In a message dated 12/21/2002 7:32:24 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Personally, I agree with Bruce Shoemaker and think the whole thing is pretty > much moot. Those who have followed the Minneapolis City council's dealings > with Block E and Target well know that any push to include some living wage > job guarantee is going to be fiercely opposed by the project developers. My > guess is that it's likely that enough council members would back off of it > that it wouldn't be part of any final proposal, meaning Brother Shane would > vote against it as his platform states. Otherwise, the other likely outcome > would be that the developers would walk away from the table rather than > agree to a livable wage guarantee and so there wouldn't be anything to vote > on and the anti-stadium folks would get their victory. Nothing could be further from being a moot point than the issue of where city council members stand on the stadium issue: A stadium deal is definitely not off the table. No one has said anything about demanding the sort of living wage guarantee that the city council proposed, then backed off of in relation to the block E development. And evidently Shane Price expects that within the next 4 years the pro-stadium lobby will propose a stadium deal which a majority on the city council will likely sign on to, with or without his support. I think that is a pretty realistic appraisal of the situation. Shane Price will be under tremendous pressure to support a stadium deal if it includes the promise of some living wage jobs and contracts for historically disadvantaged people, and has indicated that he might support such a deal. According to Bruce Shoemaker, Shane Price] ... feels that there are strong forces behind the stadium at the > local, county, and state levels and that some type of stadium deal is > likely to go ahead whether he supports it or not. If that is the case, > he wants to make sure that the benefits of this public spending (jobs, > contracts, etc.) are spread around to include historically disadvantaged > groups in the city and the Third Ward. -[Mpls] Shane Price and the Stadium Issue Date: 12/20/2002 8:52:33 AM Central Standard Time The fact remains that Shane Price has given qualified support for a stadium deal. What is the Green Party's position on this issue? Will Shane Price reconsider his position on this issue? Will the Green Party reconsider its endorsement of Price if Price doesn't back off of his conditional pro-stadium stance? -Doug Mann, King Field School Board candidate in 2002 http://educationright.tripod.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
