Re: Andrea Hart Kajer's post. I appreciate her lengthy and detailed
response. In my comments about Sen. Pogemiller and the city's efforts, I did
ask for an explanation and I thank Andrea for providing it. I did offer a
lot of negative inferences so it's only fair to accept Andrea's pointed
rejoinders.
I know legislators and lobbyists worked their butt off this session and I do
appreciate their efforts. I understand the frustration and even anger coming
out of an intense session and reading the sniping of a guy in the
neighborhood. That said, I think criticism is healthy and I do want to stand
behind some of what I said, especially with regard to the loss of Phase I
money.
First, to give Andrea her due: if the MCDA's Keith Ford really was working
with the Minneapolis Center for Neighborhoods, good for the MCDA & Keith
(and I mean that sincerely). I do think, though, that the most effective way
to get citizens' attention is to not only work through non-governmental orgs
like MCN, but also through official mayoral and council channels. They don't
call them bully pulpits for nothing.
Also, if I were in Minneapolis legislators' shoes, I would too protect LGA
first, too. It is a bigger priority. So let me say it: thanks to Sen.
Pogemiller and city staff for saving this. I tend not to thank folks for
doing their jobs, but I should. They are tough jobs, especially this
session. The accomplishments are worth crediting, though the failures are
the things we need to discuss and remedy.
Steve Cramer's TIF editorials had more to do with reform's general impact on
NRP. As I noted in my original post, I don't blame Sen. Pogemiller or anyone
else for the general reduction of TIF thanks to property tax reform. That, I
noted, was unstoppable. What is unforgivable in my view was the loss of the
$58 million in Phase I money - I don't think we were warned that was a
possibility. Perhaps I missed it.
Andrea makes a fair point that Sen. Pogemiller faced a tougher climate as
Tax Chair than Sen. Johnson. However, I am not quite willing to concede my
point. Sen. Johnson won many of his accomplishments with a Republican
governor over the last eight years. Sen. Pogemiller had a similar GOP
obstacle to overcome in the House. I'm not aware if the Ventura
administration came out against NRP Phase I. If it wasn't a big issue for
the Governor, Pogemiller had to overcome one point of resistance, something
Sen. Johnson often did. Andrea portrays Abrams as an insurmountable single
force; why wasn't Pogemiller, his Senate counterpart?
I am most baffled by Andrea's logic on elected officials not lobbying Rep.
Abrams. I know plenty of capitol lobbyists; they almost always send their
clients to talk to a committee chair, even if it is hopeless. You basically
have nothing to lose, and NRP is THAT important. At one point, Andrea
mentions "no amount of charm, pleading, or cajoling by the Mayor, any other
DFLer, Republican or Independent was going to change [Abrams'] mind. Yet in
the very next sentence, she allows, "The best anyone could hope for was to
make NRP part of a negotiated solution to the tax bill. Representative
Abrams, to some extent, was willing to consider this." That doesn't sound so
rigid after all.
As Tim Connolly - no Sharon Sayles Belton fan - has noted in his posts, the
mayor is a politician of considerable charm and even persuasiveness. To not
use her still seems foolish to me. II remain unconvinced by Andrea's
explanation. I don't want to over-rate this as THE deciding factor in NRP's
fate, but a mayor's job is to be a powerful persuader - it's a big part of
the job. I think this strategy reflects poorly on the mayor and her
lobbyists.
Also, if Mayor Sayles Belton was such anathema to Rep. Abrams, why on earth
did she call the press and TV cameras to denounce the Republican House under
the guise of rescuing NRP? That would only anger him further (and his
comments indicated such subsequently). I can only conclude, again, that the
Mayor was not engaging in productive politics and citizen awareness but
political cover and empty symbolic promotion.
Finally, I am glad Andrea reinforces the city's commitment to NRP. Despite
our differences, it's good to think that in the end we are all in support of
citizen involvement and true empowerment.
Sincerely,
David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
List Manager
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 4:40 PM
To: Mpls list
Subject: [Mpls] Re: Random Thoughts
Forwarded on behalf of Andrea Hart Kajer, city Minneapolis
Intergovernmental Relations Director...
David Brauer's post, "Random NRP Thoughts," was forwarded to me. As
Assistant City Coordinator and the person who is in charge of our
Intergovernmental Relations Department, I feel I must dispel some of the
misinformation and inferences in Mr. Brauer's post.
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
