Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Posts Tagged ‘GAIA=Global Advancement and International Affairs at Rutgers U

Changing (the) World, Changing (the) Words: Sovereignty, Circumscribing Sovereignty versus Global ‘Citizenship’ (the Unmentionable: then who is the Global ‘Sovereign’?). References. [Publ. Nov. 24, 2017]

with one comment

This topic came up in my recent posts during discussions of the “Global Framework for Tobacco Control” and HiAP (Health in All Policies) cited as an example of how to get national (countries) and local (states or territories in the USA, or presumably provinces in Canada, Australia, or elsewhere, i.e., sub-national political divisions) to implement a policy and laws to go with it, at the lower (lower than planetary) levels.

This post, Changing (the) World, Changing (the) Words: Sovereignty, Circumscribing Sovereignty versus Global ‘Citizenship’ (the Unmentionable: then who is the Global ‘Sovereign’?). References: (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7MB” started Oct. 14, 2017, published Nov. 24), came from  HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7LY”, published Oct. 24, 2017). That title added to tags as “Originating Post.”  This post in its concept also relates to a post published Oct. 26, (“Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule: ) and with extended “Foreword” section added later (but still pre-publication) and minor post-publication updates for clarity is about 8,500 words.

I am increasingly realizing how, for example, “tobacco cessation laws” and changes to the very health departments around the USA can be and have been initiated FIRST at the global level by NGOs and related organizations.  This has been given a “health” focus for justification.

See also financial standardization at the global level: My recent “Happening Now” post also references the processes in place as I write, and fairly recently (since the 2008 economic crisis) to standardize the system of “Legal Entity Identifiers” and to better monitor if not control “shadow banking activity,” meaning not necessarily illegal activity, but “bank-like activities” not under direct regulation by, for example, bodies like the SEC (Securities Exchange Commission). This is the economic, trading, finance, money sector with major implications for whether it will be completed and if so, how complete, and how well run.


The conversation (so to speak) below started on that HiAP (“HEALTH not LAW”) post with a hypothetical question I posed, and having noticed my own breezing right past the question of “sovereignty” when it came to global citizenship, I put on the brakes, looked it up in my favorite etymological dictionary. [“A map of the wheel-ruts of the English language”] and started looking for historical usages of the word. [“sovereign” in OED also includes other definitions using the word; see next two images:]

(ETMYonline.com, “Sovereign“)Note usage: “tax (n.): early 14c. obligatory contrib. levied by a sovereign or government.“)

search results for “sovereign” at ETMYonline.com

 

 

And, under “hegemony,” linked from the same “OE” search results for “sovereign,” (emphases added):

hegemon (n.)
1897, originally with reference to the position of Great Britain in the world, from Greek hegemon “an authority, leader, sovereign” (see hegemony).

hegemony (n.)

1560s, “preponderance, dominance, leadership,” originally of predominance of one city state or another in Greek history; [[Obviously, over the others..//LGH.]] from Greek hegemonia “leadership, a leading the way, a going first;” also “the authority or sovereignty of one city-state over a number of others,” as Athens in Attica, Thebes in Boeotia; from hegemon “leader, an authority, commander, sovereign,” from hegeisthai “to lead,” perhaps originally “to track down,” from PIE *sag-eyo-, from root *sag- “to seek out, track down, trace” (see seek). In reference to modern situations from 1850, at first of Prussia in relation to other German states.

Right away, you can see the usage is asserting “sovereignty” in opposition to something or some other authority.  This is where the concept of global citizenship as a tactic to minimize and place on a lower level “national sovereignty” (the laws of nation to which their citizens are subject) to some other source falls short of the language of reason, i.e., it wishes to take the positive connotations of one term, and omit the negative ones of the corollary term, while apparently not getting caught at it, which on closer look seems more like force by subterfuge than, overall, concern for the common good.

The more momentum and force is obtained through subterfuge, the less effort it causes those obtaining it, and apparently the less necessary it becomes to even pretend to legitimacy. This increasing quality unchecked will simply continue to saturate the economy and public institutions.  There are many parallels to mistakenly getting into a close or committed relationship with an abuser, batterer or in short, sociopath, from which exit is a serious and costly fight.  The basic lesson is, don’t enter into it by consent in the first place; know who one is dealing with.  And, know the wider context in which he or she  operates, including “with whom.”

Without something sovereign, it seems there can be no “citizenship.”  In the language used exalting global citizenship — I’ve added just a taste and reminder of this within a “Foreword” section below — the silence, or attempt to substitute the global “we” “us” or even “the planet” “earth” (etc.) — leaves an major information not just gap, but a chasm where credibility of the terminology does not exist.  Just exactly who do the leading advocates of “global is good, nationalism is bad per se, (by definition),” say is sovereign; and does that match who actions indicate some believe are already sovereign over the earth itself, and especially of its people?  Is it WHO, the World Health Organization, or the UN, or a collection of NON-government organizations?  And if these are NON-government, then how can they represent those global citizens being governed..

See also, published just days before “HiAP (Health Not LAW)”…

“Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule:** A Section Unearthed from My “Smoking Control/Tobacco Litigation” Post and Reposted Here, in light of Current Congressional Events, and in light of Senator Flake’s (2014) Commentary Before the CFR citing to 9/11 and the Iraq War Commended (?) for Unifying the United States. [case-sensitive short-link ending “-7QH.”  Re-posted  (bottom half) and written (top half) Oct. 25-26, 2017].[Published Oct. 26, 2017] (**the Chatham House Rule is basically anonymity of speaker within group conferences whose results may be published.  See post for more.)  About half that title added to tags as “Originating Concept Post.”


Examples of the language “global citizenship” language entrenched in institutions but without the corresponding discussion of the related concept, “sovereignty” alongside it.

When citizenship is to be re-imagined (it comes up below) and that citizenship is to be global, this entails a change of sovereign entity to which the citizens subscribe, and under whose laws they are to exist, and whose infrastructures they will be supporting with life energies and using, likely, that nation’s central banks currency, too, as well as its registration standards for corporations, for-profit and not-for-profit, and so forth.

I’m including a substantial “Foreword” with two “for example” sections to make the point that we are constantly being primed institutionally and business wise for “globalization + global citizenships” as a great, a “21st Century,” value”  (1) Common Core and Globalization, (2) Rutgers and Globalization or even the (as previously published) Tobacco Framework also in that context, but the related concept rarely discussed in the “Global Citizenship as a Positive Value” promotions and publications.  But this point was neither the inspiration for the post, nor its main point. They are there for examples, and added information, but they are not the “why” for this  post.

Also, in talking about Rutgers example below (which was not part of the original spin-off post, just an introduction to it), I’m in no way against “study abroad” programs or bringing international students here to study either.  That can and should continue happening.

But does it require going nuts over the “global citizenship” and “integrating it into the curriculum across 30 colleges and a biomedical research center” and granting awards for doing this — as Rutgers has?  [Documented below]Not really.  And IF one is going to talk “global citizenship,” then the question comes up, and should be handled in the same circles and on the same publications: “So, who’s “sovereign” (who’s on top?) of the whole “let us now globalize all” culture?  It isn’t, so I gather those behind the globalization are MUCH more interested in achieving it (their business and transformational goals) and not a fair or balanced presentation of the rationale behind them.

If we’re going global from cradle-to-career, where’s the corresponding discussion on switching allegiances and sovereignties?  You won’t find it in the examples given below.  The process is incremental and designed (so it seems) to alleviate violent protests over the erosion of the national, political jurisdictions. Among the countries that I say has the most to lose in that situation is the United States.  We’re large, we’re a developed country, we already support WHO and so forth.  Smaller countries, less developed countries, and those without constitutions that protect the public, and at least on paper, could handle major corruption, have a lot to gain. (See Thanksgiving-Day published post referencing the G20 and standardizing economic systems and business identifiers for better trade…).

Foreword — Other (than “HiAP”) Examples:

The common phrase “global citizenship” apparently is now to be engrained into the US Education system, it seems at PreK-12 and university levels both.  The Dean of Global Education at University of Oregon’s College of Education explains how in a global economy, business really does follow the lowest wages, so the least likely to profit from this are American students.  And other references.

(1) Globalizing a US PreK-12 Public Education (some Common Core debates, and featuring another Opportunist 501©3 Org. promoting the Transformation Tools)

Washington Post, 2013, The Answer Sheet posted by Valerie Strauss, Article by Yang Zhao, “Five Key Questions About Common Core.”  The Q&A makes sense on its own, but take a look at the author’s affiliations:

…Yong Zhao, presidential chair and associate dean for global education at the University of Oregon’s College of Education, where he also serves as the director of the Center for Advanced Technology in Education. He is a fellow of the International Academy for Education. Until December 2010, he was director of both the Center for Teaching and Technology and the U.S.-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence at Michigan State University, as well as the executive director of the Confucius Institute/Institute for Chinese Teacher Education.

Read the rest of this entry »

HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. [Published Oct 24, 2017]

with one comment

Post title and shortlink: HiAP (HEALTH, not LAW*, in All Policies) Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA. (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-7LY”) Published Oct. 24, 2017.  About 12,800 words. Tags, more than a dozen, added Oct. 27.

Two spinoff posts promised below (still in draft Oct. 27) are:

ICLEI in particular shows pre-planned globalism and tactics for it (with Canadian ownership from the start, and prominent connections to UNincorporated association in Europe, as I recall). ICLEI’s previous name is a big clue.  “EI” stands for Environmental Initiatives as I recall offhand.

[“Spinoff posts” are portions of drafts of this post which are felt to be significant enough for more attention under their own titles, and usually were nearly complete before moving them under their own titles.]


This post was written basically Oct. 14-16, and continues from a theme who has been promoting “Health as an Asset” globally (and some of the organizations involved) from an earlier post. Published without further work (now that “Governance: The Final Frontier” is done and has undergone the “post-publication review” (and extensive tags have been added). This one is published Oct. 24, 2017 (a Tuesday evening, my time zone) and will likely undergo a similar post-publication review (incl. added tags).


Why post-publication revisions:  As just one blog administrator, it helps sometimes to PUBLISH, then REFLECT/REVIEW MORE (which are activities with different modes and focus of attention).  If this were a subscription blog (currently it isn’t yet) of course that would be less acceptable, although even on-line MSM show “updates” after the original publish time.  I am also considering other timelines for the blog, urgencies to publish, responding sometimes to current events, such as government in motion,* outside the immediate scope of the blog and at times, when I publish after working on a specific post and its topics is just gut instinct.  I also maintain (again, a gut-level instinct) awareness of my personal limits on how much effort can be put into a single topic.


Source: WHO. Click image to enlarge. Notice at bottom: “Health is the driver” and at the top “Health requires…. all sectors work together…” and a collective set of conditions to re-organize society, throughout. (image is unusually long and looks like it might have been a hanging banner for a conference…)

Found in a list of resources at a CDC website:

Health in All Policies (HiAP): Framework for Country Action
Developed by the World Health Organization to serve as a “starter’s kit” for applying HiAP in decision-making and implementation at national and subnational levels, this framework can be easily adapted for use in different country contexts and at the regional and global levels.

! ! ! ! ! !

Notice the elements of WHO’s HiAP Banner for Worldwide Implementation, “How Does It Work?” Clean Energy | Housing | Urban Planning | Transport | Industry | Waste Mgmt | Local and Regional Authorities | Health MinistryMore Collaboration to Tackle Air Pollution.

[I’ve noticed that] Whatever the cause (Tobacco Control, HiAP, Environment, Peace, Equity, Sustainability) the push will alway be for more collaboration (coordination) of geopolitical jurisdictions, *government agencies, and between governments and private businesses (corporations) + corporate wealth.  All individuals are expected to understand that this is for their own good, regardless of where in the world they live, including in the USA.

*[i.e., focus on Local and Regional where in the USA, the States are primary levels of jursidiction on things not reserved to the federal government by the US Constitution],

This was also the request when the cause was to “prevent family violence” only then the preferred term was “coordinate” — Coordinated Community Response.” All terms will speak in collective (or “collectivist”) language. Individualism as a principle is throughout discouraged.  [Green font here just represents text added during post update Oct. 27]

In case the phrase or its acronym “HiAP” is unfamiliar, see the “infographic” to right, from the World Health Organization, also labeled as a tool for promoting HiAP at the Country level.  I’ll show it again below, larger.

Key concepts — consolidation of departments and agencies within government, and planned communities with not even a complete concept — just a single word “health” as the organizing factor.

Relevance to “FamilyCourtMatters” issues:

The immediately preceding post introduces my concerns about this topic, using “Big Tobacco” litigation (Public policy and economic impact)” under “health” rationale as compared with “Domestic Violence” (Child Abuse is related and parallel), something I had experienced and whose advocacy organization, both HHS and DOJ-funded, and others, I had researched (primarily posted on this blog).  After writing (but not publishing yet) that, I became engrossed in this aspect, especially after finding WHO citing to its involvement in a global treaty around tobacco (introduced 2003, signed by over 170 members or “signatories” – i.e., mostly countries — by 2005) as an example of why it should also lead setting the framework for HiAP — after all, it was experienced.

In that postSmoking Cessation/Tobacco Control Litigation I see is By Design GUARANTEED, (like Domestic Violence Prevention and Services) To Continue Incessantly. Meanwhile, a Wide Swath of Northern California Is Smoke-Filled and Lit Up, But Not by Tobacco. (October Local News and Blog Updates), (short-link ending “-7Lp”), which I plan to publish same day or within 24 hrs of this one,…

I discovered connections between major pharmaceutical (and other products) multinational corporation, its trust started only in 2007 (in Europe) but the company home base in New Jersey, USA — and meetings under the “Chatham House rule” (it said, “rules” but it seems there is only one — anonymity!) which is a connection to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in London. Which brings up the question, if we are to be globally aligned, and one country (the USA) doesn’t have a monarch, titles of nobility or a national (declared at least) religion, why would be be seeking to align one of our most expensive areas of public policy (i.e., “health”) with a country, formerly an empire, and to this day still characterized as a “kingdom” although with a queen instead?


If – hypothetically —  I were, from a position of authority (elected, appointed, or corporate, whether in the for-profit or not-for-profit sectors) to say over several years, and from a variety of platforms (each time referencing organizations or offices I held to underscore the authority of the message), such as a keynote speaker at a conference or university center, to say to Americans, that is U.S. Citizens, or (which is closer to the reality of networked organization communicating public policy themes), if I and my friends and colleagues… were, concurrently, repeatedly and openly, to say:

Hypothetical message/directive:

Everyone stop talking about legal rights and due process, justice as it relates to anything expressed in the U.S. Constitution, or state laws, as passed by the U.S. Congress or state legislatures (respectively), and instead, repeat after me:

“Health in All Policies”

…In fact, let’s not talk about laws at all — just policies, as enacted and implemented through the executive branch of governments, plural, of course in closest meaningful consultation with local, state, regional, national and international associations/NGOs working collaboratively. … From now on, when a conflict between law and policy comes up, policy wins every time.  When a geopolitical jurisdiction conflict comes up, regardless of the law, the argument, practice, or ideas originating in the larger body’s jurisdiction prevail and will become standard practice  — even if that’s not what either its or the smaller body’s law says (for example, federal vs. state).  From now on, right and wrong are no longer expressed in law, but in “policy.”

From now on, national sovereignty, and concern about it by any nation’s citizens, especially for the U.S.A. and its citizens = “bad.”  Global citizenship = “good, equitable, sustainable, fair and necessary for world peace (and the planet).**  And anyone who disagrees or protests is a lunatic/fringe element/conspiracy theorist, or _____(substitute other negative name-calling at will).  We allow freedom of expression, and value it — so they can talk, but we, the intelligent and reasonable, should not engage with such backwards nutcases.##

## The two sentences in blue weren’t in my original hypothetical, but after running across an OpEd and NY article using some of those terms (mocking the concept of “conspiracy theory” and applying certain labels to those in protest) — and having just been researching the organization being defended — I felt it appropriate to add.  A large part of public policy IS marketing it to the public; advertising, “PR.”  Part of PR is discrediting the competition, which here appears to be, using a different set of language, vocabulary and concepts to discuss common concerns….i.e., independence of thought, or reference to a different standard for reasoning and evaluation of public policy.  … Keep reading, I have examples….

From now on,  leave the complex thinking –including about your families and children’s educations, public schools, housing, transportation or energy infrastructure, etc.  — up to the experts, and go back to work funding them.  During your work, family, schooling or any leisure time, stay tuned in for any major changes in the current catechism…and what to think and talk about…”

**Interjection on the two-word phrase “Global citizenship” and logical corollaries:

In writing this, the phrase “global citizenship” slipped out so normally as a concept in common usage, that I didn’t at first consider how it implies but does not cite to a supreme or “sovereign” power over the entire planet.

Because the phrase and concept of “global citizenship” (unlike citizenship of known political States with their defined land and water masses) does not or cannot cite or refer to such a supreme or sovereign power with geographic/territorial authority over the whole planet (which I learned is key to the concept of “sovereign”) while also protesting allegiance to the same (warring nations, states, sovereign entities seeking to expand themselves) as the innate cause of war (and poverty, inequity, slavery and other human rights violations and social ills), the rationale for any means to achieve the concept of, and the ongoing use of the two-word phrase “global citizenship,” and corresponding allegiance to it, as a way of life or principle for assuming or assigning duties and responsibilities, however, fails.

Historically (especially post World War II) the call for global government by consensus as opposed to “national sovereignty” (which by definition comes with subjects or citizens attached…) comes from criticizing and attempting to distance all people (especially the more powerful, “developed” nations) from over-commitment to their own countries.  But, without an organized body politic which implies, historically, something “sovereign” and reigning supreme over all owned territories, there can’t be “citizenship.”


RELATED, PREVIOUSLY POSTED DISCUSSIONS: I’ve already blogged repeatedly over time about the concept of “functionalism” (David Mitrany, his involvement with the RIIA Royal Institute of International Affairs (US parallel might be the Council of Foreign Relations), (the RIIA, or “Chatham House” comes up again in the “Health as an Asset” context) and the incremental way of disemboweling, so to speak, or draining the innate power of governments — such as ours here, or the Brits, or the Germans, or the French, or the Spanish (the RIIA dating only to 1927, and it is in London) — by outsourcing it to trans-national bodies.  Or, within the USA, trans-state authorities, an early example of which would be the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) — as an example, of by persuasion, different states giving up some of their autonomy for a common geographic, regional good.

THIS ROUND, Fall 2017, having just used the word “global citizenship” almost without thinking, I went looking again for definition of “sovereign” and “citizen” and came across two Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (“SEP”) articles (one written in 2003, “substantively revised” 2016; the other in 2006, “substantively revised” 2017), which presented enough historical narrative to, I feel, communicate the concepts in a historic context well enough to explain my concerns.  (SEP “Citizenship” & “Sovereignty“)

From SEP on “Citizenship:”

Supporters of global democracy reject the conventional identification between demos, territory and citizenship. In their view, citizenship is not a set of practices and rights that need to be anchored in a particular demos defined by specific territorial boundaries. On the contrary, citizenship is ideally exercised in a multiplicity of ‘sites’, situated at different levels of governance: local, national, regional and global. Global democrats sketch a multilayered, global democratic order in which no single layer or site is dominant (Pogge 1992, 58, Young 2000, 266). This scheme {{scheme or sketch — which is it?}} implies a ‘vertical’ dispersal of power above and below existing sovereign states, which are stripped of their centrality. This would give less of an incentive for conflicts over power and wealth within and between states, “‘thereby reducing the incidence of war, poverty, and oppression’ and environmental degradation” (Kuper 2004, 30, quoting Pogge 1992, 102–105).  [[Citation: Leydet, Dominique, “Citizenship”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/citizenship/]]

(I notice in the news, the word “democracy” is so often used as opposed to “republic” when referring to the USA also, and intents to help promote it internationally.  When I was young, in school, I do not remember pledging allegiance to the “democracy” of the United States of America, but to the “republic.”…Apparently “republic” along with “Republicans” (unless you’re one) is also a bad word…)

The SEP article on sovereignty spoke of a major turning point (at least in Europe) between religious wars and the concept of sovereign states as recent as 1647: “the Peace of Westphalia” (History.com reference) ending the Thirty Years’ War AND, separately (though obviously with religious overtones) an Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch. And of the role of Martin Luther and the Reformation in changing the concepts of temporal versus spiritual power at the time.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 24, 2017 at 7:59 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Politics, Governors, Attorney-Generals and The Port Authority of NY/NJ (The Downside of Public/Private Partnerships) – SeeAlso “NextCity,” and another UNESCO “Name It and Claim it” Project in Detroit

with one comment

This post began with the Port Authority, but migrated to include a lot on Detroit through the reporting of a certain journal originally out of New York, but then (on picking up some more foundation funding — 5 ones were mentioned specifically, but I believe Rockefeller was one of the first — started a quarterly print magazine (B/W) called “The Next American City” which didn’t make ends meet, that is much anyhow.

It later moved to Philadelphia in a classy central building, and became primarily an on-line, daily, and with long-form articles.  The article I saw recommended that the Port Authority of NY/NJ  be “killed” that is, let to die a natural death and replaced by separate authorities of the respective states. Naturally, I started asking questions about that journal.

Post Title & Shortlink: Politics, Governors, Attorney-Generals and The Port Authority of NY/NJ (The Downside of Public/Private Partnerships) – SeeAlso “NextCity,” and another UNESCO “Name It and Claim it” Project in Detroit (short-link ending “-4hX” post originally published Sept. 5, 2016, now 16,000 words)


Post currently 14,000 words after I decided to break down the College for Creative Studies Tax Returns showing their involvement as a Real Estate Developer (also in the Detroit Creative Center Corridor), That Mini-Section marked off by this background-color, in addition to this section of same background-color referencing the redevelopment of the Argonaut Building:  And 15,800 after I decided to speak up about a HUD intermediary rejoicing in the Argonaut Project.
WHY: Many Colleges receive state tax-exempt bonds (this one did, in 2008) and are involved in construction and beneficiaries of public funds in a big way (i.e., tuition help for their students). The Argonaut Building in Detroit was formerly occupied by General Motors; when GM moved, it stood vacant (derelict?) 1999-2008 until it was donated to the CCS, enabling major expansion. The public who was betrayed by the bankruptcy soon after (2011?) and in general by the deteriorating infrastructure, was then hit on some more for redeveloping it, which seems to be “the way of the world” for developed countries these day, at least this one, the USA.
The Argonaut Building, renamed in 2009 the A. Alfred Taubman Center for Design Education (originally the Argonaut, or General Motors Research Laboratory), is a large office building located at 485 West Milwaukee Avenue in the New Center area of DetroitMichigan, across the street from Cadillac Place. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2005.[1]
This image is from

This image is from “EnterpriseCommunity.com” (Click on color photo of top of the building to access)

Other links to Argonaut Building in this Redevelopment Context:

From Michigan.gov (SHPO — State Historic Preservation Office) …

From “Enterprise.com of which the umbrella corp. seems to be nonprofit “Enterprise Community Partners, Inc.” (About us page) This brings up the “NMTC” (New Market Tax Credits), HUD, Pay for Success, LISC and other topics which, bottom line, the public’s tax receipts, ongoing, is the bottom line to ensure we stay strapped for cash flow and asset-poor, while paying the federal government ot play favorites, ensure a continual supply of LOW-INCOME, ASSETS-POOR people to fill their development projects… or redevelopment projects, after the prior neighborhood deterioration was in bad enough condition that ANY change would be welcomed, rather than abandoned buildings and a high crime rate to go with them.

ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS, Inc., “LISC” and HABITAT FOR HUMANITY TAKE HUD Section 4 grants and pass-through.  Enterprise, however has so many “related organizations” and apparently passes through some of its grants (I’d have to check Schedule I Grants with Schedule R Part II, “Related Tax-Exempts” to double-check), that, from a home base of Maryland, its controlling housing development, and less than obviously to people who don’t follow the tax returns.  No wonder the collective assets are so high.  Incidentally, without belaboring this situation, for the top row (latest year shown below), $55M of its $69M Program Revenues were “CONTRIBUTIONS.  Of those, most were government grants (compare to Part VIII, Statement of Revenues for exact details):
Search Again

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Enterprise Community Partners MD 2014 990 304 $264,581,345.00 52-1231931
Enterprise Community Partners MD 2013 990 76 $241,632,111.00 52-1231931
Enterprise Community Partners MD 2012 990 55 $206,179,000.00 52-1231931

(Part III, Page 2, Purpose):

TO CREATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND MODERATE-INCOME PEOPLE THROUGH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DIVERSE, THRIVING COMMUNITIES ENTERPRISE PROVIDES DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL AND EXPERTISE TO CREATE DECENT, AFFORDABLE HOMES AND TO REBUILD COMMUNITIES SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE ORGANIZATION TO COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDE GRANTS FOR THEIR OPERATIONS, SHORT-TERM LOANS RANGING FROM WORKING CAPITAL LINES TO PREDEVELOPMENT, ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION LOANS, TECHNICAL SERVICES AND TRAINING PROGRAMS, AND RESEARCH AND INFORMATION SERVICES

Enterprise is primarily government-funded, presumably HUD. As you can see, its Total Assets grew $58M in two years. Basically, HUD, or rather, CONGRESS, is saying, “we want the resources to go into nationalized nonprofits which will determine who gets what in local communities” –> but what about WHO FINANCES HUD?  Some of those “low and moderate-income people” through their taxes.  

WHAT’S SO OFF WITH THAT MODEL?  To understand requires an understanding of how communities get to the point of needing “rebuilding” in the first place, and relates to the topic of governmental reporting to each other through CAFRs, but to the public deliberately only speaking (primarily) in terms of “deficit” referring to the GENERAL FUND and BASIC GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS.  That requires an understanding of the level (and complete immorality) of  Publlic/Private collusion to NOT talk about just how many assets are available to fund government debt (or maintain its infrastructure) and collusion ALSO in calling a municipal corporation (which Detroit is) “Bankrupt” when it’s not really.  The “Bankrupt” refers to part — not collective — Municipal Corporation holdings.  (7/20/2013, by Clint Richardson/”RealityBloger”) Detroit: The Latest Bankrupcy Lies”  Has a copy of the Year 2011-2012 City of Detroit CAFR and explanation of the nature of the deceit.  (Did you, for example, know that Detroit got a new City Charter in 2011?) 

Its “Part VIIA employees total an outrageous $10M salaries (I’ve never seen so many officers — with many being paid over $200K each — on a Board of directors).  it was organized in 1980, and legal domicile is, let’s put it this way — within commuting distance of Washington, D.C.  Here are its Schedule R (ECP controlled) Tax-Exempt Organizations.  Note, there are also other Schedule R organizations, in other Schedule-R sections.  The tax return shows 304 pp because they listed their grants, 1 recipient per page instead of on the IRS form which provides for blank lines of about 10/page.  Annoying….

Apart from the first one, all are labeled “Affordable Housing”, and all (incl. first one) are “Directly controlled” by ECP, Inc. See these in chart form on the last page (page 304) of the latest return:

(1) ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY LOAN FUND INC 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 52-0192004

(1)ENTERPRISE HOME OWNERSHIP PARTNERS INC 600 wilshire blvd LOS ANGELES, CA 90017 31-1737642

(2) EHOP- DALLAS INC 500 akard street DALLAS, TX 75201 72-1590088

(3) NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP HOUSING DEVELOP 1 WHITEHALL STREET NEWYORK, NY 10004 13-3811616

(4) ENTERPRISE MARYLAND LLC 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 26-3262997

(5)IACENTERPRISE NEHEMIAH DEVELOPMENT 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 52-1742031

(6)CORNERSTONE HOUSING CORPORATION 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 52-1742293

(7)CITY HOMES INC 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 52-1479114

(8) ENTERPRISE ADVISORS INC 11000 broken land parkway 700 COLUMBIA, MD 21044 27-3846733

(9)Affordable Housing Solutions Inc 11000 broken land parkway 700 Columbia, MD 21044 35-2389470

(10) enterprise community investment inc 11000 broken land parkway columbia, MD 21044 52-1206840

From Michigan’s “LARA” (also referenced below regarding College of Creative Sciences Mini-Section) — where you look up Business Entity names, types, and dates of organization:

Entity Name ID Number Type
ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY LOAN FUND, INC. 902354 Corporation [Formed* in 2006]
ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS, INC. 902975 Corporation [Formed in 2006]
ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS, INC. 900578 Corporation [Formed in 1985]

*Formed (I added those phrases) means organized as a Maryland business to do business in Michigan.

Put another way, Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. “Competes” with only two other intermediary organizations, for HUD money appropriated under  Section 4 of an Act dated 1993.  The fiscal year starting Sept. 2015 (?), the “NOFA” amount to be awarded (split three ways) was a minimum of $35,000,000 — for that year, and for four-year projects.

See Description under last year’s NOFA (Notice of Funds Availability I guess) from HUD:  This is about Capacity-Building, and they want to strengthen the so-called “Community Development” Housing developers, financers, and providers.  Minor detail — they don’t need to be locally controlled, as we see from ECPartners, Inc., above’s list of “Controlled Entities.”  ECP is serving as a pass-through from HUD to, basically, its own corporate offspring.

Essentially, while using the word “LOCAL” (part of the title of ‘LISC” — Local Initiatives Support Corporation) and ‘Community” repeatedly (the money is passed through to a certain kind of nonprofits), the ACTUAL CONTROL of the housing development is in three corporations, ALL of them East of the Mississippi (I.e., in States on the East Coast of the USA), and, ultimately — because that’s who could pull the plug, should it determine to — the federal government:

[This info could be obtained a number of different places, but this time was from a 25-page pdf:  http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=2015capbldg4nofa.pdf, the quote is bottom of “Page 4” referring to document footer numbering //LGH]]

B. Authority.

The Capacity Building program is authorized by Section 4 of the HUD Demonstration Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-120, 107 Stat. 1148, 42 U.S.C. 9816 note), as amended. The funding made available through this NOFA is authorized by the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Public Law 113-235, approved December 16, 2014).

II. Award Information. A. Available Funds.

HUD is making available through this NOFA $35,000,000 for Capacity Building for Community Development and Affordable Housing Grants (Section 4).

Additional funds may become available for award under this NOFA as a result of HUD’s efforts to recapture unused funds, use carryover funds, or because of the availability of additional appropriated funds. Use of these funds will be subject to statutory constraints. All awards are subject to the applicable funding restrictions described in the General Section and to those contained in this NOFA.

Of the $35,000,000 available for the Section 4 Capacity Building Program at least $5,000,000 shall be made available for rural capacity building activities.

B. Number of Awards.
HUD expects to make approximately 3 awards from the funds available under this NOFA 

For why “3 awards,” see next image (the related pdf copies 4 pages of text from the above link):

hud-pdf-from-2015-showing-authority-amounts-and-3-grantees-for-sectn4-%22capacity-building%22-grants-35m-total-that-year-pp7-10-of-pdf-only hud-pdf-from-2015-showing-authority-amounts-and-3-grantees-for-sectn4-%22capacity-building%22-grants-35m-total-that-year-pp7-10-of-pdf-only <==click for full-sized image, plus 3 more pp.


From “CrainsDetroit” (before the Tax Credits Bill for this project, and others, was signed by former Michigan Governor, Jennifer Granholm), “Tax credit legislation for Broderick Tower, Taubman Center for Design awaits governor’s signature (Article shows a $3M cap per year in tax credits per project.  That’s a lot of tax credits, still!) 12/22/2009…

Hmm.  Keith Crain I noticed is on the board of that College for Creative Studies, who are now in that A. Alfred Taubmen Center.  Wiki on Crain Communications (with a flag, “reads like an ad” but also has a footnote to interesting, though possibly not fully current, “FundingUniverse” history of the publication:

G D. Crain died in 1973 and was succeeded by his widow, Gertrude Crain, who chaired the company until 1996. Under her watch, the company grew to have 27 newspapers and magazines.[5] Son Keith Crain replaced her as chairman in 1997. Following his father’s death, Rance Crain became president of Crain Communications in 1974.[4]  Crain now has about 30 business, trade and consumer publications and related Web sites in North America, Europe and Asia.[6] The company currently has over 850 employees in 14 locations spanning the United States, Europe and Asia.

In 2001 the company relocated its corporate headquarters to the Brewery Park complex on Gratiot Avenue in downtown Detroit, as part of a move to consolidate its Detroit-based employees into one facility.[7]

…and from one of the contractors involved, “Wallbridge” (see their “About Us/Overview” for more info): Dec. 2010, Lansing, MI:  Governor Honors Argonaut Rehabilitation ; Detroit Free Press “Detroit Spotlighted for Opportunity Finance Network” (/21/2015);


(WHERE POST STARTED AS FIRST PUBLISHED – – – – – – )

The Michigan Economic Development Corporation (“MEDC”) and with it, the “Michigan Strategic Fund” (“MSF”) came up in this post when looking at the Port Authority situation led to an article by NEXTCITY.org, which led to the illuminating information that UNESCO has ac/claimed Detroit as the first USA “City of Design.” (“DC3”) a project which involves Business Leaders for Michigan (“BLFM”) and the College for Creative Sciences (“CCS”).

I found out more on how our state universities — which are public institutions — are getting globalized, in “GAIA” at Rutgers. that is “Global Advancement and International Affairs.”  This is hooked into the US Department of State, and it’s moving fast forward along a certain model, with the prestigious “*.edu” website justifying the process.

(more, when link becomes active, at “…(GAIA at Rutgers, Obama Admin’s “YALI” + the reticent-to-explain-itself nonprofit “IREX,” and a Quick Primer/Refresher on The World Bank and IMF)” which represents only about half the full post title, which starts with “Gender Wars” (stemming from the GAIA reference, obviously no accident in acronyms).

Obviously that won’t all fit on one post, but this is an introduction of the various topics and their relationship to each other and to why we should protest the continued takeover of center cities by public/private partnerships which existed before those city centers fell apart.

My, oh, my, the drill-down of the involved parties get real interesting…it looks like the people that were running things (state-wide) LONG before Detroit, and parts of Michigan, went economically belly-up, had prepared to take over the reconstruction of the broken-down city centers and transforming them into new, glamorously and politically-correct (if you’re a fan of NWO and UN taking over the USA) PR-friendly labels, with a token gesture to keeping jobs local.


Shortlink to last post published 8/25/2016==> “Case in Point, NEVER skip the Business 501(c)3  Entity Lookups, and Watch the “Fiscal Agent” organizations! (Edward Charles Foundation, Fiscal Agent to “FreedomAdvocates” and, apparently, the Stars (post begun 7/3/2016)

Shortlink to this post ==>”Politics, Governors, Attorney-Generals and The Port Authority of NY/NJ (The Downside of Public/Private Partnerships) – SeeAlso “NextCity,” and another UNESCO “Name It and Claim it” Project in Detroit” (A “shortlink” here is like WordPress’s version of “tinyurl.com.”  The link contains letters which appear to be case-sensitive).

PortauthorityNYNJConf.com” shows upcoming 9/21/2016 CUNY (City University of NY) conference for Construction Industry, “Building Relationships for Lasting Success” and talking about the major reconstruction/development projects with this Port Authority

Shortlink to next intended (but not guaranteed) post; the link will become active (regardless of title) when it’s published follows up on NextCity as a nonprofit and its five-named foundation financiers: How  501©3 “The Next American City,” with help from at least Five BIG Foundations, lost its “American,” while Devastated Detroit’s DESIGN is Anointed by UNESCO, This post references the UNESCO “Name It and Claim it” habit as endorsed by public/private partnerships — regarding the City of Detroit and explores some of “DC3” the Detroit Creative Corridor Center, which came up in the context of a 2014  article by “Next City, Inc.” on the politics affecting transportation networks regarding this Port Authority of NY/NJ.

A subsequent post called Did Regionalism under Public/Private Partnerships Help Detroit the First Time Around?  A Look at MEDC, MSF, and Recent Gubernatorial EROs (Exec. Reorganization Orders) came from my noticing how Gubernatorial “Executive Reorganization Orders” (EROs) — lots of them in this century — started setting up new boards, and re-arranging the power to distribute grants set up under a year 2000 Michigan Trust Fund.   The takeover,. in other words, has been progressive and it looks like we have to keep a closer eye (state by state) on the shift in state laws also, particularly (as it happens in Michigan) under Chapter 125:  “PLANNING, HOUSING AND ZONING.”


Below, I also look again within the State of NJ CAFRs for how this Port Authority is classified (it’s as a Joint Venture) and remind us that CAFRs report things news media doesn’t — and are free to look at, the chief investment being of one’s time, and humility (for most people, I’ll bet) of seeing with your own eyes some of the accounting tricks of the trade, and, particularly, vocabulary used to describe the public (entity) projects, at a minimum.  They are self-descriptions of how and for how much the reporting entity is organized, and what entities are underneath it, and how classified.  That’s valuable information when there’s an issue with ANY of the component, blended, or discrete units within a government entity filing a report.  Despite their length, they are good BASIC information…
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: