Motiv Apartments - 2320 Colfax Avenue S

[RailBaronYarr]

Isn't the entire point of Wedgelive is to point out how insiders use their influence to shut out people who may be interested in participating, but because of parliamentary rules they impose, makes it very difficult. Earnestly trying to call out bs takes a tremendous amount of energy. Using absurdity to point out absurdity is often the only way to make any kind of a statement. Snark is an effective foil against nonsense.

That's definitely the way I take it. Even doubly so when LHE residents who I know are active association participants (one a board member) take part in the slurs against Lisa Bender but then cry foul when one blogger points out the crazy things they say. The WL writer has also gone to great lengths to document neighborhood association exclusivity and how it benefits a certain class of people - longtime resident homeowners. There are some posts with snark over the top (to make a point) that might be off-putting to people who don't find that stuff appropriate. But a good chunk of posts are very documentary - highlighting neighborhood "loan" programs set up by an association of homeowners to benefit homeowners, pointing out how biased LHENA surveys (5% surveyed renters in a neighborhood packed with them) are trotted out to give legitimacy to board strategic direction/actions, etc. It's important stuff and my personal take (as a non LHE resident and also a home"owner") is that his work does a lot to wake people up to the disparities in LHENA participation.

[David Greene]

Isn't the entire point of Wedgelive is to point out how insiders use their influence to shut out people who may be interested in participating, but because of parliamentary rules they impose, makes it very difficult.

If that's the goal they're utterly failing at it. I've read a number of their articles and feel dirtier for it. The articles are full of personal attacks and scrutiny of minute details. I did not see anything about parliamentary procedure. It's all, "I dislike this person's ideas and here's how stupid this person is."

Using absurdity to point out absurdity is often the only way to make any kind of a statement.

Bullshit. That is the excuse of the lazy. Simply present the facts of what happened and explain, rationally, why this-or-that person's statements are incomplete or incorrect. There is absolutely ZERO need for attacks. Follow Lisa Bender's model, not Nicole Curtis' model.

Snark is an effective foil against nonsense.

No it's not. It is however a very effective way to turn off people from the process entirely. Why else do you think Grover Norquist openly advocates for the divisive politics we have today?

[David Greene]

[The WL writer has also gone to great lengths to document neighborhood association exclusivity and how it benefits a certain class of people - longtime resident homeowners.

Ok, this is a good point. There are indeed some good stories with important historical information. But look at the article about the loan program:

http://wedgelive.blogspot.com/2015/02/r ... loans.html

The goal of the article is spot on - pointing out that public money is being used to heavily benefit homeowners over renters. I have been saying that in the neighborhood for a long time. Yes, we used some of that grant money on our house but I also eagerly supported the extension of the grant program to more multi-unit buildings. I would actually prefer the grant program go away entirely and all the money be put into low-interest loans. Part of the issue here is that renters can't force their landlords to take advantage of the program. Even with all of the free money it's been tremendously difficult to get anyone in the neighborhood to use it. The number of projects funded each year is paltry given that it's free money. Part of the reason for that is that it requires matching funds. You may get $10,000 free if you stay in your house for a decade, but you had to put up $20,000 of your own.

Overall, I think it's a bad program and hasn't accomplished the goal of rehabbing existing housing stock. It should be dropped.

But instead of explaining things in a (hopefully balanced) way like above, Wedgelive has gems like these:

a few were so bent out of shape at the November meeting that you'd think the money was going straight to them and their friends

That's just unnecessarily inflammatory. Money goes to neighborhood residents. That's the whole point. Of course people are going to have questions when programs connected to money get changed. Some may even get upset. This is all perfectly normal.

NRP Guy says he wants "positive ideas" for fixing this loan program at the next meeting. NRP Guy also says he reads my blog; this is awesome because my sanity won't let me attend anymore monthly meetings.

Scare quotes call into question the motives and character of "NRP Guy" and the author comes right out and says everyone is crazy to attend neighborhood meetings. That's real helpful.

Deciding to own a difficult-to-maintain museum/house, or displaying a yard sign proclaiming your victimhood (IRRE-PLACE-ABLE) are both insufficient proof of financial need.

This adds absolutely nothing of value to the conversation. What is the point of this? Because all it does is poison the reader's mind about an otherwise informative and important article.

[David Greene]

Yes, we used some of that grant money on our house

I feel I need to explain this because I know some people are going to look at this, cry hypocrisy and dismiss my post entirely.

We used the money because it was available. Who wouldn't? But we also used the money because it was literally the only way we could finance a much needed rehab of the house exterior. There was 110-year-old siding that needed replacing. It needed replacing when I moved in over a decade ago but the housing crash took me underwater and I couldn't finance the project through a traditional bank. Finally we got enough above water that combining the grant program with a low-interest NRP loan (whose total amount was also limited) and plenty of our own cash, we were able to make it work. If the grant program wasn't there, we wouldn't have had enough capital between the low-interest loan and our own cash.

I'd much rather see the loan program restructured to eliminate the grants and put a higher cap on the low-interest loans. Still, the changes that happened were at least a step in the right direction.

[mplsjaromir]

Wedgelive had a very intensely researched article about Minneapolis Organizations and how they work.

http://wedgelive.blogspot.com/2015/01/w ... -most.html

So yeah, they do more than just bash people.

I forgot that satire is only employed by losers like Aristophanes and Bill Shakespeare. The process is what turns people away, not people making observations about the process.

[EOst]

Since you mention Aristophanes, it's worth pointing out that his satirical plays not only failed to have any real political influence, but might have strengthened the hand of his opponents (esp. his arch-nemesis Cleon). Satire is fun (and valuable!), but it rarely accomplishes anything.

[johneapolis]

(I wrote this before reading David’s merciless takedowns. I appreciate that he’s pointing to specifics. Sorry about that dirty feeling.)

David,

First of all, I’ve seen you banging your reasonable head against the wall on Facebook recently, and I sincerely appreciate the effort. Facebook makes me feel dirty, so I know it can’t be easy. This post isn’t aimed so much at you, as it is the stuff I’m seeing in other venues. Consider this an Open Letter to the Haters.

One thing I’ve noticed about much of the criticism from The Healy Project; from a Nicole Curtis employee; and from other North Minneapolis Rehab Addicts: no links, no quotes, no specific descriptions of the offending posts or Tweets (I knew I could count on you, David).

A lot of people are bent out of shape because I’ve gone hard after Anders Christensen and Nicole Curtis, two people who could not be more deserving. I hope you’ll take some of the criticism with a grain of salt and come to your own conclusions from reading my words (which David has, and that’s fair enough).

Let’s acknowledge the context. I’m not the only person engaging in the social media conversation. MRRDC (I’m assuming everyone is familiar) is run by multiple LHENA Board Members and some of the Truthy-Truthtellers at The Healy Project. Last year, LHENA held a fundraiser with The Healy Project; the year before, it was a Healy/Tuthill fundraiser. And don’t forget how coordinated this whole crew is with Nicole Curtis (and her gross Facebook page).

Me? I’m just a guy with a blogspot (with the reach equivalent to a forum post prior to last Friday). This one-man crusade is a response to the absurdity I was seeing online, and the shockingly nasty attitude of some homeowners (#notallhomeowners) at my first LHENA meeting. I guess what I’m saying is: you need me on that wall.

MRRDC tells us, in a feel-good op-ed, that neighborhood associations are vitally important (they’re like the City Council mixed with the Red Cross and free ice cream!). Many people agree with this. LHENA’s opinions are reported as news.

I view LHENA, in its present form, as a political obstacle. Based on my strict meeting attendance over the last year, the organization does a really good job of promoting the interests of our neighborhood’s small Healy faction. So I crash the party and tell people what’s happening at these public meetings. And I make jokes. If I wasn’t making jokes, would anybody read my tweets? No; just like nobody attends the meetings.

One more thing about my jokes. I know some people are not fans; my sense of humor is not for everyone (it's definitely not for David). With @MRRSVLD and @WedgeLIVE, I try to be light-hearted. Some people think I succeed in striking the right balance. This endeavor is partly a comedy project. Some of my jokes misfire, but I always try to punch up. Which isn’t hard to do when you’re a dirty, no-good transient.

[FISHMANPET]

Also John Stuart and now John Oliver and the likes seem to do a serviceable job talking about things without needing to be DEATHLY SERIOUS about DEATHLY SERIOUS THINGS.

I see Wedge Live and its over the top ness as a direct reaction to the tone and tenor of the likes of the Healy Project and MRRDC. If those groups were rational people looking to build consensus on issues, then yeah, Wedge Live would be mean spirited. But when you've got groups that make ridiculous claims of absolutism and ban people that disagree with them, I think they deserve to be poked in the ribs with a stick a little bit.

I'm not going to claim that neighborhood preservation is anywhere near the magnitude of racial justice in this country, but I'm not sure why it's OK for people to protest for social justice when the system has failed them, but it's not OK to point out people being patently ridiculous when they're doing so in a public forum.

[johneapolis]

But instead of explaining things in a (hopefully balanced) way like above, Wedgelive has gems like these:

a few were so bent out of shape at the November meeting that you'd think the money was going straight to them and their friends

That's just unnecessarily inflammatory. Money goes to neighborhood residents. That's the whole point. Of course people are going to have questions when programs connected to money get changed. Some may even get upset. This is all perfectly normal.

NRP Guy says he wants "positive ideas" for fixing this loan program at the next meeting. NRP Guy also says he reads my blog; this is awesome because my sanity won't let me attend anymore monthly meetings.

Scare quotes call into question the motives and character of "NRP Guy" and the author comes right out and says everyone is crazy to attend neighborhood meetings. That's real helpful.

Deciding to own a difficult-to-maintain museum/house, or displaying a yard sign proclaiming your victimhood (IRRE-PLACE-ABLE) are both insufficient proof of financial need.

This adds absolutely nothing of value to the conversation. What is the point of this? Because all it does is poison the reader's mind about an otherwise informative and important article.

I don't pretend to have an ounce of balance in me. Despite the appearance of my Twitter avatar, @WedgeLIVE is not CNN. Though I won't foreclose on implementing your suggested editorial standards at some point. Inflammatory or not, I'm not sure why I should ignore the fact that the people protecting a deeply flawed loan/grant program are the same ones benefiting from it.

Some background on the "positive ideas" scare quotes. Those are quote quotes. This guy was implying that previous successful efforts to implement income restrictions on the free money wasn't a positive idea. He wants to roll this back. I would have quoted him at length but I'm a lousy fake journalist who doesn't take notes.

Yes, people who religiously attend neighborhood association meetings are insane. I know this because I am one. One of the ongoing comedy bits at @WedgeLIVE is that I'm a sad crazy person who goes to too many NA meetings. At least I tell myself it's just a bit. Zing.

We may just have to agree to disagree on this whole "humor" thing. Like I said, my stuff is not for everyone, though I do appreciate that you're trying to offer constructive criticism and pointing to specific issues.

[xandrex]

Also John Stuart and now John Oliver and the likes seem to do a serviceable job talking about things without needing to be DEATHLY SERIOUS about DEATHLY SERIOUS THINGS.

Yeah, I was going to point this out. Jon Stewart does a great job of taking something ridiculous, perhaps that we take for granted, in our political system and exposes it for the sham it is. Does he add nothing when he tears down an opponent?

[RailBaronYarr]

Yes, we used some of that grant money on our house

I feel I need to explain this because I know some people are going to look at this, cry hypocrisy and dismiss my post entirely.

1) I don't think you need to explain yourself on taking the money. I detest the mortgage interest deduction as public policy and want to see it heavily overhauled or flat out removed (with some of the savings going to reducing overall tax rate but a large chunk going directly toward actual low-income housing assistance), but I'd be insane NOT to take it each year.

2) On the loans/grants themselves, I think this is one of my bigger beefs with the push for additional historic preservation, which almost always seems to center around people's single family homes. There's already a LOT of money being thrown at homeowners in general, and add to that loans/grants/etc that make owning old houses (which clearly require a lot of work to maintain in a state preservationists deem appropriate) financially viable. When my wife and I bought our home last spring, we specifically turned our gaze away from giant homes with intricate interior/exterior finishes that cost a lot to maintain after touring a couple. We bought a home with plain siding, simple roof lines, minimal windows (excluding the front sun room), and no fancy architectural elements. In fact, it was more than likely a kit home. Something similar to this one (without the attic window). I counted 7 homes on a 2 block stretch with the design, even. I dunno, I guess I fall on the side that wants the city to roll out protected bikeways and Midtown Streetcars and maintain roads/parks and buy police bodycams, and all of those things probably rank higher on my list (and, I would guess many renters in the Wedge who don't go to LHENA meetings) than grants for maintaining a variety of old homes with varying levels of historical-ness.

[clf]

I am a renter who also has attended LHENA meeting for many years. Yes, there are some preservationists that are obsessive. I have also seen and heard some pro development people made offensive statements at meetings. You are going to get crazies on both sides of an argument in a public setting, it the nature of politics. As for the loan program, it is not just for home owners, my landlord is one that has benefited from this program. Many apartment complexes in the neighborhood are run by absent landlords that use management companies. I can see how the loans would not be available to these corporations as these loans are structured.

[David Greene]

I see Wedge Live and its over the top ness as a direct reaction to the tone and tenor of the likes of the Healy Project and MRRDC.

But Wedge Live goes beyond that. And really, if you want, say, more renters to participate in th neighborhood organization (and I do!) why jeopardize that with language known to discourage people from participating?

I'm not going to claim that neighborhood preservation is anywhere near the magnitude of racial justice in this country, but I'm not sure why it's OK for people to protest for social justice when the system has failed them, but it's not OK to point out people being patently ridiculous when they're doing so in a public forum.

The difference isn't the magnitude of the problem. It's the tactics. The serious social justice workers I know don't go around making fun of their political targets. Yes, they challenge them but they challenge them with respect. "No permanent allies, no permanent enemies" as they say. That target you're going after today may be your ally tomorrow.

[David Greene]

When my wife and I bought our home last spring, we specifically turned our gaze away from giant homes with intricate interior/exterior finishes that cost a lot to maintain after touring a couple. We bought a home with plain siding, simple roof lines, minimal windows (excluding the front sun room), and no fancy architectural elements. In fact, it was more than likely a kit home. Something similar to this one (without the attic window). I counted 7 homes on a 2 block stretch with the design, even. I dunno, I guess I fall on the side that wants the city to roll out protected bikeways and Midtown Streetcars and maintain roads/parks and buy police bodycams, and all of those things probably rank higher on my list (and, I would guess many renters in the Wedge who don't go to LHENA meetings) than grants for maintaining a variety of old homes with varying levels of historical-ness.

Our house has similar trim elements, it's the Transitional style which was a gigantic break from the over-the-top Victorian styles. It was a deliberate design movement rebelling against what was seen as the excesses of Victorian design.

And I definitely get your point and agree with much of it. I do, however, think it is worthwhile to invest some money in maintaining those older Victorians as well because they do have a special design aesthetic that's both pleasing and evocative of a different era. I guess that's the history buff in me. But there are plenty of programs out there currently. We don't need to do it at the neighborhood level.

[David Greene]

[We may just have to agree to disagree on this whole "humor" thing. Like I said, my stuff is not for everyone, though I do appreciate that you're trying to offer constructive criticism and pointing to specific issues.

Thanks. And I do appreciate a lot of the content on there. It's just that sometimes my brain glosses over it due to harsh reactions to the snark. That's what I was trying to get at. The content is often great but it's obscured by the style.

[FISHMANPET]

But Wedge Live goes beyond that. And really, if you want, say, more renters to participate in th neighborhood organization (and I do!) why jeopardize that with language known to discourage people from participating?

I just imagine some kind of stage interview set, where you've got two chairs half facing each other, half facing the audience. You've got one person sitting very calmly in one of the chairs, waiting for the intellectual debate to start. But nobody's in the other chair. Instead you've got a bunch of kids running around. Yelling and screaming, playing, generally as kids do. And here you've got the one guy sitting down saying "This is a very serious manner why won't anybody be serious about this!" And yeah, WedgeLive is one of those kids running around, but meanwhile Healy Project and MRRDC have stolen someone's bookback and doing that thing where they throw it back and forth between each other while the kid runs back and forth trying to steal it. And Wedge LIve showed up and said "hey these are a bunch of kids I gotta dive into the mud with them.

You can't have a very serious discussion about a very serious topic if the other side has shown from the start that they're not really looking to engage on that level. If Wedge Live gets some people into the fray, and maybe saner heads on each side will emerge and something resembling reasoned discourse can emerge.

As it stands, if one side flings mud, I don't see a problem with the other side flinging mud back.

Related, I thought this was a pretty detailed and fairly unbiased view, up until the most recent events where the only "bias" is sanity: http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2015/ ... net-junkie
Gives some good background on possible motivations for these actors well before this specific house was an issue.

And another piece: http://www.southwestjournal.com/voices-feed/a-bad-sign

[twincitizen]

Wow, Tane Danger's piece was good. I wonder why MinnPost refused to run it... (from a Twitter convo I was reading last night)

I want to throw a possibly controversial opinion out there: Mayor Hodges made this situation worse by engaging with Nicole Curtis.

Despite all of the nasty comments directed at Bender on previous Nicole Curtis Facebook posts, this thing was well on its way to dying down and the Mayor's intervention did nothing but stir shit back up. On one hand, kinda cool of her to publicly defend her colleague (friend?) and call out the bullshit coming from mean internet trolls, but on the other hand it was wholly unnecessary and beneath her to find it necessary. As Mayor, I think it's fair to say you are way above the level where you need to pay attention to what non-resident internet trolls are saying. As the guy in the TC Daily Planet piece said, news cycles run like a week, tops, and typically less than that in the Twitter-era. We probably wouldn't even be talking about this right now if Betsy had just left it alone. With the houses finally torn down, I think nearly everyone would've moved on and forgotten about it in another week or two.

[RailBaronYarr]

^I'd agree with that. It was maybe the morally right thing to do, but a politically bad choice. Having just come out looking great from #pointergate (where she stayed above it all for a looong time), she didn't need to be in the media spotlight for something that would have died down on its own. Even if the crap people were saying was really bad.

[Anton]

Yeah, I think the Mayor jumping in maybe was unnecessary, but how could she stand idly by while this happens? Nicole has been posting inflammatory comments re: 2320 for almost an entire year now; she started back in April 2014 and I think is at around 30 posts on the topic (I was curious and counted them). But trolls live on that kind of attention, and I'm sure the Mayor's detractors were thrilled to be acknowledged, even if it was for spouting profanity.

And I also applaud WedgeLIVE for covering what no one else bothers to. These sparsely-attended meetings do have some impact on neighborhood policy, and it's not surprising that renters aren't champing at the bit to show up and talk about interest rates on homeowner loans. I'd rather get my news from a source with known bias than not know what's going on at all, which was the case for many years. And I'm not sure I'd even bother to read it without the snarky commentary. (And that's not even counting the "posted without comment" pictures from the Wedge newspaper of yore, which are great)

The "accusations" against WedgeLIVE seem to never link to any evidence either. For example, the latest Healy Project talks about a "nonstop tirade of name-calling" yet I see no evidence of the names that were called, let alone a tirade. (The "doxing" accusation is similarly laughable) It's also frustrating for me as a transparency advocate to listen to Healy Project now claim it's about "the corrupt process" when they have had their day in court twice and the second judge even acknowledged the "lying" accusations (HP couldn't produce a witness to refute what Smoley said, and Anders Christensen and Bob Roscoe didn't qualify as experts, so the statements stood).

[David Greene]

As it stands, if one side flings mud, I don't see a problem with the other side flinging mud back.

Wedge Live doesn't just exist to cover 2320 Colfax, right? Yet I see the same style on other stories.

The problem with your statement above is that it falls right into the trap the Norquists of the world have set. They *want* the discussion to devolve because it turns people off from engaging, thereby ceding power to them.