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
