Appoint a Retrenchment Committee for Albert Lea

Open letter to Mayor-Elect Murtaugh:

Thank-you all for subscribing to my blog! I appreciate the opportunity to express my thoughts and comments in a format that is casual, yet publicly accountable. I believe it is important to be respectful, yet not be afraid to question generally accepted standards.

With that said, I have watched with interest the recent news coming from the State level. I respect the fact that the League of Minnesota Cities stepped up and issued their list of potential cuts to cities that MAY come forward. The numbers for Albert Lea are substantial!

http://www.lmnc.org/media/document/1/25_100million_cut_estimates.pdf

I happen to serve on the board of a state-wide legal aid organization that relies heavily upon funding from the State of Minnesota -- Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services. Without going into the great work that this organization does for those in need, I am most proud of this organization's ability to proactively respond to crisis. They strongly articulate their programs, but do not jump on the "poor us" bandwagon. At our most recent meeting, they appointed a "Retrenchment Committee." The goal of this committee is to carefully review our budget and recommend a series of scenarios of how we would respond to various levels of budget cuts. No-one wants to cut, but being prepared with responsible options seems beyond logical.

I suggest that you follow this lead and immediately appoint a citizen committee to carefully scrutinize the City budget and present a series of options for cuts. Use the Leagues' projected cut as the first tier, and a tier 5% greater than and a tier 5% less than that number. Most importantly, allow this committee to operate outside the sphere of influence of the staff and current council. This will not be a popular job and it is unfair to expect those with a vested interest in this year's budget to re-trench. The staff should be an available resource to this committee, as invited.

Set the expectations high and expect this committee to do a lot of heavy lifting to actually understand the complexities of the budget. Good luck!

The Beginning of the End of the Department of Agriculture!

I'm afraid that we are seeing the beginning of the end of the United States Department of Agriculture. The USDA facilitates one of the largest sources of federal funding to Rural America. Under the new Obama administration, the trend of moving this funding source away from Rural America and to the population centers will undoubtedly be accelerated.

This week, an editorial from New York Times' columnist Nicholas Kristof entitled "How about naming a Secretary of Food," articulated this trend very clearly. Kristof states, "Renaming the department would signal that Mr. Obama seeks to move away from a bankrupt structure of factory farming that squanders energy, exacerbates climate change and makes Americans unhealthy – all while costing taxpayers billions of dollars."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-kristof_13edi.State.Edition1.2a4e285.html

Kristof's editorial summarizes a long-time popular attack on traditional agriculture -- divert money away from USDA farm programs to food programs concentrated where the people are -- population centers. As argued by Kristof, only 2% of us are farmers, but 100% of us eat.


Kristof is no crackpot either -- he is the recipient of two Pulitzer Prizes and former managing editor of the New York Times. His opinions would certainly be considered mainstream in today's media world.

My concern is that while this frontal assault is being waged, Rural America continues to perpetuate the problem. Traditional agriculture continues to cling to the last remnants of their turf and resist reforms that would be more marketable to mainstream America. At the same time, each sector of agriculture attacks the other as they continue to fight over an ever shrinking piece of the pie.

The rural town kids, not recognizing that one of the largest returns on their tax investment is being systematically torn down, continue to tell farmer jokes and beat their chests reciting the motto, "get rid of subsidy payments for factory farms". As the saying goes, be careful what you ask for, you may get it. The new "Department of Food" will eliminate payments to farmers... and to Rural America.

LETTER FROM THE 2006-2007 CHAIR OF THE ALBERT LEA/FREEBORN COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

September 2007

Exactly one year ago, I started my term as Chair of the Albert Lea-Freeborn County Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors with a simple theme: “Promote, Promote, Promote!” I felt it was important to focus the efforts of our organization towards promoting the strength of our business community not only within our Chamber area, but also outside of our community. I am happy to report that we have made great progress in this area. Thank you to the wonderful Chamber staff that continuously make our success possible – Katie, Liz, Marcie and Tami – your energy is contagious. Also, I have had the opportunity to work with two very positive and energetic Executive Directors, Susie Petersen and Randy Kehr. Thank you!

The theme of this year’s Membership Celebration, “Raising our Community Profile” is the culmination of this year-long effort to focus the resources of your Chamber towards this goal. Without the tremendous support of our members, our organization would quickly fail. Rest assured that we value every member when they renew their annual dues and otherwise support our programs. We have worked hard in recent years to maximize your dues and to find other revenue sources.

As a result of these efforts, we are proud to announce that membership dues for the 2007 – 2008 year will not increase. This is the first time in many years we have been able to accomplish this goal. We do, however, continue to count on our members to support our programs and to help us to grow our membership roles. Not all local businesses recognize the importance of being a Chamber member, please help us to explain this to them to continue to expand our membership and our ability to promote the community.

I often hear the community nay-sayers comment that the Chamber is boring and doesn’t do anything for the community. I’m not sure where they have been in recent years, but they apparently have not been paying attention. The Chamber has successfully kept our community active by promoting the following: the Positive People program, the Gourmet Auction, the Farm Family of the year award, 3rd Grade Farm Tours, the 4-H Livestock Auction, the 3rd of July Parade, the Party for the Lakes, Eddie Cochrane Days, Career Day and the Annual Fireworks. Likewise, we are proud of our renewed partnership with the Big Island Rendezvous, which had a record-breaking year. I challenge any organization to try to beat the quality and quantity of these “community pride” activities. Our business community deserves kudos for their continued support of the quality of life in our area.

As for our programs, our long-time Housing Committee “graduated” this year and became independent of the Chamber and is now supported by the Albert Lea Housing Authority. Our long-time support of affordable housing in Albert Lea has paid huge dividends in addressing this important economic development issue. As always, the Chamber Ambassadors and the Chamber Lake’s Restoration Committee continue to host one quality event after another. Take the time to thank these volunteers for their hard work. Also, the Government Affairs committee hosted two legislative forums, the last one in July with three of the four State Legislative leaders in attendance and our greatest turn-out yet for a legislative forum.

To promote our community, it is important that we find ways to differentiate ourselves from others. We successfully promoted this concept by hosting another record breaking event in April of this year – “Celebrating our Green Community.” With the support of our Agriculture Committee, we rolled out the green carpet for over 400 guests from around the State for our Annual Agriculture Banquet, with Governor Tim Pawlenty as the keynote speaker.

The strength of our organization and our community depends on new energy and new ideas. In an effort to continue to develop future leaders, the Chamber has partnered with Riverland Community College to create our new “Leadership” program. Our inaugural class of 20 is currently completing their curriculum.

As a community, it is important that we promote a positive feeling inside and outside our community. In accomplishing this goal, we should strive to make our community more welcoming to families and minorities. We must have an available workforce for expanding or attracting employers. We must also foster a strong relationship with our local media and find a way to promote ourselves through media outlets outside of our community. Our business community is the key to setting the tone for community success. The Chamber is the catalyst to make this to happen. Together, we can continue to promote our community and “Raise our Community Profile.”

Why are they picking on small towns?

It is interesting that so many people in Hollywood think that being from a small town disqualifies a person from being smart -- or qualified to be President? Perhaps they should recognize that being a movie star does not qualify them as political experts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6urw_PWHYk

Email Subscription

Subscribe to Tilting -- Challenging your view of . . . by Email

The "Palin" Label

For the past few years, it has been extremely unpopular for many people to even admit that they supported or voted for a Republican candidate. Whether it was President Bush's coarseness, or the media's successful villainization of his Presidency, it has been very uncouth to openly admit your Republican credentials.

When I ran for the Minnesota State Legislature in 2006, my traditional support of Republican ideas was a huge attack point against me. I was given the scoundrel label along with our President, as our local campaigns were tagged with national unpopularity. This is the unfortunate, yet realistic side of politics. Individuals, however, tend to avoid unpopular labels and therefore avoided admitting that they were Republican, even if they supported Republican ideas.

It appeared that this year's campaign season would be a rerun of the 2006 election, as many pundits have been predicting another successful Democrat year in the voting booth. So long as it was unpopular to wear a Republican label, it would be difficult to generate support for Republican candidates.

In one surprise appearance, Sarah Palin appears to have brought a designer label back to Republican politics. Her small town, straight talk approach is a breath of fresh air for many who have been wearing the "independant" label. This is a huge turning point for those of us who wish to have a discussion about issues, not labels.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-ig-notebook7-2008sep07,0,7585060.story

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-dreher_07edi.ART.State.Edition1.26b4583.html

Vote for Common Sense

Next Tuesday, the City of Albert Lea appointed housing task force will vote on the, now much publicized, Rental Licensing Ordinance. After much discussion and hard work, the task force will be presented with at least two proposals for consideration – one from the City and one from the Landlord Association.

From a big picture perspective, we should all continue to recognize that we are in this together. Everyone at the table has an interest in making the community a better place. With that said, an agreed upon purpose that has been now been added to both versions of the ordinance reads, “To preserve and promote tax base growth throughout the City.” This stated purpose recognizes the need for balance.

According to the 2006 Maxfield Research Housing Analysis, 90% of the housing stock in Freeborn County was built prior to 1980. In Albert Lea, 46% of the housing stock was built in the 1950’s or earlier. It is unrealistic and almost arrogant to believe that this quantity of aged housing stock can be “made like new” by the symbolic passing of a “tough” ordinance with unrealistic timelines.

A better approach is to acknowledge the problem, identify the parties that can help solve the problem and then find a common solution. The City must recognize that they cannot legislate their way to prosperity. They can tell people to fix up property in as tough of a manner as possible. If it is economically not feasible to do so, however, that property will fall off the property tax roll and into blight.

The landlord proposal actually takes a reasoned approach in accomplishing the goals of the City. There are no differences between the proposals on the need for inspections and creating a good inventory of the rental housing stock in Albert Lea. The differences arise under the implementation of the program. It appears that the City cannot resist their use of the stick in accomplishing their goals.

The major areas of difference are summarized as follows:

1. Talk Tough Language. The City continues to include tough language and the criminalization of every technical aspect of the ordinance. The Landlord proposal recognizes that the ordinance is legally enforceable, but softens this approach;
2. Owner-Occupied Property. The City wishes to require a license for a “dwelling unit occupied by the Owner and rented or leased by more than one Occupant unrelated to the Owner.” Consider whether you know any unmarried individuals living together with their families? Licensing is required if they share expenses. How about the host families for the new hockey team?
3. Length of Provisional License. The Landlord proposal requests 9 months after they receive the results of the inspection. The City gives 6 months after the provisional license is issued. That’s right, if it takes 5 ½ months for the City to get the results of the inspection to you, you have 15 days to complete the upgrades. “Do not worry” the City will tell us: the Ordinance says that we “may” give you an extension. Unrealistic and unnecessary? I believe so.
4. Payment of Taxes and Utilities. How does requiring payment of taxes help tenants and improve the housing stock? It doesn’t, it just adds current tax dollars to the City’s revenue stream. In our discussions, it seemed that the City was agreeing that, so long as you had a payment plan in place for your taxes you would not be “delinquent” and they would issue the license. Their recent proposal, however, has gone completely the other direction. Now, they’ve added the word “unpaid” to the ordinance. Meaning all current and owing amounts (including taxes, utilities and other charges to the City) must be paid in full to get your license. If not, you must immediately evict your tenant or you’ve broken the law. While I do not advocate non-payment of taxes, the current system is set-up so that there is a substantial opportunity to work through tough times before you lose your property. The City’s attempt to short-circuit this process is mean spirited when you consider the large short-term investment they are asking some landlords to make.
5. Landlord and Tenant Registry. The City continues to indicate that they may implement a searchable system in the future, but that they do not want to be obligated to do so. At first, Landlords were told that a registry would be illegal. Yet, it was later discovered that the City of Rochester has an on-line system that is accessible by all licensed landlords. Providing access to this information to the tenants and the landlords seems like a no-brainer. If the City wants to hold everyone else accountable, a little bit of accountability in their direction seems appropriate.

Given this explanation, it is my hope that you will understand the frustration that has been voiced by the landlords. These changes are more about fairness, than about “fighting the inspections.” In fact, as the differences are compared side-by-side, it appears that the City is driven more by dollars and cents, rather than common sense. I advocate for common sense.

Matt Benda

Published in the Albert Lea Tribune on September 6, 2008

Proud Americans

Los Angeles -- Downtown??

What I pleasant surprise! I had always viewed L.A. as the symbol of excess in America. With Hollywood and all the glitz and in your face debauchery, to say I had low expectations for my visit to L.A. was a gross understatement.

My wife recently had a Rotary International convention there and we took, what prevailing wisdom considered, a chance and booked our hotel in the heart of downtown L.A. in Little Tokyo. What a great decision. The excitement, buzz and culture in this entire area was overwhelming.

The people were nice, the streets were clean and activities were everywhere. A short walk around town took from a sushi lunch with my wife (she then went to her convention), past a traditional Mexican dance and festival and into China Town. On my way back to the hotel, I wandered into a Catholic mission church and sat through mass in Spanish. The next day, we visited the fashion district, the toy district, the jewelry district and the garmet district -- people were everywhere.

The overwhelming observation I made was that L.A. was open and welcoming to all -- especially people celebrating their culture. After all, they have Little Tokyo, Little China, Little Italy ... the list goes on. Yet, to suggest that because these people celebrate their culture that they somehow are not "American" misses the entire point of L.A. This place is as American as it gets. These people are living life.

The only difference is they are choosing what it means to them to be American. Nobody will tell people in this community what it means to live -- after all isn't that the American dream? Watching the Celtics v. Lakers game at a sports bar in Little Tokyo confirmed it for me -- I am proud that there are so many people that are creating their own definition of what it means to be a "Proud American."

MEASURING COMMUNITY SUCCESS: Our Community’s Quality of Life

How do we measure what is good and bad for a community? Is it good if an elected official says so? Does the newspaper editorial committee get to decide? More likely a successful community action is one that is talked about with pride around the dinner table or the coffee shop circuit. In other words, we’ll know it when we see it.

The phrase “quality of life” is thrown around like candy at a parade when describing our community measuring stick. One of our community’s greatest strengths is the “causes” that are started and implemented. Our community is vocal and engaged. When an individual or group starts a project, the volunteers and money often follow. This is a great indicator of a vibrant community. Yet, these successes still seem random and spotty. If a group declares their cause a “quality of life” issue does that mean it is good for the collective community, or just that particular special interest group. Broader community objectives should be taken into account.

Our community is interconnected and resources are finite. There is a limit to how many causes any community can successfully support. Rather than quantifying quality of life from an individual basis, perhaps we should measure quality of life from a community perspective. We should promote our “community’s quality of life.”

The school district successfully used this approach in promoting the “yes/yes” vote on the referendum. The Albert Lea Medical Center also promotes this message: quality affordable health care is a good the entire community. Yet, both of these organizations have a symbiotic reliance on community success and growth. They must support each other to be successful. Likewise, individual businesses need to think beyond their “economic bottom line” in quantifying success.

Local governments must also recognize that their funding sources are finite. They continuously struggle with providing community “good” within their means. The trap for them is to avoid mistaking more causes as progress. Again, how to promote the community’s collective interests, not special interests or causes.

It sounds like a simple concept! However, recognizing the interconnectedness of our community activities can go a long way in measuring success and allocating our limited community resources.

Could 2006 be the year of the woman?

Outside of the American pop culture media, the news is all positive for the role of women in world politics. Recent world elections have shown that woman are more and more taking top level positions in the world political scene. In Germany, the first female was recently elected to be that country's Chancellor --Angela Merkel. http://www.tempo.com.ph/news.php?aid=20517. Recently, Chile added to the list by electing Michelle Bachelet as their first woman president -- and the first female leader of a major latin american country.

In another first for a woman, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf was elected president of Liberia, again a first for any African State. The list continues with female leaders in: Ireland, Finland, New Zealand, Muzambique, Bangledesh, the Phillipines and Latvia. http://www.independentng.com/saturday/ccjan210602.htm

In the U.S., Condoleezza Rice has taken the role of Secretary of State to a new high in terms of profile and influence. Leading the diplomatic efforts in Iraq and the middle-east, at the same time performing a "sweeping" transformation of US Diplomacy in a post-cold war era. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/20/opinion/diplomatic/main1226605.shtml

Certainly 2006 is paving the way for women in the world political scene.

Political Commentary by Hollywood Hacks?

It appears we have crossed a new threshhold in America's obsession with popular culture taking over for news. Even the local Albert Lea Tribune cannot resist the temptation of sensationalizing the news to sell newspapers.

Two of our esteemed political columnists are a comedian and a political satirist (definition: irony, sarcasm, or castic wit used to attach or expose folloy, vice, or stupidity. http://www.answers.com/satire&r=67). Let's call a spade a spade -- these folks do not deserve to be placed on a credible opinion page -- certainly not at the same time. Garrison Keillor, whose stories and voice enthral me -- has a political agenda. Here's an example of one of his tirades:

"The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of
hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists,
fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance
racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats,
nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons,
hacks,
fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who
believe Neil
Armstrong’s moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little
honkers out to
diminish the rest of us, Newt’s evil spawn and their
Etch-A-Sketch president, a
dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of
information and of secular
institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of
badly sutured body parts trying to
walk. Republicans: The No.1 reason the
rest of the world thinks we’re deaf, dumb
and dangerous."

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/were_not_in_lake_wobegon_anymore/


His resume is that he is extremely intelligent and spins a good yarn. I was actually enjoying Garrison Keillor's articles as he was keeping his comments away from politics. But, but . . .two liberal commedians on the same page. Please don't add Al Frankenstein to the editorial page!!

What about Will Durst? I was vaguely familiar with his name, but had to Google to really figure out who he was. One of my first hist hits was a webpage advertisting a video called "Voices of Dissent." Apparantly, Mr. Durst joined ranks with other well-known Hollywood "columnists" (described as "peace activists" on the website) such as Martin Sheen, Al Franken and Woody Harrelson. This video's tagline asks for buyers to view, "many of the surprising ways that Americans have found to express their views in dissent against the Bush administration policy of war in Iraq." http://www.voicesofdissent.us/Certainly, Mr. Durst appears to have obtained an informed view of his corner of the world from his home in California and he also tells a good joke. I do not question that these two columnist's are talented and are able to get their point across. However, do we really want to further "hollywoodize" how us mid-westerners obtain our political information?

Although, Mr. Durst does hail from Milwaukee, his comedy should probably appear on the comic page, not political opinion.

Imagine this conversation at the local Albert Lea coffee shop:Bernard: I hear President Bush is now trying to spin himself as an environmentalist. He's joining the "Green" party.James: No kidding. Where did you hear that?Bernard: From Will Durst!!James: Durst. Is that Crandall's neighbor?Bernard: No, No that's the guy from Comedy Central.James: Oh, I don't get CNN . . . cable prices just keep going up.Waitress [pouring 6th free refill]: I know who Durst is . . . he's that five-time emmy nominee that appears on PBS and NPR.James: Oh, I guess he does know what he's talking about.

What is intelligent design?

The concept of Intelligent Design seems to be getting a lot of attention. Interestingly enough, the attention seems to be coming from the liberals attempting to refute it, when most of us have no idea what it's about. That should be reason enough to take a closer look.

For an explanation of ID from the advocates themselves at the Discovery Institute.

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3059&program=CSC&callingPage=discoMainPage

A Muslim's view of ID

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3062&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage

An easier read explanation of ID

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3063&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage

Great Article on Supreme Court Nominations

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5529574.html

Minnesota has the lowest rate of uninsured in the country

Despite the noise in the traditional media and many individuals who criticize Republicans about anything and everything, Minnesota has the lowest rate of uninsured in the country. See attached AP article

Even the Star/Trib had to run the article... I believe on page 6 or 7.

For previously misplaced angst expressed by the Albert Lea Tribune editorial page click here

Senator Norm Coleman is definitely on to something

It appears that UN Secretary Kofi Annan is up to his ears in scandal. In a little reported incident in the mainstream media, a senior investigator in the UN's oil for food investigation resigned on "principle" in protest to the conduct of the investigation.


See attached AP article.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050424/D89LI1J00.html

What a beautiful Sunset

The Albert Lea City council did agree in February to sunset the storm water and lighting utility fees at the end of 2005. http://www.albertleatribune.com/articles/2005/02/15/news/news4.txt

Please watch, however, as technically they put a sunset on the fees, but not on the utilities themselves. The public has been promised that they will review these utilities at the end of the year and determine whether the property tax is the more appropriate location. Time will tell.

Also, this year's bonding bill is to include funding for some city projects. If these projects have been budgeted for in the city budget, will there be adjustments made to next year's budget process?

Landlords are part of the Meth Solution

Opposition to “super-reporting” requirements in Meth Bill

To: The Governor and the State Legislature.

I have followed with interest the developments at the legislature in regards to the attempts to crack down on the statewide meth epidemic. I have become growingly concerned, however, with what I consider a gross over-legislation in this area.

I am admittedly a landlord and an attorney who represents numerous landlords in Freeborn County and therefore do have a vested interest in this issue. Likewise, I also represent many families who have been devastated by the destructive power of meth. I understand why it is easy and/or popular to get tough on this issue.

My concerns, however, stem from the need to maintain and promote affordable housing in communities; as well as providing many small real estate owners the ability to preserve the substantial investment they have made in rental property. I believe that it is easy to villanize landlords and promote a “punishment” philosophy rather than a cooperative free market approach. As I testified to in front of the Freeborn County Commissioners when they considered a similar County Ordinance:

“This is a community problem that requires a community response. Landlords are the front line of this defense. They should not be treated as if they are part of the problem. As a landlord and as an attorney who represents landlords, I find many parts of the proposed ordinances unacceptable. From a community perspective, those interested in continued economic growth should also be concerned. We are on the verge of an expected growth spurt in workers and business in our community. To create a hostile environment for landlords all but guarantees a limit on affordable housing in our community. Availability of affordable housing is a necessary pre-requisite to adding employment to our community.

* * *

The landlords are not the criminals and cannot realistically be expected to financially guarantee a drug-free rental property. Tenants rightfully enjoy legal protections to use their property without constant monitoring and harassment of their landlords or others. Addressing this community problem should require a community response.”

What I consider the greatest example of this over-zealousness is in regards to the “super reporting” provisions that have been included in the current version of H.F. No. 572 and S.F. 0423 (the “Meth Bill”). The Meth Bill provides for multiple provisions that are intended to protect the innocent tenant or property purchaser:

1. First, the Meth Bill requires that any property found to be contaminated be prohibited from being occupied until a department of health guideline clean up has occurred.

2. Second, the Meth Bill mandates that each local community health services administrator shall maintain and make available to the public a listing of the status of any meth contaminated property.

3. Third, the Meth Bill requires that all sellers of real property disclose whether meth has or has not occurred on the property.

4. Finally, the Meth Bill further mandates that an affidavit be filed against the property at the county recorder’s office, designating the property as a “Meth Lab Property”.

The super-reporting provision that I strongly advocate against is the last item listed above: the ability to record a Meth Lab Property affidavit with the County Recorder’s Office. Quite frankly, given the other three protections that are included in this legislation, this provision to me is unnecessary and constitutes a “punishment” provision to property owners. The title to a property is not the proper place for this designation.

If the intent of the Meth Bill is to protect innocent tenants, then the “no-occupation” order will prevent anyone from living at the property. As for property purchasers, the local department of health records and the mandatory disclosure provisions will protect the innocent property purchaser.

I have discussed this issue with many individuals and no one has been able to articulate why this “super-reporting” provision is necessary. Instead, I understand the Meth Lab Property Affidavit as an “extra” protection for the innocent tenant or purchaser. Such super reporting is not necessary for fire damage, flooded basements, sewage back up, chemical spills or even mold infestation and is unnecessary in this case.

I would request that the super-reporting provisions of this bill be eliminated.

Alternatively, I would request legislation to create a centralized database with the Minnesota Department of Health that would allow for designation of the location of a meth lab and a record of whether the meth lab has been cleaned in compliance with MDH guidelines.

I am also advocating for the Meth Bill to allow for innocent property owners to utilize the low-interest loans for clean-up purposes. I request that innocent property owners, having no notice of the clandestine activities should be eligible to utilize this money for clean up.

Without dragging out this issue I would simply state that undoubtedly private property owners would be more efficient in accomplishing the clean-up efforts than a government entity that will simply pass on the clean-up costs as an assessment against the property.

I fear that overzealous legislation in this area threatens to cool the rental market and put an unnecessary cap on a community’s capacity to enjoy economic growth.



For a link to the status of HF 572: http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=House&f=HF572&ssn=0&y=2005

For a link to the status of SF 0423: http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Senate&f=SF0423&ssn=0&y=2005

When is a good time?

It is interesting to read the comments by members of the city council and the Albert Lea Tribune suggesting that the time for debating the issue of the creation of the new storm water and lighting utility has passed.

Please remember that the taxpayers were unaware of the financial implications or even the amount being proposed until a city council meeting held on December 13th. The Albert Lea Tribune gave the story light coverage by making a vague reference to "an equivalency factor" of $2.95 per residential lot under one acre and a "graduated system" for commercial and industrial property on the storm utility. The article did not even mention that the rate was per month, not per year. Same coverage on the lighting utility. Likewise, the coverage provided no explanation of what revenue was being collected or what the new revenue stream was to be used for? http://www.albertleatribune.com/articles/2004/12/21/news/news2.txt


Even more telling of the public's "ignorance" on this issue is revealed in the Tribune's coverage of the budget and levy limit decisions made by the city council. The coverage on the city council budget and levy amount made absolutely no reference to how much the levy was increased. I only learned that the city had increased it's levy by 25% by reviewing the minutes from the meeting. The Tribune instead ran an article indicating only that the levy was about the same as the year 2000. http://www.albertleatribune.com/articles/2004/09/14/news/news2.txt

I must confess that when I originally read that article my brain processed that the levy was about the same as last year -- I did not recognize that the comparison was to 4 years ago until much later.

It is not reasonable to expect the public to understand the intricacies of municipal finances. Yet, the public tends to have yardsticks it uses to keep an eye on what the government is doing. The primary gauge that the public watches is the annual levy increase. For example, the Tribune ran an article that the county levy increased by 5.8% from last year. Perhaps the public would not have been so quiet had they known earlier that the city's levy increase was 25%, plus two additional user fees.

It is also disingenuous to suggest that opposition to the new utilities is somehow coming out of the woodwork. Any follower of local politics knows that generally items pass through the city council with little public scrutiny. Yet, the creation of these new utilities had across the board opposition. Two of the other taxing authorities -- the school district and the watershed board -- opposed the creation of these utilities. Also, the Chamber of Commerce, representing over 500 members, clearly advocated for the use of the property tax system in lieu of the new utilities. The city council also heard from two respected members of the community, including the former mayor of Albert Lea, Bob Haukoos, asking the city to look closer at what they were doing. http://www.city.albertlea.org/9-13-04min.htm

To suggest that the public did not voice it's opposition upon the creation of these utilities is untrue. Likewise, to suggest that the public should have seen through a crystal ball what the financial implications would be at the time the "concept" was proposed seems unreasonable.

HOLD ON TO YOUR WALLETS

If part of your year-end includes planning your monthly budget for 2005, you should plan on paying more per month for the honor of living within the Albert Lea city limits. As mentioned in a previous posting, residential homes will pay two new user fees: storm water fee of $2.95 per month and lighting fee of $3.85 per month.

As if a 60% increase in local revenue was not enough, the City is also proposing to increase its sewer and water charges. At the last city council meeting, a request was made to increase the sewer bill by 15% or $2.81 per month; and the water bill by 5% or $.50 per month.

If you are comparing budgets from 2004, plan on spending another $10.11 per month or $121.32 per year.

http://www.city.albertlea.org/minutes.htm

Important Links

http://www.city.albertlea.org/9-13-04min.htm

http://www.albertleatribune.com/articles/2004/09/14/news/news2.txt