Tuesday, September 11, 2001

SUMMARY NOTES: Guidelines Review, Empowerment & Assessment Team, GREAT

City of Portland, Office of Neighborhood Involvement

Members present:
Nancy Chapin, Alliance of Portland Neighborhood Business Associations
Cathy Crawford, University Park Neighborhood Association
Leonard Gard, Southwest Neighborhoods, Inc.
Patricia Gardner, Pearl District Neighborhood Association
Raymond Hites, Lents Neighborhood Association
Brian Hoop, ONI, City of Portland
Joleen Jensen-Classen, ONI, City of Portland
David Lane, ONI, City of Portland
Moshe Lenske, Woodstock Neighborhood Association
Stanley Lewis, Downtown Community Association
Jerry Powell, Goose Hollow Foothills League
William Warren, Central Northeast Neighbors

Members Absent:
Bud Breithaupt, Central Northeast Neighbors
Mark Sieber, Neighbors, West/Northwest
Ruth Spetter, Attorney, City of Portland

Visitors:
Karen Lehman, PSU Student Intern, ONI Office

Decisions by this group are subject to change at future meetings.
Opportunities for public input at the end of meeting and future workshops.

I. Minutes Corrections for August 28

Note that attached calendar needs to be corrected. Tuesday, October 27 and Tuesday, November 13 are incorrect. We meet October 23 and November 13. And November 27 was not on the calendar.
Minutes accepted.

II. City Code, Chapter 3.96 - Definition of Neighborhood Assoc.

Ray suggests themes that need to be represented in definition including:

Leonard- Definition should have reference to geographic boundary and refer to associations as an "organization" recognized by ONI, not a group of people.
Discussion- Re: geographic boundaries, what happens when a cluster of neighbors feels interests may be better represented by groups or associations outside their current association boundary or if they want to represent themselves?
Several comment they want to keep the definition as simple and broad as possible. Like Leonard's simplicity.
Moshe- Geographic boundaries need to be there to show what jurisdiction each group has.
Patricia- Propose add new definition to define a "Neighborhood" which goes beyond the association.
Several comments support that idea.
Discussion- Need to allow flexibility for sub-groups of a neighborhood association to identify themselves independently from the larger neighborhood association.
Cathy- Recognize that some groups may not want the ONI recognition and administrative responsibilities. See it as too costly in time and resources.
Joleen- Committee should not get into issue of sovereignty. Current guidelines allow how groups can redefine their boundaries.
Discussion- Want groups to have flexibility to define themselves as neighborhoods.
William- Reason for minimum number of houses was partially to minimize discrimination of keeping certain people out of an area. That has been a real issue that guidelines have protected us from.
MOTION: Patricia moves to accept Leonard's definition of neighborhood association.
"An organization formed by people for the purpose of considering and acting on issues affecting the livability and quality of their neighborhood, formally recognized by the Office of Neighborhood Involvement, and subject to this chapter and any implementing guidelines."

Discussion: Should we include "formal" recognition by ONI? Joleen describes process to seek recognition. Others can grieve process if they don't agree.
Ray- Proposes adding "independent" organization to help outsiders understand these groups do have some autonomy from city. Need to let people know that associations have autonomy from City.
Several others suggest autonomous instead.

"An autonomous organization formed by people for the purpose of considering and acting on issues affecting the livability and quality of their neighborhood, formally recognized by the Office of Neighborhood Involvement, and subject to Chapter 3.96 and any implementing guidelines."

Motion passes.

Moshe- Wants everyone to know the group and public comment can always go back and reconsider issues.


The information contained in this document is preliminary and informal in nature and does not necessarily reflect the views or adopted policies of the City of Portland or the final outcomes of this project; the reader should exercise caution in its interpretation.