees which was actually the last motion to be made, calling the question prevented such... So in the end the motion carried and I didn't support it for the very reasons I outlined above... I'm okay with it not going the way I seen it, that's how it goes sometimes and i'm a team player. I just recognize how and when rules are used does matter. You did what you thought should happen

So I think it's great for us to continue the discussion of sustainability of projects on both ends. I think it's really a matter of revisiting our mission/statement and guiding principals, I joined on after those things were formed so maybe going over them will help out a bit as we seem to have different values, ideas around whats important which is perfectly fine however discussing it may help us all better understand and support our work together as a committee... 

Smile, yes commissioner Andres and I had a good discussion that I appreciate very much! It's always helpful to better understand one another. Maybe we can revisit the points we both made at some point as they both were important around supporting our collective work as a committee and also providing space for differing opinions within our committee work. The commission as a whole makes the final decisions on committee recommendations and it seems to me that committee members have the right and duty to advocate for or against recommendations by making the case to the commission members... 

Okay, i'm officially off work today but wanted to respond. I'm looking forward to our next meeting! Thanks for your leadership Tessa as Chair and the efforts of each committee member... 

Respectfully,

Commissioner McKnight   

  

[Kenya McKnight]

Correction of this line: 

So while many ppl wanted to extend one mpls funding to previous grantees which was actually the last motion to be made, calling the question prevented such... So in the end the motion carried and I didn't support it for the very reasons I outlined above

Should read as: 

So while many ppl wanted to extend one mpls funding to previous grantees for the same or different projects which was actually the last motion to be made, calling the question prevented such... So in the end the motion carried and I didn't support it for the very reasons I outlined above

Thanks,

Commissioner McKnight