If the city invested in projects that were required to produce a positive cash flow, they wouldn't do many projects; especially those of the housing variety. The city tends to do projects the public sector either can't or won't do on their own. Any why, with the tremendous subsidy and political support given to the downtown Target can't Target Corp THEMSELVES float some dough to the Broadway one to keep it afloat? Kowalski has repeatedly stated that their northside store is barely breaking even but they stay 'for the good of the people' and 'tough it out'. They're making money, trust me. Target's not a struggling corporation, but that particular store is. If the downtown Target isn't raking it in, then it will be the city's loss too. But to offer another business that wants the Target property that I believe has been subsidized by the city once already ADDITIONAL subsidies to move into the same location without approaching or passively suggesting that Target HQ kick in something is, in my mind, throwing money in the wrong direction.
As an aside, I admit I shop at the Robbinsdale Rainbow Foods now and again, as there still isn't a choice for economical groceries on the north end of town. I heard the Rainbow Foods in both Brooklyn Park AND Brooklyn Center are to close soon too. Maybe they should be approached for either the Target site or Penn/Lowry. The one northeast is long gone and the one in Robbinsdale isn't much of an option these days.
Jill Harmon
Cleveland



From: "Jim Mork" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Jim Mork" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Mpls] Closing Businesses
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:26:49 -0500

I know there is a strong emotional component in the reaction to
the closing of the northside Target.  Target is a powerful
Minnesota symbol. Having a Target is like "belonging".  Losing a
Target looks like rejection.  But the fact is that these stores
have to make money. The corporation DONATES money to local
communities, but that comes out of the money it MAKES.  Now the
best-case-scenario might be locating the Cub in that property. A
dedicated Minneapolis booster will hope that is what happens, but
who knows?  Cub and Super Value are a couple more huge icons of
our region.

Lots of northside people treat downtown as their second
neighborhood.  Given the involvement of us taxpayers in the
downtown Target, I hope at least some of the abandoned customers
will go down there and make THAT store a better site for the
company.

What this all represents is a good argument for fighting the
concentration of poverty in one area.  If it is dispersed, it
would have less of an effect on the neighborhood businesses.  It
is a fact that the poorer people are, the harder it is for them
to travel to shop.  Not impossible, mind you.  I've done lots of
shopping by busing.  People take the bus to Rosedale from
northside, so its done.  It isn't the favorite way, but the bus
will take you from that area to both Brookdale and Rosedale.  So,
the argument here is more about symbolism than practicality.  In
fact, I would recommend the boosters of the area to look at the
overall commercial health of the area, and stop focusing on a
particular store.  Minnehaha Mall has been kind of a worry in
Longfellow, but it is still alive and kicking, even though the
overall quality of the leasing businesses isn't quit what it used
to be (used to have Minnesota Fabrics, Dairy Queen, Super Value,
Great Clips, and Twin City Federal. Now we have Petters, The
Alternative School Federation, and another liquidator store).

I think it would be really good to develop some sort of index
that measured the overall health of a neighborhood.  Business
departures vs. openings.  Number of condemned houses.  Crime
statistics.  It could all be lumped into something like the index
of leading indicators to show the OVERALL health of the
neighborhood, and that could be used to offset something  showy
like a big store closing.  Heck even attendance at community
group meetings could be part of it.  Because more people coming
out shows something about commitment to a neighborhood.

Public Projects:
I think maybe there should be a circuit-breaker on public
projects that says something like "an increase of 50 percent
above the approved budget requires reconsideration of the whole
idea".  I can see it is awfully tempting to lowball a public
project to get SOME money spent on it so that now they can argue
"if we cancel, that money is wasted".  Well, there is some level
of money we can AFFORD to waste rather than trudge mindlessly
forward with a project that is not worth its final price.  Also,
maybe there should be a MONETARY penalty for lowballing.  In the
adjudication process, the entity that is being fined gets to show
how it wasn't ITS fault.  On the other hand, this "mitigation"
stuff should be priced into the project. You know it will be
there.  It is pure folly to add it on afterwards.

----------------
Jim Mork
Cooper Neighborhood
Longfellow Community
In The Great and Wonderful City I Call Home, Minneapolis

TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.)


________________________________

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

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject 
(Mpls-specific, of course.)

________________________________

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

Reply via email to