March 23-25, 2015
Mar 23 12:39 Moe's MNSCU myths Mar 23 12:57 Scott Walker, scrappy survivor Mar 23 15:25 House GOP transportation proposal Mar 23 23:47 New MnSCU incompetence? Mar 24 09:20 Thissen's dishonesty is disgusting Mar 24 14:38 Bakk's math doesn't add up Mar 24 20:13 Gov. Dayton's flash of lucidity Mar 25 11:53 Confucius Institute Lost and Found
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Moe's MNSCU myths
When Sen. Moe created MnSCU, he envisioned a system that worked. He couldn't have envisioned the structure that currently exists. First, here's what he envisioned :
During the 1980s Minnesota legislators discussed various options for governing the state colleges and universities. In the 1991 session, Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe introduced legislation to merge the seven state universities, 34 technical colleges and 21 community colleges under one board. Senator Moe suggested that the merger of these institutions would increase institutional accountability, improve student transfer, coordinate program delivery and improve facility planning. The general expectation was that the merger would not save money in the short term, but that efficiency and effectiveness would be increased over the long term.
Of the five things hoped for, 4 have definitely failed. Institutional accountability hasn't increased. Students' ability to transfer hasn't improved. MnSCU hasn't done an effective job of coordinating program delivery, which means "efficiency and effectiveness" haven't increased.
The only thing that might've happened -- and I emphasize might've -- is that facility planning might've happened. One out of five isn't good.
Part of the problem is that you've got a bunch of academics making financial decisions. Another part of the problem is that the administrators and trustees are hidden in their ivory towers. The other problem is that these administrators and trustees are incompetent. There should rarely be a need to hire a consultant. That's foolish. If these administrators were worth their salt, they'd be the experts. They wouldn't need to hire consultants to be experts.
For instance, when St. Cloud State hired Earthbound Media Group, aka EMG, to help with their rebranding effort, the first question that should've been asked was whether rebranding was possible. The next question should've been whether a different solution was required. The third question that should've been asked was whether the job could've been done in house.
The answer to the first question is no. Rebranding isn't possible. Providing a quality product is the only thing that's needed to sell most products. Marketing a university is essentially futile. Either the university has a great academic reputation or it doesn't. It sinks or swims on the merits.
The answer to the second question is yes. A different solution was required. Specifically, SCSU didn't need a glitzy ad campaign. SCSU needed to commit to maintaining its recruiting connections. SCSU needed to avoid things like a Masters degree in Social Responsibility .
The answer to the third question likely was yes. I say likely yes because, unfortunately, we don't know if there were any people on campus who would've done a good job with the job. I suspect there were people capable of doing the job but I can't prove that.
What I know with certainty, though, is that President Potter didn't want to consider these options because he knew the outcome he wanted. The last thing President Potter wanted was an independent-thinking group of professionals doing what was right. He wanted to head in a specific direction whether that was the right direction or not. This was his opportunity to put his imprint on SCSU.
Unfortunately for SCSU, that's what happened. I say unfortunately because the rebranding project failed miserably. Since the rebranding project, SCSU has gone downhill fast. Enrollment is down. Deficits are up.
That's why MnSCU's competence is a myth.
Posted Monday, March 23, 2015 12:39 PM
No comments.
Scott Walker, scrappy survivor
This morning's biggest political headline is Ted Cruz's announcement that he's running for president. Right behind that headline, though, is this Washington Post article :
COLUMBIA, S.C. - When Jim Ulmer came to see Scott Walker here last week, he was transfixed. 'He's the little engine that could,' Ulmer said, describing the Wisconsin governor who successfully battled labor unions and has rocketed to the front of the Republican presidential race. 'He has guts,' said Ulmer, 52, Republican Party chairman in rural Orangeburg County. 'The people of America are looking for another Ronald Reagan, someone we can believe in, someone who will keep freedom safe. Walker could be it.'
That's the basis for the article's headline. Still, that isn't what should give the Bush campaign pause. This should:
Those who turned out in droves to size up Walker during two days of events here said his top rival, Jeb Bush, a former Florida governor and heir to a political dynasty, gives them pause. None mentioned Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), a tea party favorite who will announce his candidacy Monday at Liberty University in Virginia.
This isn't a prediction but it wouldn't surprise me if Jeb Bush flopped. The media love Jeb Bush. They're love that he isn't willing to rule of raising taxes. They love the fact that he's a fierce advocate for federal control of education, aka Common Core. Mostly, though, they love him for supporting the Democrats' immigration bill.
That puts him out of step with Republicans.
It isn't that Bush "gives them pause." It's that Republican activists don't trust Jeb. They don't trust Bush because he represents the loser wing of the Republican Party. There isn't a dime's worth of difference between Jeb Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney. They don't fight for conservatism. Their chief attribute is that they're supposedly electable.
Contrast that with Scott Walker:
As they see it, he's a fighter, tenacious and decisive. He fought the unions again and again, and he won each time. They see the 47-year-old governor as a truth-teller, a pure conservative and an energetic, fresh face, as the future.
'He represents everything I want in a president,' Joan Boyce, 61, a school cafeteria worker, said after seeing him speak at a barbecue dinner in Greenville. 'He's refreshing for a change. He feels honest to me; he really does. He doesn't talk like a politician. He talks like a regular guy.'
Scott Walker has a substantial list of conservative accomplishments. People appreciate that. They don't appreciate Gov. Bush's attempt to sell conservatives down the river on important things like immigration and Common Core.
Posted Monday, March 23, 2015 12:57 PM
No comments.
House GOP transportation proposal
House Speaker Kurt Daudt issued this statement after announcing the House GOP transportation proposal:
'Minnesota families rely on our road and bridge infrastructure to get their kids to school and themselves to work. To help them, our goal from the beginning was to refocus transportation dollars on roads and bridges and deliver a real, long-term solution without increasing their tax burden. I'm proud today to unveil our vision for the next decade that achieves our shared goal,' announced Speaker Daudt.
"Republicans have developed a thoughtful solution to adequately maintain and expand our road and bridge infrastructure without raising gas taxes, because Minnesotans can't afford to pay more at the pump. Our proposal will benefit small cities, rural areas, suburban communities, and elderly and disabled Minnesotans while also making significant commitments to state roads,' said Senate Republican Leader Hann.
'Most Minnesotans count on safe roads and short commutes every day, and our plan focuses on those daily needs. It fills potholes and repairs streets in their neighborhoods and will alleviate congestion on Minnesota roads. Now, Minnesotans have a choice between smart budgeting that dedicates existing transportation taxes to roads and bridges without a tax increase and a plan that raises the gas tax by at least 16 cents per gallon,' added House Majority Leader Peppin.
Predictably, the DFL immediately criticized the plan :
DFLers, in contrast, attacked the Republican plan for shifting money from other sources. "What programs will (Republicans) cut to pay for (money) they are taking from (the) general fund?" Dayton's deputy chief of staff Linden Zakula wrote on Twitter.Here's my response to Mssrs. Zakula and Thissen: What corrupt programs will the DFL fund with the money that the GOP proposes to fix roads and bridges with? Does the DFL plan to finance more trips for Sen. Hayden? Or would they rather direct money to Community Action ? Would the DFL rather funnel more money to MnSCU to sign contracts with their friends to do 'consulting' work ?
House Minority Leader Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis, responded that the GOP plan "irresponsibly raids" the general fund. "Unfortunately, the Republican plan is the same old shifts and gimmicks budgeting we've come to expect from them. Siphoning money from schools and hospitals and relying on the state's credit card is no way to fund Minnesota's transportation system," he said in a prepared statement.
Actually, Rep. Thissen, putting some things on the state's credit card is the right thing to do. Why should this generation pay the entire cost for fixing bridges? Shouldn't subsequent generations pay for their fair share of the cost since they're going to get a substantial benefit from new bridges? Why shouldn't younger generations pay for some of the cost of lane expansions?
There's nothing wrong with paying for road repairs with current money. Maintenance is a short-term proposition. Fixing potholes is something that's done annually. Widening State Trunk Highway 23 to 4 lanes from St. Cloud to Foley is a one-time thing. That's something that should be paid for by multiple generations.
Finally, it's interesting to watch the DFL immediately insinuate that Republicans want to "siphon money from schools and hospitals." It didn't matter to Rep. Thissen that there's literally no proof that Republicans want to do that. In fact, there's proof that Republicans don't want to do that.
That's irrelevant to Rep. Thissen. The truth isn't relevant to him because it's about frightening people with baseless allegations. It isn't about having an honest debate based on reality. Simply put, the DFL is the Fearmongering Party.
Posted Monday, March 23, 2015 3:25 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 23-Mar-15 03:58 PM
Gary:
Since I didn't see the proposal, can I assume what really has the DFL angry that instead of proposing a billion or more for mass transit every year (you know those useless trains) to be spending that billion (or whatever it was) on roads and bridges. Since the billion already exists that means there was no need to do a tax increase.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Mar-15 04:55 PM
I wouldn't make that assumption. This doesn't have anything to do with logic or GOP policies. The DFL would've complained if the GOP plan would've proposed a 5.5% wholesale gas tax instead of the DFL's 6.5% wholesale gas tax. The DFL's whining is about criticizing Republicans.
Comment 2 by RexN at 23-Mar-15 07:51 PM
What I'd tell Thissen: trains are urban planner crack, not transportation. Pull that crap out, come back when you've got a serious proposal.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 23-Mar-15 08:59 PM
I can't disagree with that, Rex. Further, I'd tell Move MN and Thissen that Northstar isn't a priority in outstate Minnesota. I drive on roads. I don't ride on transit.
New MnSCU incompetence?
Is This An Example of Incompetence In The MnSCU Office?
by Silence Dogood
On February 23, 2015 Laura M. King, Vice Chancellor of Finance and Chief Financial Officer for MnSCU testified before the Ways and Means Committee in the Minnesota House with Chairman Rep. Knoblach. In her testimony relating to the Composite Financial Index (CFI), she stated that "The trends for the universities is concerning." Then Vice Chancellor King said "On a scale from 1 to 5, we want to be in the 3 range." (Referring to the CFI)
The Composite Financial Index (CFI) is calculated from four component measures: return on net assets, operating margin, primary reserve, and viability. Supposedly, the CFI is a way of measuring the financial health of a university. In essence, the CFI is considered a financial "Stress Test."
On the MnSCU system website you can find a table showing the Composite Financial Index for all of the MnSCU institutions. A portion of the document currently on the MnSCU website showing the MnSCU universities is shown below:
Unfortunately, even as of March 24th, 2015, the data for FY2014 has not been posted. I made a request for the updated data and recently received a copy reproduced below, which includes the data for FY14:
Back to Vice Chancellor King's statement:
"On a scale from 1 to 5, we want to be in the 3 range." (Referring to the CFI)
Looking at the data in the table, from FY2009 through FY2014, there are 21 institutions with values less than 1 and includes 4 institutions with values that are negative. The lowest value shown was -1.12 for Lake Superior College in FY2009. Additionally, there are 15 institutions with values greater than 5. The largest value shown was 7.42 for Rainy River Community College in FY2012. From the data shown, the CFI is outside the range of 1 to 5 a total of 40 times, which corresponds to being outside the range 18% of the time.
I'm sure everyone misspeaks. However, the CFI should be one of the most important measures of an institution's health and the Chief Financial Officer might be expected to know the ranges and the averages for the CFI for the institutions within MnSCU.
The summary data for MnSCU colleges, MnSCU universities and the system as a whole is shown from FY2009 to FY2014 in the following figure:
From the figure, it is clear that only in FY2010 and FY2011 did the average of the MnSCU colleges exceed a value of 3. The averages of the MnSCU universities never reached 3 during the period FY2009 through FY2014 and only half of the time was above 2. In fact, the university average decreased from 2.65 in FY2012 to 0.83 in FY2014, which is a decrease of 1.82 and corresponds to a decline of 68.7%.
If you look more closely at the data for FY2012, the CFI for the system is 2.78 where the values of the CFI for the colleges and universities is 2.72 and 2.65, respectively. In every other year, the average is in between the two. Unless this is some kind of really 'new math,' it is hard to understand how the average for the MnSCU system can be above the values for which it is an average.
As the data shows the CFI does not have a scale of 1 to 5. Additionally, if as stated by CFO King: "we want to be in the 3 range", things look really bad financially for the MnSCU system since in FY14 the average for MnSCU colleges was 2.28 and MnSCU universities was 0.83.
Clearly, the CFO of an organization not understanding the range of values for the CFI or the averages of its colleges and universities is alarming, you be the judge if it rises to the level of incompetence.
Originally posted Monday, March 23, 2015, revised 24-Mar 8:52 AM
Comment 1 by Rex Newman at 24-Mar-15 08:00 PM
There is so much wrong with MnScu and UofM, primarily because both are so over-extended. Serious right-sizing is in order at both, and the Legislature should flat line their appropriations accordingly, until they both start closing and selling off unneeded capacity. Yes, that means closing some campuses, like UofM Crookston and Jackson Community College. No student will be left behind, and if the best professors are kept (ha!), the quality of education could improve.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 24-Mar-15 08:20 PM
Don't say that, Rex. You must be one of those Neanderthals that hates young people and professors.
FYI- I don't think that. I'm just doing my best Paul Thissen impression.
Thissen's dishonesty is disgusting
Rep. Paul Thissen, currently the House Minority Leader, issued this totally dishonest statement after Republicans presented their comprehensive transportation plan:
'Minnesotans who are sitting every day in traffic, who are afraid their kids can't get to school safely, who can't get to that new job that promises a brighter future for their family, demand real transportation solutions. Unfortunately, the Republican plan is the same old shifts and gimmicks budgeting we've come to expect from them. Siphoning money from schools and hospitals and relying on the state's credit card is no way to fund Minnesota's transportation system. This is a 'Give the Deficits Back' Act.
House Democrats have said all along we will work to pass a comprehensive, statewide transportation solution that meets the needs of our entire state, roads, bridges, and transit, in a permanent way, without excessively siphoning money from our kids' education or running up the credit card. It's our hope Republicans will get serious about a plan that solves our transportation problem without creating new potholes in our budget.
The Republican plan irresponsibly raids the general fund, shifting hundreds of millions of tax dollars that should pay for better schools and uses it to pay for transportation projects. The next economic downturn could be around the corner, and if we use general fund tax dollars to fund transportation projects then we are hurting our schools, hospitals and other basic priorities in the future. Investments in Minnesota's transportation systems shouldn't compete with our kids' education.
And the Republican plan excessively borrows money, running up the credit card bill to pay for future road and bridge projects. Minnesota is finally in a better financial position. We shouldn't go right back to the borrowing and gimmicks that got us in trouble for the previous decade.'
Let's go through Thissen's diatribe paragraph-by-paragraph, starting with this:
Siphoning money from schools and hospitals and relying on the state's credit card is no way to fund Minnesota's transportation system.
First, Rep. Thissen can't offer proof that the GOP transportation plan siphons "money from schools and hospitals" because that proof doesn't exist. Period. Next, it's entirely appropriate to put major bridge repairs on highway lane expansions on the state credit card because a) the rebuilding of a major bridge is expensive and b) it's the type of thing that'll benefit multiple generations. Why should 1 generation pay the entire bill for a bridge that multiple generations will benefit from? Why shouldn't multiple generations pay for adding lanes for a state trunk highway? After all, multiple generations will benefit from it?
When the DFL raised taxes just 6 short years ago, we were promised that the DFL's plan was the investment that would fix our transportation funding problems. Either the DFL lied to us then or they don't know what they're talking about. Why should we trust them at this point?
House Democrats have said all along we will work to pass a comprehensive, statewide transportation solution that meets the needs of our entire state, roads, bridges, and transit, in a permanent way, without excessively siphoning money from our kids' education or running up the credit card.
It's without question that the DFL has said that they'd work with Republicans on "a comprehensive, statewide transportation solution." It's just that their statements aren't credible. The DFL always meant that they'd work with Republicans if the Republicans' transportation plan included a major middle class tax increase. The DFL never meant that they'd work with Republicans if the Republicans' transportation plan didn't include a major middle class tax increase.
The Republican plan irresponsibly raids the general fund, shifting hundreds of millions of tax dollars that should pay for better schools and uses it to pay for transportation projects.
If there's a political party that knows about irresponsibly raiding the general fund, it's the DFL. That doesn't mean they're trustworthy. It just means that they know about irresponsibly raiding Minnesota's general fund. Look at all the money they shipped to Community Action's corrupt leaders. That includes the money CA shipped to Jeff Hayden while stiffing the people who needed the money to survive.
Minnesota is finally in a better financial position. We shouldn't go right back to the borrowing and gimmicks that got us in trouble for the previous decade.
Rep. Thissen shouldn't talk out of both sides of his mouth. Year after year, the DFL has called their bonding bill their jobs bill. The DFL has told us time after time that borrowing money to build civic centers and sheet music museums was essential to creating jobs. It's astonishing that the DFL can tell us that borrowing money to pay for critical highway infrastructure is a negative.
It isn't astonishing that Rep. Thissen could tell us this without hesitation. You can't be a leader in the DFL if you can't lie through your teeth with a straight face.
Originally posted Tuesday, March 24, 2015, revised 17-Apr 9:52 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 24-Mar-15 11:49 AM
Gary:
Lets not forget how they setup the transportation funds to be raided to give it to mass transit over the years instead of spending it on roads. How many millions if not billions have they raided for their train projects.
And if it's okay to bond a train project why isn't it okay to bond a road or bridge project?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 24-Mar-15 06:04 PM
MN is in a better financial situation because the DFL and Dayton overtaxed people and now the spoiled little brats want to spend all of the money and tax us even more.
There's nothing wrong with shifting money from bloated education, health care, social engineering, etc. programs and putting that money to good use build roads and bridges.
Bakk's math doesn't add up
Yesterday, I wrote that Rep. Thissen reflexively criticized the Republicans' transportation proposal . This post will show how Sen. Bakk's math doesn't add up . Here's what Sen. Bakk said about the Republican transportation plan:
Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk, DFL- Cook, said constitutionally-dedicated funding, like the gas tax, is a better approach for transportation. Bakk said the House Republican plan to use general fund revenue could too easily be undone by the next Legislature.
'There's just no guarantee that roads and public infrastructure are going to continue to be a priority once you've put them in the mix of having to compete with everything in the state budget,' Bakk said. 'I think it's unlikely that transportation competes in that environment in the next budget cycle.'
First, the DFL essentially raised the gas tax unilaterally in 2008. That tax, we were told, would solve our problems. I wrote this post in 2008. It turns out that that "constitutionally-dedicated funding" plan didn't fix anything, which proves that Sen. Bakk is full of it.
Why trust a guy who promised a solution that didn't work the last time? It's foolish to trust people who've failed us before. That's what Bakk did. There's also no reason to trust Sen. Bakk, especially after he said that 'There's just no guarantee that roads and public infrastructure are going to continue to be a priority once you've put them in the mix of having to compete with everything in the state budget."
Under the GOP plan, those sales taxes on lease vehicles, auto parts and car rentals wouldn't be part of the general fund. They'd be part of the Transportation Stability Fund. The only way that changes is if the DFL would vote to take money out of that fund to pay for other things that they want.
If Republicans hold their House majority and retake their majority in the Senate, they could put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2018. If that passed, then the Transportation Stability Fund would become constitutionally dedicated fund.
Finally, beyond Sen. Bakk's shaky math, it's shameful that the DFL is ignoring their constituents. According to KSTP's latest poll, 75% of Minnesotans oppose raising the gas tax. What part of that doesn't the DFL understand? Perhaps the better question is this: Does the DFL care what their constituents want? I'm not certain they do. At minimum, I haven't seen proof that they care about their constituents, though there's tons of proof they care about their special interest allies.
In fact, there's ample proof that that's all the DFL cares about .
Posted Tuesday, March 24, 2015 2:38 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 24-Mar-15 06:19 PM
So we are supposed to believe the math from a group of people who gave us the Vikings stadium funding solution and a $2 billion dollars of over taxation?
Again, roads and bridges should be just as much a priority as the rat holes of education, health care, and welfare.
Gov. Dayton's flash of lucidity
During his interview with MPR, Gov. Dayton experienced a brief flash of lucidity :
Gov. Mark Dayton is siding with U.S. Steel in a battle over water pollution standards for the company's taconite facility in Mountain Iron. In an interview with MPR News, Dayton said the existing sulfate standard aimed at protecting wild rice is out of date, and pushing it could be catastrophic for northeastern Minnesota.
As the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency prepares to release new environmental standards, U.S. Steel is lobbying the Legislature to delay the implementation of a clean water standard aimed at protecting water where wild rice grows.
The existing state standard prevents companies from discharging more than 10 milligrams of sulfate per liter of water. But company lobbyists and Iron Range legislators say the standard is too low. With his latest comments, his strongest to date on the long-running debate, Dayton is joining that group.
"Some people will say, 'you're going to abandon the standard,'" Dayton said. "But if the standard is obsolete and it's not validated by current science and information, then to stick with it and close down an industry isn't really well advised."
The MPCA just issued this draft proposal :
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is proposing that rather than relying on a single sulfate level for all wild rice waters, sulfate levels should be calculated for each wild rice water, based on location-specific factors. In coming to this conclusion, the MPCA studied how sulfate affects wild rice. The study, which began in 2012, found that:
- In the sediment in which wild rice is rooted, sulfate from the water above is converted to sulfide by bacteria.
- Higher levels of sulfide in the sediment create an environment that is less hospitable to wild rice.
However, certain factors change the rate at which sulfate is converted to sulfide. Most significantly, higher levels of iron can lead to less sulfide, and higher levels of organic carbon can lead to more sulfide.
To take these variables into account, the MPCA developed an equation that can determine a sulfate level that will protect wild rice for a specific water body. The agency proposes collecting sediment samples in wild rice stands, measuring the iron and organic carbon concentrations in the sediment, and then plugging the data into the equation to calculate a protective sulfate concentration for that particular wild rice water.All of the environmental organizations are protesting these findings because it strips them of another of their anti-mining arguments. They aren't happy campers over this draft proposal. These environmental organizations were licking their proverbial chops over this:
Dayton said the sulfate standard is outdated and has rarely been enforced since it was first established in 1973. U.S. Steel's Minntac plant was facing the new standard as it renewed a decades-old permit, something U.S. Steel said would cost hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades.
Then Gov. Dayton stepped in.
It isn't that Gov. Dayton had a change of heart. It's that he knows pissing off the Iron Range means Tina Smith, his Lieutenant Governor, will lose the DFL gubernatorial campaign to Tom Bakk in 2018. Gov. Dayton can't have that. That's part of his lackluster legacy.
Posted Tuesday, March 24, 2015 8:13 PM
No comments.
Confucius Institute Lost and Found
Is There A Confucius Institute At SCSU?
by Silence Dogood
I though there was a Confucius Institute at SCSU. In an attempt to find out some background information about the Confucius Institute, I thought I would search the SCSU website to see what information could be found. On the main university website, I typed in "Confucius"
When I hit the search button, the result I obtained is shown below:
Not being deterred, I went to the SCSU Office Directory Search webpage and entered in Confucius and hit the search button again. The results are shown below:
To the best of my knowledge, SCSU has a Confucius Institute. I've even heard that SCSU spends $150,000 per year on it. However, unless I can't spell "Confucius" correctly, based on the SCSU website searches I performed, it certainly doesn't look like it. For a so-called 'signature' accomplishment of President Potter, this is kind of embarrassing.
Posted Wednesday, March 25, 2015 11:53 AM
Comment 1 by Mystique at 25-Mar-15 11:58 AM
Maybe President Potter and the Conficious Institute can be found in China.
Comment 2 by Yeager at 25-Mar-15 01:53 PM
http://www.stcloudstate.edu/confucius/
First result when searched in the toolbar.
Comment 3 by Mystique at 25-Mar-15 02:40 PM
Yeager: How do you explain the "no results - please update keyword search" when Silence tried?
