Re: Al Gore and urban policies
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, John Rocker wrote: But, the biggest positive = impact Nader can have this election is to get out the vote for Gore. Who = knows, maybe Gore will appoint him head of the EPA. Maybe pigs will fly. --David Shove
Re: Al Gore and urban policies
Read Utne Reader for the Cabinet selection - a really great list - that would change the planet, no matter who is President. AY First they ignore you, Then they laugh at you, Then they fight you, And then we win! -Mohandas Gandhi
Al Gore and urban policies
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --=_NextPart_000_0062_01C04348.E81265C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Contrary to what Nader supporters say, Gore and Bush are not the same = when it comes to urban policies that will effect Minneapolis. Following = is an excerpt from Gore's speech to the Brookings Institution that = demonstrates Gore's grasp of issues facing Minneapolis. The complete = text can be found at http://www.algore.com/speeches/sprawl.html. If Gore = or Bush had a clear lead, I would urge Nader supporters to vote for = Nader and get the Green Party $12 million. But, the biggest positive = impact Nader can have this election is to get out the vote for Gore. Who = knows, maybe Gore will appoint him head of the EPA. Here's part of what Gore said: "In the last fifty years, we've built flat, not tall: because land is = cheaper the further out it lies, new office buildings, roads, and malls = go up farther and farther out, lengthening commutes and adding to = pollution. This outward stretch leaves a vacuum in the cities and = suburbs which sucks away jobs, businesses, homes, and hope; as people = stop walking in downtown areas, the vacuum is filled up fast with crime, = drugs, and danger... "How, then, can the federal government encourage and strengthen smarter, = more livable, sustainable growth? Again, smart growth is about local and = community decisions, and we don't want to tell anyone where to live, or = where to locate a business. But I believe there is nevertheless an = important role for federal support for local energies. "We in the federal government can start by getting our own house in = order, and making it look good. We should start paying closer attention = to livability in the building and planning we provide to taxpayers-such = as where we locate new post offices, new libraries, new federal = buildings and so on, and whether we should fix up old beautiful old = buildings in historic areas before rushing to build bland new ones = farther out. "Secondly, we can get our own house in order by reexamining federal = policies that may have been well-intentioned, but have encouraged and = subsidized the wrong kind of growth and runaway sprawl. For example, in = some cases, federal subsidies actually gave handsome financial rewards = to communities to extend sewage lines far out into undeveloped areas, = rather than spending those funds for needed improvements and expansions = in places where families already relied on them. And until we changed = the policy, the federal government gave employers big subsidies to offer = parking spaces to their employees, but much less help if they wanted to = help cover their employees' mass transit costs. We need a national = dialogue on the kinds of policies that actually subsidize and encourage = the wrong kind of development. "Third, we can provide carefully targeted incentives to encourage = smarter growth-such as support for mass transit and light rail = systems-not to restrict growth in any way, but to reward growth that = strengthens family-friendly communities. "Fourth, we can play an enormously positive role as a partner with = cities, suburbs, and rural areas, as we have already started to do = through our empowerment initiative and through out work with the U.S. = Conference of Mayors and the National Association of County = Organizations on their brand-new Joint Center for Sustainable = Communities. That way, whole regions can create a vision and build = together for their common future." John Rocker CARAG --=_NextPart_000_0062_01C04348.E81265C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" HTMLHEAD META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1" META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4207.2601" name=3DGENERATOR STYLE/STYLE /HEAD BODY bgColor=3D#ff DIV PFONT face=3DArial size=3D2Contrary to what Nader supporters say, = Gore and Bush=20 are not the same when it comes to urban policies that will effect = Minneapolis.=20 Following is an excerpt from Gore's speech to the Brookings Institution = that=20 demonstrates Gore's grasp of issues facing Minneapolis. The complete = text can be=20 found at /FONTA = href=3D"http://www.algore.com/speeches/sprawl.html"FONT=20 face=3DArial = size=3D2http://www.algore.com/speeches/sprawl.html/FONT/AFONT=20 face=3DArial size=3D2. If Gore or Bush had a clear lead, I would urge = Nader=20 supporters to vote for Nader and get the Green Party $12 million. But, = the=20 biggest positive impact Nader can have this election is to get out the = vote for=20 Gore. Who knows,nbsp;maybe Gore will appoint himnbsp;head of the=20 EPA./FONT/P PFONT face=3DArial size=3D2Here's part of what Gore said:/FONT/P P"In the last fifty years, we've built flat, not tall: because land is = cheaper=20 the
RE: Al Gore and urban policies
The amazing thing is that Al says these things, but then doesn't take the opportunity he had in the last eight years to propose Superfund reform. How much land along the Hiawatha corridor is lying unused? The way the enviro laws are now it will stay that way. Any business in their right mind will avoid an old former industrial area like this because they would be responsible to clean up any nastiness found after they buy the plot and start construction. So they go out to the burbs and beyond to find a piece of land that was never anything but a woodlot or a farm. Reforming Superfund - no action Cleaning up brownfields - no action Voting for Gore - no action Rich Chandler - Ward 9 -Original Message- From: John Rocker Contrary to what Nader supporters say, Gore and Bush are not the same when it comes to urban policies that will effect Minneapolis. Following is an excerpt from Gore's speech to the Brookings Institution that demonstrates Gore's grasp of issues facing Minneapolis. The complete text can be found at http://www.algore.com/speeches/sprawl.html. If Gore or Bush had a clear lead, I would urge Nader supporters to vote for Nader and get the Green Party $12 million. But, the biggest positive impact Nader can have this election is to get out the vote for Gore. Who knows, maybe Gore will appoint him head of the EPA. Here's part of what Gore said: "In the last fifty years, we've built flat, not tall: because land is cheaper the further out it lies, new office buildings, roads, and malls go up farther and farther out, lengthening commutes and adding to pollution. This outward stretch leaves a vacuum in the cities and suburbs which sucks away jobs, businesses, homes, and hope; as people stop walking in downtown areas, the vacuum is filled up fast with crime, drugs, and danger... "How, then, can the federal government encourage and strengthen smarter, more livable, sustainable growth? Again, smart growth is about local and community decisions, and we don't want to tell anyone where to live, or where to locate a business. But I believe there is nevertheless an important role for federal support for local energies. "We in the federal government can start by getting our own house in order, and making it look good. We should start paying closer attention to livability in the building and planning we provide to taxpayers-such as where we locate new post offices, new libraries, new federal buildings and so on, and whether we should fix up old beautiful old buildings in historic areas before rushing to build bland new ones farther out. "Secondly, we can get our own house in order by reexamining federal policies that may have been well-intentioned, but have encouraged and subsidized the wrong kind of growth and runaway sprawl. For example, in some cases, federal subsidies actually gave handsome financial rewards to communities to extend sewage lines far out into undeveloped areas, rather than spending those funds for needed improvements and expansions in places where families already relied on them. And until we changed the policy, the federal government gave employers big subsidies to offer parking spaces to their employees, but much less help if they wanted to help cover their employees' mass transit costs. We need a national dialogue on the kinds of policies that actually subsidize and encourage the wrong kind of development. "Third, we can provide carefully targeted incentives to encourage smarter growth-such as support for mass transit and light rail systems-not to restrict growth in any way, but to reward growth that strengthens family-friendly communities. "Fourth, we can play an enormously positive role as a partner with cities, suburbs, and rural areas, as we have already started to do through our empowerment initiative and through out work with the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National Association of County Organizations on their brand-new Joint Center for Sustainable Communities. That way, whole regions can create a vision and build together for their common future." John Rocker - CARAG
Re: Al Gore and urban policies
Richard Chandler may be right about the lack of progress on Superfund reform on the national level (I don't know), but brownfields are getting redeveloped locally. There was a ground-breaking ceremony today in St. Louis Park for new apartments on the old Mill City Lumber property (Hwy 7 and Louisiana) and I believe the City of St. Louis Park helped pay for the clean up and a state program limited the liability. I'm sure someone on this list can provide much better information on the local and state programs for cleaning up brownfields. My point is that Superfund reform may increase funds for clean up and limit liability, but it is still going to take local government to consolidate land, clean it up, and make the tough redevelopment sites as attractive as green fields in Woodbury. Re Gore and Nader and Shrub: Gore still seems like the only candidate that understands urban issues, wants environmental reform AND has a chance of getting a bill through a Republican controlled Congress. John Rocker CARAG
RE: Al Gore and urban policies
About a year ago I was shocked when I went to the US Census website and downloaded the "Landview" software with the associated files for Hennepin county. One of the icons that could be turned on and off was Superfund sites. I was shocked! Previous to this I was completely unaware that there were bunches of these sites right here inside Minneapolis proper. So...why hasn't Gore tried to shepherd a bill through the Republican controlled congress already? Rich Chandler - Ward 9 -Original Message- From: John Rocker Richard Chandler may be right about the lack of progress on Superfund reform on the national level (I don't know), but brownfields are getting redeveloped locally. There was a ground-breaking ceremony today in St. Louis Park for new apartments on the old Mill City Lumber property (Hwy 7 and Louisiana) and I believe the City of St. Louis Park helped pay for the clean up and a state program limited the liability. I'm sure someone on this list can provide much better information on the local and state programs for cleaning up brownfields. My point is that Superfund reform may increase funds for clean up and limit liability, but it is still going to take local government to consolidate land, clean it up, and make the tough redevelopment sites as attractive as green fields in Woodbury. Re Gore and Nader and Shrub: Gore still seems like the only candidate that understands urban issues, wants environmental reform AND has a chance of getting a bill through a Republican controlled Congress. John Rocker - CARAG