MNGOP’s Anti-Rybak #16: Street Lighting Fees
Again, the MN GOP relies on a proposal to attack Rybak rather than an actual fee or tax.
* “A new street lighting fee proposed by Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak last February has hit the desks of a City Council that will need to make an election-year decision on whether to use it to help balance the city’s 2010 budget. Rybak proposed the fee, which would cost the typical residential property owner about $20 a year… The fee is designed to raise $3 million to pay for electricity and bulb replacement for the city’s 46,700 residential-area wooden poles, metal poles in business areas and parkway lights.” (Steve Brandt, “Plan to lighten city’s budget,” Star Tribune, July 8, 2009)
They forgot to quote this part of the story: “Those cuts are driven by the $21 million in cuts to state aid to Minneapolis for 2010 announced in June as part of Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s state budget-balancing unallotments.
. . .
The city department has warned that the alternative to proposing the fee is limiting the hours lights are on or cutting back on repairs.”
Pawlenty shifts the burden from the state to cities. Rybak decides to keep the lights on in the City of Minneapolis.
March 18th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
I agree with most of your posts today. I am a conservative, but hope that Rybak’s receives the DFL endorsement. This wasn’t included on the Republican talking points but what role did Rybak play in the smoking ban and Minneapolis’ support of Nice Ride Minnesota. These are two areas I believe the government should have not been involved in.
March 18th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
Must say if this is all the GOP is standing on, maybe they should save us the tax money that would be wasted in this campaign and not run a candidate.
@Dan – regarding the smoking ban and nice ride support, I happen to like the smoking ban (and have zero knowledge of any issue with nice ride), in fact I’m listening to blues in a club right now and the lack of smoke takes away none of my enjoyment. In fact, I think smokers are 100 times healther now than 5 years ago and given the cost of health care, I think that’s a fine tradeoff.
But that’s my opinion, just like you have yours. This is political discourse, and we are welcome to ask our candidates about their stances and politics…and that is what I want. No more of this MDE crap misleading attack and more open AND honest discussion.
March 19th, 2010 at 6:31 am
While the Mayor supported the Minneapolis smoking ban (which turns 5 this month, BTW) he was not the one who proposed it.