U of M and Northsiders negotiate terms of ‘partnership’

Community stakeholders in North Minneapolis are generating a wish list for what they hope will come out of the University Northside Partnership (UNP), a redevelopment plan for the intersection of Penn and Plymouth Avenues North. Those needs and wants will eventually work their way into what’s referred to as a “Community Benefits Agreement” (CBA).

Part one of a two-part story

The idea behind a CBA, which is a legal document that lays out the terms of a relationship between a community and a developer, is to reach “mutually beneficial objectives, and a mechanism to enforce both sides’ promises” according to communitybenefits.org.

CBAs vary from place to place, reflecting the needs or wants of a particular community. (Locally, they have been used to ensure equitable development along St. Paul’s University Avenue, for instance, and to prevent the loss of affordable housing in Brooklyn Park, among other examples.)

What form the CBA will take in the UNP is still unclear, as are many of the project’s details, including its projected budget and timeline. The University of Minnesota, which is leading the project, is not exactly a “developer” in this case, nor is this the typical economic situation in which CBAs most often come into play.

That raises some issues about how the CBA will work, especially with so many partners involved. The CBA’s proponents say it has the potential to usher in plenty of benefits for Northside residents, but critics aren’t so sure it will accomplish anything. Additionally, some people are concerned about the U’s motivation for doing research on the Northside, while also questioning the nature of the research itself.

A formal draft of the CBA will probably be ready sometime in June, according to Northside Residents Redevelopment Council (NRRC) Executive Director Sherrie Pugh Sullivan. NRRC is leading the CBA’s community input process on behalf of the North Side, and it originally advocated for the project itself.

A handful of public input sessions were hosted in December 2007. More recently, there was a town hall forum on April 3, while a NRRC taskforce performed preliminary research even before that.

Pugh Sullivan said a CBA will create long-term accountability for the project. The U of M is not a part of the CBA’s development to ensure that the community comes forward with an authentic voice, she emphasized.

Pugh Sullivan has encouraged people to dream big. In her view, “This is an opportunity to capture the intellectual capital of the University of Minnesota to benefit the North Side. Education is our pathway to wealth.”

The project

As part of the UNP, the U of M will renovate the now-vacant Penn Plymouth Shopping Mall, which it purchased for $1.125 million from NRRC on February 6, according to university information. It will transform the existing building into a research facility, with centers devoted specifically to education, business economic development and children and family (a.k.a. the Urban Research and Outreach/Engagement Center) as is pointed out in literature on the project.

The project includes the demolition and rebuilding of the nearby Pilot City building, which will house the Hennepin County Human Services Facility along with the university’s mental health research center and NorthPoint Health Clinic that currently occupies the space. The children and family clinic will be spearheaded by renowned developmental psychopathologist Dante Cicchetti. He is widely recognized for his groundbreaking work with thousands of at-risk children and families at Mt. Hope Family Center in New York, according to university information.

Cicchetti’s clinic has generated some controversy given the general lack of knowledge about his work, a point of frustration among some people. One concern is that it will involve something along the lines of the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, wherein African Americans were exploited and abused for 50 years in the name of research. The U of M has refuted such criticism, claiming that no drugs are involved in Cicchetti’s “participatory” research.

At a basic level, UNP will “establish a physical presence where services can be offered and where the community will have easier access to University programs,” reads the university’s website for the project. It will “leverage the capacity of these programs by focusing their efforts on high-priority needs identified by the community,” it states.

Robert Jones, senior vice president of system academic administration at the U of M, said at a December panel discussion, “We’re trying to think differently about our land-grant mission.” That means fast-forwarding to the 21st century and “not doing business as usual,” he remarked. UNP represents a “new model whereby the partners in the community identify needs… [T]he community is driving it. That’s the essence of it,” he said.

Not everyone is convinced. Twila Brase, an activist and president of the locally based Citizens Council on Health Care (CCHC), is skeptical of the motivations behind the UNP. “Across the board, this initiative is being imposed on the community,” she said, adding, “There’s not enough disclosure about what is planned for the community. It’s clear there’s an outside agenda.”

Next week: Public input generates CBA ideas; U of M cautious, hopeful.

Anna Pratt welcomes reader responses to annaprattjournalist@gmail.com.