Michael Atherton continues to generalize what he thinks my reasoning is based
upon:
"So, following the consistent flow of your argument, then
you would support 0.3 time of some police positions being
subsidized by the NRP (as long as they eventually go away)?
As I understood it, it was a third or more of a salary (which
might translate to 0.3 time in the arcane language of
the school district payroll). It's surprising that Mr. Kahn
had to research this detail, given that he was PPERRIA
board member and a board member of the Pratt Council when
some of these budgeting decisions were made.
"BTW, this salary contribution is not the only way that the NRP
is subsidizing pubic education at Pratt and some of the other
subsidies come in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. My point
is that if you accept the use of NRP dollars to subsidize public
education, then why object to them subsidizing the police
department? Personally, I don't think that the NRP should be
subsidizing anything. It's a system with no real checks and
balances which is subject to an unrepresentative, uninformed,
and irrational budgeting process run by private contactors. Anyone
who is concerned about proportional representation should be aghast
at the NRP program."
Bill Kahn responds:
Mr. Atherton continues to assume the reasoning behind my opinions based
on I know not what. To repeat, the point of my original post on the topic is
that honoring the social contract proactively is better than reacting to
conditions created by not doing so; I posited that creating a better quality of
life
for all Minneapolis citizens will do more to improve our lot in the future
than reacting to the costs of failing to do so. Adequate numbers of
professionals are needed in education and law enforcement. Study after study
has shown
that, dollar for dollar, investing in education is about the best bang for our
buck that you are likely to see. The teachers and police officers are both
laudable and necessary jobs to maintain and repair the fabric of our society,
but
the success of the former dictates the demand for the latter in a big way (to
repeat the main point of the original post).
As far as the role of NRP in city government, it has flaws; but the
engagement of citizens in improving our city is not one of those flaws. As far
as
proportional representation, I think that the organization and funding of NRP
citywide has succeeded beyond any comparable effort to engage the city
government and citizenry in improving our lives in a very fair way; if all
neighborhoods agreed that NRP funds for more police officers was necessary, I
might
reconsider my position. But given our budget woes spawned by underfunding of
all
kinds of necessary public services and public infrastructure, I expect that
all concerned will continue to gravitate towards funding of any kind wherever
they think they see it. NRP funds should be spent on strategies that better our
lot in lasting ways.
I did not research subsidies to Pratt School as Mr. Atherton implies; it
came up at a recent meeting. My point that the cost of 0.3 education workers
is essentially peanuts in the whole of my neighborhood's Phase I NRP allotment
remains valid. For some unaccountable reason, I thought I should correct my
error regarding subsidy; I'm not sorry I did so and not surprised that this
motivated Mr. Atherton to respond as he did. Our NRP safety and security
strategy
for lighting suggested by the Minneapolis Police Department that Mr. Atherton
opposed, contributed no subsidy to MPD salaries, but it proactively gave MPD
a leg up in our neighborhood. What we have done at the Pratt Community
Education Center besides the ongoing transition to a school component there
(Pratt
School, a partnership with Tuttle School) with NRP funds will pay off much
bigger than our lights whether Mr. Atherton believes it or not.
I support having a level of taxation adequate to cover the cost of
running our city; if we had such taxation, using NRP funding to do so would be
a
nonstarter. NRP was never about subsidizing government services; it is about
improving our city.
I would not look for many more responses from me on this thread because I
think I've been way too redundant.
Bill Kahn
Scrounging food for the Beast in Prospect Park
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
