Library update
--part1_b8.e9944dd.275da70b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a previous post I pointed out that the mayor had proposed cutting $8,000,000 from the Library's normal capital allocation over the next five years. Over the ten year library remodeling, if continued, that would have cut $16,000,000 from the Library's capital needs. I have since had time to read the proposed budget further (it helps me go to sleep at night) and I missed a footnote! The mayor's proposal is that the Library's normal 1.6 million per year for capital be cut in half through 2003 and cut totally in 2004-2008. This part I knew. The note I missed says that after the library spends its referendum money through 2008 that the Mayor and Council will "use net debt bonds to complete the funding gap in 2009 and 2010." I confirmed with Library staff that they estimate they will need an additional 8 to 10 million at that time. That isn't as bad as the 16 million originally estimated, and its nice to know there is a plan. The part that should make the library nervous is that they are counting on the mayor and council to follow through on a footnote to cover this gap. In 8 to 10 years there could easily be a new mayor and new council members who might be surprised by agreements such as this and might not feel obliged to live up to them. An additional concern brought up by library staff is how do they plan and negotiate with neighborhood groups without knowing what committed funds they have to complete the project? Even if the current politicians are all still in office, how tight will finances be in 8 to 10 years and will they be able to come up with 8 to 10 million in 2009 and 2010. The library staff also needs to be concerned that the negative cash flow they are projecting will begin to hit before that time. When they are looking for the final money to complete their improvements they will also need to come back for the additional $2,000,000 per year they will need for operations. With no dollar commitment yet made by the Mayor and Council, how willing will they be to fund the cash flow problem as well. Apparently the Library Board has put the topic of their operations shortfall on the agenda for their next meeting. There is a lot of citizen good will behind the Library referendum. I hope that we hear soon, even though belatedly as concerns the referendum, about their plans to pay for the operations of their new facilities. Bob Gustafson 13th --part1_b8.e9944dd.275da70b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit HTMLFONT FACE=arial,helveticaFONT SIZE=2In a previous post I pointed out that the mayor had proposed cutting BR$8,000,000 from the Library's normal capital allocation over the next five BRyears. Over the ten year library remodeling, if continued, that would have BRcut $16,000,000 from the Library's capital needs. BR BRI have since had time to read the proposed budget further (it helps me go to BRsleep at night) and I missed a footnote! The mayor's proposal is that the BRLibrary's normal 1.6 million per year for capital be cut in half through 2003 BRand cut totally in 2004-2008. This part I knew. The note I missed says that BRafter the library spends its referendum money through 2008 that the Mayor and BRCouncil will "use net debt bonds to complete the funding gap in 2009 and BR2010." I confirmed with Library staff that they estimate they will need an BRadditional 8 to 10 million at that time. That isn't as bad as the 16 million BRoriginally estimated, and its nice to know there is a plan. nbsp; BR BRThe part that should make the library nervous is that they are counting on BRthe mayor and council to follow through on a footnote to cover this gap. In 8 BRto 10 years there could easily be a new mayor and new council members who BRmight be surprised by agreements such as this and might not feel obliged to BRlive up to them. nbsp;An additional concern brought up by library staff is how do BRthey plan and negotiate with neighborhood groups without knowing what BRcommitted funds they have to complete the project? Even if the current BRpoliticians are all still in office, how tight will finances be in 8 to 10 BRyears and will they be able to come up with 8 to 10 million in 2009 and 2010. BR BRThe library staff also needs to be concerned that the negative cash flow they BRare projecting will begin to hit before that time. When they are looking for BRthe final money to complete their improvements they will also need to come BRback for the additional $2,000,000 per year they will need for operations. BRWith no dollar commitment yet made by the Mayor and Council, how willing will BRthey be to fund the cash flow problem as well. BR BRApparently the Library Board has put the topic of their operations shortfall BRon the agenda for their next meeting. There is a lot of citizen good will
Taxes, Mayor's budget and Library Referendum
--part1_4f.3a847a7.27473ebf_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Whether you are a tax and spend liberal Democrat, a fiscal conservative Republican, a WWF supporting Independent (we don't have reform people in Minneapolis anymore do we)? or a hug a tree Green, I believe that we become at times too concerned with the "politics" of government and forget the "economics." Budgets are boring, budget documents hard to decipher. CLIC just received the Mayor's recommended budget adjustments covering the five year 2001-2005 capital period. For your weekend reading enjoyment I will track you through the story of the Library Capital program from its presentation to CLIC last June through today. Keep in mind the economics, since from its overwhelming support this does not appear to be a partisan issue. The library submitted to CLIC in June an accelerated request for capital to begin remodeling the community libraries. Their request over five years was for $16,692,000 (approximately $3,340,000 per year). It was clear CLIC did not have the funds to recommend the request and stuck with recommending $1,600,000 per year which is the allocation per the adopted Capital Program. CLIC told the library they would need to either go through the Council process to seek an increase to their capital funding or they would have to include the community libraries with their referendum request. Concern was expressed with their need to find significant additional operating funds. It was clearly stated in their capital requests that they had no way to fund the increase in operations estimated to be approximately $2,000,000 per year. Library staff at first just recommended a referendum for the Central Library. They knew that the Central Library had no projected negative cash flow, but they still had no idea how to cover the negative associated with the community libraries so they left them out. From conversations with staff and one Library Board member (read hearsay) the decision to add the community libraries was made after the problem was brought up in a meeting with the Library Board and mayor. Staff had recommended asking for operating funds as part of the referendum. The decision by the Library Board and mayor to go ahead was made with the idea that once the buildings were up they could worry about the cash to run them. I was told this month by library staff that it has not been uncommon for other libraries around the country to go back to voters after their buildings are built to ask for more money for operations. Although that might be true, and apparently that happened here after the current Central Library was built, the problem is that the staff, Library Board and mayor know of the shortfall now. Since it will take several years for the construction projects to be completed the problem has been conveniently put off into the future. The city of Minneapolis voters, across partisan lines, displayed their strong faith in their libraries and their elected officials by solidly approving the $140,000,000 referendum. Perhaps you saw the October 2000 "Currents," the Citizens' Guide to the Minneapolis Public Library Referendum. Highlighted in the lower right corner of the front page is the Proposed funding for Library Projects. Nothing is said about operating cost problems and the section on Community Libraries was written as follows: Community Libraries $30 million from the Library Referendum This amount would supplement the Library Board's annual allocation from the City Capital Long-range Improvement process, which has provided about $1.6 million annually for library projects. While reading this front page you might catch the Message from the Library Board that says: This issue of our "Currents" newsletter is being mailed to every Minneapolis household in order to provide voters with the facts they need to MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION about the Minneapolis Public Library Referendum on November 7. (emphasis mine) Now that the referendum is approved, the Mayor in her Recommended Project Adjustment just presented to CLIC Tuesday, recommended reducing the capital expenditures for the library by $8,084,000 over the next five years. This cuts $1.6 million PER YEAR from the library's capital program. This is the $1.6 million the library said in their promotional material would be part of their community library funding. Over ten years this cuts $16,000,000 from the library's capital budget. The voters of Minneapolis clearly were not given the information to make an informed decision on the referendum. They were not informed that the library does not have the operating funds to adequately staff and purchase
Re: Paying for the Library/Regional facilities but Minneapolis pays
--part1_83.2c697f1.2740d55b_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit rt@rtrybak ended his comments on the library with: We shouldn't blow it by thinking small, or letting others off the hook. This has the potential to be one of the most important projects this generation will leave behind It's just that all the spending on other projects means we shouldn't, and can't, pay for it on our own. The problem is that we have not been voting on an entire package. The library staff recommended at first just doing the new Central Library. The reason was that the negative cash flow in the libraries own projections after remodelling the branch libraries approaches $2,000,000 per year. The library board was aware of this unfunded negative cash flow and made the decision to not include a request to fund it in the referendum.Their consultants told them they had to include the branch libraries in the referendum in order to get voter support for the Central Library. The decision was to get the capital projects funded and when the negative numbers hit go back to the voters, or the city, to fund the rest. Once we are on the hook they figured it would be hard to turn down the additional request. Staff has even mentioned that this need for additional cash flow came up after the current library was built so the Library Board felt there was precedent to go back to the citizens after they see thier new buildings. The problem gets worse in that the $2,000,000 estimate per year appears to be low. Wizard mentioned in an earlier exchange that Hosmer library, after remodelling, needed 70 to $80,000 per year above the budget of the library to run the remodelled facility. With all the remodelled libraries looking for similar services that will significantly increase the negative. The $2,000,000 also does not include any additional operating losses for the Central Library. It also does not include any expanded hours from the current hours. One of the libraries major goals has been listed as expanding the service hours to meet todays needs. I believe the potential negative more likely approaches $3,000,000 per year. It is obvious the voteres are supportive of the libaries and are willing to pay for the improvements. I agree that now is the time, even though we have weakened our negotiating position, to pursue other funding sources. If outside sources are not available we should make sure the Library can answer how they will cover their budgets. If they can not provide the answer it seems we should go back to the voters and ask for additional funding before we authorize the 140,000,000 of capital improvements. Bob Gustafson, 13th --part1_83.2c697f1.2740d55b_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit HTMLFONT SIZE=2rt@rtrybak ended his comments on the library with: BR BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;We shouldn't blow it by thinking small, BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;or letting others off the hook. This has the potential to be one of BRthe most BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;important projects this generation will leave behind It's just BRthat all BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;the spending on other projects means we shouldn't, and can't, pay for BRit on BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;our own. BR BRThe problem is that we have not been voting on an entire package. The library BRstaff recommended at first just doing the new Central Library. The reason was BRthat the negative cash flow in the libraries own projections after BRremodelling the branch libraries approaches $2,000,000 per year. The library BRboard was aware of this unfunded negative cash flow and made the decision to BRnot include a request to fund it in the referendum.Their consultants told BRthem they had to include the branch libraries in the referendum in order to BRget voter support for the Central Library. The decision was to get the BRcapital projects funded and when the negative numbers hit go back to the BRvoters, or the city, to fund the rest. Once we are on the hook they figured BRit would be hard to turn down the additional request. Staff has even BRmentioned that this need for additional cash flow came up after the current BRlibrary was built so the Library Board felt the! ! ! re was precedent to go back to BRthe citizens after they see thier new buildings. BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;The problem gets worse in that the $2,000,000 estimate per year appears BRto be low. Wizard mentioned in an earlier exchange that Hosmer library, after BRremodelling, needed 70 to $80,000 per year above the budget of the library to BRrun the remodelled facility. With all the remodelled libraries looking for BRsimilar services that will significantly increase the negative. The BR$2,000,000 also does not include any additional operating losses for the BRCentral Library. It also does not
Re: WhoRWe/was:bradys,mobys,subfright,etc
--part1_fb.d9ad331.273f101d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In response to R.T.Rybaks thoughts about rural areas looking to Minneapolis, I just completed a construction job on the Minot Air Force base in North Dakota and can confirm what a draw we are to those areas. When you speak of the "cities" in Minot, they know you are not talking about Bismarck or Fargo. The obvious big draws mentioned for visiting are the Mall, Vikings games and visiting family. I talked to several carpenters as the job ended to see what they would be doing. When they said they had not lined up work yet I told them about the need for carpenters in the cities. The pay they were receiving up there is about $12 to $16 for the most experienced carpenters. Pay for those individuals would be approximately double in the cities, with plenty of work. None of the individuals I talked to wanted to come here. The reasons were many, from the area is too big and too busy, to they didn't feel it was a good area to raise kids. The ones who had family down here said they lived out in suburbs. When our project manager came to visit his niece (and shop at the mall), they asked for some good ethnic restaurants to try. We took them to El Meson on 34th and Lyndale which they loved, and the next night they took their niece to Christos on 26th and Nicollet. We heard later their niece and husband thought they were crazy to go into that neighborhood. Happy to report they convinced them to try it and the evening was enjoyed by all. From the people we worked with I agree that although race issues and crime were mentioned, there were more comments about the pace of life, the heavy traffic and the lack of open space. Unless you have ever driven to Minot, you will not understand what open space is. Bob Gustafson, 13th --part1_fb.d9ad331.273f101d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit HTMLBODY BGCOLOR="#ff"FONT SIZE=2In response to R.T.Rybaks thoughts about rural areas looking to Minneapolis, BRI just completed a construction job on the Minot Air Force base in North BRDakota and can confirm what a draw we are to those areas. When you speak of BRthe "cities" in Minot, they know you are not talking about Bismarck or Fargo. BRThe obvious big draws mentioned for visiting are the Mall, Vikings games and BRvisiting family. I talked to several carpenters as the job ended to see what BRthey would be doing. When they said they had not lined up work yet I told BRthem about the need for carpenters in the cities. The pay they were receiving BRup there is about $12 to $16 for the most experienced carpenters. Pay for BRthose individuals would be approximately double in the cities, with plenty of BRwork. None of the individuals I talked to wanted to come here. The reasons BRwere many, from the area is too big and too busy, to they didn't f! ! ! eel it was BRa good area to raise kids. The ones who had family down here said they lived BRout in suburbs. BR nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;When our project manager came to visit his niece (and shop at the mall), BRthey asked for some good ethnic restaurants to try. nbsp;We took them to El Meson BRon 34th and Lyndale which they loved, and the next night they took their BRniece to Christos on 26th and Nicollet. We heard later their niece and BRhusband thought they were crazy to go into that neighborhood. Happy to report BRthey convinced them to try it and the evening was enjoyed by all. BR nbsp;nbsp;From the people we worked with I agree that although race issues and crime BRwere mentioned, there were more comments about the pace of life, the heavy BRtraffic and the lack of open space. Unless you have ever driven to Minot, you BRwill not understand what open space is. BR BRBob Gustafson, 13th/FONT/HTML --part1_fb.d9ad331.273f101d_boundary--
Re: Church and State?
--part1_47.3362368.273b6ee9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I surely hope they were not giving the Augustana folks any cigarettes. Bob Gustafson 13th --part1_47.3362368.273b6ee9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit HTMLFONT SIZE=2I surely hope they were not giving the Augustana folks any cigarettes. BR BRBob Gustafson BR13th/FONT/HTML --part1_47.3362368.273b6ee9_boundary--
