Carol Becker wrote: >Personally, I always think it is cheating when you >shoot at someone else's solution without providing >one of your own. I want to begin by agreeing with Carol that TIF is a useful and important tool for the City of Minneapolis. No argument from the MMM. I did not however see the report by the paper as an attack on TIF. I saw it as raising questions about its cost and whether that cost is at times excessive. The question SSB and the current City Council have to answer is did they in their fiduciary role representing Minneapolis citizens properly oversee the handling of public subsidies of private development. I disagree wholeheartedly with Carol's statement that the Strib in any way was "cheating" by not having provided an alternative to SSB and Councils actions. This was not written on the editorial page, it was written as news. I find at times the Strib confuses the two, but feel they are to be strongly endorsed for what was in this report an informative, useful presentation of fact and opinions of the players involved. I personal do not want an opinion by the paper for a "solution", unless it is firmly planted on the editorial page. I trust the people of Minneapolis to reach that proper solution in the voting booth, especially if they have been provided proper information, and the ability to enter into discourse on the issue without being labeled "cheaters". I might add at this point that the two major candidates for Mayor have given their opinions on how they would have handled this development differently and how they would handle subsidies in the future. RT posted on this list, and Lisa in her letter to the editor (Nice timing Lisa!) It is appropriate that they offer solutions, it is not appropriate for reporters to do so. TIF is a fine development tool, but there is a cost to everything. At times that cost goes to high. Was the Target deal one of those times? Perhaps. I believe the comment by Paul Ostrow was most telling. "We decided, We're going to do this, now we've got to figure out how to pay for it, Thats exactly backwards." I see this attitude of "Full speed ahead, Damn the Torpedos" as one of the qualities of a leader. Although we might appreciate the leader with famous quotes like that, if we are the crew working below the water line trying to drive the ship forward, you can bet that in times of relative peace we would expect the captain use a little cost benefit analysis before signaling full speed ahead through a field of ice bergs. Even in times of war we wouldn't even mind much if he posted a lookout for torpedoes. I have written before, and will again, about the example of this attitude seen in how the Library referendum was handled. The same attitude quoted by Ostrow was shown through in the current administrations handling of the referendum. The citizens have voted to spend $140,000,000 to update our libraries. Since the beginning the powers that be have known they do not have the operating budget to stock, staff, heat, light, maintain these expanded libraries. Current estimates of the library staff show them to be facing a shortfall of at least $4,000,000 per year upon completion. As Ostrow says, "Thats exactly backwards". I believe the question of this election will revolve around the issue, not of TIF, but of who will be the better stewards of our resources. Who will better watch the community purse strings, not just penny pinching but choosing wisely when and where to invest. And perhaps leaving a few coins in all our individual purses as well. Bob Gustafson C of CCC of MMM __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! 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
