Organized Trash Collection

The Macalester-Groveland Community Council, with the support of the MN Pollution Control Agency, has been hosting a series of community conversations about our trash hauling system in the City of Saint Paul.  Currently, each household is responsible for contracting with a trash hauling company individually.  An alternative system of “organized collection” would allow the City of Saint Paul to negotiate contracts with trash haulers on behalf of residents.  Organized collection does not necessarily mean just one trash hauler for the entire City.  There are several ways that this system could work, including supporting multiple hauling companies.  Many cities that have implemented organized collection have achieved greater efficiency, increased services and/or decreased costs.         

How to get involved:

• Take our brief survey before June 7 to share your thoughts about trash collection in the City of Saint Paul.  Visit macgrove.org/trash to take a 5 minute survey and be entered in a drawing to win a $50 Mississippi Market gift card.
• Join us for our last community conversation about organized trash collection on Thursday, June 4 (Hamline Midway Library, 1558 W Minnehaha Ave, St Paul) Visit macgrove.org/trash for more information.

Notes from Dialogue to Action Steering Committee meeting 5/11/15

Agenda approved.

Minutes approved with a minor correction (made on website).

Ground rules approved without additions. Our practice as a committee - Discussion suggested for how we send substitutes if members have an emergency, vacation, etc. To do – revisit question of how to assure that each steering committee member organization is represented at the meetings. Detailed minutes will always be available so that absent members can be kept in the loop of discussions and decisions.

Teamwork Inventory – To do – Discussion of the results of this inventory was postponed until the June meeting.

Budget – Revised budget was distributed, the changes discussed, and approval made. The only changes were a decrease in the fiscal agency fee, and in mailing and supplies costs. Committee members were reminded that they can submit their first half invoices by Tuesday May 12 noon to assure that they will have payment with the May 15 payroll. Committee members were reminded that the timeline sent by Lor has the dates for submission of the invoices.

Track 2 (PED) Discussion – Track 2 of this project will be dialogues between staff of the Department of Planning and Economic Development and district councils (both staff and land use committee members) about how we can work together to assure that the voices of communities of color are heard in land use and zoning decision processes.  This track will have its own planning group of 5-7 members. Discussion included - What role is the Ambassador Team playing in recruiting members to the planning team for this track of the project? There hasn’t been a meeting of the Ambassador Team since our last meeting, but members have been reaching out to other district councils including: Hamline Midway Coalition, Mac Groveland, Union Park, District 6 (North End). Who is involved from PED? District 1 will make initial outreach to Jake Reilly and Bill Dermody in PED because each has expressed and demonstrated interest in this topic. There was a lengthy discussion of which district councils should be invited to participate in the planning for this track. The emphasis will be on 1) assuring representation from across the city, 2) including councils who have not been involved in the dialogues previously, and 3) assuring that there is at least one member from the steering committee who sits on this planning group so that solid communication is assured. Confirmed interest in participating came from districts 5 and 2. District 3 will look at staffing. One of the 4 previously contacted organizations will be asked (6, 11, 13 or 14), and at least one other council from another area of the City will be sought until 1) we have confirmation of the total number of PED staff who will participate, and 2) a total of seven members is reached.

Additional discussion focused on how to keep the focus in the dialogues on equity, the importance of training and having a shared language around issues of race, the use of solid data in helping to frame any action steps, looking at the available resources around development issues and equity (e.g., the tool used by Minneapolis’ Hope Community in dealings with Parks, the Twin Cities Equitable Development Scorecard, Voices for Racial Justice’s equity scorecard, etc.), and the relationship between this track and the other (more community-focused) tracks.

Chia presented a proposal from Voices for Racial Justice to train the trainers in critically analyzing racial dynamics. They propose a 3 hour training at $125/hour. There was a lengthy discussion of the need for training and the difficulty of finding additional funding to support this particular request. Again, members stated the need for a shared language among participants around issues of race, racism and privilege. We discussed other resources that are currently available to us at no cost and how we might integrate this training with the Cross-Cultural Dialogue work that the Saint Paul Foundation will be funding, including how we can use the quarterly forums that work will hold. Decision was made that Chia will discuss the budgetary constraints with Voices for Racial Justice and our need to make use of currently available resources.

Update on Community Action Team (CAT) Meeting – There was the third CAT meeting on May 4 at the East Side Freedom Library. There were 22 people who attended, including 6 police officers, 5 youth, and a very diverse group in terms of culture/race, age, and gender. The group made the decision that Parks and Recreation would be the second city department other than the police that will be a part of the project. We discussed strategy for gaining departmental buy-in.

Concerns – The issue of a shared language persists. The importance of training that includes a way to build this shared language and connects the disparate parts of the project continues to be a focus for us. There was a concern that earlier CAT meetings may not have been productive because of a persisting resistance of white participants to acknowledge white privilege and to downplay the importance of racism in the lives of participants of color. We need to challenge ourselves to keep the focus on conversations about race. We need to hold ourselves and each other accountable for this work, which will include the need to challenge each other and accept those challenges.

We need to do our lists of major events in our neighborhoods and dates of member absences from meetings so that we can avoid scheduling conflicts. Send these to Chia.

Each of us needs to send to Chia the name of individuals we are encouraging to come to the CAT meetings so she can prepare for, welcome, and incorporate the new people into the work. District 1 will draft a description of the CAT members can use to encourage participation (see below).

NEXT MEETING is June 15 from 10a to noon at the District 1 office.

CAT Description – The Community Action Team is a group of Saint Paul community members who meet monthly to plan the dialogues that will happen this fall between police and youth, and between community members and the Parks and Recreation Department. The purpose of these dialogues is to build understanding and positive interactions among city departments and people of color, and to find common action we can take to assure that interactions are respectful and inclusive. The commitment for members of the CAT is about 3-4 hours per month, including one two-hour meeting per month (the first Monday from 5:30 – 7:30p at the following locations).

June 1st, 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm

Western District Office

389 Hamline Ave. N, 

Saint Paul, MN 55104

July 6, 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm

Rondo Library, Multipurpose Room

461 N Dale Street

Saint Paul 55103

August 3rd, 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm

El Rio Vista Rec Center/Wellstone Center (room 107)

179 Robie Street E.

Saint Paul, MN 55107

Programming for our young residents

Did you know that there is an Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE) program at Battle Creek Elementary School (60 S. Ruth Street)? This program is for families with children ages birth to kindergarten entrance. There are classes and activities that support parents as their children's first and most important teachers. There is family time for parents and children together, parents' time, and children's time that are age and culture specific. Family literacy and home visiting are also components. Fees are based on the ability to pay and NO ONE is turned away. Limited transportation is provided as needed.  Call 651-793-5410 for more information.

Also there are pre-kindergarten programs at Battle Creek Elementary (60 S. Ruth St.), Eastern Heights Elementary (Margaret and Ruth St.), and Highwood Hills Elementary (Londin Lane and Winthrop). This program prepares 4 year-olds for school success. Children need to be 4 by September 1 and live in Saint Paul. Admission priority is given to children who are English Language Learners, qualify for free or reduced meals, or receive Early Childhood Special Education services. Classes are 5 days a week, 2.5 hours in the morning or afternoon, or 6 hours at selected sites. Parent education and support is available during this year-long transition to kindergarten. To apply for the program, call the Student Placement Center - 651-632-3760.

Minutes of the 5/4/15 Community Action Team for the Dialogue to Action Project

NOTE: For more information about this project, contact Chia Lor at district1chia@gmail.com or by calling 651-578-7400.

This meeting was held at the East Side Freedom Library and was attended by 21 members of the Saint Paul community including 5 youth from District 1. The meeting is open to any community members who would like to actively participate in developing the dialogues planned for this fall between youth and police, and between community members and city departments. 

Welcome by Peter Rachleff of the East Side Freedom Library, with an explanation of what the library is intended to represent to the community – a resource on racial and economic justice and its history.

Attendees introduced themselves.

Opening quote by International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)  President Richard Beary following the grand jury’s decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Mo.: “At this crucial time, it is imperative that law enforcement and community leaders, both in Missouri and through the United States, make every effort to reduce tensions and ensure a peaceful and lawful response to today’s decision.  Only by working together to create a constructive dialogue can law enforcement and community leaders establish effective police-community partnerships that are at the heart of safe communities…”

Ground Rules for the meeting were reviewed and participants were asked if there were any additions or modifications. None were proposed.

The history of the project was reviewed – the four action steps from the 2014 Cross-Cultural dialogues were named (develop an Ambassador Team to spread the word about the dialogue process, conduct intergenerational dialogues, develop education around local government and the importance of voting in local elections, and these community/city department dialogues). Police officers in attendance asked about whether there has been any discussion of what has already been going on to improve and support good relations between the police and the community. These existing efforts will be highlighted in this project.

Work to support this project was identified and a request was made to have a lead for each set of work:

1. How do we partner with schools and churches that have existing youth groups? – C. Ware identified as lead
2. How do we use social media to get the word out? – several youth stepped up to work together on this
3.   How can we pull together the history of police and community relations? J. Lozoya and M. Edwards will be leads from the Police Department
4.  How do we provide the food and social needs when the dialogues happen? Fundraisers, donations, potlucks? – several youth stepped up to think about this, also B. Leach can act as a resource
5.  What about community partnerships outside of the district councils? – K. Hallstrom, J. Bandemer, also district council partners can assist with this
6.  How can youth recruit other youth? – several youth stepped up for this task, but district councils can help make initial connections to other existing youth groups
7.   How can we make sure that there is transportation available to the dialogues? This will be an on-going discussion.

We want to assure that the dialogues are a diverse and representative cross-section of our city – by ethnicity, by age, by gender, by geography. We need to recruit with this in mind.

We already have a strong and supportive relationship with the police in developing this dialogue. We need to turn our attention to the other department(s) and community dialogues. After much discussion of the pros and cons, the overwhelming vote was to focus on the Department of Parks and Recreation for the second set of dialogues. This decision was made because of the level of direct impact this department has on community members. The question was also raised as to whether this dialogue was to be with policy makers or with front-line staff. We will need to determine this as we get buy-in from Parks. C. Lor will meet with Parks administrators along with community members that will include youth. It was emphasized that not only park users but those who do not use the recreation facilities be included in the dialogues. Potential questions to ask include – what is privatization or partnering of facilities and why is it happening as it is? What is the relationship between the partners and the community? How does the city track activities or hold partners accountable for the use of public facilities?

We then turned to looking at the dialogue curriculum for the Police and Community Dialogues. It currently contains 5 sessions – 1) set the framework and get to know participants and how their experience has shaped their relationship with police, 2) history of police and community relations and interpretation of what each of us thinks is happening, 3) what are expectations of police and of community members for each other? 4) Look for different ways to improve on relations between community and police, 5) explore potential action steps and decide on the action steps we want to take. The organizers/sponsors of this project want to make sure that a session is added that discusses racial dynamics – taken from the original cross-cultural dialogues.

We divided into 5 groups, each taking a dialogue session and thinking about what would work, what we might keep and what we would want to change in the curriculum. Time ran out, so we will report back on the groups at the next meeting. (NOTE: this curriculum will also be modified to fit the dialogues with Parks.)

We finished the meeting with a privilege walk to highlight the differences in the lived experience of white residents and residents of color in our community. We discussed the impact of this activity on our perspectives, and came together by looking at the actions each of us has already taken and continues to take to narrow the gaps in our experiences.

Next meeting will be at the Western District Police headquarters, just off University Avenue at Hamline Avenue, 389 Hamline Avenue North, on Monday June 1 from 5:30p to 7:30p.

Minutes of the 4/27/15 Board Orientation

The meeting was called to order by Board President Paul Sawyer at 6:34p

Introductions – Board members were asked to introduce themselves by name, occupation, where they live, and what was special to them about our district or being on the board. Members spoke of the importance of the natural environment of District 1, of how important it was that our organization is trying to be representative of the people who live here, about the importance of making connections within the board as well as with the community. Board members were encouraged to make as much of the board membership as you want and are able. It was noted that one of our new members is on WEQY (new eastside radio station) board and this connection is a good one for us to have.

Bylaws change – The proposed change to the bylaws regarding election of board officers was announced in the March issue of the District 1 News. Staff received no comments from community members about the proposal. The proposal was moved by Harper, and seconded by Mohr.  Discussion – the reason for the change was to clarify how we elect officers because of restrictions about who can run (certain offices require a certain number of years on the board) and to bring us into best practices for officer elections. Questions were asked about why officers were elected in alternative years (Pres and VP in one year, and Sec and Treasurer in the next). This practice allows continuity and transmission of knowledge by staggering the terms. Questions were asked about why it is done the way it has been – election of officers by community members. Sitting members were not aware of the history. Motion passed on a unanimous voice vote.

Election of Board Officers – The Secretary and Treasurer duties outlined in the Bylaws were read and nominations were requested, first for Secretary and second for the Treasurer.  Fuehrer was the only nomination for Secretary - unanimously elected on voice vote. Westerberg was the only nomination for Treasurer – elected unanimously on a voice vote. There was further discussion of the importance of checks and balances around the finances of the organization. Note: Westerberg is serving his second term as Treasurer and term limits for offices require that next Treasurer election vote in a new Treasurer.

Financial Reports – The financial reports for the 3^rd quarter of the fiscal year were presented and discussed. Approval of the reports was moved by Mohr and seconded by Turner. Questions were asked to explain our relationship with other organizations – fiscal agency and collaboration. Questions were asked about how we can increase our organizational income. Question asked of how board members get training around their financial responsibilities – Minnesota Council of Nonprofit classes, Nonprofit Assistance Fund classes were mentioned and staff will forward these opportunities as they arise.  Reports were adopted unanimously on a voice vote.

Transit and Economic Development Summit proposal – Discussion of how we can use the transit projects that are being proposed for the eastside to generate economic development – to bring jobs, educational support for those jobs and improved housing to the area. The proposal from Herman before us is asking for $500 seed money to get the summit going for the fall that will help build an eastside coalition around these efforts. This effort would be community-driven but also would combine with the Chamber’s efforts in East Metro Strong. Fuehrer moved and Clark seconded the motion to approve the $500 seed money. Questions were raised as to how the summit relates to SunRay redevelopment, around youth needs and transit. Questions were asked as to what is the next step after approval of the money? What is the oversight of the project? Who are the partners and what do they stand for? Board members were concerned that we identify immediate needs first then go for longer term needs so that community members can see results of the work. Given the questions raised there was a motion to table the original motion until we get more info (moved by Clark, seconded by Harper). Discussion of the motion to table involved questions about what was learned from FESTEC/ESTE project around transit developments and collaboration. Do we make the short term investment and help shape the way forward? Or do we wait. The motion to table was withdrawn on the condition that we make sure we have a voice at the table to shape the project, and that we have a voice in hiring staff. Further discussion of the broader committee that will oversee the project and of the criteria used to hire. If we are going to support this effort we need to be all in. The motion to expend $500 was approved contingent on steering committee including D1 staff and that D1 staff be on the hiring committee (one vote in opposition – Harper). Staff was asked to schedule Herman (project proposer) for a board meeting to provide more detail and to receive input from the board.

Board Responsibilities – The main focus of the organization has been the community plan, Youth work, and the dialogue projects. The organization is growing – Sawyer asked how we best meet our mission under this growth mode. We will need to examine and potentially change board and staff responsibilities. We may need to move toward an executive director and staff model rather than a do-it-all model of staffing. Board members received a synopsis of funding projects. Sawyer spoke of clarifying the board role as one of oversight and general policy setting. The board should look at what the ED does at a policy level. We need to recognize that there is a distinction between what is a board duty and what is a volunteer duty of people who happen to be board members. It is not the role of the board to manage day-to-day operations and implementation of goals.

Sawyer outlined the fiduciary duties of board members. The duty of care – things must be done to the benefit the organization, keeping a focus on our mission and our purpose, and seeing to it that our programs are advancing this mission and purpose. The question we need to ask is, do we have the capacity to do (resources) what it is that we are saying we are going to do? The duty of care means doing nothing that will undermine the organization. The duty of loyalty – this is the concept that helps us in dealing with conflicts of interest – and those conflicts can be of self, family or our employers. Examples were provided and discussed regarding choice of our financial institution and board members who work for our current bank. The duty of obedience – this concept involves making sure that we are in compliance with state laws and that our bylaws are supporting the mission. It also involves the separation of fiscal responsibilities so that no one person controls all aspects of our monies – checks and balances are in place. It also involves assuring that we are following the wishes of our funders in how we spend the money that is given to us.

Future meetings – It was recognized that we have a lot more to learn and that continuing this discussion and orientation will be important. Board members were asked to look at the MCN nonprofit principles and practices booklet and at the Attorney General’s booklet on Fiduciary Duties to see if there are topics they need to hear more about. Board members were also asked to look at our articles of incorporation and the bylaws (bylaws in the handbook – staff will provide articles). We will also need to look at our committee structure to make best use of board and staff time. Board members are asked to email to staff suggestions of what to cover in future orientation sessions.

Meeting adjourned at 8:40p.