Update: East Phillips Neighborhood Institute

SUNDAY, MAY 22: Join the East Phillips Neighborhood for a community meeting from 1-3pm on Sunday May 22 at 2307 17th Ave S, Minneapolis, to find out how you can get involved!

In this episode, MN350 volunteer Jeff Diamond is back with an update on our friends at the East Phillips Neighborhood Institute (EPNI) and their ongoing fight against the City of Minneapolis to preserve the community's vision for the future of their neighborhood: a model of health, sustainability, and a good life for all in generations to come.

What Can You Do?

VIEW Information Flyer HERE. Print and share with neighbors and friends!

SIGN the Change.org petition supporting the East Phillips Urban Farm at http://chng.it/nmKXM5Vkfx

PRINT and send postcards to Minneapolis City Council:  click here.

VOLUNTEER! We host meetings every Wednesday evening open to all! Contact vital.joe12@gmail.com to get involved and visit epnifarm.org for more information.

DONATE to our legal fund stopping environmental racism in East Phillips at gf.me/u/y65d87 

FOLLOW US on Instagram: @eastphillipsurbanfarm, Facebook: @eastphillipsneighborhood, our website: epnifarm.org, and our mailing list to stay informed!

POST on social media to raise awareness! Tag your local officials and tag #EPNIUrbanFarm .

Transcript

Update: East Phillips Neighborhood Institute

Wed, 5/18 8:00AM • 19:36

Sarah Riedl  00:00

Hi everybody and welcome back to Nourish by MN350. I'm your host Sarah Riedl and we are coming at you today with a little mini episode here. We wanted to do a follow up from an episode we did earlier this year called "Changing the Course of a Neighborhood," which covered an organization called the East Phillips Neighborhood Institute and their fight against the city of Minneapolis to build an urban farm and so much more on the site of the former Roof Depot building in South Minneapolis.

00:43

Welcome to Nourish by MN350. The podcast that features visionary leaders who are creating the regenerative, inclusive local food economy we need to meet the challenge of climate change.

Sarah Riedl  01:05

A lot has happened since the episode aired so we wanted to follow up with our listeners about where things stand with East Phillips and the indoor Urban Farm project. This episode very much builds off that episode. So if you haven't heard it yet, I would highly recommend you stop and go back and listen to that episode, which was originally published on February 22. With me today is Jeff diamond, one of the co-hosts from that episode. Hi, Jeff, thanks for being here today.

Jeff Diamond  01:33

Yeah, good to be here. Thank you for having me back.

Sarah Riedl  01:36

So to pick up where we left off in our episode, Jason Chavez, the council member representing East Phillips noted that a resolution would soon be brought before the Council. What happened to that resolution?

Jeff Diamond  01:49

Sure, so that resolution was brought to the Council on March 10. It would have rescinded the prior Council action to move forward with the city's water yard project and allowed the East Phillips community to present their vision to the Council instead. Our listeners might remember that our guests in the prior episode were optimistic that the new City Council might be more willing to support the community's plan. The resolution did pass the Council and a vote of eight to five. Unfortunately, the very next day, Mayor Frey vetoed that resolution and overriding the veto would have required nine votes. So unfortunately, that resolution is still not in place today.

Sarah Riedl  02:34

So City Council voted to pass the resolution. The mayor came back and vetoed it. Did he say why he was vetoing the resolution. 

Jeff Diamond  02:42

He did. He released a letter with the veto stating that he may be open to a similar action. But he also released this laundry list of information that would need to be provided for him to approve the action, which I would describe as a mixture of confusing and sometimes ridiculous. So first off, he stated that the prior Council action which approved and city's plan should be, quote "suspended" instead of "rescinded," which would mean that the plan to demolish the Roof Depot would immediately kicked back in if the community's plan was not approved by the City Council. Second, he required a finance plan for how any proposal would repay the city the $14 million that they've already spent developing this water yard plan against the community's wishes. In addition, he also asked for a business plan to be presented that would include both how the entire project would be designed and how it would be funded. And he even asked for a strategy identifying an alternative site for the city's water yard project, which, of course, is not the job of EPNI or any other community organization other than the city. You know, most egregiously, in my opinion, the last thing he asked for was a strategy for remediation of the site, which our listeners may remember, is contaminated with arsenic, which is what caused this site to be a Superfund site in the past. And, you know, our listeners might also remember that the city themselves in their plan have not provided a strategy for remediating the site where they plan to destroy the building. And they themselves have not specifically said how they plan to remediate the site so that they're not releasing more arsenic into the air. So I don't know how they have the the nerve to try and ask that any proposal include a requirement for remediation. Other than you know, maybe they're trying to do something like cheating off of someone else's homework or something, you know, maybe if they hear a plan about how to remediate the site, they can, you know, use it for themselves as part of their own plan or something like that.

Sarah Riedl  05:06

Okay, so let me get this straight. The mayor vetoed this resolution and said that the neighborhood has to pay back $14 million that the city has already spent on this site, even though they haven't started building or anything like that, it would just be planning at this point. He also said that they have to come up with a plan for remediation when the city themselves do not have a plan for remediating the arsenic in the site. In fact, they want to tear down the building, which we all know then the more you start destroying things, digging things up demolishing things, the more it spreads out, it gets in the air gets in the land. And that's what the city is planning doing, but they expect the neighborhood to do something else.

Jeff Diamond  05:51

Exactly. That to me sounded like the best plan for remediation possible don't destroy the Roof Depot building, like there's your strategy for remediation: don't do the city's plan.

Sarah Riedl  06:02

If I'm understanding this correctly, the mayor is also saying that the neighborhood has to come up with an alternative site for the public works facility.

Jeff Diamond  06:12

That is what was listed in the veto that any community project moving forward part of what would be needed would be a strategy for identifying alternative locations for the city. If the community is successful in satisfying all of the other metrics.

Sarah Riedl  06:29

I think that's really interesting, because another thing that we know is that there already is an alternative site. This public works facility would be moving to East Phillips from where it is currently located. And at one point, there was a plan to just expand the public works facility where it was. And that didn't happen, they've decided to move it. But now, the mayor is asking that the neighborhood come up with an alternative plan when in fact, there actually is an alternative option. And the city knows that.

Jeff Diamond  07:03

Yeah, they're multiple alternative options because as part of their Environmental Assessment Worksheet, they were required to to list an alternative site and because some of the other City Council members ultimately were persuaded to vote against the plan, because of the alternative site listed there. The site you're referring to is an expansion of the currently existing site in the Marcy Holmes neighborhood. And like you said, it was essentially suppressed by the city was drafted, I believe, in June of 2021. And it was a plan requested by the city, it seems to be a plan on the city's letterhead created by the same architectural design firm that created the plan for the Hiawatha expansion yard. And it was a plan to expand the current existing site and meet all of the needs of the water yard on the same site where it currently exists without destroying the Roof Depot building. And without bringing this bring this action into the neighborhood of East Phillips, it would have been cheaper, it would have been less harmful to the environment. And of course, it would not have impacted this already affected neighborhood and East Phillips. But that plan was never discussed and still to this day has never sufficiently been discussed.

Sarah Riedl  08:22

Okay, so the mayor vetoes the resolution, he comes back with these pretty ridiculous propositions. Where do things stand now on that?

Jeff Diamond  08:33

Currently, the city and EPNI are in the midst of a mediation process. So EPNI has been pursuing a legal challenge to try and stop the demolition of the Roof Depot site. And there was some hope that, you know, through mediation, we would have two parties that may have similar interests in mind and might be able to come to some sort of agreement. There has been a little more movement from the city side and a couple of options discussed, we're gonna refer to them as Option A and Option B, what he outlined in his veto letter is essentially now Option A: EPNI can develop and propose a plan, but you know, they would have to go through that laundry list of things that that we just discussed. There's also an Option B that's been proposed in which three acres would be offered for the project, but only after the demolition of the Roof Depot building, which, of course, would raise fears of reproducing the arsenic contamination that has plagued the community for so long. And in addition, these three acres that would be provided to the community and ideally EPNI would be allowed to present their plan for and there's the possibility that they might get this these three acres and not have to pay rent on that land. So that is Option B, which is you know, the not having to pay rent part of it is a little bit of an upgrade from when City Council passed their, quote compromise last year. That says the city put forth a presentation in February that outlined their plans for this site. And there were a couple of concerning elements of what they're proposing. First off, something that jumped out to me there's a section in their proposal where they say they describe the the plat to be assigned to community later on as the "out lot area." And there's a section in their proposal where they say, the 2.9 acre out lot area will be utilized as a construction staging zone during the project's construction. Which sounds a lot to me like like A) the community would have to wait until the entire construction of the new facility was done. And B) and this is where I've just kind of like a slap in the face, the design has a fueling station, right outside of this three-acre plat. So let's say the community decided they just wanted to use the three acres as garden space, you know, they would be doing this while staring at a fuel station, where you know, big trucks from the from the city would theoretically be fueling up right outside of the space that the community was operating. So that's Option B. So then, these two options proposed, neither of them seem real realistic, neither of them seem like good faith alternatives.

Sarah Riedl  11:32

So just to make sure I have the straight up Option A is what the mayor proposed in his veto letter. Option B says you can have some of this space, but only after we've contaminated with arsenic and finished parking all of our vehicles there.

Jeff Diamond  11:47

Yes, you know, they always claim that the space will be remediated all of their documents say that they're going to remediate the site as part of their their building of this facility. And yet, they have still, to my knowledge yet to say exactly how they plan to do that. And of course, you know, how exactly do you demolish a very large building that has soil underneath that has arsenic in it without kicking up that arsenic and without the arsenic getting into the air? So it seems, it seems wrought with, with complications.

Sarah Riedl  12:30

Yeah, and as, as we've said, the best remediation here would be to leave the building standing and not disturb it. So I'm gonna switch gears a little bit. Jeff, is there anything going on at the state level about this project?

Jeff Diamond  12:44

Sure. So there is a bill that talks about creating a a funding source for this project, it was originally proposed at $20 million. I think that that proposal has been reduced to about $7.2 million in funding for this bill, you know, that $14 million in repayment that we talked about before the city paid $6.8 million, originally to purchase the Roof Depot building, and what they describe as the additional work that they've done on the site, they list as being $7.2 million. So I'm not sure if if that's just a coincidence, or if the state would be saying, Look, this is $7.2 million, that never should have been spent on a project that never should have happened. And therefore we're going to provide funding for this $7.2 million, or it may just be a coincidence. But that bill is is pending in the state. And it is possible that it could be included in the omnibus bill to be approved by the state. You know, I think some of the challenges that they're running into is to convince legislators to include that in the omnibus bill, because there's no guarantee that the city is actually going to approve the project.

Sarah Riedl  14:02

So it's it's really a catch-22. The city won't approve the project unless there's a plan for funding, but the state may not approve funding, because there is no approval from the city.

Jeff Diamond  14:14

Exactly. You know, I think to me, I see the opposite argument in there. Perhaps it would be perhaps it might be easier to convince all parties to include this funding in the omnibus bill, because there's no guarantee that that the money will be spent, maybe they'd be more willing to have it included since that money, could could just stay with the state if the project doesn't end up coming to pass, but we'll have to see how it plays out if there even is an omnibus bill that gets passed in the state.

Sarah Riedl  14:44

Okay, so not great, but where do things go from here? What are some of the next steps and how can our listeners continue to support EPNI?

Jeff Diamond  14:55

Sure. So the mediation that I mentioned earlier is still ongoing. EPNI had some questions for the city and the city is taking some time, and one of which was how exactly do you plan to do to complete the remediation of the site. So, you know, I think there's still hope that a better alternative than some of the options that have been presented thus far, might come about, you know, as EPNI and East Phillips are extremely, extremely intent and the "Do No Harm" part of their, you know, "Do No Harm, Urban Farm" policy, meaning try to do everything in their power to prevent the destruction of the Roof Depot building. So, you know, hopefully, something will come out of mediation, that will not lead to the demolition of that building. But if mediation does fail, then they'll go back to the ongoing litigation. So East Phillips has a, a GoFundMe site where they're accepting donations, and I would, again, urge our listeners to to support the East Phillips Neighborhood Institute, especially as the City looks like it's going to be kind of dragging on these legal proceedings, and and they may be more in need of, of funding to continue these ongoing legal battles. There's also a community meeting coming up on May 22. The details of this community meeting are still being discussed, though, you can certainly follow the East Phillips Neighborhood Institute, both on their on their website and on their Facebook page. And we will include links to both of those things in our show notes.

Sarah Riedl  16:50

Absolutely. So there's there's some hope through ongoing legal matters. But the big thing I think I hear you're saying is that they are looking for donations. It's it's not free or cheap to carry on these battles. So for all you folks listening out there, you can learn more and find the East Phillips Neighborhoods Institute's GoFundMe at EastPhillipsNeighborhoodInstitute.org, that's their website. And aside from their GoFundMe there, there are current updates and some other actions you can take, including contacting the mayor's office and telling them do not destroy the Roof Depot building.

Jeff Diamond  17:35

Absolutely. And in every phase of legislation across the state really contacting the mayor's office contacting your City Councilors as well as your state legislators to try and get them to support the inclusion of this bonding bill in in this year's omnibus bill. So yeah, pick pick a legislator, any legislator who represents you can be contacted and asked to support EPNI asked to support the East Phillips community.

Sarah Riedl  18:06

All right, so once again, for people listening, the website is EastPhillipsNeighborhoodInstitute.org. And you can find everything that just Jeff just mentioned, their scripts and directions on how to contact any legislator, you can they all need to hear about this. So please check it out. Donate if you can, and you know, spread the word. Don't demolish the Roof Depot building. Jeff, thank you so much for coming back and giving us this update.

Jeff Diamond  18:38

Yeah, thank you. It was it was good to be here. And we'll continue tracking this as it continues to develop.

Sarah Riedl  18:46

All right, that's all we have for today. So once again, EastPhillipsNeighborhoodInstitute.org, go check it out. And we will see you next time. Thanks for listening.  Nourish by MN350 is a production of MN350's Food Systems Team. This series is made possible by the hard work and passion of a group of dedicated volunteers. This episode was written and produced by Shannon Lippke, Jeff Diamond, and me, Sarah Riedl. Our audio editor is Mary Clare McAleer. Our logo was designed by Fizz Design Collective, and our music is by Ecuador Manta. You can learn more at MN350action.org/podcasts.