Jim Graham writes:

> The Mayor has a difficult time with this situation.  The only veto of
Mayor
> RT Rybak in four years in office was in favor of the criminal Basim Sabri.
> Fortunately enough Council People had good sense that they overcame
Rybak's
> illegal veto.  ... What politician in his right mind would support a
> project that resulted in Basim Sabri getting not only a city block, but
even
> the City street for only $125,000.  Perhaps this is part of the reason for
> the FBI investigation. Where will the next FBI investigation be?

I think this is really unfair speculation.

We know FBI agents raided Zimmermann's home. As of now, we don't know why -
as his campaign manager notes, the affidavit is sealed. The Sabri connection
here is a guess, and to then leap to the suggestion that a third party
(Rybak) is criminally involved is simply a smear.

Reasonable people can disagree about Rybak's veto in support of Sabri's
project. But it's worth remembering that the initial council vote against
Sabri's Elroy Street & Pillsbury project wasn't 13-0, or 9-4, it was 7-6.
Councilmembers Niziolek, Benson, Goodman, Lane and Samuels joined Zimmermann
in support of the project - before Rybak ever whipped out his veto pen.
Should we assume they're criminals too? Or maybe suggest that we should
narrow the field of future FBI targets to just Niziolek, Goodman and Lane,
who voted with Zimmermann to uphold Rybak's veto?

Must we criminalize political acts based only on our dislike for the actors?

And it wasn't just six, or four, councilmembers. The Minneapolis Planning
Commission also supported the project. [Later, the Council's Zoning and
Planning Committee granted the Whittier Alliance's appeal of the Planning
Commission's approval, which the Council's 7-6 vote upheld.]

For everyone's memory, here are the facts about what the vote was about
(from
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/archive/20040903-proceedings.pdf):

The Council ultimately rejected the Planning Commission's approval of a
conditional use permit and site plan for 69 dwelling units. (This was the
affordable housing Rybak said he wanted when he issued the veto.)

The project is rising, I assume without the housing, which means Rybak's
veto was not crucial to Sabri getting the site and ultimately building
something there. It was just about what would be there.

David Brauer
Kingfield

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

Reply via email to