Mr. Peterson brings up a large number of issues in his second post. In
response:
Affordable housing: Yes, affordable housing has become a larger issue
during Sayles Belton tenure. As noted previously, this has not been her
doing, instead being a product of forces larger than the City of
Minneapolis. And the solution is beyond the City of Minneapolis. The Mayor
has formed coalitions, talked to other levels of governments, argued and
cajole, but the solutions lie financially with the federal and state
governments and locationally (is that a word?) with the suburbs. Saying
that she has not responded is simply not accurate but the solutions are not
hers to control.
Money to wealthy corporations: The statement that the Mayor has given more
of our money to corporations is not true. The tax base is not hurt for
having done a TIF project. None of your tax dollars have gone to TIF
projects. Yet the City has more employment, has a thriving downtown, has a
wider range of employment opportunities than it could have ever had without
TIF. And TIF is also the source of funds for NRP, a program that has
provided a greater investment in housing than any other program ever.
Asked Public Works to trim its budget resulting in basic services slipping:
The Mayor has asked all city departments to find ways of saving money, not
just Public Works. This has been necessary because the tax base declined
because of the 1991-1992 overbuilding in the downtown and then the property
tax classification changes enacted by the Legislature in the past five
years. I can list many areas where services have been improved - cleaner
water in the lakes, an extensive flood mitigation program, increased treated
water storage, more parking ramps in the downtown, completion of the 30 year
street paving program are a few. I think there are some areas that spending
could be increased, most notably in alleyway repaving but a blanket
statement that things are worse is not true.
More airport noise: Ms. Del Calzo posted an excellent response to this
issue, noting that the Mayor has absolutely no control over the number of
flights from the airport.
Cost of houses increasing: I made an investment in a house and now that
investment in appreciating. I am unsure how this is bad other than I have
to pay more taxes because I am richer. I would much rather have my
investment appreciate than the alternative. And I am happy that so many
people want to invest in my city because it makes me even more secure in my
investment.
Higher income employment being created on the outer ring: You have spoke in
your other posts about being opposed to the use of TIF. The tools that
government has available to entice businesses to locate within their boards
are pathetically small. You have been opposed to financial incentives, even
those which do not require funds from the general taxpayer. What other
incentives would you propose to attract businesses to Minneapolis?
Lower crime rate: I agree that the decline in crime can be attributed to
many factors. The two obvious ones are high employment and a decline in the
number of people in the age bracket of persons who commit most crimes. The
changes in the Police Department, Attorney's Office, and the Courts have
also had a very big impact. The Mayor hired 100 more cops and a
commensurate number of attorneys. She invested in technologies like bait
cars, which reduced auto theft 43% the first year alone (I am remembering
this off the top of my head). The computerized criminal records system also
has had a huge impact in officer's ability to find out information about
persons. The computerized mapping of crime has let police focus resources
in ways that were not possible before. I believe that crime is down for
several reasons, with the investments in the Public Safety being one of the
leading ones.
Fiscal disparities pool: Yes, it is a bummer that Minneapolis has been a net
contributor to the fiscal disparities pool. For everyone who isn't a
government finance geek out there (like me) fiscal disparities were created
so everyone in the region would share in the growth of the
commercial/industrial property tax base, thus reducing the incentives for
cities to raid businesses from each other. In practical terms,
Minneapolis's commercial/industrial tax base is growing and the whole region
is benefiting, just like Minneapolis benefits from the commercial/industrial
growth in the suburbs. All boats in the region rise from growth. I would
note that system has been in place for over 20 years and the program is held
up across the country as regionalism working in practice.
I'm not sure that the folks that created this system envisioned that
Minneapolis would be able to sustain growth to make it consistently a net
contributor to the region. St Paul has been the large winner because it has
had so little growth in its business sector. Again, I would rather have a
growing tax base than have the situation in St Paul.
Mediocrity:
You end your post with a statement that we live in a mediocre city that
needs to reinvent itself. I agree that we live in a city that needs to
reinvent itself - I think every city needs to be continually reinventing
itself. I think every city service needs to be continually reinventing
itself.
But I take great exception to the statement that Minneapolis is mediocre.
For a central city, given the society that we are in, given the economy we
are in, we are doing very well. We have a thriving downtown, the envy of
most of the country. Businesses continue to invest in our city rather than
abandon it like so many other central cities. This business investment is a
source of employment both for the middle class and for people entering
employment. We have retained middle class persons unlike many other
central cities in this country. We are attracting people back with our
amenities like the lakes, the river, the parks and the wonderful housing
stock. We have amenities like the Art Institute, the State, the Orphium,
the Convention Center, the Target Center, the Metrodome, dozen smaller
theaters, which bring people from all over the region to our city. Do we
have every problem solved? No. Will we ever? No. But we are not
mediocre.
Carol Becker
Longfellow
Original Message -----
From: Russell Wayne Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: [Mpls] Mayor letter to DFL delegates - Response to Peterson
issues
> I completely understand the defense of the Mayor's policies by Ms. Becker.
> Four years ago, I would probably have said some of the very same things.
> But I urge Ms. Becker to see this through my eyes or the eyes of my
> neighbors.
>
> Make no mistake that affordable housing is a catastrophe in this city that
> happened completely under Mayor Sayles Belton's reign, that Mayor Sayles
> Belton has given more and more of our taxes to wealthy corporations, that
> the Mayor has consistently asked for Public Works to trim their budget
> resulting in basic services slipping big time (don't we have a big
internal
> services debt too?), that the skies have gotten louder under Mayor Sayles
> Belton and she DOES have the power to help quiet the skies instead of lock
> us up in our houses with insulation programs, and there is definitely a
> revolving door in city hall when the mayor appoints a lobbyist to the
> planning commission and the MCDA director becomes a vice president in a
> company she just helped give money to, and our cost of housing has
increased
> exponentially while the good higher paying jobs that could afford that
> housing are being created in the outer rings while we focus almost solely
on
> a tourist and retail industry in the downtown core.
>
> I find it ironic that you'll hold up the Mayor and take credit for the
lower
> crime rate even though there is convincing evidence that it is primarily
do
> to the good economy and that many other cities have benefited as well, but
> you'll turn around and blame the good economy for the housing crisis. You
> can't have it both ways Ms. Becker. I gave Mayor Sayles Belton credit
where
> credit was due. I do believe she has helped reduce crime to some degree
and
> has helped protect our lakes to some degree. But I also believe her
> policies or lack of policies has contributed to an under whelming vision
for
> our city that invests future tax dollars in wealthy corporations and
> re-distributes our taxes all over the place. Just look at the fiscal
> disparities pool. We don't have enough for basic services, yet we have
> enough to pay money to other cities including St. Paul. This makes
> absolutely no sense to me. Where is the advocacy for me and my neighbors
> and our increasing tax burden? Where is the vision that looks forward
> instead of reacting to something that has already happened? When will we
> have a mayor who sill stand up for the middle class of this city?
>
> Why is it in this great era of wealth accumulation we can't pick up the
> garbage, fix the deteriorating streets, build enough housing, and protect
> our citizens from the harmful affects of increased noise pollution to name
a
> few? Because where there isn't a will, there isn't a way!
>
> We can hide behind statistics and some feel-good policies or we can take a
> good hard look at the mediocrity of our city and embrace a new vision,
> re-invent ourselves, and set a new course as a leader for the country.
>
> Russell W. Peterson
> Ward 9
> Standish
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
