David Brauer: Sorry, guys. The money (as others have noted) is dedicated to airport operations - it can't be used for the better purposes you cite.
Since the MAC isn't talking about cutting the dedicated fee, that means you can have a nicer concourse for the Airport Mall or some mitigation for people adversely affected by airport noise. Me, I'd rather spend it on people who suffer, even if it is less than those who suffer in other walks of life. Frankly, supporting such a paradigm might help others in other walks of life with more serious problems. Or, we can all undercut each other, which is a pretty good way to make sure no one gets ahead. [Me] Wow. As a quick aside, it's rather nice that Jim Graham and I agree on something. Probably less energy wasted for both of us. Anyway, my point in this is not to undercut funds to property owners in the DNL zone, though I do question the propriety of entirely free home improvements to the tune of $80,000 to $120,000 in some cases, not tied in any way to income of the recipient or value of the home. Again, though, I met with one of ROAR's leaders some time ago to make this clear--that we expected to raise the issue of mayoral and government priorities regarding environmental hazards and make the wildly successful and popular airport noise mitigation strategies a potential target. Our point was not to say, 'hey, you don't deserve it' or 'divert that airport money to a better cause' but to say 'hey, you defined airport noise as an environmental problem and addressed it with significant and free resources, why not concentrate that energy in our arena as well.' In other words, the message is, as it always seems to be, 'where there's a will, there's a way.' For us working in or living in (e.g., Jim Graham) far less well-to-do and much more diverse neighborhoods, we question why that will is not present for hazards such as lead-based paint, mold/mildew, or other environmental hazards, particularly hazards that cause irreversible brain damage. For many, it's a hard dose of reality, in that the already privileged are typically the most powerful--thus, it's likely no coincidence that RT has a powerful voter base in a belt around the airport that conforms rather remarkably to the 60-65 DNL lines. For young African American mothers, the grandmothers and grandfathers of lead-poisoned kids, and for the young Somali, Hmong or Hispanic families dealing with lead poisoning, or even the landlord on the receiving end of a lead hazard reduction order, the message seems clear: we don't matter as much. And, in the cynical cycle of politics, it's hard to say that they are wrong. Here's my dream: landlords and tenants come together and rally our city, our regional governments, and others to provide the resources that are absolutely essential to eliminate childhood lead poisoning. Not just $4 or $5 million here and there--significant dedicated funding that makes it nearly free to improve a home by removing the lead. If that means I'm working side by side with Jim Graham and Keith Reitman, in an effort to go after those (i.e., lead pigment and paint manufacturers) who caused poor neighborhoods and their residents and property owners to suffer so much and so needlessly, then we'd welcome them at the table, as I hope they'd welcome me and others as well. If it also results in our engaging ROAR and airport noise folks to make them understand that their noise levels are not the only environmental hazard reduction efforts worth funding, and that we ask for their genuine and real support on other critical issues of environmental justice, then we ask that they join in our call for significantly increased resources. Stay tuned, I guess. Where there is a will, there is a way. Really, that's all this is about. There are plenty of options available to fund lead hazard remediation, including rental licensing fees, tax on mortgage registration, tax on paint, tax credits for lead hazard reduction, dedicated CDBG funding, dedicated general revenue, etc. The real contributor in my mind, however, should be the manufacturers that caused the problem, in the same way that Northwest Airlines is often the target of noise mitigation efforts. Now, who will step up with the will and leadership to make that happen? We've got a goal of the year 2010 to eliminate lead poisoning, and I for one am serious about that goal. Gregory Luce St. Paul Our issue is with concentrating significant efforts on this environmental hazard at the expense of or in lieu of likely more After all, lead poisoning is completely preventable, if we lay out the needed resources. 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
