It is not about the money. It's the public service aspect. Absolutely, I think it has qualities of redemption. The city gets a second chance. I get a second chance.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I believe in giving people a second chance.
The city has to do what any citizen or family does, when you have a dream. You tighten your belt. You sacrifice some luxuries. Above all, you don't waste a dime.
I see city finances within the context of an economic strategy... We are going to solve our financial problems by growing the economy, and I have rejected some corners that have called for a slash-and-burn approach, and I've rejected others who have called for raising taxes and leaving government as is.
I'm a sucker for giving people money on the street. I don't know if it's a good or a bad thing, but I can't help myself.
In large commercial cities, the money power is, I fear irresistible. It is not by open corruption that it always, or even most generally, operates.
The mayoral mentality is incredibly valuable. I don't want to lose that.
I think it's great that they are getting funding, but it's just too easy. They don't have to work for it. We did it because we had pride, because we loved it.
People don't get involved with local charities or politics because they think it's hard to make a difference and the problem feels overwhelming. But I believe that if all I've time for this year is to write one letter to the local council, it's still worth doing.
Historically, over the last two or three hundred years, the relationship that we've had with money as a society - having money, talking about money - has been a little bit of a shameful thing. Splashing money about is clearly wrong, but there's nothing wrong about giving it back.
First and foremost it's important that we're able to put something back in the game, which we have always done. We're doing this to help needy charities along with the police forces in different towns and cities.
No opposing quotes found.