Keep Como Going !

7 Important Reasons for Como to Stay Independent !

Stand Up for Como !

Our local Como neighborhood association is important to Como – it sponsors events like the annual Como Cook Out, operates the beautiful community gardens around Como, and guides new property development to best suit Como’s vision and needs. It communicates about local activity, and keeps the local neighborhood bond alive among residents. When people talk about Como neighborhood vitality, that’s what’s usually behind the scene.

But all that could change. There’s a proposal to do a large-scale merger that would replace the Como association with a much larger organization covering Marcy-Holmes, Nicollet Island, and more -- a “University District” association. So -- Is this really a good thing for everyone in Como? When you take a closer look, the answer is “No.”

So what’s driving this idea? It’s definitely true that the city is now backing away from its commitment to neighborhood life, and has been reducing neighborhood association funding. But that’s a political/public policy problem we all need to take up with city council members and mayor office. And -- amalgamating multiple underfunded neighborhood associations just creates a “bigger sized” problem spread across more city blocks -- since the merger will not by itself increase any city funding stream. Instead, it should be better and more direct to “stay local” in Como and solve our problem here by adjusting our association plan, making smart budget choices, and spending and operating the way we want and decide – instead of being at a crowded “merged” district table with many, many others, along with a lot of competing agendas.

What are other Minneapolis neighborhoods doing? We can definitely say that other neighborhoods are not merging. We’ve contacted 19 other Minneapolis neighborhoods all around town. Several of them emphatically tell Como to stay independent and local. Other neighborhoods told us they’ve considered merger and then rejected it as a bad fit or a non-solution. Near us, only 4 Northeast neighborhoods considered merger, and in the end 2 neighborhoods backed out of the idea, so only 2 merged. Very near us, Prospect Park neighborhood attended “University District” planning sessions, and then decided to opt out and stay an independent neighborhood. So – very, very few neighborhoods are pursuing the merger idea – read the signs! -- it’s a big warning sign to Como that this may be a bad dead-end idea.

Won’t a merger give some cost savings? This idea seems good but probably doesn’t pan out in reality or amount to much that’s sufficient. The savings on back-office things like insurance really aren’t sufficient to justify the merger jump. There really isn’t much point talking about reduced admin staff costs, since a merger doesn’t reduce the inbox of paperwork in the association back-office very much -- and consider how the after-merger situation could change the upfront, at-event staffing! Everyone wants ideally to keep traditional, valuable neighborhood events going – but on Saturday night, the neighborhood event coordinator can’t be in 4 neighborhoods at once, so after merger which neighborhoods take their turn to wait for that association assistance to be available to run local events? For lower costs, the new mega-U District surely will have reduced staff count -- so Como will wait in line.

Isn’t a merged organization “simpler” and therefore better? Well, probably not. First consider that it will take a year or more to do the enormous amount of work to set up a new umbrella organization across Southeast. That’s a big price to pay, with no great assurance of future benefits to make it worthwhile. Then, once it’s operating, are things really going to be so simple and efficient? Try a comparison. If it usually takes 10 people up to 3 evening hours every month to meet and handle Como neighborhood business, how is it going to work to handle 4 neighborhood areas under a single merger umbrella – is that really going to be workable for neighborhood association business? (Meet monthly all day from 9am to 9pm?). And just look at some numbers – the new proposed merged organization will be trying to serve around 40,000 residents with neighborhood services, using a small crew of paid and many volunteer organization staff. How’s that going to fly? To cross-check: the city of Maplewood is about 40,000 people, and cities of that size usually have a paid staff of 300 to administer city activities (public safety staff excluded). From our career lives in the business world, we know that it’s not at all a simple thing to take a small, experienced, well working team or organization and then “scale it up” many times – things can get very dysfunctional and chaotic. So betting on a merger means getting onboard a wild and not-quite-completed and tested rollercoaster. The Como association has been running for many decades for Como benefit – is this merger proposition a change that we really want?

Have we been here before? Another way to judge the merger proposition is to ask about other “all-Southeast” organizations and how they’ve fared. It’s a relevant comparison but the upshot isn’t very promising. There have been other similar SE “umbrella” organizations formed over the years (UDA, SEMPACC) but these have never had the same success in delivering successful local events and services in the same way that our Como and other neighborhood associations have done long term. These other umbrella-SE units apparently never had the strong, broad volunteer engagement that’s needed to make a volunteer neighborhood organization take off and succeed. The lesson here: people most strongly identify with their very local neighborhood like Como, and are most willing to volunteer to help on events and association activity within that neighborhood sphere. The network of known nearby friends and neighbors, businesses, park and of your “place” are all really very important! (Think of it as a “walkable” community engagement sphere.) Bigger district-wide organizations just don’t inspire that same neighborhood spirit and volunteerism – that’s why they wither. So – let’s improve what we have here in Como, and not go down the merger expansion route because it could very well lead to a dead-end organization that really doesn’t have any vital, sustaining roots in community.

“Carry a Big Stick” and Como Another claimed future benefit is that, if Como merges, the new all-SE organization will really have clout when dealing with the U or city hall. Realistic? The best answer on this one is that every time there are large issues to address, the neighborhoods always can act jointly to put across their case with government units. It just may be that when a government official sees a communication coming from 3, 4 or more neighborhoods acting together – that it’s a more effective voice. And actually Como and other SE neighborhoods have been doing that joint action for some time, on issues such as preservation and environmental, with success. And sometimes the issues or opportunities are really local within Como, so there will be reluctance and organizational drag having to go to and through the big merged organization (“Put in U District request, wait 1 month for answer …”) – instead of Como community action moving right away with concerned neighbors working directly with government or others. So merging isn’t really upping our game much for dealing with government, and the probable risks of a merger move outweigh this clout argument decisively.

Como’s a great neighborhood! – Our strengths? Another way to think about giving a merger proposition a rationale is to ask how a merger is expected to strengthen and enhance some of Como’s strongest points – for example, our array of community gardens, our environmental oversight, our review and guidance of new property developments, and so on. And here the answer is very definite. The merger proposition really doesn’t have anything solid to contribute to sustain or improve any of these. No reasonable person expects that the Como teams doing these community services will want to “merge” these volunteer activities under a new, larger, more complex, slower operating umbrella district organization. So what’s the point of merging when the strongest things contributing to Como’s neighborhood quality and vitality are the things that you don’t want to merge into an oversize, less-workable and less-responsive mega-association? Just this one point most undercuts the various claims made to rationalize the merger proposition.

So what should Como do? The best answers are that Como should --

• Stay an independent neighborhood – as nearly all Minneapolis neighborhoods are doing
• Press our two Como city council members for a reasonable base funding for the neighborhood services that we’re delivering to all residents – we can make this case!
• Budget “smart” – ask other neighborhoods how they’re shifting funds and expenses to adapt to the new city approach, apply their solutions by fitting these into our Como planning
• Organize “smart” – tune for best results, recognize that many Como residents are short term rental residents, so organize to ask them to volunteer onto projects that best match their availability, meanwhile make use of longer-term Como neighbor volunteers (with deeper community knowledge, more volunteer availability) to help with association steering where their background and commitment can best move the association ahead.
• With local businesses reviving after pandemic, again try for maximum coordination w/ Como business owners
• Refocus Como association on truly local Como needs and mission – put emphasis on delivered services to neighbors, over administrative & city matters – plus, consider offering a new great Como park event in spring?
• Outreach to all Como residents yearly, then put the main work focus on delivering good services
• Keep circulating regularly, and expand comm services like the Como newsletter and other media channels to inspire engagement, using Como neighbor volunteer publishing power – 21st century style

What can I do right now to help keep Como going?

• The Como SECIA board has now voted to "proceed" with a merger (Como association terminates December 31) -- this move will require a community-wide vote in Como. They did this action without even having a publicized, open public comment section at their SECIA meeting on this major step toward termination! Despite this, Como neighbors should still be talking to SECIA association board directors, making Como voices heard -- telling them "No to Merger!" so board members understand Como neighbor sentiment. So send your message -- you get the names and emails of the board on the SECIA secomo.org website here .
• A community wide Como vote will be held sometime in in the next months. Get ready to vote "No!" during fall community voting on the merger. More info will be circulated soon. To receive our info to you, send your name to the "Keep Como Going" team at OurBetterComo@gmail.com.
• Sign this petition page and leave your comment -- tell everyone why you love Como and want it to stay a strong, independent neighborhood with its own local services & events organization
• Show your support for Como! Contact OurBetterComo@gmail.com and we'll get you a "Keep Como Going - Vote No! on Merger" lawn sign to send your Up with Como message to everyone!
• Tell your neighbors about this concern -- Refer them to this site -- Ask them to speak up too

Larry Crawford - Connie Sullivan - Steve Peterson -
Wendy Menken - Phil Roban - and more Como neighbors
"Keep Como Going" team

Please take a minute and add your name along with ours to co-sign this petition to stand up for Como -- Share your ideas, then press the green "Sign Petition" button to the right. Thanks !