This sat, my family and I went to Parc Lhasa-De Sela and saw that La Pépinière had set up a "Laboratoire de l'hiver", evidently funded by public funders purportedly to (according to their mission statement) counter isolation, build local links and support community initiatives.

It brings up so many questions... First why Lhasa-De Sela park? Most of La Pépinière's "lab-making" and " #placemaking" takes place in rich neighborhoods (Plateau and Mile End parks, old Montreal, the now-gentrified Parc Emilie Gamelin)... Do plateau folks need more fun animation?

What's the rationale for a non-profit benefiting from public funds to animate in areas well served by local groups who know their contexts much better than La Pépinière would? Lhasa-De Sela is near @MileEndMission who provide amazing local services. Why not give them the funds?

In line with that, have La Pépinière given thought to the optics of selling $3 cups of hot chocolate water as part of a project that claims to promote social inclusion? What exactly is #innovative (to again pick up on their language) about that?

La Pépinière is part of a growing movement of orgs that believe in the importance of urban spaces - without necessarily recognizing the creeping loss of agency that's actually at play in neighborhoods, but yet manage to capture the interest of philanthropy and public funders.

My own skepticism notwithstanding, I'd be curious to know how we go from A (wanting to #makepovertyhistory) to B huge funding awarded to orgs led by rich white folks with clear access to wealth and social capital, while sidestepping the sustained work by for-and-by local groups..

In as much as the #innovators and #changemakers leading these labs and hubs and what-have-yous think they have amazing ideas, wouldn't the funds involved be better managed by groups who are led by folks with lived experiences of poverty and discrimination?

La Pépinière gets recurrent support from @MTL_Ville, from the @McC_IF (Cities for People!) and @CSolidaire as well as @CentraideMtl. Exactly what kind of vetting occurs to ensure local demand and relevancy for this stuff, before funds are awarded?

Also - just sayin... It's weird to have paid staff on hand taking pictures of people hanging out in parks with their kids. But yeah if you disagree I'd love to hear it because from where I'm sitting it doesn't look or feel good.