tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19838051.post8352305972843349429..comments2024-01-28T22:16:50.852-06:00Comments on Mr. Dilettante’s Neighborhood: Zygi MayoMr. Dhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13920907647566015611noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19838051.post-24515982614141779162013-04-10T11:12:38.387-05:002013-04-10T11:12:38.387-05:00Mayo is more or less asking for funds to remedy wh...<i>Mayo is more or less asking for funds to remedy what Rochester has neglected for decades.</i><br /><br />And therein lies the public policy question to address. What incentive does Rochester have to develop any remedies if it can count on a <i>Dayton ex machina</i> bonding initiative for infrastructure?Mr. Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13920907647566015611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19838051.post-72142763951533800892013-04-10T10:13:57.782-05:002013-04-10T10:13:57.782-05:00I don't like public subsidies, but if you'...I don't like public subsidies, but if you've ever been down here, you'll see quickly that it's a lot harder than it ought to be to get to the Mayo and Gonda buildings, even by the standards of big hospitals and such. Mayo is more or less asking for funds to remedy what Rochester has neglected for decades.Bike Bubbahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08193546045614393425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19838051.post-9442401120036890212013-04-10T09:44:45.472-05:002013-04-10T09:44:45.472-05:00If it truly is just "infrastructure" - r...<i>If it truly is just "infrastructure" - roads, technology, services - to support the growth I think that is within the public purview, especially if the organization is footing 90% of the bill for something that will benefit the public a lot more than a stadium will.</i><br /><br />The "if" is pretty big on this one. The public threats and steamrolling are what arouse my suspicions. <br /><br />On balance, I agree that giving Mayo infrastructure would benefit Minnesota a whole lot more than what's going down on Chicago Avenue. And the larger issue is that because we've committed public dollars to that boondoggle, it's going to be more difficult to muster the resources and the political support required for what likely is a more useful project.Mr. Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13920907647566015611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19838051.post-1544519696199229172013-04-10T09:26:54.612-05:002013-04-10T09:26:54.612-05:00Let's see, one one hand we have a private enti...Let's see, one one hand we have a private entity demanding that the public pick up the biggest share (well more than just "infrastructure") of a $1 billion+ seasonal stadium while paying its own share out of petty cash. On the other hand we have an organization putting up $4.5 billion of a $5 billion project and asking the public/state to pay $500 million in infrastructure costs to build it a new home. If it truly is just "infrastructure" - roads, technology, services - to support the growth I think that is within the public purview, especially if the organization is footing 90% of the bill for something that will benefit the public a lot more than a stadium will. 3john2https://www.blogger.com/profile/05359114327414576258noreply@blogger.com