[Mpls] MACs broken promises

[David Brauer]

On Jul 14, 2004, at 1:04 PM, gemgram wrote:

> David Brauer writes:
>> "Bottom line: the MAC has to spend the money somewhere. Better on the
> people affected by noise than on a facility that's already overbuilt
> (and it is overbuilt, in gates, parking, etc.)"
>
> I am bothered by the idea "has to spend the money somewhere".

> While I truly feel for those who built and bought houses before the 
> Airport
> was in full operation, I must say there are other environmental 
> impacts and
> even greater needs in some other areas.

Sorry, guys. The money (as others have noted) is dedicated to airport 
operations - it can't be used for the better purposes you cite.

Since the MAC isn't talking about cutting the dedicated fee, that means 
you can have a nicer concourse for the Airport Mall or some mitigation 
for people adversely affected by airport noise.

Me, I'd rather spend it on people who suffer, even if it is less than 
those who suffer in other walks of life. Frankly, supporting such a 
paradigm might help others in other walks of life with more serious 
problems.

Or, we can all undercut each other, which is a pretty good way to make 
sure no one gets ahead.

David Brauer
Kingfield