---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:29:03 -0800 (PST)
From: Dan Dobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Who is Organizing to fight the Stadium in Minneapolis/Hennepin
County?
Friends -
Is anyone organizing over in Minneapolis/Hennepin County to fight the
newest Stadium proposals?
We are just starting our organizing here in Saint Paul and would like to
coordinate with people and groups on the other side of the river.
Originally we thought the plan, as put forward by the St. Paul Chamber of
Commerce, would be to sell the St. Paul Regional Water System for the
depreciation. However attached below is an analysis, I recently received,
that shows the real target will be the sale of the sewage treatment plants
owned by the Met Council.
It's not sexy stuff, but it could have huge implications 30 years down the
line, when a few rich individuals or one corporation will have control of
how we dispose of our waste water in the Twin Cities.
If you are doing any anti-stadium work, I would like to hear from you.
Dan Dobson
801 Goodrich Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105
651-227-4376
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=======================================================
Subject: RE: Stadium plans - back from the dead and bigger than ever
The St Paul Regional Water System (SPRWS) only brings the water to our
homes and helps with the pipes that cart it away. SPRWS is our little
municipal water system, and it has 7 suburban participants who would
likely be able to block any takeover, as Mr. Zanmiller has stated. Our
bills include both water and sewer services, but they're provided by two
different entities. SPRWS owns the incoming, but the environmental
Serivces division of the Metropolitan Council owns the other end of the
process. For administrative ease, SPRWS bills for sewers, but it's the
Met Council that owns the treatment plants.
The lease/leaseback proposal can be done with any municipal asset, be it
the local bus system or the waterworks or (as we just saw in St. Paul) the
Police Station. It's hyped as a way to "sell the tax writeoffs from the
depreciation" while getting cash into the pocket of the municipality, but
it's fraught with problems (that discussion can take place later). But
before it can happen, you need an asset that is publicly owned, big
enough, and full of undepreciated assets. After looking at this for a
while, I don't think that SPRWS is big enough -- it's only worth $216
million by their own accounts.
The real prize here is the wastewater treatment system that is owned by
the Met Council (web site:
http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/environment.htm).
It's a billion dollar asset that performs wastewater treatment for the
entire 7 county area. It's full of millions of dollars of new investment
over the last several decades, and the assets are new enough to engage
them in a lease/leaseback scheme that is currently being hyped to the
League of Minnesota Cities and is being considered by Rochester (web site:
http://www.ci.rochester.mn.us/clerks/Agenda_pdf/2003/10October/100603/100603_agenda_F01.pdf).
The plan we still see proposed is that the Met Council lease the sewage
treatment system to some entity for 99 years, and then the Met Council
will lease it back for 30. The entity will use the tax depreciation and
the Met Council will get an upfront payment that is equal to 3 - 4% of the
value of the asset. If the system is worth a billion dollars, that would
yeild thirty-five million, not a bad down payment on a ballpark. I can't
seem to find any estimates of the value of the 8 plants they have,but
their annual revenues are about $140 million.
And the beauty of using the wastewater treatment system as the asset is
mulit-faceted. It's easy to get romantic and protective of the local
waterworks because it gives us the water that supplies life. No one feels
that way about sewage treatment plants, even if they're every bit as
important. But the biggest draw for mortgaging that asset is that it is
firmly under the control of a gang of unelected Republicans that answer to
nobody but the governor.
This will likely take some enabling legislation, but they'll push it. So I
think that the only issue for the City Council in St. Paul will surround
some smaller financial contribution and zoning. But that's only if they
decide to come to St. Paul.
--fwd by David Shove
Roseville
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
