I was gobsmacked, as my British friends might say, when I learned that the price tag for Mayor R.T. Rybak's public drinking fountain campaign was $500,000. That's $50,000 each for the 10 fountains originally planned for installation throughout the city of Minneapolis. (The number now being considered is four fountains.) Given the dismal economy, the state's deficit and the city's budget challenges, this project, on the surface, seems like an extravagance we can't afford. But before throwing up our arms and tarnishing this initiative as just another example of a liberal Democrat's unbridled spending, let's consider the timing, proposed funding and purpose of this plan.

For starters, Mayor Rybak introduced this idea in 2007 – well before the economy went south. The Mayor has a vision for Minneapolis, but he also is pragmatic. I doubt he would have undertaken this venture after the country slipped into the Great Recession. Mayor Rybak has since requested a reduction in spending for the project which would result in reducing the number of drinking fountains that will be installed.

Political pundits argue that these fountains are taking the place of additional cops on the streets, but having less fountains does not translate into having more police protection. A portion of the funding for this project comes from water fees paid by Minneapolitans. The city also has a longstanding commitment to designate two percent of construction costs for the creation and installation of public art. Public art has always been a lightening rod for criticism from conservatives, but the reality is that cities that embrace the arts attract visitors and others who want to live and work in vibrant communities.

Lost in all of the rhetoric is the purpose of these fountains. Minneapolis has excellent drinking water, it's true. Any campaign that draws attention to this and gets us drinking water from the tap and reducing the consumption of bottled water would be a good thing for the environment. But there is something else missing from this debate.

Every day, hundreds of homeless women, men and children in the Twin Cities must think about where they are going to get water. I know this because I work in the Phillips neighborhood of Minneapolis where our building's outdoor water spigot is a resource for many people who do not have the access to safe drinking water that most of us take for granted.

Yes, $50,000 for a single drinking fountain is expensive, but Mayor Rybak has spurred discussion about a subject that wouldn't even be considered had he not introduced this idea. And, pardon the pun, ideas have ripple effects.

My employer, Open Arms of Minnesota, is about to complete construction of a new facility at the intersection of 25th Street and Bloomington Avenue in Minneapolis. Because of the Mayor's initiative to promote city drinking water we realized that we have a responsibility to ensure that all people in the Phillips neighborhood have access to drinking water. Through fundraising efforts we received donations from the private sector to purchase and install a very utilitarian drinking fountain outside our new building. It didn't cost $50,000, and no one will confuse our fountain (pictured to the right above) for a work of art; but it wouldn't have happened at all if the Mayor hadn't tweaked our consciousness on the issue.

Now that Mayor Rybak has emerged as a frontrunner for the Democrats in the gubernatorial race, we can expect even more criticism of his drinking fountains. Elections come and go. People will still be drinking out of these fountains long after this red herring is forgotten.