Feds denies funds for Minneapolis rebuild

[ilikeverin]

https://www.startribune.com/feds-deny-walz-s-request-for-aid-to-rebuild-after-riots/571715162/

Im guessing Trump wants to punish the city despite the fact most are innocent.

Tom Emmer himself wrote to Trump to ask him to deny the aid.

Why should the fed give Minneapolis funds? Make the leftists pay for that sht

This is a fair point.  I don't agree with it, but this is a fair point.  

I don't wish to punish the citizens of Minneapolis, as most are not responsible for this.  But the damage occurred to the extent that it did because the Governor of MN (Tim Walz) and the Mayor of Minneapolis (Jacob Frey) ordered Police to stand down and deliberately did not take the sort of enforcement measures to contain the rioting, looting, arson, false imprisonment, battery and intimidation of persons, and other criminal activities of Marxist Mobs.  Indeed, as Mob Activity raged on, the Minneapolis City Council actively sought to placate the mob, voting to actually abolish the Minneapolis PD.  Gov. Walz could have sent in the National Guard, but he essentially did not until it was too late.  Political Leadership allowed a police precinct to be occupied while they publicly spoke of abolishing the only Department Minneapolis has to enforce the laws.  

If we are going to rebuild (with Federal monies) cities that have been destroyed by the rioting, arson, and looting done by Marxist BLM and Marxist Antifa, there ought to be preconditions to that aid:

^^^Aid needs to be predicated on the premise that the damage done is the sole fault of the rioters.  
       These riots need to be blamed squarely on the riots themselves.  There must be NO rhetorical
       concessions whatsoever regarding George Floyd, police brutality, "systemic racism" etc.  These
       riots were not about any of that, and this is crystal clear in hindsight.  The mistake of the Kerner
       Commission was to place the blame for the 1967 riots on "everyone but the rioters themselves".  
       If rebuilding these cities is to be on the taxpayer's dime, that mistake must not be repeated.  
       The rioters and the rioters alone are to blame; this must be a precondition to any aid.

^^^A National Commission needs to be empaneled to point out the failure of the Minneapolis City
       Government and of Gov. Walz to maintain order in the face of Marxist Mobs, looters and vandals. The manner in which Gov. Walz, Mayor Frey, et al, abandoned their primary duty to provide for the public order needs to be examined, documented, ,and explained to the people.  There needs
       to be a clear presentation of how and why law enforcement was ordered to stand down, as well
       as an objective look as what would have likely happened if law enforcement, or the National
       Guard had provided the response necessary to quell disturbances from the outset.

^^^No aid whatsoever shall go to any city that seeks to cut back its police force in the least.  These
       riots were extensive, they were anything but peaceful, they were traumatic to law-abiding,
       taxpaying citizens.  Most importantly, these riots in these cities demonstrate a need for MORE
       policing, and not less.  

^^^No aid will be given to rebuild cities where states have abolished cash bail.  This was an insane
       idea that has repeatedly compromised the safety of law-abiding citizens.  If states wish to
       abolish cash bail, they can rebuild on their own dimes.  If not, taxpayers need to be assured that
       governments have the will and the ability to ensure that dangerous suspects are held and that all
       suspects have the proper motivation to show for trial.

^^^No monies shall be expended for replacement statues and monuments.  Non-confederate
       monuments torn down may be restored and replaced.  New monuments shall be at the expense
       of the Municipality.  

^^^No monies shall be expended to rebuild municipalities where its prosecutors refuse to proceed
       with prosecutions of those who committed crimes while rioting, or whose Governors have
       granted blanket amnesties to rioting activities.

Minneapolis, Seattle, New York, and any number of other cities conducted themselves irresponsibly.  They failed to defend the persons and property of law-abiding citizens.  Even moreso, many of their local leaders appear to actively sympathize with the rioters.  This is what it is, but taxpayers in cities whose leaders DID contain violence where rioting was prevented, or promptly addressed, deserve assurances that the elected leaders in these municipalities will not allow this disorder to happen again without a full response.  Local governments and state governments in numerous states have executed an Epic Fail in protecting its citizens.  Rebuilding ought to come with many strings attached, and with no concessions to the anti-American Woke Contingent who bear great responsibility for the current destruction.

This is a fair point.  I don't agree with it, but this is a fair point.

I don't wish to punish the citizens of Florida, as most are not responsible for this.  But the damage occurred to the extent that it did because the Governor of FL (Ron DeSantis) ordered environmental engineers to stand down and deliberately did not take the sort of mitigation measures to contain the development of unspoiled land, blatant disregard for estimates of the effects of climate change on sea level rises and the severity of extreme weather events, and other criminal activities of developers.  Indeed, as unsustainable development raged on, the Florida Legislature actively sought to placate the mob, voting to actually abolish the ability of municipalities to incorporate climate change into their development plans.  Gov. DeSantis could have done anything at all whatsoever to acknowledge the effects of climate change on sustainability, but he essentially did not until it was too late.  Political Leadership allowed lands that flood at the drop of a hat to be occupied while they publicly spoke of abolishing the only mechanisms Florida has to develop more sustainably.

If we are going to rebuild (with Federal monies) cities that have been destroyed by extreme storms, there ought to be preconditions to that aid:

^^^Aid needs to be predicated on the premise that the damage done is the sole fault of the developers ignoring climate change.
       This destruction needs to be blamed squarely on the ignorance of the people developing areas that will soon be flooded themselves.  There must be NO rhetorical
       concessions whatsoever regarding "property owner's rights", "my home is my castle", "I've poured so much money into this house" etc.  This
       destruction was not about any of that, and this is crystal clear in hindsight.  The mistake of the [analogy not found] was to place the blame for Hurricanes Irma, Maria, and Harvey on "everything but climate change itself".
       If rebuilding these cities is to be on the taxpayer's dime, that mistake must not be repeated.
       The developers and the developers alone are to blame; this must be a precondition to any aid.

^^^A National Commission needs to be empaneled to point out the failure of the Florida Legislature to maintain order in the face of developers claiming that all of Florida can forevermore be developed without any restrictions whatsoever.
       The manner in which Gov. DeSantis, the Florida Legislature, et al, abandoned their primary duty to provide for
       the public good needs to be examined, documented, and explained to the people.  There needs
       to be a clear presentation of how and why environmental engineers and climate change researchers were ordered to stand down, as well
       as an objective look as what would have likely happened if scientists, or engineers had provided the response necessary to quell unsustainable development from the outset.

^^^No aid whatsoever shall go to any state that seeks to cut back its acknowledgement of climate change.  The drastic consequences of climate change are extensive, it is anything but peaceful, it has been traumatic to worried, taxpaying citizens.  Most importantly, these destruction in these cities demonstrate a need for MORE climate change mitigation, and not less.

^^^No aid will be given to rebuild cities where states subsidize flood insurance.  This was an insane
       idea that has repeatedly compromised the safety of law-abiding citizens.  If states wish to
       subsidize flood insurance, they can rebuild on their own dimes.  If not, taxpayers need to be assured that
       governments have the will and the ability to ensure that developers are held to account for their stubborn refusal to acknowledge the risks taken by building in dangerous areas and that all homeowners are fully cognizant of the risks they are taking when purchasing a property in a dangerous area.

^^^No monies shall be expended for replacement beachside attractions.  Buildings that have collapsed further from the ocean may be restored and replaced.  New beachside attractions shall be at the expense of the Municipality.

^^^No monies shall be expended to rebuild municipalities where urban planners continue to allow unsustainable development close to the ocean, or whose Governors have continued to ignore climate change and its effects on the form of cities.

Miami, Tampa, Fort Myers, and any number of other cities conducted themselves irresponsibly.  They failed to establish cities that recognized the precariousness of their development patterns.  Even moreso, many of their local leaders appear to actively sympathize with climate change skeptics.  This is what it is, but taxpayers in cities whose leaders DID start climate change mitigation efforts, deserve assurances that the elected leaders in these municipalities will not allow rebuilding to happen again without taking into account these deleterious activities.  Local governments and state governments in numerous states have executed an Epic Fail in protecting its citizens.  Rebuilding ought to come with many strings attached, and with no concessions to the climate change deniers who bear great responsibility for the current destruction.

[ilikeverin]

https://www.startribune.com/feds-deny-walz-s-request-for-aid-to-rebuild-after-riots/571715162/

Im guessing Trump wants to punish the city despite the fact most are innocent.

Tom Emmer himself wrote to Trump to ask him to deny the aid.

Why should the fed give Minneapolis funds? Make the leftists pay for that sht

This is a fair point.  I don't agree with it, but this is a fair point. 

I don't wish to punish the citizens of Minneapolis, as most are not responsible for this.  But the damage occurred to the extent that it did because the Governor of MN (Tim Walz) and the Mayor of Minneapolis (Jacob Frey) ordered Police to stand down and deliberately did not take the sort of enforcement measures to contain the rioting, looting, arson, false imprisonment, battery and intimidation of persons, and other criminal activities of Marxist Mobs.  Indeed, as Mob Activity raged on, the Minneapolis City Council actively sought to placate the mob, voting to actually abolish the Minneapolis PD.  Gov. Walz could have sent in the National Guard, but he essentially did not until it was too late.  Political Leadership allowed a police precinct to be occupied while they publicly spoke of abolishing the only Department Minneapolis has to enforce the laws. 

If we are going to rebuild (with Federal monies) cities that have been destroyed by the rioting, arson, and looting done by Marxist BLM and Marxist Antifa, there ought to be preconditions to that aid:

^^^Aid needs to be predicated on the premise that the damage done is the sole fault of the rioters. 
       These riots need to be blamed squarely on the riots themselves.  There must be NO rhetorical
       concessions whatsoever regarding George Floyd, police brutality, "systemic racism" etc.  These
       riots were not about any of that, and this is crystal clear in hindsight.  The mistake of the Kerner
       Commission was to place the blame for the 1967 riots on "everyone but the rioters themselves". 
       If rebuilding these cities is to be on the taxpayer's dime, that mistake must not be repeated. 
       The rioters and the rioters alone are to blame; this must be a precondition to any aid.

^^^A National Commission needs to be empaneled to point out the failure of the Minneapolis City
       Government and of Gov. Walz to maintain order in the face of Marxist Mobs, looters and vandals. The manner in which Gov. Walz, Mayor Frey, et al, abandoned their primary duty to provide for the public order needs to be examined, documented, ,and explained to the people.  There needs
       to be a clear presentation of how and why law enforcement was ordered to stand down, as well
       as an objective look as what would have likely happened if law enforcement, or the National
       Guard had provided the response necessary to quell disturbances from the outset.

^^^No aid whatsoever shall go to any city that seeks to cut back its police force in the least.  These
       riots were extensive, they were anything but peaceful, they were traumatic to law-abiding,
       taxpaying citizens.  Most importantly, these riots in these cities demonstrate a need for MORE
       policing, and not less. 

^^^No aid will be given to rebuild cities where states have abolished cash bail.  This was an insane
       idea that has repeatedly compromised the safety of law-abiding citizens.  If states wish to
       abolish cash bail, they can rebuild on their own dimes.  If not, taxpayers need to be assured that
       governments have the will and the ability to ensure that dangerous suspects are held and that all
       suspects have the proper motivation to show for trial.

^^^No monies shall be expended for replacement statues and monuments.  Non-confederate
       monuments torn down may be restored and replaced.  New monuments shall be at the expense
       of the Municipality. 

^^^No monies shall be expended to rebuild municipalities where its prosecutors refuse to proceed
       with prosecutions of those who committed crimes while rioting, or whose Governors have
       granted blanket amnesties to rioting activities.

Minneapolis, Seattle, New York, and any number of other cities conducted themselves irresponsibly.  They failed to defend the persons and property of law-abiding citizens.  Even moreso, many of their local leaders appear to actively sympathize with the rioters.  This is what it is, but taxpayers in cities whose leaders DID contain violence where rioting was prevented, or promptly addressed, deserve assurances that the elected leaders in these municipalities will not allow this disorder to happen again without a full response.  Local governments and state governments in numerous states have executed an Epic Fail in protecting its citizens.  Rebuilding ought to come with many strings attached, and with no concessions to the anti-American Woke Contingent who bear great responsibility for the current destruction.

This is a fair point.  I don't agree with it, but this is a fair point.

I don't wish to punish the citizens of Florida, as most are not responsible for this.  But the damage occurred to the extent that it did because the Governor of FL (Ron DeSantis) ordered environmental engineers to stand down and deliberately did not take the sort of mitigation measures to contain the development of unspoiled land, blatant disregard for estimates of the effects of climate change on sea level rises and the severity of extreme weather events, and other criminal activities of developers.  Indeed, as unsustainable development raged on, the Florida Legislature actively sought to placate the mob, voting to actually abolish the ability of municipalities to incorporate climate change into their development plans.  Gov. DeSantis could have done anything at all whatsoever to acknowledge the effects of climate change on sustainability, but he essentially did not until it was too late.  Political Leadership allowed lands that flood at the drop of a hat to be occupied while they publicly spoke of abolishing the only mechanisms Florida has to develop more sustainably.

If we are going to rebuild (with Federal monies) cities that have been destroyed by extreme storms, there ought to be preconditions to that aid:

^^^Aid needs to be predicated on the premise that the damage done is the sole fault of the developers ignoring climate change.
       This destruction needs to be blamed squarely on the ignorance of the people developing areas that will soon be flooded themselves.  There must be NO rhetorical
       concessions whatsoever regarding "property owner's rights", "my home is my castle", "I've poured so much money into this house" etc.  This
       destruction was not about any of that, and this is crystal clear in hindsight.  The mistake of the [analogy not found] was to place the blame for Hurricanes Irma, Maria, and Harvey on "everything but climate change itself".
       If rebuilding these cities is to be on the taxpayer's dime, that mistake must not be repeated.
       The developers and the developers alone are to blame; this must be a precondition to any aid.

^^^A National Commission needs to be empaneled to point out the failure of the Florida Legislature to maintain order in the face of developers claiming that all of Florida can forevermore be developed without any restrictions whatsoever.
       The manner in which Gov. DeSantis, the Florida Legislature, et al, abandoned their primary duty to provide for
       the public good needs to be examined, documented, and explained to the people.  There needs
       to be a clear presentation of how and why environmental engineers and climate change researchers were ordered to stand down, as well
       as an objective look as what would have likely happened if scientists, or engineers had provided the response necessary to quell unsustainable development from the outset.

^^^No aid whatsoever shall go to any state that seeks to cut back its acknowledgement of climate change.  The drastic consequences of climate change are extensive, it is anything but peaceful, it has been traumatic to worried, taxpaying citizens.  Most importantly, these destruction in these cities demonstrate a need for MORE climate change mitigation, and not less.

^^^No aid will be given to rebuild cities where states subsidize flood insurance.  This was an insane
       idea that has repeatedly compromised the safety of law-abiding citizens.  If states wish to
       subsidize flood insurance, they can rebuild on their own dimes.  If not, taxpayers need to be assured that
       governments have the will and the ability to ensure that developers are held to account for their stubborn refusal to acknowledge the risks taken by building in dangerous areas and that all homeowners are fully cognizant of the risks they are taking when purchasing a property in a dangerous area.

^^^No monies shall be expended for replacement beachside attractions.  Buildings that have collapsed further from the ocean may be restored and replaced.  New beachside attractions shall be at the expense of the Municipality.

^^^No monies shall be expended to rebuild municipalities where urban planners continue to allow unsustainable development close to the ocean, or whose Governors have continued to ignore climate change and its effects on the form of cities.

Miami, Tampa, Fort Myers, and any number of other cities conducted themselves irresponsibly.  They failed to establish cities that recognized the precariousness of their development patterns.  Even moreso, many of their local leaders appear to actively sympathize with climate change skeptics.  This is what it is, but taxpayers in cities whose leaders DID start climate change mitigation efforts, deserve assurances that the elected leaders in these municipalities will not allow rebuilding to happen again without taking into account these deleterious activities.  Local governments and state governments in numerous states have executed an Epic Fail in protecting its citizens.  Rebuilding ought to come with many strings attached, and with no concessions to the climate change deniers who bear great responsibility for the current destruction.

I'd be willing to talk about your points if you concede I'm right about aid to Minneapolis.

I'm not a climate denier.  I certainly do not agree with the massive amount of construction in Florida (or in the Outer Banks of NC and other low lying coastal areas) which constitute building in harms way. 

If I were to make your argument, the hyena packers here would accuse me of derailing a thread, or engaging in whataboutism.  I'm not going to do that because my logic on aid to Minneapolis is applicable in other situations.

So to be sure:  Are you saying that we should not provide aid to Florida cities that have not complied with measures to combat climate change, or construction that has gone forward denying climate change, while, at the same time, we provide Federal Funds to a Municipality that, in the face of massive Marxist lawlessness, opts to abolish its Police Department, after ordering Law Enforcement to stand down in the fact of violent Marxist Mobs?  I'm OK with a "No!" to aid on both counts.  But "yes" to Minneapolis and "no" to Florida is certainly not acceptable.

Alright. If you're content with the idea of federal disaster belief being contingent on the political beliefs of the party in charge, then I'm happy to hear you acknowledge that. I believe very strongly that Florida is a state that needs to strongly change its patterns of development; I do not believe that disaster relief funds, immediately after a disaster, are the place to be pushing policy agendas, no matter how strongly I believe them. As stupid as I think it is to build right up to the ocean in a state that's as flat as yours, if a hurricane leveled Florida, of course I'd want to give you aid. Your citizens should not have to pay the price for your politicians' foolishness. Of course we should use such things to start a dialogue about the future; but immediately after a disaster is not the time to withhold money to individuals.

As far as the "this won't help Trump carry MN" takes, lolwut?

Liberal city vs more conservative suburbs/rurals is one of the oldest political dynamics in the book (way older than Trump), and statewide elections (both primaries and the general) in Minnesota and other Midwestern states have often hinged on this "everybody else vs the Big, Bad City" type mob mentality.

Letting Minneapolis fester in its own squalor is going to serve voters in Minnetonka and Apple Valley just fine.

I wouldn't say that the city vs. suburban/rural dynamic is quite as strong in Minnesota as it is in most of the Midwest. For example, Minnesota's Met Council is one of the strongest and (generally) most-effective regional partnerships in the country. Sure, some voters in MN-07 (Emmer's district) probably agree with your sentiments, but MN-02 (Apple Valley), and, especially, MN-03 (Minnetonka)? Nah. I doubt this is going to have much of an effect on MN's vote in the general election, but I have my faith in Minnesota Nice.

[ilikeverin]

Also R.P McM comparing this to damage caused by a natural disaster is hilarious given there is now way you can stop those from happening

There's a very, very easy way that you prevent destruction from natural disasters: don't build cities where you know they will strike. Hurricanes are not only possible in Florida, they are entirely inevitable. The government of Florida "WILLFULLY declined to protect the safety and well-being of ordinary citizens when they had the means at their disposal to do so".