Comments on: STRIB: RYBAK’S CUTS PINCH SNOW REMOVAL

By: chile

chile — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:05:04 +0000

Ed, I don’t understand why you are having such a hard time with understanding that taxpayer money was wasted.

the city didn’t need water fountains, artistic or otherwise. It was a waste of money. The money spent to connect them to the city water lines was also a was.

By: Focused on 2010

Focused on 2010 — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:07:32 +0000

Mr. Ed,
How does that explain your claim that it is $450,000?

Get it?

By: Ed Kohler

Ed Kohler — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:39:52 +0000

Guys, I don’t understand why you are having such a hard time with the math here. As I’ve explained before, the GOP talking point ties to the art part of that $500k expense and not the entire $500k. Get it?

By: Focused on 2010

Focused on 2010 — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 17:15:01 +0000

Thanks Chile. That link is where I got my information from too.

Mr. Ed, are you now calling the Mayor a liar?

By: chile

chile — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:25:03 +0000

Ed, your are wrong about a number of things.

According to Rybak’s chief of staff (who was at the time his communications director) the amount is $500,000.

http://themayorblog.com/2009/06/18/drinking-fountains/

Also, Rybak stole $250,000 from the cities water fund to spend on the water fountains. As far as capital fund expeditures, the city determines what will be paid for with capital funds. The Mayor and Council can make the capital budget smaller and the operating budget bigger, or vice versa.

Whether tax payers paid for RT’s fountains out of the capital budget or the operation budget is beside the point. It’s still a waste of money.

By: Some Perspective on MN GOP’s Issue with RT Rybak | The Deets

Some Perspective on MN GOP’s Issue with RT Rybak | The Deets — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:21:27 +0000

[...] recent comment on Minnesota Democrats Exposed helped me understand that there may be some misunderstandings between MDE readers and the reality based community when it comes to the size and scope of Minneapolis’ city [...]

By: Ed Kohler

Ed Kohler — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 05:16:19 +0000

Focused on 2010, believe what you want or look it up for yourself.

By: Focused on 2010

Focused on 2010 — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 05:10:56 +0000

Let me think… water fountains on one hand, clearing streets of snow on the other. Which would be the best way to provide services to the most customers.

I believe clearing the streets winds on that one.

I’m not sure where you got your $450,000 number from but I believe that is a little low. Are you interested in making intellectually honest arguments?

By: Ed Kohler

Ed Kohler — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 03:28:53 +0000

@Focused on 2010, I was attempting to rephrase that to make it more clear when I hit the Submit Comment button on my phone’s touchscreen.

The point being that Luke Hellier is comparing $1,400,000 in operating expenses to $450,000 in capital expenses. If Luke’s going to suggest that Rybak’s choice to balance the city’s budget in part through $1.4 million in cuts, he should find $1.4 million in expenses. And, ideally, operating expenses rather than capital expenses.

But, that’s only if Luke’s interested in making intellectually honest arguments.

By: Focused on 2010

Focused on 2010 — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 22:01:47 +0000

“And, could you explain how a 1-time capital expense could pay for 2 years worth of opera nearly 3x greater operating expenses?”

Huh?

By: Twitted by hartupnorth

Twitted by hartupnorth — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 19:20:57 +0000

[...] This post was Twitted by hartupnorth [...]

By: Ed Kohler

Ed Kohler — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:15:56 +0000

Luke, what would you propose is the right size for Minneapolis’ snow plowing budget? You seem to have strong opinions that the decisions Rybak took to balance the were wrong, but you’re failing to explain in a mature manner why the hard adult choices he and the city council created were wrong for the city.

Clearly, with unlimited funds, plowing could be better, but that’s not how fiscally responsible politicians operate.

And, could you explain how a 1-time capital expense could pay for 2 years worth of opera nearly 3x greater operating expenses?