[Speed Gibson,
Sunday January 2, 2005 at 4:08pm]
Minneapolis: Who's in Charge? (1)
The Minneapolis Star Tribune first posed this question in a special OpEx suite of articles four weeks ago (Dec 5). A number of responses were published Dec 18. Yesterday, Republican and former State Senator Fritz Knaak wrote that "As Minneapolis founders, GOP can't stand by."
Minneapolis has a "weak mayor" / "strong council" form of government. The council comprises 13 ward members plus the mayor, who has relatively little power over and above the council as a whole. The council directs day-to-day operations, as there is no City Manager like most of the suburbs. Minneapolis also has a number of separate legal entities such as the Park Board with its own police and elected officials.
I'm rather impressed with the Star Tribune's work here. The problem is real, and the reporting much more focused on policy than politics. There is open admission that even the DFL has much to do with the current state of affairs.
Minneapolis is in serious financial trouble. Annual per capita spending is approaching $4,000, and that doesn't include the Minneapolis Public Schools. A generous Legislature and Congress have provided cover in the past, but budget deficits here and in Washington are drying up these sources of revenue.
The Star Tribune's position is that productive reform, even a productive dialog about reform, is difficult at best given Minneapolis's obsolete structure. The mayor's position is largely ceremonial, and the council makes each decision based on the ward politics of the moment. It is both inefficient and ineffective, and even the Star Tribune seems to understand why further "investment" in Minneapolis is unappealing to the Legislature given this near total lack of accountability.
I don't know how long these articles will remain on the Star Tribune web site, but they are currently grouped together under Editorials. You'll even find a proposed new Minneapolis City Charter.
More to come...
Minneapolis has a "weak mayor" / "strong council" form of government. The council comprises 13 ward members plus the mayor, who has relatively little power over and above the council as a whole. The council directs day-to-day operations, as there is no City Manager like most of the suburbs. Minneapolis also has a number of separate legal entities such as the Park Board with its own police and elected officials.
I'm rather impressed with the Star Tribune's work here. The problem is real, and the reporting much more focused on policy than politics. There is open admission that even the DFL has much to do with the current state of affairs.
Minneapolis is in serious financial trouble. Annual per capita spending is approaching $4,000, and that doesn't include the Minneapolis Public Schools. A generous Legislature and Congress have provided cover in the past, but budget deficits here and in Washington are drying up these sources of revenue.
The Star Tribune's position is that productive reform, even a productive dialog about reform, is difficult at best given Minneapolis's obsolete structure. The mayor's position is largely ceremonial, and the council makes each decision based on the ward politics of the moment. It is both inefficient and ineffective, and even the Star Tribune seems to understand why further "investment" in Minneapolis is unappealing to the Legislature given this near total lack of accountability.
I don't know how long these articles will remain on the Star Tribune web site, but they are currently grouped together under Editorials. You'll even find a proposed new Minneapolis City Charter.
More to come...