Karen Collier writes, in response to Margaret Hastings: I'm sorry, I don't get it. Why are you expecting the people recently appointed will not be good for the City? Do you have some evidence of which I am totally unaware? The fact that someone known by Lee Sheehy was appointed should not be a detriment. At least he knows going in what the person is capable of doing. I am sure he took quite a reduction in pay from his law firm to accept the position. The other individual had a track record in St. Paul. Let's withhold judgment until these individuals are on the job and can show us what they are capable of doing.
Why is this an insult to the people of Minneapolis? I just don't get it. Me: I second Karen's emotion, up to a point. I think the snap judgments (tennis=death, Smith Parker=666) are leading to a much-too-hasty offing of Mr. Christensen's virtual head. I, too, would like to hear a bit more about what he will actually do - and in fact, what he has specifically done - before pronouncing him an outrage. But snap judgments aside, I do think the mayor and Mr. Sheehy should take note of some legitimate concerns: 1. Restructuring. How can the city justify $100,000 salaries at a time of layoffs - and when a similar number of MCDA high-level execs were let go. 2. Related to #1: Is this about downsizing, or merely cleaning house at the top? 3. The 35W Access Project has split neighborhoods and activists. It has been portrayed as helping major employers at the expense of neighborhood livability (though others say major employers and neighborhood livability will both be improved). Was Mike Christensen involved in the Access Project, and how will he handle it as head of strategic partnerships and planning? 4. What neighborhood-level experience does the CPED leadership bring? Based as much on history as any one appointee's resume, there is skepticism that economic development will be guided by a "bottom-up" philosophy (as opposed to a long-running "big-employer, top-down" one.) How can the mayor or Mr. Sheehy reassure reasonable skeptics that CPED's "reform" is nothing more than repackaged top-down. As you can tell, I find the snap judgments and instant memorials silly and premature. I hope elected & appointed officials will at least answer reasonably skeptical questions as a way for all of us to make better, fairer judgments, whatever those judgments may be. David Brauer King Field 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
