Mr. Berg, we object to the term "Hellhole of crime". We would prefer "Heckhole of bad behavior".
Thank you.

(Simpsons parody)

A) Even KvM has posted the correction on the FBI statistic that was misreported. If you want to keep using that wrong figure, then your fact-checker needs to be re-calibrated.

A for who's Minneapolis it is, there is plenty of blame to share. If you are into the blame game, you need to look all across the spectrum.

http://centrisity.blogspot.com/2006/05/whose-minneapolis-is-it.html

If Amy is to blame, wouldn't you think that crime would have been on a steady rise the whole time. I look at the spike, and I look at what has changed just preceding the spike. If you rub you eyes, and look closely at the truth, you will see it to. As they say, follow the money.

Flash

So where does Minneapolis find the resources to enact its smoking ban?

Flash, if it ain't AK's fault that crime went up, it can't be by her doing that crime goes down either!

If she has no possible role in this spike, she can have had no possible role in the decrease from the 97 spike.

Still wanna go down this road? Still wanna blame the cops, even though they keep arresting the same people over and over.

The cops I talk to are pretty darn tired of seeing the perps walk out of jail before they even finish typing the reports up.

So if she isn't to blame for crime in Minneapolis, what else does she have that would make her a good US Senator again?

The reality is that Minneapolis is a particularly more intense place than St. Paul, or any other area you mentioned and draws a lot more people in from around the state, metro, etc. Consequently per capita crime numbers are going to be higher. Minneapolis also has a higher number of youths than St. Paul (a higher crime demographic) A lot of the changes needed to improve the situation will have to take place at the state (welfare reform, prisons)and county level (courts) but are not simply a function of the county attorney's office. This is not to say that Klobuchar has no responsibility but that to put the entire, or even bulk of the burden on her isn't particularly fair or honest.

The idea that LGA was some type of smokescreen: It seems pretty idealistic to me to assume that a property tax is inherently the most efficient at funding the various needs of different cities.

By the way the state funded Gang Strike Force cuts in 2003 disproportionately hit Minneapolis. Organized crime needs to be pursued across governmental jurisdictions and properly should be funded at that level.

Statistically people also seem to ignore the fact that Minneapolis is a small central city (383K) relative to the metro. If we were to assume that there is some rough baseline criminal element in a metro of approximately 3 million people, Minneapolis has a large portion of these people since they tend to be concentrated in certain areas over time due to housing economics, social services available etc. (For example Indianapolis has 800K or so people in a 2 mil metro) Now let's just hypothesize that St. Paul and Minneapolis were one larger central city. Then the crime rates in the consolidated city would be lower per capita than they are currently in Minneapolis. Is it any safer, no it is simply a statistical issue. As things sit Minneapolis has a proportionately smaller property tax base to draw on to address the fact that it is currently responsible for policing a disproportionate amount of the Metro areas crime.

This is not a political issue. The Strib is writing quite a bit about the unacceptable level of crime in Mpls. Pointing fingers is not a solution. Do you have any?

AAA:

"Still wanna go down this road? Still wanna blame the cops, even though they keep arresting the same people over and over."

Can you show me where I blamed cops. I realize you don't know me as well as some of your colleagues, maybe they can assist you in that.

As for the road we are traveling, you folks chose this path, one I believe you may regret.

Follow the money, or in this case, the lack thereof. Look at what has changed most recently to cause this spike.

I can't predict what kind of Senator Amy will be, but I do know where Mark Kennedy's loyalties lie, and they are not with Minnesotans, that is the bottom line in my decision to support the Left leaning Moderate Klobuchar over the far right-winged extremist Kennedy.

If you all are so confidence in the candidacy of Rep. Kennedy, when are we going to see a website dedicated to the positive vision towards the future he has to offer, instead of attack site popping up all over the place.

Flash
Centrisity.com

Flash,

"Even KvM has posted the correction on the FBI statistic that was misreported. "

Doesn't matter. Even if you accept the lower figure, the spike is immense, and grossly out of proportion to the rest of the region.

Nick,

"The reality is that Minneapolis is a particularly more intense place than St. Paul, or any other area you mentioned and draws a lot more people in from around the state, metro, etc. Consequently per capita crime numbers are going to be higher"

Saint Paul has a *large* immigrant population.

And when you say "Minneapolis draws..." etc, I'd have to ask "why does it seem to draw so many criminals?"

By the way, Saint Paul is right across the river (or down the street) from Minneapolis. From Phillips, it's a three minute drive. Why has the crime wave not crossed the river?

Mitch, I could note that no city in the state had a bigger dollar drop in LGA than Minneapolis, or that Minneapolis' per capita drop from '03-'05 is greater than any city you cite (Bloomington lost no aid, and Mazeppa gained), or as stated above, that cuts to the COPS program hit Minneapolis' police department disproportionately, or that Amy Klobuchar is the county attorney for all of Hennepin County, and crime there--including Bloomington, which you cite approvingly--has dropped.

But instead, I'll just remark how sad it is that crime in Minneapolis is spiking, and rather than see what can be done on it, the GOP wants to blame Amy Klobuchar for it. Way to show how much you care about the state, guys.

Ok Flash. I really love how you are spinning this issue. But facts are nasty little things.

First, regarding the COPS program. The program was started under the Clinton administration, and it funded additional police on the streets. BUT! BIG BUT! Read closely now, Flash: THE PROGRAM FUNDED THE ADDITIONAL POLICING POSITIONS AT 100% FOR THE FIRST FEW YEARS, BUT SLOWLY REDUCED THE LEVEL OF FEDERAL FUNDING! OVER TIME, CITIES WERE REQUIRED, AS A MATTER OF ACCEPTING THE GRANT MONEY, TO ABSORB THOSE POLICE POSITIONS INTO THEIR ONGOING BUDGETS! Understand? So the bottom line is that Minneapolis grabbed the cash, KNOWING they were supposed to slowly begin local funding of the positions! That's the promise they made when they accepted the cash.

Next, let's dispose of the kinard that local government aid (LGA) cuts have caused the problem. Take a look at how many cities completely lost LGA www,house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/issinfo/certLGA04.pdf

Since the 2003 cuts, Minneapolis has been held harmless on LGA. This report does NOT even include the complete reduction of a program named HACA, which provided additional aids.

Look how many cities were zeroed-out. Is crime skyrocketing? Nope. I know cities who lost a total of 25% of their funding...and crime is about the same as its been in the past 10 years.

And the blame here does not lay with the cops on Minneapolis' streets. They only arrest people, not try them and lock 'em up. THAT'S WHERE LIL AMY HAS FAILED MISERABLY. THE...WORST....HENNEPIN...COUNTY....ATTORNY...EVER.

And YOU want her involved in our National security? With Lil Amy's catch-and-release loving programs, I can only believe she'd be the first one to release those terrorists in Gitmo on her first day in office.

Get some educating, Flash. Or get your money back for any college you paid for.

*whispering*

Oh Daaaavve!!

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/004423.php

""Klobuchar has proved to be an excellent County Attorney. She has vigorously supported the prosecution and incarceration of the gangbangers without the slightest public display of hesitation, handwringing, or apology. Although the competition is not stiff, she is the best Hennepin County Attorney of the past 30 years. Today's Star Tribune has a good profile of her: "Amy Klobuchar talks about life, politics, and family."""

Flash
Centrisity.com

I didn't mention anything about immigrant populations but you are right St. Paul has a large one.

What I was referring to was that fact that Minneapolis draws more people in to it on a daily basis than St. Paul. 175K working downtown Mpls v. 50K or so in St. Paul. There are more people in the Warehouse district on a typical Saturday night with no Target center event than on an Xcel center event night. Add in the Lakes and Uptown and there is a big difference between the intensity of the two cities that is not evident from their populations. Minneapolis has a level of intensity that is more similar to much larger cities such as Seattle (500k+), Denver (500k+), Dallas(1.2mil) Crime will often follow the crowds.

I would bet that if you take out a couple neighborhoods in North Minneapolis and Phillips, Minneapolis' crime rate is likely very similar to St. Paul's rate. These are the highest crime areas in the metro. Pretending that it is solely a Minneapolis governmental problem because those areas happen to be in Minneapolis (largely for economic and political reasons) is similar to making the statistical error that I mentioned earlier, where one would conclude that a consolidated Minneapolis and St. Paul would be safer since the per capita crime rate is lower.

For example, if Minneapolis were to give those neighborhoods to St. Paul and allow St. Paul to draw only on the tax base that they added to fund all of the additional city functions, do you really think that crime would decrease because they are now the responsibility of St. Paul?

I have lived in the Warehouse district for most of the past 9 years just 5 blocks from W. Broadway and Washington yet there is very little violent crime here when compared to just blocks away. Urban areas almost always have areas with completely different levels of crime in a matter of a few blocks. So your example of Phillips v. St. Paul isn't particularly apt.

Nick,

Several good points. Crime isn't necessarily portable.

However...

In 1990, North Minneapolis and Phillips (a famously lousy 'hood in south Mpls, for all you non-Twin-Citieans) were having their most epic crime wave to date. So were Frogtown, Dayton's Bluff and Selby-Dale in Saint Paul (outsiders: all of them tough 'hoods).

16 years later, the Saint Paul neighborhoods are relatively tranquil, especially compared to...North Mpls and Phillips.

And while you make a good point - Saint Paul has an older population - why is it that Minneapolis' youth seem to be so much more prone to crime than those in so many other places?

The fact remains that the Hennepin County Attorney's office pursues lighter sentencing, lower bails, and generally more lenient prosecution than comparable offices in other cities. Hence the "catch and release" jape.

Dave is right - there has been some serious spinning going on about Mpls finances.

Minneapolis has 7% of the state's population. Minneapolis now gets 20% of all LGA paid out. The "huge cuts to LGA for Minneapolis" are based on fuzzy math - Minneapolis had a huge increase in LGA in 2002, followed by a cut in 2003. At the same time, their was a change in the transit tax that greatly benefited Mpls.

Here is a summary of the tax and aid changes 2001-2006 for Minneapolis:

LGA/HACA 2001: $108,799,637
LGA 2006: $ 94,842,422
Net Change: (13,957,215)

Reduction in city tax levy due to transit tax change: $15,662,343

Net change in taxes and aids due to state actions:
$ 1,705,128 (in other words, Minneapolis is actually AHEAD of where they were in 2001.)

Mpls change as percent of 2004 Current Expenditures: +.3 %

Compare that to Lakeville:

2001 LGA/HACA: $2,244,911
2006 LGA: $0
Net Change: ($2,224,911)
MVHC Cut: ($ 656,230)
Transit change: $ 205,959
Net Change 01-06: ($2,695,182)
Lakeville Net Change as a percentage of 2004 current expenditures: -15.44%

So if cuts caused the problem, Lakeville should have had a massive increase in crime. But it didn't. Lakeville should also have decimated their police department. It didn't. Lakeville cut quite a few things, and raised property taxes for others, but public safety was the #1 priority.

Does that mean that Lakeville spent so much more than Mpls that it had more room to cut? Lets look at the numbers. Minneapolis spent about $1500 per resident in 2004, Lakeville spent about 371. So while Minneapolis is struggling to find any fat, and had to cut public safety, Lakeville managed to find a way to manage with far, far less money to work with.

So maybe LGA causes crime?

Hey Flash...thanks for admitting defeat by changing the subject.

Also, what John Hinderacker says is his opinion. Not mine. And not based on REAL experience. It should be noted that John is the same village idiot that attempted a completely moronic re-write of the Mn GOP party platform at the 2000 Rochester convention, only to have it ripped to shreads by the delegate.

Thanks Wendy! I appreciate the comment. If you review almost any city outside of Minneapolis, the LGA-crime connection is non-existant.

And my COPS program information is WELL known to even the DFLers. They just don't want to ADMIT that they took the grant money, KNOWING they had to increasing pick up the funding. They'd rather lay the blame on BUSH! BUSH! BUSH!

Reality bites, don't it...you DFL hacks (see: Flash)

Dave and Wendy -

I don't find your analysis to be convincing regarding the LGA cuts and crime rates.

It would make sense that LGA cuts will impact the issues/programs that the monies were being spent on. Minneapolis had been spending much of its LGA on public safety, consequently crime has gone up in light of the cuts.

Not all cities that had LGA cuts had the same needs in public safety (i.e. high concentrations of poverty in historically high crime neighborhoods)and were spending LGA funds in a different manner. I'm sure that Lakeville and other cities had budget shortfalls in the areas they were funding with their LGA dollars.

Furthermore, I pose the same question to you as posed to Mitch, For example, if Minneapolis were to give its worst neighborhoods to Lakeville and allow Lakeville to draw only on the tax base that they added to fund all of the additional city functions, do you really think that crime would decrease because they are now the responsibility of Lakeville?

Mitch, I'm not familiar with Frogtown, or Dayton's Bluff, but I can say that the commercial corridor revitalization at Selby-Dale seems to have the most to do with that area's turnaround (as opposed to policing/sentencing). I think of it as similar to the Eat Street area in Minneapolis, The problem with Phillips and Much of North Mpls is that there aren't commercial corridor's for entrepreneurs to begin businesses in.

Gentrification generally follows this type of pattern: Low rental rates attract small businesses, new commercial activitiy brings in people from outside of the neighborhood, improves the public safety by having business keep order, etc. Outsider's decide to move there due to the increased business amenities and the generally lower housing costs. Repeat.

Predominantly residential areas like much of North and Phillips have less of a chance to regenerate in this fashion since there is nothing to draw people in.

Nick: I'll start correcting you and let others complete the job.

Your comment:

"Minneapolis had been spending much of its LGA on public safety, consequently crime has gone up in light of the cuts."

Sorry, but that is not true at all. Counties and municipalities receive their LGA for ANY purpose they want and it dumps into their general fund accounts. There is no "ear-marking". No strings. It goes into the same pot as property taxes. Your statement is as accurate as me stating "Minneapolis spends all its LGA on street repair, housing inspections, and human rights coordinators."

Once you get your money, you choose what to spend it on. Minneapolis has CHOSEN not to spend money on police. They could cut any number of programs and redirect funds to more police. They CHOOSE not to. And LGA has nothing to do with it.

Dave said:""They only arrest people, not try them and lock 'em up. THAT'S WHERE LIL AMY HAS FAILED MISERABLY.HE...WORST....HENNEPIN...COUNTY....ATTORNY...EVER.""

I didn't change the subject, I merely responded to one of your baseless attacks.

Oh, and the name calling (ie, DFL Hack) is a standard tactic by those afraid of rolling up their sleeves and being part of the solution.

I proudly display a picture of the current president in my den, not because I necessarily support him, but I respect the office. As for Mr. Kennedy, I honor and respect him and his candidacy, but it doesn't mean I will sit idly by while his surrogates spend more time attacking his opposition with baseless charges while spending minimal if any time presenting his vision.

DFL Hack, maybe in your world, but not in the world of those on both sides of the aisle who know me and know that I sincerely want to work towards a better tomorrow, not dwell on pitbull attacks that only causes all of us to spin our wheels.

Flash
Centrisity.com

Dave, whether it is legally earmarked or not doesn't change the fact that that public safety is something Minneapolis was spending a larger amount on until their overall revenues were decreased. The decreases were largely through LGA cuts and property tax reform. Furthermore, it is not as if the city didn't make significant cuts to other areas too.

There are a lot of things that could be cut in theory, such as NRP, but there are reasons that they cannot be in reality, i.e. dedicated funding, state regulations, etc. If you have a proposal that gets around all of these very real issues, I'd be interested. Otherwise this simple, "They CHOOSE not to" argument is unconvincing.

Exerpt from the 2005 budget.

"In 2005, the City of Minneapolis projects $1.25 billion in revenue from a variety of sources. It is important to note that many of the City’s revenues sources are tied revenue, meaning they are required to be spent in defined areas or on specific programs or projects. This limits the City’s ability to apply the revenue to other departments or programs. For example, the City cannot use revenue from fees that it charges for services to fund general government services, such as police and fire services. The City charges fees for water, sewer, and garbage pick-up, but the State law requires that these fees be no higher than the cost of providing those services. So the City cannot raise water bills to pay police officers, for example.
Grants and transfers from the Federal Government and other units of government are also
usually designated for specific needs and purposes. If the City does not spend such grants for their designated purpose, the City will not receive the grants at all. Some cities increase their revenues through assessments, which are also tied to specific purposes like street
maintenance. Bond proceeds must g0 to purposes for which the debt was incurred. Sales tax
revenue is dedicated to the Convention Center by State law. Like many Minnesota cities, Minneapolis pays for other city services (police, fire streets, parks, libraries, etc.) with property taxes and Local Government Aid (LGA)."

From the Minneapolis city budget for 2006

FIR01 City/County EOC/Training Facility
Existing or new infrastructure: New
Cost: $45,000.00

BIK01 Cedar Lake Trail (Phase 3) $583,000.00
BIK04 18th Ave NE Bikeway $300,000.00
BIK08 Hiawatha Trail Connections $487,000.00
BIK18 Hennepin/1st Ave NE Bike Lanes $100,000.00
Total Bike Trail Projects $1,470,000.00

ART01 Art in Public Places $200,000.00

Total expenditure: $1,715,000.00

Tell me about LGA and priorities.

Uh ooh...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Murders in the United States jumped 4.8 percent last year, and overall violent crime was up 2.5 percent for the year, marking the largest annual increase in crime in the United States since 1991, according to figures released Monday by the FBI.

Damn You Amy Klobuchar!

But all those bike trails make it a "better Minneapolis", of course that's assuming people actually feel safe enough to use them.

Well done, Kermit.

Very good work, Kermit.

Nick, I won't debate that grants have to be ear-marked for their specified purpose. LGA is NOT a grant. It is NOT required to be spent in ANY specific manner. That's a fact. Linking any LGA directly to cuts in police is a falsehood.

Here's another item, to add to the LGA issue. You and Flash want to lay the LGA cuts for policing reductions. What ELSE happened in 2003?

Here's a "flash" for you. The state REMOVED levy caps. So, while LGA was cut...the State ALSO removed the handcuffs from the local governments, allowing them to make budgeting decisions and increase their local taxes WITHOUT a levy cap. That meant...if you lost state aid or their were projects you really wanted, YOU CAN BE RESPONSIBLE BOYS AND GIRLS...AND DECIDE IF ITS NEEDED AND TAX YOUR RESIDENTS....WHO ACTUALLY BENEFIT DIRECTLY FROM THE MONEY THAT'S SPENT.

Again, Minneapolis made CHOICES. They were elected to do so. If they want more police, they can re-direct money or raise taxes to protect their citizens from crime.

And Flash, stop portraying yourself as some seeker-of-truth, as I read your blather on your blog. You are ignorant to the COPS program and just as ignorant to the LGA issue. The definition of a "party hack" in my book is spewing uneducated BS (as your post was). You've been proven utterly moronic in your assertions. Just slink back to your hack-hole.

"YOU CAN BE RESPONSIBLE BOYS AND GIRLS...AND DECIDE IF ITS NEEDED AND TAX YOUR RESIDENTS....WHO ACTUALLY BENEFIT DIRECTLY FROM THE MONEY THAT'S SPENT"

That is one of the reasons Minneapolis gets LGA. The state had decided it made sense to tax its residents whom directly benefit. The city provides services to many people who are not residents, i.e. there are things that the non-residents should pay for beacause they benefit the state not just Minneapolis residents. For example the tens of thousands of non-resident business people who work downtown benefit from Minneapolis police, fire protection, etc. They do not pay taxes to Minneapolis. In this respect Minneapolis is distinctly different from most other cities in the state.

Kermit will surely ask, why the commercial property tax rates wouldn't account for this. As a response to that question I'll pose this question in a third variation. Let's say Minneapolis were to turn its worst neighborhoods into separate cities i.e. the city of North Minneapolis. North Minneapolis is only allowed to draw on its own tax base to fund all of the additional city functions, Would there be enough money to decrease the crime and provide all other services? Do you really think that crime would decrease because they had a more aggressive attourny?

My guess is that for the first question the anwer is no. Consequently as it sits now any increase in police funding from increased property taxes will be the richer areas of Minneapolis subsidizing the police proteciton in the poorer areas. This is no different in philosophy than the state subsidizing the city through LGA to address these problems other than the fact that you would like the subsidization to end at a artificial political boundary established over 100 years ago

Kermit,

Before you start making claims about priorities would you care to trace the funding of the trails and bike lanes back to the source and see if they come from the general fund or from some type of dedicated environmental grants, MetCouncil grants, etc. These sound distinctively like grant type projects where the funding wouldn't be available for policing. (I don't know though)

"Kermit will surely ask, why the commercial property tax rates wouldn't account for this."

No, Kermit would ask why the commercial property tax, the city-owned parking ramp fees, the city park parking fees, the additional sales tax (I guess those tens of thousands of non-resident business people who work downtown DO pay taxes to Minneapolis. What a surprise!), and the zillion other fees and levies that local government assesses would pretty much do it.
The point is, they've got enough money to put in bum highways, I mean bike paths, and Mary Tyler Moore statues and some dipsh@t is whining about cuts in LGA.
Give me a friggin break.

Posted by Kermit at June 14, 2006 12:48 PM

should be Nick - Please excuse the mistake. I wrote the saluation in the Name line

"The state had decided it made sense to tax its residents whom directly benefit. The city provides services to many people who are not residents, i.e. there are things that the non-residents should pay for beacause they benefit the state not just Minneapolis residents."

This is an interesting discussion, but your point is rather lame. If your point is that I (not living in Minneapolis) might use their parks or sidewalks, you do have a point. But if that's the reason for the aid, why would MY city not receive a proportional token amount of money when YOU come to MY city?

If your point is that we all drive around in Minneapolis, to destinations or drive though...well...that's why there's a DIFFERENT program from the State, called Minnesota State Aid for streets. High volume arterial streets actually get LOTS of state aid money for repair or rebuild.

I appreciate the discussion, but it all boils down to...the CITY COUNCIL in each city making THEIR decisions on THEIR spending. If Minneapolis wants to actually, seriously make police a priority, they can do it with their own budgets and their own money.

Nick, if you can wade through the hundreds of pages detailing the income and expenditure of the Minneapolis City Budget for 2006 you are welcome to the point (good luck). My point was more general, in that the city spends boatloads of cash on trivial nonsense while whining about so-called cuts in funding and ignoring real priorities.

Again my point is that the city DOES NOT have the ability to shift the money from just any of these programs into policing.

Could they do more than they have? Perhaps, but I don't think you or I are in a position to determine that with what we currently know.

Dave - My point is that a disproportionate percentage of non-residents do use Minneapolis parks, libraries, sidewalks when compared to people from outside of Lakeville for example, whom use Lakeville parks, sidewalks, etc.

Nick, you are wrong. Only grants, specifically applied for and provided by another government entity must be specifically ear-marked for that purpose. Example: You apply for a grant from the Department of Homeland Security for bio-hazard equipment. Or you get MSA money for MSA streets. Or a grant from the Met Council for parks improvement. Or a grant from the local watershed for stormwater cleanup programs.

But...again...BIG BUT!...those are VERY small, one-time shots of money. The VAST amount of money that cities get for operations is DIRECTLY from local taxes and state government aid (in the case of Minneapolis). Those dollars are COMPLETELY at the spending discression of the local government. Do NOT lecture me that the local elected official's hands are tied by ear-marks. It ain't so. Go look at Minneapolis' revenue streams from ad velorum taxes and LGA...its the vast majority of their funding.

They can spend money on what they want. Don't excuse them from their choices.

Nick: I took a look at Minneapolis' on-line 2006 budget. They have $318.5 million dollars in "general revenue" fund budgeted. That does NOT include one penny of ear-marked or purpose-specific spending. That means about 25% of their budget can be spent on ANYTHING they want...whether that's police or trips to Bora-Bora. They have the money. They just choose to spend it the way they do.

Great, we have all established that MPLS has had some financial issues and apparently has not chosen wisely in its spending habits in regards to current crime issues.

Tell me again how this relates to Amy Klobuchar? I hear these attacks how she is soft on crime, but no statistics or information to back it up.

Dave: The city budget puts $115.5 million of the $318.5 million general fund money into policing. That is more than a third of the total general fund. Looking at the 2006 general fund expenses on page 38 and I don't see any easy targets for increasing the police force in any significant manner. Please let me know if you do.

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/city-budget/2006adopted/docs/Sec03_AB06.pdf

Preved Medved

Amy K. Has never done anything that doesn't promote her two bit political career!

atk natural and hairy nefer men hairy penis