Wizard wrote: However, the crime in Mpls. is, in part, about RT 's management of the city. It is true that RT balanced his budget on the backs of the police and fire departments, both of which are the particular purview of the mayor. If McLaughlin is going to defeat RT, of course he's going to continue to highlight RTs actions; it only makes sense that he would. At the same time, Jim Graham, Barb Lickness, myself, and some others are going to continue to point out that while crime happens everywhere, it happens in the core of the city with a greater frequency that it is important to note. 145 cops were dropped from the Mpls. roster, I'm sure the local crud balls were delighted. They're able to see their opportunities blossom in the vacuum. Since these miscreants are right outside my door on a frequent basis, I'm going to continue to point out what a tremendous disservice RT has done to me and my neighbors. We are going to get 60 cops back, but we lost 145 cops. The MPD is still 85 cops short of the number we had when SSB was mayor. That's an unmanageable loss, particularly from the third and fourth precincts. So if McLaughlin had said that, "we're going to take it back," he may have been talking about taking the city back from the miscreants and the poor management we now have.
Mark Anderson: If Peter McLaughlin is saying that Rybak should have hired a bunch more cops, then he needs to say how many he would hire and where the money's gonna come from. Crime is really bad for the quality of life, but so are 20% annual increases in taxes. Rybak has been trying to balance essential city services against outrageous tax increases. I think he's done a pretty good job in that area, based on the even or decreasing crime statistics I've been hearing, other than the very recent up tick in murders. McLaughlin may balance services versus taxes at a different place than Rybak does, which is fine and dandy, but he owes the electorate a full explanation of where he sets that line, not just complaints about services under Rybak. If Peter won't say how much taxes should increase, how about you, Wizard? How many additional cops would be sufficient if you were running the city? We can then calculate the extra taxes you want us all to pay, and then we can have a real discussion of the issues. I think Reinhardt said it costs about $100,000 per cop? Does that include the increase in overhead, I wonder? After all, to add 200 cops on the street, you'll need more supervisors, clerks to process the paperwork, and personnel at the jails and courts to handle the expected increase in arrests. Mark V Anderson Bancroft 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
