RE: [Mpls] City budget: tough choices for tough times - 23% cut to Police! and NRP funding
I want to acknowledge Paul Lohman's correction: > David Brauer wrote: > > >The details are grim...greatly reduced community-development funds, a 23 > >percent cut to the cops, > > This is really a bit misleading and just one way in which numbers can be > turned to almost any advantage. The budget for police over the next 5 > years (2003-2008) will INCREASE by about $18 million dollars. They will > actually receive a 3.6% average annual increase in their budget. > > They WILL be 23% of the solution - meaning the city has to find $55 million > in cuts over the next 5 years and the police will be 23% of that amount. Sorry, I didn't intend to be misleading. A subsequent post I wrote stated, "The police make up 32 percent of the 2003 property-tax-supported budget alone; they are getting 23 percent of the cuts. ... According to the city's 5-year projections, they need to cut $55 million in anticipated spending growth. The police come in for $12 million in cuts, fire for $2 million and public works for $8.4 million." Good catch, Paul - I think my second post was more careful. As Jim Graham recently said, sorry for the initial haste. By the way, Dan Niziolek made a big deal of the fact that several city departments (including the mayor's office and the council) were getting 6.5 percent average annual increases when the cops were getting 3.6 percent. Expect this to be a major point of discussion. The rejoinder (from whom, I forget) was that you only save a little out of other departments but you save a lot off the cops. Niziolek's response was that everyone should be limited to what the cops get. By the way, the fire guys are getting more - 5.5 percent annual increases. David Brauer King Field ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] City budget: tough choices for tough times - 23% cut to Police! and NRP funding
David Brauer wrote: The details are grim...greatly reduced community-development funds, a 23 percent cut to the cops, This is really a bit misleading and just one way in which numbers can be turned to almost any advantage. The budget for police over the next 5 years (2003-2008) will INCREASE by about $18 million dollars. They will actually receive a 3.6% average annual increase in their budget. They WILL be 23% of the solution - meaning the city has to find $55 million in cuts over the next 5 years and the police will be 23% of that amount. Jim Graham wrote: I (Jim Graham) answered RT that this debate had already been engaged in and was over. The debate took place before the last election. ... snip... The Mayor and several candidates for City Council won on the basis of these commitments to keep NRP intact and promises to find the funding for it. We gave money, support, and votes on the basis of those commitments. It is NOT up for debate about funding NRP; it is up to those making the commitment to find the funds. That the taxpayers of Minneapolis should have a referendum on where and what they would be willing to see tax increases for. The Mayor said he would oppose such a referendum. (The Mayor and City Council Members do not trust the people to spend the people's tax dollars in the places the politicians think are important I guess.) A referendum on whether or not to raise taxes in Minneapolis for NRP would be a BIG mistake. First of all it would lose. Taxes are already going up anywhere from 8% to 13% (er, what's inflation again?). Numbers presented on Saturday showed that to raise $20 million for NRP would increase taxes something over 25%! This would also absolutely kill NRP as it would turn out to be a referendum not on a tax increase but on NRP itself. We have to remember that though some of us could easily bear a large tax increase many people simply cannot. There are people on fixed incomes that have lived in their homes or neighborhoods for 50+ years, but these kinds of tax increases would simply force them out. Affordable housing is already a huge issue. This would simply make a bad situation even worse. Paul Lohman Lynnhurst Paul Lohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] City budget: tough choices for tough times
City leaders prep themselves, and others, for $55 million in cuts in expected spending over the next five years...and that's before the state cuts any local govt aid. The details are grim...greatly reduced community-development funds, a 23 percent cut to the cops, delayed fixing of the infrastructure gap...wither NRP? Affordable housing? Rochelle Olson's story: http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3585360.html Strib editorial: http://www.startribune.com/stories/561/3584088.html David Brauer List manager ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
