It is unlikely that the community will ever have the opportunity to review the two proposals written in response to the Bike Walk Center RFP side by side. The process of submission to municipal authorities does not permit that kind of disclosure until there has been an action to approve a submission that will be funded by public dollars at which point it becomes a public document.

In my opinion the issue of concern related to this particular project is vested in the process of selection that resulted in the Health Department identifying the Cultural Wellness/Major Taylor proposal to receive the award.

There are questions that should be answered:

Who specifically reviewed the proposals, what is their expertise for participating in the process, and do any of them have a conflict of interest?

Why is the Community Planning and Economic Development (CPED) so insistent on a Lowry location instead of 26th and Penn for reasons that were strongly supported in the proposal and by the neighborhoods that endorsed it?

What was the real intent of the rapid timeline from response to the RFP to submission to a Council Committee for approval given the conditions of the grant?

I suggest that this is a question of ethical practices for the City of Minneapolis’s Department of Health and that a review of what constitutes may be in order for any City department action.

If north Minneapolis residents really want the best for themselves and these neighborhoods they need to be informed and actively engaged. I commend the Public Safety and Health Committee for postponing a decision on this project until January 5, 2011. However, if this project falls off the radar, if residents and organizations who care don’t pay attention – any discussion about which proposal was better, which one delivered a collation of partners that could sustain the project beyond the grant period and which one really met the intent of the RFP to encourage healthy neighborhoods will be irrelevant .