Just because I raise questions concerning city spending on libraries and the new planetarium doesn't mean I don't support them. And I'd appreciate it if my Library Board opponents refrain from implying as much!
I support the new downtown library and improved community libraries... especially improved service! (I worked with the Linden Hills NRP over several years to allocate neighborhood funds into remodeling our community library-- several years prior to the recent library referendum.) I also support the new planetarium. However, I am very interested in how all these new amenities are going to be paid for. In fact, it was my interest in financing all these new projects that initially propelled me to run for the Library Board of Trustees. I am not one to be satisfied with a project simply because the Mayor, the City Council and the Library Board have approved it. After all, look at the many other projects the Mayor and City Council have brought us in recent years-- Target and Block E being prominent on the 'questionables' list! Some background... The planetarium-- As recently as last March, discussions centered on a 15,000 sq.ft., $11 million planetarium. A consultant came to town (Ian McLennan from Vancouver) in April, I believe, and offered two expanded versions for consideration-- 32,000 sq.ft. and 48,000 sq.ft. options, with varying cost and revenue projections. The City Council and Library Board opted for the largest option that same month. [At the same time the decision was made to add 10% to the floor space of the new downtown library, and recommendations were made concerning the 200-225 housing units to be built on the adjacent block (basically dealing with retail and underground parking to be provided by the developer, which was previously to be above ground). Funding for 300 spaces of underground library parking remained unclear and the MCDA was examining TIF options.] -Linda Mack, STrib, 4-22-01. I'm not interested in hashing old dates and decisions, I'm interested in today and tomorrow! Today we face significant fiscal uncertainty regarding the planetarium project (as well as with the housing/retail/skyway and parking portions of the overall project). The new planetarium will be a major attraction to regional residents, students of all ages and visitors. I hope the state is willing to provide the $30 million, however, getting $30 million for a local project from the state in today's economy gets less likely each week. I remain hopeful, yet I'm pragmatic. Since I support the planetarium, I am very interested in identifying where the necessary funds will come from. At the same time, I don't want Minneapolis property tax payers to incur the costs-- that would be the easy way out! This is where the interesting questions arise, and this is where my experience with finance and business planning will be of value on the Library Board. The libraries-- Over the past decade-plus, discussions of a new downtown library always referenced a multi-source of funding for the project. In June, 2000, the Library Board asked the City Council to approve a referendum to borrow money for a new downtown library, leaving open the possibility of seeking additional money for branch libraries. Earlier discussions had indicated about half the needed funds would be raised through the referendum. It might be suggested that the Library Board and the City Council took the easy way out, knowing there was public support for a new library. The public schools were also going for significant funds in a referendum last fall, and officials knew there was strong public support of our schools as well. Then the Park Board wanted to jump on the wagon... and officials got worried... just how much would the voting public tolerate in a given year? A political decision was made and the Mayor and City Council shuffled internal funds to get the Park Board their money without going to the public via a referendum (another interesting story in it's own right). Library polling data showed more support for neighborhood libraries than for the new downtown library, and, to her credit, Board member Diane Hofstede fought to get the community library funds included in the referendum. Soon others realized the political value of the branch operations and decided to include them in the referendum-- a good decision. However the Library Board, City Council and Mayor did not include any increased funds to operate the new, enlarged facilities once completed. Hence, the referendum was misleading because it only covered about two-thirds of the funds needed to build and OPERATE the new and expanded library facilities. The referendum will raise $140M and will require about $8M annually to retire the debt. Recent library operating budgets have in fact projected operating shortfalls growing from about $500K to $4M annually as these new facilities are completed. Budgets are continually being revised and I expect the projected shortfall will likely disappear as the election nears. The usual excuses now given by management and Board members to justify these shortfall projections could be paraphrased as "they were based on blue-sky planning, including everything we wanted", or "we will design cost savings into the new buildings", something about "wise choices being made about the level and type of service programs to be provided" and "savings available from closing the downtown library during construction." These annual operating shortfalls-- five to ten years out, as new buildings come online, represent something on the order of fifty percent of the annual bond debt! Library Board members have publicly admitted there is a problem (SW Journal, 12-19-00), but to date have not addressed it. We currently don't see a work-out plan for the operating shortfall. This demonstrates poor planning and poor leadership from library management, and those voting in the majority for the Library Board and the City Council. What good are the new buildings if we can't provide the unique, necessary services demanded in our neighborhood libraries. Projects like these should include a structurally sound budget that includes BOTH capital and operating expenses and indicates the source of said funds over time. This is what the public should expect and this is what elected officials should provide. Vote for new leadership and new vision on the Library Board. Michael Hohmann Independent Candidate, Minneapolis Public Library Board of Trustees www.mikeforlibrary.org www.mahohmannbizplans.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
