|
Sorry about the name spelling David. It was in the heat of the
moment. It demonstrates a good reason for setting everything aside for an
hour and re-reading before sending. Which I am not planning to do this time
either.
David your wife is probably correct, but her timing is off regarding NRP being cut. NRP has already been cut by 50% by the present Mayor and City Council. That happened earlier in the year. The neighborhoods have already bitten the bullet and been far more understanding than they should have been. Some others need to bite a little now and the Mayor and City Council need to make good on their commitments. 9-11, and City employees playing the stock market with taxpayer dollars, is not a good enough excuse. It is an excuse for changing the way the City does business the future, but not for reneging on commitments. David asked about the basis for a lawsuit if police services were
cut. David State legislation mandates that adequate police protection to
enforce the Laws of the State of Minnesota will be provided or the Council and
Mayor are individually guilty of "malfeasance of office". State law
does not mandate any other services, but it does mandate police
protection. I believe the US Attorney Heffelfinger alluded to this in
a story related to terrorists in today's newspaper. There are definite
grounds for a federal lawsuit if equal protection is not provided for poor
communities. (Poor communities are the ones who will suffer from a reduction of
police resources, not more affluent ones)
The purpose of a 10% pay decrease for Council, Mayor, and senior positions is as an "INCENTIVE" to be creative in solving the budget crisis. Right now they lose nothing by making bad decisions. Lets make them bite the bullet a little like the taxpayers must. As far as the City getting good candidates for positions, lets get real, the reason the City might have a problem recruiting good people for all positions is the poor management, not the compensation. There has been a brain drain from Minneapolis for the last several years because of bad management being appointed, not because of compensation. There is a waiting list of qualified people willing to work for the City. As far as present employees not staying, that is not all bad, helps cut the payroll, and new people can take those positions, new people that want to work for Minneapolis. It is better to take a 2% pay cut for the period of the crisis than to lose your job and take a 100% cut. Sure, management would rather do layoffs, but that is because layoffs do not affect management. A pay decrees until the problem is solved gives a little "need" to solve that problem quickly. Minneapolis also needs to address the parts of Minneapolis City government whose responsibility is to go and get "Community Development" dollars. Before RT was elected I told him that Minneapolis does not have the fundraising manpower resources "to go get the money". We still do not have those resources at the end of the first year. The most critical shortcoming of City Government has not been changed. Same old people, doing same less than adequate job. Minneapolis needs to recruit and hire people who have real fund raising skills in going and getting our share of grant and other monies. We presently have amateurs (at best) fulfilling this function. This is a legacy of the Belton era, but RT and the Council have not addressed it in the last year. Minneapolis just does not compete with other cities at going and getting Federal and State tax dollars back for us. This is also true of going to get Law Enforcement funds. I have seen little towns down south that have all kinds of police resources. When asked where they get the money their reply is usually that they have a great grant writer and fundraiser. Why don't we? The NRP set aside for Housing and Commercial Corridors, should be the first pot of NRP money tapped for any cuts. The Mayor and City Council do not want to lose this discretionary money, because they wish to be able to fund the large politically powerful Non-profit Developers who are their friends. They should realize that the neighborhoods already fund those housing and commercial projects that are considered beneficial to the communities. The NRP Policy Board should be making those decisions, not the Mayor and Council. MCDA created part of the housing and budget crisis by tearing down houses, duplexes, and triplexes. I do not remember MCDA tearing down large non-profit developments, so why throw all the money at the most expensive per unit developers? The solution is to allow neighborhoods to rebuild that infrastructure with PRIVATE development using primarily PRIVATE financing, not in throwing money at politically powerful buddies. Wait until the budget crises is past before funding political eye candy. The housing problem could be largely addressed by zoning changes to return the City to the 5000 sq. ft. lots for duplexes (that the City was originally designed around). This solution would cost the City nothing and actually add tax base. But I doubt if the Council will do this, it solves the problem without CM's being able to throw those tax dollars to their non-profit developer friends. Has anyone else noticed that pre-election the Mayor and some CM's thought
that small rental property owners were the people addressing the affordable
housing shortage, but post election only Large Non-Profits have any influence
with these folks. Smart City Council Members would be looking at how to
change zoning to encourage the private sector to create housing without public
dollars, rather than how to only benefit their powerful friends. Remember
the "Non-Profit" sector were Sharon's supporters before it looked like RT was
going to win. Large politically powerful "Non" Profits get zoning changes and
conditional use permits anytime they want one (even if it violates Minneapolis
ordinance), why not thoughtfully look at how to reasonably change zoning to
allow small providers to address the problem with more private money.
Budget cut suggestion: Have Neighborhood Organizations take over "Housing Inspection" function for City. It is usually them demanding that eye sores be fixed. It could quickly be accomplished and be a neighborhood quality of life issue. It would also take away the arbitrary nature of present enforcement. Building Inspectors are essential, so they should be fully funded. As for Casino suggestion: By the way, the poor are already spending their money at casinos outside our community. I doubt there would be an appreciable increase in actual gambling. If the City CM's have a concern for this they should ban the casino buses that pull into poor neighborhoods to haul poor people to the existing casinos on a daily basis. Also make charitable gambling pull-tabs and lottery tickets illegal in Minneapolis. Instead how about if we have the City of Minneapolis act as a non-profit and sell pull-tabs at bars? Just until the budget crisis is solved? The debts of past City Council Members should not be forwarded at all. I say pay the thing off with a one year tax increase and then pay your debts as they come due. Saving the debt load interest would go a long way to addressing the budgets for the next few year. Also, since the State mandates that Minneapolis must make up the difference in pension plans and that allow the employs to decide where the money will be invested, lets seek legal ways to turn over the pension funds to the State. Isn't there some kind of State pension fund? If the State wants to make the rules, heck, why not give them the ball? Last but not least suggestion: Minneapolis should offer rewards for employees and residents who make suggestions about where to make cost savings and sources of additional funds. Pro rate the reward according to dollars saved or dollars found. Suggestion that saves $50,000 gets you $500; save $5,000, get a $5000 reward. Seems like a cheap way of showing a profit. I will not be holding my breath until I get my check in the mail. Jim Graham, Ventura Village |
