Hello supporters!
We have some HUGE UPDATES!
[CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE VIDEO UPDATE]
As promised, members of Northview Rising and Northview community members gave public comment during last week’s City Commission meeting [click here to see everyone’s full public comment].
Last week, community members stood up, and made a simple assertion: Publicly funded projects need to be relevant to community stakeholders, and without a kitchen, the Eisenhower Community Center fails to meet critical community needs. We told the Manhattan City Commission, the Mayor, the City Manager, and city staff to do the ethically right thing, as well as the economically sound thing - by starting to address systemic problems like food insecurity in our community.
Our actions last week were a critical step towards putting an end to Northview’s food desert, as well as to bringing greater equity to our community. However, we were also met with hostility and a lack of good will by the city.
During public comment, speakers are limited to five minutes. That’s an extremely narrow time limit to clearly and meaningfully explain something as complex as food insecurity - and how the logistics and administration of a kitchen at a community center can be part of a solution. That’s an unreasonable, if not an impossible ask for anyone.
And since the issue is complex, and there were four of us offering comment, that’s precisely why we also made it clear that we wanted to speak in a particular order - to lay out our reasoning as clearly and efficiently as possible. That request is a courtesy that the city extends regularly to the Chamber of Commerce - as well as for the majority of private and public organizations and programs that speak before city commissioners. But apparently that courtesy isn’t extended to the public. Quite the opposite, Mayor Wynn Butler scowled and shook his head as I stated our request, and our need to speak in a specific order - for the sake of efficiency, out of respect for everyone’s time, and to work within the limits that are placed on public comment. Despite this, Mayor Butler interrupted our comment after the second speaker, and attempted to delegitimize and derail us by falsely claiming that our comments for the Eisenhower Center had nothing to do with the Social Services Advisory Board (SSAB) agenda item.
[Click here to see the recording of Mayor Butler’s behavior towards community members]
The local paper - The Mercury - released an article on our public comment, but made no mention of this, and did not contact any community members for our thoughts or perspective.
Mayor Butler's claim was, of course, disingenuous. The relationship of food insecurity to the budgeting and operation of social services bore directly on that SSAB agenda item. Everyone from the SSAB in the room understood that. Wynn probably just wanted to flex some power, and maybe thought he was rattling community members - and ultimately, he transformed the already limited space of public comment into a toxic environment for community members. When Commissioner Hatesohl asked some follow up questions to Susanne Glymour, Mayor Butler interrupted again, stating that if community members responded to Hatesohl’s questions, it would count against their time. Since we had planned our comments down to a margin of seconds, that wasn’t an option - and Wynn knew that.
Even though that entire exchange is on record and available on the City of Manhattan’s facebook page, The Mercury decided that this context was irrelevant, and did not report on it.
This should be alarming to the entire community of Manhattan: when the public shared its concerns and articulated its needs - especially those of low and middle income community members - the city responded by dismissing and delegitimizing community voices, rather than listening to and valuing them. We can observe the hostile and dogmatic way in which Wynn used public comment restrictions to marginalize public voices. We can observe public comment at the city as a space that does not respect or value public voices or interests - a space that is fundamentally undemocratic. Again, The Mercury decided that this was not something to report on. And consequently, The Mercury is now complicit in that hostile, dismissive behavior.
I’ve written a response to The Mercury for it’s lack of journalistic integrity. If you’re interested seeing just how badly they got it wrong, and what the important implications of what happened last week for Manhattan’s local democracy are - you can read the whole thing here [since it’s unlikely The Mercury will publish the article].
There’s still a long road ahead of us, but we've moved the issue in the right direction. City of Manhattan staff and officials have made a complete 180º in their position - from total noncooperation and ignoring this issue, to discussing how to use Capital Improvement Project funds to get kitchen equipment for the Eisenhower Community Center. The catch: they still want community members to do the work.
Ultimately, this is a problem of inequity at the policy level of the city, and equity will be its solution. This is not about getting some kitchen equipment, or community members driving that process. If we frame it as that - if we frame it as just about food insecurity - we're going to be in the exact same position we've been in, which led to this problem. Northview's food insecurity results from inequity - and that inequity results from the city, using tax dollars to promote projects that are not in the interest of community wellbeing, as well as actively ignoring and shutting out stakeholder voices in project development and needs identification (the same voices that have been asserting themselves now for over 3 years). The city is taking tax dollars and putting forward projects that it claims are in the interest of community members, and which reflect community needs - when in reality those community members, and their voices, have been shut out of this process from the beginning. That's inequity. Specifically, that's political inequity. It's marginalization. And in that, the same community's tax dollars are taken, and funneled towards the sports tourism industry. Okay - that's exploitation. Community members are having their money appropriated, they have no say in how it's being used - and the proposed uses are not in their interests. That's the problem. It's not just food insecurity. It's the systemic inequity that the city endorses and practices that has created these problems.
Which brings us to another fundamental problem, and a question that we need to be asking: Does the city not have an obligation when it's using public funds and putting forward public projects, to identify community needs with equitable community engagement - so that the relevant voices of stakeholders are the ones driving the projects? Only then can you have projects that actually meet the needs of the community. Right now, it would appear that the city - as a practice - believes and acts as though it has an obligation to the local sports tourism industry. But there's no burden of proof on the city for evidencing that building a project for sports tourism and sports recreation is what the community really wants - or if this will actually provide a meaningful benefit to community stakeholders. That's not going to address food insecurity. That's not going to address economic inequity. That's not going to address political inequity.
And yet, without providing any evidence of how recreational centers could be substantively beneficial, the city has had no trouble summoning all of the technical and administrative expertise and knowledge it needs to justify moving forward with a recreational center in Northview. Another question we should all be rhetorically asking ourselves and the city: Is the city suddenly totally incapable of summoning that same expertise, that same knowledge, that same technical and administrative talent to actually satisfy community needs? They're taking the public's money, shouldn't they be applying those skills - and the machinery of local government - to actually serve the community's well known and identified interests - and not just the narrow interests of sports tourism or recreational facilities? Is it such a radical idea that publicly funded projects should serve public wellbeing? Or that the city staff and officials exist to serve the public wellbeing? Is that not their obligation and role? How has this situation become so inverted, to the point that when a community repeatedly asks that its tax dollars address the most pressing issues and needs that it faces - the city either ignores them, or demands that said community do all of the lifting in convincing the local government that their needs are legitimate? How is that acceptable on any level?
All of that is the problem - not whether or not the city can figure out how to make a community kitchen work, and not just getting some kitchen equipment. Those are symptoms, and solutions to symptoms.
The problem is inequity. And the solution is demanding that the city start practicing equity.
Manhattan residents - WE NEED YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT!
Will you help us to get more signatures by sharing this petition with ten other people? Here’s a link to share https://www.change.org/p/city-of-manhattan-ks-officials-tell-the-city-of-manhattan-to-put-an-end-to-northview-s-food-desert