All,
Does anyone know if there has been any responses to Steve Brandt's
article about Brighton claiming there was sufficient profit to share
with the city as an initial and early investor in their river front
condo building exercise?
* Has there been any official comment?
* Is anyone looking to hold elected feet to the fire on this issue?
* Has anyone officially requested that a legal authority look into this
issue?
This will be a great opportunity to find out if the new alphabet office
of development is the MCDA with a new fa�ade -- or actually an
accountable advocate for the residents and taxpayers interests.
Joseph Barisonzi
Willard Hay
**********************
MILLIONS IN SUBSIDIES
From: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Re: [Mpls] Millions in subsidies
for the homeful Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:48:49 -0600 (In Part)
From Steve Brandt's article in yesterday's Strib:
"The city provided several million dollars in up-front assistance
for the rehabilitation of two milling buildings and the construction of
a
third between them.
Despite grossing $50 million in condominium sales from developing
three buildings overlooking St. Anthony Falls, a developer said it
probably hasn't made enough money to pay the city under a profit-sharing
deal.
The condos along S. 2nd Street in Minneapolis sold for a cumulative
total far higher than the $27 million that Brighton Development
estimated
they would fetch before it broke ground in 1998. At least 10 units sold
for more than $1 million each, and one topped $3 million."
Link to the article:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4245464.html
Chris says: I guess I need to take "new math" or "creative
accounting" or "greed ethics." The city was supposed to receive 25% of
any profits exceding $4.4 million. The sales were far higher than the
expected $27 million, a number no doubt agreed to by the city as an
amount that would net the city some profit. And yet, despite exceding
the no-doubt
optimistic forecasts, there is no money to pay the city its share?
Sounds like Brighton "lost money on paper" but made a fortune in
hard cash through the use of creative accounting. It's just another case
of the city giving away taxpayer money to favored developers.
COMMENTS/QUESTIONS:
When does suspected creative accounting become actionable in
criminal or civil court through the Hennipen County Attorney, Minnesota
Attorney General, or U.S. Attorney? Since the City of Minneapolis and
some of its officials could be either plaintiffs or a defendants in such
action, the City Attorney would have possible conflicts of interest. Can
tax payors initiate inquiries or action? Do they have to post a bond?
If there is actual malfeasance and not just sloppy or negligible
oversight, don't we have to do more than just complain about wasted tax
dollars? If it is just sloppy or negligible oversight, don't we need to
do more than just yell about the problem? What?
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
