I come from Minneapolis and moved back here as an adult. A few observations:

1) Of course lots of stuff still sucks, this is a low bar for miracles ;)

2) The region of influence is huge – going west the next real city is Seattle. This has always been an important part of the city, first for lumber, then agriculture, and now medicine and education.

3) Sure there's a brain drain, but we also have that large region draining into this city. Rural areas produce smart and interesting people as well.

4) Government is quite competent. I get a broad and consistent sense that people who work in government, elected or not, see it as a form of service.

5) Government is generally fiscally conservative. Not bullshit fiscal conservatism, but the kind that keeps expenditures low AND taxes high. As a result the squeezes we have had (the same everyone has had lately) haven't been too destructive.

6) Minneapolis is embedded in a quite large county, that includes a lot of suburbs and even some rural areas (even if those are dwindling). Minneapolis is not the majority of the county, population or area. I know many urbanists get excited about unified governments like Indianapolis where county and city take on the same boundaries. I think that's unsafe – you can get shit done, but shit can also fall apart. St. Louis is a good counterexample.

7) We're even less unified than that, because Minneapolis and St. Paul make up one metro area, the two being largely indistinguishable from each other. I liked this opinion piece on the problems with city government: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/07/19/urban_malgove... – specifically the problem with a lack of political competition in core cities. Like most big cities Minneapolis is almost one-party (there's a Green Party that manages to just barely hold on to relevancy), but the competition between Minneapolis and St. Paul I think helps keep both of them honest. It's a friendly competition, but it helps moderate things. For instance, a useful critique lately has been that St. Paul Public Schools manages to spend considerably less and has better outcomes, for a student body that looks largely the same. I'm hoping we explore that further.

8) Cost of living isn't that low. Lower than San Francisco, sure, but everything in the U.S. is cheaper than that. We don't have the bursts of speculation that drive prices up in weird ways, and we have the naturally suppressive power of our weather, but it's not cheap.

9) There are many criticisms of the disparities here – that Minnesota generally and Minneapolis along with it have a greater difference in outcomes for whites and minorities, across many measures. Some of these are problematic (I'm very unhappy with our policing), but some of the criticism I think is unwarranted. We have a large Somali population, for instance. They are struggling. But they JUST MOVED FROM SOMALIA. Families torn apart, no background in an educational or economic system like here, I'm certain many people hold trauma from their experiences in Somalia. Of course they aren't doing awesomely. But they are doing okay, and all considered that's kind of incredible. And that population is in Minnesota ENTIRELY because of our social services. And I'm glad this community can use its wealth to help these people, but the talk of disparities is just off. I think this is largely true for many of the minorities here who are fairly recent immigrants, we could do better but we're also doing good by them. (The same assessment doesn't really apply to Native Americans, that's a sad situation where this community is not living up to its obligations.)