I looked at the math for the city budget and then read that therer was "no
way to take care of the cuts without hitting police and fire" and blinked my
eyes. Of COURSE there is "a way". There are multiple ways. But even the
crudest way would cover police and fire. Basically what they are saying is
that you can't cut anything ELSE too radically. And I say, on a temporary
basis, WHY NOT? It isnt as if city departments are sacred. We're facing an
enormous slap across the face from our suburban neighbors. We may not have
the votes to PREVENT it, but no way in heck we have to shoot our own foot in
frustration. The amount of money pre-cuts is more than enought to cover
police, fire and public works. We just have to put everything else on a
SEVERE diet for a period of time. And let me tell you, if I only had the
money for my house payment and to gas my car, and maybe 1500 calories a day
of food (ANY FOOD), I'd do it. And hope it wasn't more than a year or two.
But STOP with this Rybak nonsense of "can't do it without cutting public
safety". The math says that is baloney. If it isnt baloney, let the MAYOR
stand up like a MAN and prove it! But the math I see right now says we HAVE
the money to fund police, fire, and public works, and all the rest is
manure.
Jim Mork
Cooper
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
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
