Transparency (and equal access in the...um, blogosphere?)

The discussion which began two weeks ago and continued last week over PLUS's application for a community redevelopment grant and the issues brought up therein continues, and we wanted to make sure we drew attention to the thoughtful post PLUS president and executive director Mark Dicus made in the comments section. Anyone interested in PLUS or the PLG community would be well served to read it.

All of this discussion highlights one of the things that's so great about PLG, namely the intense connection people feel towards the neighborhood and the dedication people show to improving it. We here at PPLG are huge proponents of getting involved on any level -- in your community, on a municipal level, on a national level, on an international level -- and it's extremely rare in NYC to see so many neighbors who feel so passionately about where they live. (An extraneous and tangential plug: all Brooklynites would be well-served by checking out -- and supporting -- 826NYC, an after-school tutoring program locating in the back of a superhero supply store. 826 is located at 327 Fifth Ave -- yes, the other side of the park -- but still, it's one of the most necessary and most wonderful organizations out there. Feel free to drop by, or to email planetplg@gmail.com if you're interested in more info. OK, tangent -- and for that matter, post -- over.)

Being paid for community development and the makeup of PLUS: a follow up

Last Thursday, I posted some details of the Prospect-Lefferts application for a city grant and what that would mean for staff funding. I'd urge everyone to check it out -- not to read the post itself, but to read the spirited responses left in the comments section.

One clarification: in raising the question of what appears to be a $50,000 annual payment to a salaried executive director (a post which current Prospect-Lefferts United (PLUS) for Services Mark Dicus nominated himself) I wasn't trying to pass any sort of judgment...I was just raising the question. I'm one of those 'sunlight is the best disinfectant' folks, and I'm hard-pressed to think of an example where more transparency in any kind of public or civic organization is a bad thing. Maybe $50,000 a year is way too little money; I really don't know. But it can't hurt to talk about it.

What does bother me is what feels like an attitude of secrecy within PLUS. There is currently no way for community members to communicate regularly with members of PLUS. I've received several reports from people who've tried to get information from current members -- in order to discuss various suggestions and to learn more about the application for the city grant -- and were told that was not information meant for the hoi polloi. And it seems as if there's still no information regarding what happened at last week's board meeting. (As it is, the only reason anyone outside of PLUS even knows about the application for city funds is because of an email snafu whereby Mark sent out what was meant to be an email to board members to the entire PLG Yahoo board.) I'm well aware of all the good work PLUS has done, just as I'm well aware of its passionate commitment to PLG. I'm also of the mind that if a group wants to speak for the community -- and get paid by the city for doing so -- we'd all be better off if more information was made available and more participation was encouraged.

That's my two cents. Anyone else want to weigh in?

Revitalizing our community: how much should we be paid?

Last night was a PLUS (Prospect-Lefferts United for Service) board meeting. (It didn't seem like there was a huge amount of advance warning about the time or location, but maybe we're wrong on that count.) The meeting, according to an email sent around yesterday at 1:45 pm, was meant to discuss Prospect-Lefferts' application for an Avenue NYC grant from the city's department of small business services. (Here's the city's SBS website; PLUS doesn't appear to have a site that outlines its work or mission.) Communities that receive the grants are estimated to get around $167,000 over the next four years, although funding will ultimately be decided according to "successful completion of the preceding year's activities."

In the first year of funding, the lion's share of that money -- $50,000 out of a total of $66,000 -- is designated towards "personnel and fringe" expenses. That certainly ain't chump change. In yesterday's email, current board president and A&H broker Mark Dicus nominated himself to serve as PLUS's official, salaried executive director. PLUS has certainly been active in the three years since it formed. Any thoughts on this kind of funding for personnel? Reports from last night's board meeting? Feelings about PLUS's work with other community groups? Opinions about the best way to spend a city grant? Info from K-Dog or Enduro owners on what it was, exactly, that brought them to the area? Thoughts about having a city-funded local group given the authority to speak (and spend) in the name of the community as a whole?