I'm sure I'm not the first person to have this thought, but I thinkt he city has to
start seriously tying our core needs with our core revenues, something an outside and
hostile political grouping cannot deny us. Of course, that also means that
extraordinary expenditures must be so constructed as to weather temporary economic
hard times. A household would think this way, and I think the time has come for the
city to do so also. We've heard some fretting about getting sued because we made
lavish plans when we thought the flow of money was insured. That is a good point, but
not the way it was presented. We have to consider the RISKS of these plans and never
create a legal exposure due to interruptions in income. With homes, that is
guaranteed by protections built into our laws. But as a city, we need to insure the
protection on each contract we consider. If a potential contractor will not settle on
that, we should never HINT that we would do business with them. We have !
a risk management department, but it has to start doing its job better.
And candidates for city elective office have to be cornered on these quesitons. We've
been remiss as voters in considering that we elect charming but careless people to
office.
--
Jim Mork--Cooper
Only a LUNATIC would cut schools in order to pay for more bombs.
Depart from me, you cursed of my Father. Inasmuch as you have not done it to the
least of these my brethren, you have not done it unto me.
Get your free Web-based E-mail at http://www.startribune.com/stribmail
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Send all posts in plain-text format.
2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible.
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
