David Brauer is correct about competition for similar funds, if in fact a tax levy were approved to fully fund NRP. At present, NRP is not funded through that source. Also the City Council proposed five year plan for Community Development, (CD), does not include such funding. That CD Plan calls for funding from a number of sources, most prominent of which are Federal funds including CDBG, Empowerment Zone, Aids Housing, Home, and others. Included is also income from common projects including the TIF Development Account and interest, but not from the tax revenue stream. So at present and in the proposed "planned" future there are discrete funding sources for Police and for NRP.
Jay Clark asks, "I am sure this proves what an ignoramus I am, but how much NRP-dedicated TIF money is there now?" No Jay, it does not prove anything other than you are smart enough to ask for pertinent information. I believe the total from Common Projects TIF and Interest income is 11 million dollars this year. Again I may be wrong, but I believe this amount is legislated to be used for NRP. If like Jay I am wrong and an "ignoramus" about this, like Jay I am smart enough to ask that the correct information be posted. If the Council passes a 33 million dollars set aside for Community Development and 1/3 were to be set aside for NRP, then that 1/3 would be the same 11 million dollars. Still no competition between NRP and the Police for tax dollars. Jim Graham, Ventura Village ----- Original Message ----- From: David Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Mpls list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:03 AM Subject: RE: [Mpls] Miss-Information about NRP and Police Competing For Same Dollars Jim Graham writes: > Lets start with the basis of your concern, the forced choice between NRP and > more police officers. This is falsehood and deception of the worst kind. > NRP and the Police are funded out of two totally separate revenue streams. > It is not the same money at all. Any politician who brings this up is a > liar, or just incredibly miss-informed, so please be skeptical of all other > things they might say. I believe Jim is wrong. His is right that NRP DOES have a dedicated revenue stream - TIF proceeds from the Downtown Common Project. However, tax increment revenues were cut dramatically by the 2001 state legislature. I believe there is not enough NRP-dedicated TIF to pay the $11 million currently obligated to the program. So that means if you want to "fully fund" NRP - either at the current $11 million annually or the old $20 million per year - you need to get the money from a property-tax-supported place. You can use a special levy or you can cut city departments such as cops (or fire, or public works, or ITS, or licensing, etc. - it doesn't have to be cops, but it does have to be some city function). This is not a comment on NRP's worth. Like Jim, I'm a fan. But after decades of pushing off debt (including repayment of NRP's first-10-year bonds until...now), we need to be honest about our finances. Bottom line: NRP has dedicated revenues, but not enough. We have to make a collective choice where, or whether, to get the rest. David Brauer King Field TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ 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 TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. ________________________________ 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
