Contents: Ballpark resolution; council action; my opinion --- Resolution 2005R- By Johnson Lee and Zimmermann Opposing the use of public money for a baseball stadium.
Whereas, Minnesota Statute 297A.99 calls for voter approval of local sales tax imposition; and Whereas, by a 1997 referendum, Minneapolis taxpayers have already expressed their desire to limit public funding of a professional sports stadium to $10,000,000; and Whereas, the current proposal would raise a projected $9,800,000 per year for 30 years from Minneapolis; and Whereas, in a May 1, 2005 Star Tribune poll, 58% of Hennepin County residents disapproved of using public money for a professional sports stadium and 71% favored a referendum on the issue; and Whereas, any additional tax revenues collected should be directed to higher priority needs identified by the residents of Minneapolis, such as housing, public safety, transportation, education, and youth sports facilities, and should be subject to the open public process of normal municipal budgeting; and Whereas, authorizing legislation Minnesota House File 2480 removes municipal control by forcing the City to issue event parking passes for City-operated ramps, to vacate public right-of-way on Third Avenue North, to convey City-owned land in the development area without charge, and to issue liquor licenses to the proposed stadium; and Whereas, Minnesota House File 2480 exempts Twins tickets from the very sales tax that would pay for the stadium and any other local sales taxes; Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by The City Council of The City of Minneapolis: That the City of Minneapolis opposes the use of a Hennepin County sales tax to fund a professional sports stadium that would generate income solely for the Twins franchise and its owner, Carl Pohlad. --end of resolution-- --City Council action-- I called Dean Zimmerman to ask how the resolution had fared. He said the DFLers had been planning to cut off debate and a vote (by tabling the motion). They wanted neither since both their DFL mayoral candidates RT and McLaughlin support a sales tax for the Carl Pohlad Stadium. Johnson Lee acted first and kept the motion debatable (by sending it to a committee). --end of Dean's comments; on to mine-- RT ran 4 years ago on an anti-stadium plank. It helped him defeat Sharon Sayles-Belton. Then not long after being elected he went pro-stadium, thus invalidating representative democracy in this case. If candidates won't keep basic well-advertised promises, and leap over to the corporate side just after bamboozling us of our votes, how are our voices to be heard? Then just about two weeks ago, the Pohlad opertives launched a lightning surprize attack to rob the public. McLaughlin was right on it. RT held back for a few days. So the Pohlad attacksters called him nasty names. O no not nasty names! - so RT jumped in - he was for the Pohlad Stadium too, just like McLaughlin. Thus leaving mainstream DFLers no choice - stadium or stadium. Exactly what the Pohlad undead had worked to engineer. Arrogant extortion. The DFL is supposed to be the common people's defense against unprincipled wheeler-dealers and corporations. Where is our defense when the DFL joins them? Re mayor I'd like to see two things: 1) RT and McL scarecrow figures burnt in effigy 2) a huge protest vote for (anti-stadium tax) Farheen Hakeem, GP Re the DFLers on the City council, I'd like to see them dispel any suspicion that they are willing to sell us out for "party unity" because RT and McL sold us out. The rot need not spread from the top down; let it stop with RT and McL. Let the CMs go on record as being clearly against the stadium sales tax. If the CMs fail to do so, I'd like to see two things: 1) the offending CM's scarecrow figures burnt in effigy (add to the RT McL pyre); perhaps the homeless could sleep near in on these cold evenings. 2) a huge protest vote for the GP council candidates in wards 2 (Cam Gordon), 3 (Aaron Neumann), 5 (Natalie Johnson-Lee), 6 (Dean Zimmermann); throw in a vote for Annie Young GP for park board for good measure. We should stop picking the least bad DFLer from an ever-worsening field. Progressives should at least in Mpls dump the DFL as a party if it will not defend us as a party. The DFL CMs have a little time to reject the stadium tax; but after that, those sticking with Pohlad should be voted out. The DP won't defend us in the US Congress. It has done a poor job in the new MN Leg. It now appears to be failing even at the city level. Perhaps it is time to sweep it into the dustbin of history. --David Shove Roseville 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
