Lybak should cut the budget of CPED in half and give it to the police and fire departments. Residents of Minneapolis are paying property taxes for platinum, but we are getting sterling silver, if you know what I mean.
Peter Vevang writes: Planning is about looking to the future and imagining what our city should be like, and thinking about what we need and how we are going to get it. Community planning and economic development is an important function. Unfortunately doesn't run as well as it could right now. We don't have an effective City plan, we don't have a vision of what the goals of the city are. We don't have a sense that 'this is what Minneapolis is all about' when we look at our plans. We don't have a clear point of view about what we are doing. We have a whole slew of only somewhat useful master plans that aren't always used to direct development, and have weak directives that are not backed up with a firm city committment. Most city plans only describe what is already built, and don't have a point of view about how we should be pushing development or preservation.
The effect of that is that we reinvent the wheel for every development, there isn't continuity, goals get lost or cut short. We have unnecessary conflicts between thc City, neighborhoods and developers. Zoning and ordinances can be inneficient in some cases, pushing improper development, or restricing proper development reducing our potential tax base and other such unfortunate things. We do development on a property by property basis, rather than with citywide goals in mind. Good planning would have made the Metrodom work better, good planning would have prevented the K-Mart on Nicollet, good planning can help us focus and control development along the Mississippi so that this resource is preserved and improved. We can understand the linkages between City and Parkboard Land with a good plan, so that our efforts all work together. If we are clearly aware of our goals, we can be certain that when we give out TIF financing or developer subsidies, those resources will be effectively used in the public interest.
We aren't getting in front of some of our problems as a result of our planning failures and we are wasting some resources because we can't focus in on our primary problems, and are solving problems that don't exist and are creating new ones that can block future growth and damage our prospects. Firm and effective planning can be solidly linked to our budgeting process to virtually guarantee our success. Weak planning removes budget discipline. If you eliminate half of the planning function, you will make the situation worse, not better. Resources will be used more inneficiently, it will be more difficult for developers and businesses to get through the city process and economic progress will slow.
I don't see how eliminating leadership positions in CPED will help us be more successful as a city. Planning needs to be improved not cut, they need to be tasked better and have better oversight and more authority to set city development goals based on clearer criteria. Gutting planning would be extremely short sighted. It will result in a long, slow, decline in our prospects. The long term damage would be immense, both in financial terms and our quality of life.
Peter Vevang Audubon
REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
