I have heard the following sentiment once or twice on this forum: "I don't really believe that tying the Holman Field floodwall into all other projects beneficial to St. Paul was real." That concerns me a bit, because the threat WAS made. In fact, Mayor Kelly's own words show threats WERE made. Allow me to quote from the 3/16/05 Pioneer Press (http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/11144504.htm):
"Kelly denied making the threat. He said it was "nonsense" and "absurd" to suggest that he would torpedo the city's top initiatives should he not get his way with the airport project."
That's interesting...I guess the Mayor's free to try to make any claim. Except, in my eyes, he contradicts himself one paragraph later:
"[Kelly] explained that he merely told Rep. Alice Hausman, another of St. Paul's delegation members, that any St. Paul projects included in an approved bonding bill must later be approved by the mayor before the funding is sent to the city."
Let's unpack that last sentence ever so slightly, without distorting its words. Even Kelly's own calm explanation to the Pioneer Press is essentially saying, "Representative Hausman, you could get the money for the projects, but I have the power to veto the acceptance of your projects at the City if you oppose me on Holman Field. If that's the route we go, you'll be back to square one, and yep, you'll probably look ineffective in the process."
And that's what he told the Pioneer Press in a calm moment after they were running a story specifically on one of his many rumored blowups. Threats real? You betcha. Unless you don't believe the Mayor's words.
But there's still another layer. Rep. Hausman said the Mayor "would work toward a Governor's veto" on the floodwall issue. So if we had evidence that the Governor was getting involved with the matter, well, that would give credence to the claim, no?
A post from last week that reported: "the Holman Field Floodwall is BACK in the BONDING BILL at the behest of Governor Pawlenty."
Maybe people are unsure if the Mayor intends to follow through on the treats?
If that's what people have been saying, I agree it is hard to know. That's the difficulty with threats. You toss them around, and people don't much like you for making them. I have certainly tried to give this Mayor a fair shake, and give him credit for his better judgements. Yet the mere statement that a Mayor would threaten other city legislative priorities if his own aren't met is what so clearly crosses a line for me, and I'd guess for many others as well.
Respectfully,
Bob Spaulding Downtown
-------------------------------------------------
JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY:
http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/
-------------------------------------------------
POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected]To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
