Once again, I've not read all the posts regarding this proposed development due to time and acess constraints. i do want to respond to some reaction I've read to comments I've made. It seems to be the opinion of some that Basim has pulled the wool over my eyes. Let me assure people that when Basim mentioned the project to me Saturday after the 8th ward convention I cut him pretty short. I've stated that basim is a friend and that I know him. I do not automatically do his bidding nor do I necessarily agree with him. To the contrary I think Basim is sometimes his own worst enemy. I am I hope, if nothing else in this world, a skeptic and doubting Thomas who relies on his own investigations and intelligence and ideas before forming final judgements. Having said that, on the surface I believe this may be a decent plan. I also must disclose that Basim wanted me to write a letter to this forum on his behalf. I am mostly concerned about the city over and above any one person, save myself of course. Basim is not the only person who has asked me to write to this forum either to lend support to their positions or in some cases to fight their battles with political opponents they do not feel they can or want to publicly attack. When my values and theirs vis a vis a project such as the proposed Ryan/Padilla Spear building I have written and felt no need for disclosure. In cases when the point a person may have wanted me to espouse seemed relevant to people's reasoned judgement of candidates I have written as much. Having said that once again, I don't like being used by anyone. i resent it highly and when someone tries to engage me in their malicious political tricks I may use valuable info they use in an unmalicious manner and then make sure I reserve my strongest criticism of positions i know they have held. As far as one person asking me if I am familiar with the Fair Oaks Motel you're barking up the wrong tree. I am intimately familiar with the place. I worked there in the mid 70's when W.R. Frank still owned it and I've stayed there on occasion in the 90's when I was between places to live. I'm 51 years old, live her most of my life, have an eye for detail and a great curiosity and I know this town like nobody's business. Believe me I know the place. I know prostitutes and drug addicts. I understand the sentiments of Whittier residents. I also know the county used the Fair Oaks as a shelter resource paying ridiculous sums of money. Though i do not mean to impugn any one person or employee of any govt. agency or have any proof of anything I do not buy this peculiarly Minnesota thing that tauts how honest our government, polittics, etc are. I may have been born on a Sunday but it sures as hell wasn't yesterday. It would not surprise me one bit to find evidence of kickbacks and if not there certainly somewhere else. I also was employed by the Minneapolis Institute of Arts up until a few months prior to their purchase and demolition of the building. I attended a Zoning and Planning Committee meeting this past summer which was laughable for the ease in which a zoning variance for a surface parking lot which two Saturdays ago held 9 cars was steamrolled through a committee that likes to characterize themselves as the last line of defense in the western hemisphere to protect the good citizens of Minneapolis from the rendering of our city into one big parking lot, especially one they don't control. Oh yes. I am more than acquainted with the Fair oaks. I also spent about an hour of my time last Saturday dodging water puddles and tip-toeing over unshoveled walks on two city blocks because I wanted to form my own judgements. I spoke to real live residents of two blocks though certainly not all of them and the thoughts I presented on this forum were mine and mine alone. They are also first thoughts and without the benefit of talking to all residents. Frankly I prefer one-on-one communication or physical group settings to cyber tit-for-tat. My approval would not come easily. I am no pushover. I believe it is the responsibility of everyone to give back to there community to the some degree in such way as might be possible. Zoning variance in this case would be the leverage. The Mayor, god love her, talks about being a "work horse rather than a show horse." Well if I were to use that imagery I would liken myself to a show and work horse, something like a Triple Crown Winner. There is a need for both characteristics. And this is a case where both those qualities would be needed. If a pol decided anything were a good course of action they ought step out front and sell the idea to the public rather than rely on back door negotiations and with a few key people who carry the water and then talk about being a work horse. If anyone does not see the Mayor's fingerprints all over this deal then they have pulled the wool over their own eyes. That is still not to say it might not be a good idea. The problem rests in the fact that when you work behind the scenes and, I emphasize AND, never come out in the open you lose some of the leverage you might have with your partner in the deal. Obviously you cannot negotiate every detail and facet thereof in public. And finally: one of the things I dislike most about this community is the sort of NIMBY attitudes that are so prevalent. You want to mock me for speaking of a monetary investment to be made. What I am really most concerned about is rebuilding what has been torn down as a result of past policies and contributes less and less to the tax rolls. Where possible and sensible I want greater density to build the tax base. I wince almost every time I hear MCDA selling a small lot for $750 to a neighbor for a sidelot when once before there had been a small residence on the lot that was 1) affordable and 2)tax-paying at a much greater rate. We hear a lot on this forum of poor city services, lack of investment in infrastructure, etc and we want to lay the entire blame on some very questionable development deals downtown when during the past decade we tore down numerous structures in this city that housed poorer people and yet contributed to the city's finances and we often did it because the house had attracted people who absentee landlords feared or couldn't deal with and subsequently they let the properties run down until the city stepped in and bought and demolished them. I cannot tell you how short-sighted and risk-averse I find this to be. My all time favorite example though it doesn't concern a house is a little triangular park on Park Avenue as it enters downtown in front of the Drexel Apartments. There were problems in the park with people drinking , hanging out so rather than politely running them off as a beat cop would have done we took the slats out of the park benches. Then nobody could use them. Gee, makes sense to me. And now they are gone completely. You remember what they looked like: pebbly aggregate concrete supports and soft wood slats. Infinitely more comforable than a lot of benches that came afterward. Sorry about the rant. Consider it my St.Patrick's day blowout. Tim Connolly Ward 7 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
