November 17-18, 2013
Nov 17 03:33 Allegiant article raises St. Cloud State questions Nov 17 04:47 Open letter to the MnSCU Board of Trustees Nov 17 07:11 Another DFL lie exposed Nov 17 09:26 The pro-censorship party Nov 17 10:02 Matt Entenza vs. reality Nov 18 05:23 Are higher ed committees doing their job? Nov 18 06:34 Fossilized administration dooming California community college Nov 18 12:13 Dayton backtracks on I-94 project
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Allegiant article raises St. Cloud State questions
Friday night, former St. Cloud State Aviation Professor Pat Mattson sent me the link to this St. Cloud Times article . Included in Dr. Mattson's email was this paragraph from the article:
'One is the seasonality of it - this time of year typically, they don't see as much demand,' [Airport Director Bill] Towle said. 'But the other piece is that they're finding they're having some crew issues - enough crew to operate the aircraft."
Having talked with Dr. Mattson about aviation workforce issues in the past, it was apparent that Dr. Mattson used bold print to highlight the fact that there are serious workforce issues within the aviation industry and that St. Cloud State's decision to close the Aviation program is contributing to those issues.
What's interesting is that that paragraph had gotten altered by the time I got there to read the entire article. Here's how that quote currently reads:
'One is the seasonality of it - this time of year, typically they don't see as much demand,' Towle said.
While I've been critical of the Times from time to time, I don't believe that the Times' reporter, Lisa Schwarz, got Bill Towle's quote that badly wrong. It's possible to miss a word or two in a sentence that short. It isn't likely that they'd get a quote wrong by adding an additional sentence that wasn't spoken. In fact, I'd bet the proverbial ranch that they didn't get Bill Towle's quote that badly wrong.
What happened to the article? Why was that line removed? Did someone from the Potter administration contact the Times to get that sentence removed? Did President Potter call John Bodette directly to get that quote modified? That's certainly possible considering the fact that St. Cloud State hasn't taken criticism of their closing the Aviation program well.
When students were met with President Potter, President Potter berated two of the students :
Furthermore, later, as the meeting progressed, President Potter yelled at myself, as well as another student. He raised his voice at me and mentioned, 'do not take that tone with me' while he leaned over the table with both hands on the table. At this point, I literally shut down as the other 4 individuals resumed the meeting. He also yelled at another student with the same tone and words.
A university president that's willing to intimidate students is certainly capable of getting upset over a quote in an article.
Let's remember that MnSCU Chancellor Rosenstone gave President Potter the option of re-opening the Aviation program. President Potter responded by saying that it'd be a sign of weakness if he changed his mind. Silence Dogood wrote about it here :
At Meet and Confer on March 28, 2013 between the Administration and Faculty Association, President Potter said that 'to admit a mistake would make his leadership team look weak .' [ed. added highlighting] He was referring to the closure of SCSU's accredited Aviation Program and not Coborn's Plaza.
When people have questioned President Potter about the wisdom of that decision, he's lashed out at those questioning him. That's what he did with the students. It wasn't a mild disagreement. He attempted to silence them with intimidation.
I'm not sure intimidation was required with the Times. Considering the Times' refusal to cover controversial things on the University campus, from the transcript scandal to Coborn's Plaza to the Herb Brooks underfunding to the enrollment decline, it's possible that a friendly conversation between President Potter and John Bodette got the quote changed.
That quote directly questions President Potter's decision to close the Aviation program. The anecdotes from campus are legion that President Potter doesn't respond well to people questioning him.
Demanding that an embarrassing sentence from a quote be deleted isn't just possible. It's likely. That's a disgrace to both President Potter and the St. Cloud Times.
UPDATE: This afternoon, the article quoting Bill Towle from Friday night had disappeared from the Times website. There were lots of articles from Friday, just not the Allegiant article. The Times didn't delete the article. They just took it off of their roster of articles. It can still be found by using the search window in the upper right hand corner of the page and by searching for Allegiant.
What's interesting is that there's this brief article from Saturday praising St. Cloud State. Here's the article:
For the second straight year, the St. Cloud State University Residence Hall Association has received the Commitment to Philanthropy Award from the Midwest Association of College and University Residence Halls.
The award recognizes combined campus and community philanthropy efforts.
It's amazing. An article with the potential to embarrass President Potter disappears from plain sight and a PR article praising St. Cloud State appears the next day. What a coincidence.
Posted Sunday, November 17, 2013 4:07 PM
Comment 1 by Jethro at 18-Nov-13 09:10 AM
Found using the search function.
http://www.sctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013311150020&nclick_check=1
Comment 2 by Jethro at 19-Nov-13 09:49 AM
Allegiant is acquiring A320 aircraft and is having to cross train some of their MD80 pilots. Hence, the crew shortage problem.
Open letter to the MnSCU Board of Trustees
To: MnSCU Board of Trustees
From: Gary Gross, investigative reporter, conservative activist, taxpayer watchdog
Subject: Oversight responsibilities
Though there's nothing official in the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Board of Trustees list of responsibilities, that doesn't mean the position comes without responsibilities. In the past, politicians have seen the Board of Trustees as an honorary position or as a holding spot until 'retired' politicians run for office again.
University presidents and MnSCU chancellors alike have counted on that wink-and-nod 'understanding' to operate without meaningful oversight. That's how they've whitewashed issues, spent money recklessly and caused some great universities to crumble to the brink of disaster.
Silence Dogood wrote here about St. Cloud State's enrollment decline. In his post, Silence wrote that the FYE enrollment was 14,975. Later, Silence wrote that the numbers for the current school year aren't finalized yet but that FYE enrollment might drop as low as 12,066, which represents a 19.5% drop in 3 years.
Shouldn't the Board of Trustees demand that Chancellor Rosenstone investigate this calamity? After all, he, theoretically at least, works for the Board of Trustees. If Chancellor Rosenstone isn't willing to ask President Potter tough questions and to get the ship righted, then Chancellor Rosenstone should be put on notice that accountability isn't an option. The Board should make clear that accountability is a requirement.
When was the last time any Trustee visited a MnSCU university campus? Better yet, when was the last time a Trustee unexpectedly visited a MnSCU university and talked with members of that university's budget advisory committee? When trustees see money being spent recklessly, trustees should demand to look at the contracts that that university signed before spending the money.
Minnesota's taxpayers can't afford having a rubberstamp Board of Trustees. Universities have been emboldened by the lack of oversight into their activities. Too often, trustees have rationalized their inaction by saying issues are "a local matter."
If I hear that rationalization another time, I'll verbally and publicly embarrass the trustee who tried rationalizing the issue away. Explain how a city council or county commission has jurisdiction over their area's university. Further, I'd love hearing how holding universities are held accountable by a local board of trustees.
Trustees know that the only people with jurisdiction over MnSCU universities are Board of Trustees, the Higher Education commitees and the MnSCU chancellor. Period.
I'll just leave you with these questions: If you don't hold these universities accountable for their actions, who can? If you don't hold them accountable starting now, when is a better time to hold them accountable?
The time for accountability is now. The vehicle for accountbility is staring at you in the mirror.
Posted Sunday, November 17, 2013 4:47 AM
No comments.
Another DFL lie exposed
This Pioneer Press editorial exposes the DFL's lie that property taxes would go down this year:
In July, Gov. Mark Dayton said that, for the first time in a decade, property taxes would drop by $121 million statewide in the year to come. But now, Minnesotans are staring at a potential $153 million increase in property taxes, instead, to a total of $7.7 billion.
Yes, that's a preliminary estimate, and yes, it's based on the maximum the various local entities could levy; some will come in a tad lower. But any property tax increase is hard to swallow given that legislative Democrats and DFL Gov. Mark Dayton cranked taxes up by $2.1 billion to cover spending increases.
The DFL knew they were lying about cutting property taxes when they made those claims last spring. That was their way of justifying the huge increases of income taxes, sales taxes and other fees.
Republicans repeatedly questioned the DFL's lies, highlighting the fact that local governments and school boards levied property taxes. They, not the state, set property tax levels. Now that Republicans are being vindicated, what will the DFL do?
The answer is simple. They'll do what they always do when they're caught. Led by the Alliance for a Better Minnesota, aka ABM, they'll lie more blatantly. That's what ABM specializes in. Without their unprecedented smear campaign in 2010, we wouldn't have been afflicted by a Dayton administration.
Democrats knew when they were given the gavels in 2013 that they had lots of special interest allies to pay off, starting with big city mayors. The best way to pay them off was through massive LGA increases. Democrats knew they couldn't sell that massive spending increase to Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth and Rochester by telling the truth. They had to sell it as property tax relief.
With that determined, Democrats, led by ABM, said that raising LGA would lead to lower property taxes for Minnesotans. To use Jeremiah Wright's phrase, the DFL's chickens are coming home to roost. Few people will be getting bigger property tax refund checks. People living in the core cities of Duluth, Minneapolis, Rochester and St. Paul will see their city budget spending increase dramatically.
Some of that spending will go towards essential government services. Most of that spending will go towards paying off the Democrats' special interest allies.
Most importantly, the business climate in Minnesota will have taken a turn for the worst. Small businesses will get hit with the higher income tax rates. They're already getting hit with the B2B sales tax increases. The middle class and working poor are getting hit with cigarette tax increases and with higher prices caused directly by the Democrats' B2B sales tax increases.
The DFL can't survive without ever-increasing taxes. Without ever-increasing taxes, they wouldn't have the taxpayer money they need to pay off their political allies with other people's money. Anyone who thinks that the DFL is the taxpayers' watchdog or that they believe in strict accountability of public funds is kidding themselves or intentionally lying to others.
There are some fiscally responsible Democrats. Unfortunately, they're the exception, not the rule.
Posted Sunday, November 17, 2013 7:11 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 17-Nov-13 01:58 PM
Gary:
I will encourage to look at your truth in taxation statement that comes. The cities, counties, and school districts are suppose to put out a statement usually done by the county showing what the maximum property tax is.
Big surprise on my statement the county, city, and school board all went up. Mind you the value of my house went up by basically the tax increase.
Your statement also tells when your school district and city are having meetings so the public can comment. I think I will have to show up at my city and school board and ask why didn't it go down since we were promised.
One other thing I don't have my statement, but each one of three is suppose to put out a generic statement on how money is spent. I think Minneapolis is trying to hide their biggest source of spending is debt spending.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
The pro-censorship party
In the 1970's, Democrats touted themselves as the greatest defenders of free speech. By contrast, the Democrats of today are the the greatest practitioners of censorship. This WSJ article is proof that Democrats are especially good at political free speech intimidation:
In recent weeks, special prosecutor Francis Schmitz has hit dozens of conservative groups with subpoenas demanding documents related to the 2011 and 2012 campaigns to recall Governor Walker and state legislative leaders.
Copies of two subpoenas we've seen demand "all memoranda, email...correspondence, and communications" both internally and between the subpoena target and some 29 conservative groups, including Wisconsin and national nonprofits, political vendors and party committees. The groups include the League of American Voters, Wisconsin Family Action, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Americans for Prosperity - Wisconsin, American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, Friends of Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
One subpoena also demands "all records of income received, including fundraising information and the identity of persons contributing to the corporation." In other words, tell us who your donors are.
The term fishing expedition jumps to mind. So does the term censorship. Ditto with illegal searches. Here's why those terms apply:
The subpoena demand for the names of donors to nonprofit groups that aren't legally required to disclose them is especially troubling. Readers may recall that the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent the tax-exempt applications of several conservative groups to the ProPublica news website in 2012.
The censorship thugs weren't gentle. They didn't request anything. They demanded things that they didn't have a legal basis to ask for. Asking for confidential tax filings is illegal because IRS filings are confidential under federal law.
Expect some IRS employees to to get convicted of federal crimes and doing some serious prison time for giving Pro Publica confidential IRS documents. As outrageous as that is, that's just the tip of the iceberg:
The subpoenas don't spell out a specific allegation, but the demands suggest the government may be pursuing a theory of illegal campaign coordination by independent groups during the recall elections. If prosecutors are pursuing a theory that independent conservative groups coordinated with candidate campaigns during the recall, their goal may be to transform the independent expenditures into candidate committees after the fact, requiring revision of campaign-finance disclosures and possible criminal charges.
That's admitting that they're doing this to intimidate people who want to participate in the political process. That isn't just unacceptable. It's unconstitutional because it violates the First and Fourth Amendments. That's before talking about the US statutes these warrants violate.
It's notable that the new batch of subpoenas began flying just days before Democrat Mary Burke announced her candidacy for Governor. District Attorneys are partisan elected officials in Wisconsin, and Mr. Landgraf works for Mr. Chisholm. Neither of them returned our call for comment.
This isn't litigation. It's attrition. It's painfully obvious that Mr. Landgraf and Mr. Chisholm are unapologetic Democratic political hatchetmen. It's apparent, too, that they've used their office to a) threaten citizens who want to participate in the political process, b) intimidate legitimate political organizations and c) chill political free speech to help Democratic candidates.
They should be prosecuted for using their official positions as a campaign outlet for Democratic gubernatorial candidates, which is a clear violation of using elected offices for campaign purposes. My hope is that the Wisconsin AG opens an investigation into these Democratic anti-free speech thugs' censorship campaign. They're disgusting, not to mention that they're criminals who should be removed from office.
Posted Sunday, November 17, 2013 9:26 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 17-Nov-13 01:47 PM
Gary:
It would've helped to have a couple of things clarified:
One, is this special prosecutor a WI prosecutor or a federal prosecutor. Mine guess based on the article it's a WI prosecutor.
Two, the prosecutor is usually looking for a crime (example Scooter Libby's prosecutor was looking into the charge of who leaked the name of a cover agent) What charge is Francis looking at to try to hide this fishing expedition or censor conservative speech on?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 17-Nov-13 02:37 PM
It's a city attorney leading the witch hunt. The WI Attorney Gen. should look into it, though.
Francis isn't trying to hide this witch hunt behind a legitimate charge.
Comment 3 by Patrick-M at 17-Nov-13 03:29 PM
The Democrats know they have weak candidates for governor's election coming up in 2014 so they must resort to these questionable tactics to try to place ' doubt in the voters' mind. My guess is that this will backfire just as the recall attempts did! (Disclosure - I am a Wisconsin resident)
Matt Entenza vs. reality
This morning on At Issue With Tom Hauser, Matt Entenza made a fool of himself. Again. During the Face-off segment, Entenza tried defending the Affordable Care Act. He did as well as one could expect, which isn't setting the bar high. After Andy Brehm said that the Affordable Care Act was a disaster that needed a major overhaul, Entenza got himself in trouble.
The trouble arrived when he said that, prior to the Affordable Care Act, "hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans" couldn't get health insurance. That's BS because, as recently as 2009, 93% of Minnesotans were insured, with another 5% of Minnesotans being eligible for state-subsidized health insurance.
Let's do the math on this. Minnesota's population following the 2010 census was 5,303,928. If 98% of the state either had insurance or were eligible for state-subsidized insurance, that's 5,197,849 people. That means only 106,079 people weren't insured or eligible for insurance programs.
That's virtually universal coverage without a federal takeover of the health insurance industry. I triple-dog dare Mr. Entenza to top that percentage. In fact, I'd highlight the fact that the CBO said in scoring the bill that, after 20 years of the ACA, 30,000,000 people still wouldn't be insured.
That's right. The Affordable Care Act, aka the ACA, does a terrible job, especially compared with the fantastic job that Minnesota did without taking over the health insurance industry.
What's more important is the fact that Matt Entenza knows this. It's impossible to believe that the former House Minority Leader didn't know that. Democrats prided themselves for providing health care. That's before talking about the fact that his wife is Lois Quam , the former CEO of UnitedHealth Group.
Mr. Entenza isn't ashamed of the fact that he lied. He didn't hesitate in arguing against reality. The fact that he could be proven wrong this effortlessly didn't deter him from lying about Minnesota's leadership on health care issues.
Mr. Entenza is an affable man who won't hesitate if he has to lie to defend the indefensible.
Posted Sunday, November 17, 2013 10:02 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 17-Nov-13 05:33 PM
Does Entenza's lying or any liberals lying surprise you anymore? It's an old cliche but you know a liberal is lying when their lips are moving. Problem is the rank and file DFLer will continue to vote for these liars. Tough to vote against someone who is promising goodies even if it is a lie because the other option is to vote for someone who may make you responsible for you own actions and decisions.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 17-Nov-13 06:02 PM
Chad, I'm not surprised. I've caught them lying too many times to be surprised.
The thing for Republicans to do is put a positive pro-growth agenda together to get people voting for the GOP, not voting against the DFL.
Comment 3 by J Keim at 17-Nov-13 06:05 PM
It's Obamacare.
Comment 4 by Reid McLean at 17-Nov-13 06:18 PM
Gary -
Your main point here, which would not be a strong one even if true,is not supported by 2012-2013 data (which took me all of 30 seconds to find.)
I understand that data from 3-4 years ago works better for you, but regardless, today, Mr. Entenza's statement is defensible.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 17-Nov-13 06:24 PM
Reid, the fact that Obamacare doesn't come close to universal coverage is a strong point.
That's before talking about how well Minnesota's plans have worked from more than a decade. Just because the data is from 3-4 years ago doesn't mean Minnesota has dropped off all that much since.
Regardless, Entenza lied when he said hundreds of thousands. He knew that statement wasn't close to being true.
What's more is that he's known Minnesota's history on providing health insurance has been superb. He knows that from his time in the legislature. He knows that because his wife is in the health insurance industry.
The case against Entenza is air tight. Deal with it.
Comment 6 by Reid McLean at 17-Nov-13 06:38 PM
If that was your main point, I invite you to start a "Conservatives for Universal Coverage" campaign, though not one funded by the Koch brothers.
I mistakenly thought your main point was that Mr. Entenza "lied" (just like all Democrats do etc etc etc.) In November of 2013, your math does not work the way it worked four years ago. He did not lie.
Anyway, anyone paying attention is aware that people in Minnesota have less to gain from the ACA that folks in many other states. Minnesota does do a good job with health care. Nice to see you on board with that.
Comment 7 by Gary Gross at 17-Nov-13 07:09 PM
Mr. McLean, my main point is still accurate. If you add the percentage of people who were insured prior to them getting cancellation notices thanks to Obamacare with the people who are eligible for taxpayer-subsidized health insurance, there aren't "hundreds of thousands" of Minnesotans who couldn't get health insurance.
That's been accurate for a decade.
Finally, this is about statistics. Had Entenza talked about the number of people who weren't insured, that would've been a different argument. He didn't. He talked about how many people couldn't get health insurance.
If it's available & people don't take advantage of it, that's different than it not being available.
That's where the lie happens. Deal with it.
Comment 8 by b bruckbauer at 18-Nov-13 12:07 AM
Gary is right, Reid is wrong....enough said.
Are higher ed committees doing their job?
To those of us who've paid attention to the corruption happening at MnSCU universities, the question about whether the legislature, specifically the House and Senate higher ed committees, are doing their job is a troubling question.
I've forwarded both commitees information about specific instances where, at minimum, SCSU's decisions are creating difficulties for the University today and in the future.
Specifically, President Potter fired Mahmoud Saffari for not putting together an enrollment retention program. That's part of the documentation Dr. Saffari received from Provost Malhotra. Dr. Saffari's termination happened in the fall of 2011. There are a multitude of reasons why that's troubling, starting with the fact that SCSU enrollment is dropping off a cliff.
That's bad enough but it doesn't stop there. Since Dr. Saffari's termination, the administration hasn't put a plan together. I know they haven't because they recently asked for help in putting a plan together.
Have either of the higher ed committees looked into this? Of course they haven't. They've told me that "it's a local issue." Which it isn't and they know it. That's their way of saying that they aren't interested in holding real oversight hearings.
Five years ago, St. Cloud State enrollments were increasing. SCSU was the flagship university within the MnSCU system. They aren't anymore. In fact, Mankato has sailed past SCSU in FYE enrollment. (FYE enrollment is the number that matters because that's the enrollment that determines tuition revenue.)
That's before talking about President Potter signing a contract with the J.A. Wedum Foundation that virtually guarantees their apartment complex a profit for the next 20 years. The first two years that the apartments existed, SCSU had to send the Foundation all of the rent they collected from students plus checks totalling $2,250,000. The figures haven't been released for the third year but reports have it that the University is hoping they only lost $950,000 this time.
Again, have either higher ed committee looked into this? Nope. A university with shrinking enrollment and losing money on its other 'investments' isn't enough to get the commitees' attention. Apparently, they think that it isn't a big deal because it isn't their money.
Let's be clear about some things. First, the blame rightly belongs to the committee chairs. They're the only people with the authority to gavel an oversight hearing into existence. Committee members can't ask questions until the meeting starts. Second, the time for status quo committee hearings has passed. Lots of things are happening that need addressing. Financial mismanagement at St. Cloud State is running rampant. Third, if higher ed committees don't take their oversight responsibilities seriously, it sends the signal that universities can pretty much do whatever they want with impunity.
The committee chairs carry the big stick. They can get the universities' attention if they're intent on being the taxpayers' watchdog. When they aren't willing to be the taxpayers' watchdog, then they're part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Finally, legislators in positions of power are in a position of vulnerability because taxpayers take it seriously when they turn a blind eye towards corruption and financial mismanagement. Legislators should know that, while taxpayers don't care about every penny of wasteful spending, they care if legislators ignore a ton of corruption mixed with financial mismanagement.
Committee chairs aren't irreplaceable, especially when they ignore their essential responsibilities.
Posted Monday, November 18, 2013 5:23 AM
No comments.
Fossilized administration dooming California community college
The Community College of San Fransisco is facing a daunting task. Here's what's happening:
In July, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, said it plans to revoke the school's accreditation at the end of the school year, giving the college a year to prove that it can turn around or be shut down.
Here's why CCSF is in this difficult position:
Among other failings, the private agency found the school had failed to reduce spending amid state funding declines while keeping too little money in reserves. City College has $10 million in savings and $850,000 set aside for emergencies, but the accreditor found the school faces long-term problems if it doesn't change its spending patterns.
The commission also found the college didn't meet standards in some instructional programs, in student support services and in library facilities.
Imagine that. Another California institution thinks spending isn't linked to revenues. The culture must change:
Mr. Agrella has instituted a de facto hiring freeze on vacated faculty positions he considered not essential to the curriculum. Last month, he named a new chancellor, Arthur Tyler, to succeed an interim one. In perhaps his most controversial move, Mr. Agrella canceled a new $120 million performing-arts center.
That's ridiculous. What community college needs a $120,000,000 performing arts center even in the best of times? CCSF isn't enjoying the best of times, making this decision seem rather foolish. Despite the situation, people are upset with Mr. Agrella's decision:
Timothy Killikelly, 56, a political-science instructor, said he likes Mr. Agrella, but disagrees with some of his moves, such as canceling the performing-arts center, mainly because voters had passed a bond measure for it.
CCSF won't exist a year from now if a) it doesn't get spending under control and b) it doesn't focus its mission to what's essential. The state accrediting board can put CCSF out of business if it doesn't start acting responsibly. That would make the bonding vote moot. (Then again, we're talking California, so it's possible that they'd spend money on a performing arts center on the campus of a now-defunct community college.)
CCSF is the most dramatic case of financial mismanagement I've read. Unfortunately, it isn't the only collegiate institution that's been poorly managed. Colleges and universities nationwide have spent money foolishly, especially on shiny buildings that enhance a president's self-image but do little to build a well-educated workforce.
At St. Cloud State, one of the least-talked-about financial disasters is the renovation of the National Hockey Center. It's now known as the Herb Brooks National Hockey Center. When the project was first announced, it was called the National Hockey and Event Center. When fundraising fell far short of the goal, the event center part of the project got dropped like a hot potato.
With enrollment dropping like a rock, tuition revenues have fallen short of what's needed. Now SCSU is figuring out what to cut from their budget.
If only management had learned that you can't spend money you don't have on things you don't need.
Posted Monday, November 18, 2013 6:34 AM
No comments.
Dayton backtracks on I-94 project
This St. Cloud Times article reads like a Dayton administration press release. Here's the newsy part of the Dayton press release:
Gov. Mark Dayton's announcement Thursday that up to $46 million will be spent as soon as summer to expand Interstate Highway 94 between Rogers and St. Michael is extremely welcome news.
As Dayton and Minnesota Department of Transportation Charlie Zelle noted in meeting with this board prior to the announcement, these bonding dollars are not just a down payment on expanding this critical corridor all the way to St. Cloud, but in providing the funding necessary to maintain and expand roads and highways statewide.
Nowhere in the Dayton press release did they talk about the Dayton administration's disapproval for the expansion project when they attempted to thwart Michele Bachmann's proposal:
But Minnesota Department of Transportation spokesman Kevin Gutknecht said the I-94 widening doesn't rank high on the agency's long-term list of priority projects. 'There are projects like this all across the state - really good projects, really important projects , projects that have tremendous support like this,' he said. 'It all really boils down to the funding piece.'
It's clear that the Dayton administration is talking out of both sides of its mouth. Here's how the Times attempts to spin this project:
The focus of Corridors of Commerce is to improve roads that are bottlenecked or considered critical to regional economic development but not funded under MnDOT's latest 'fiscally constrained' 20-year transportation plan.
That's insulting. MnDOT's budget isn't "fiscally constrained." It's politically constrained, especially when Michele Bachmann was trying to get I-94 expanded. Back then, MnDOT said directly that I-94 expansion didn't "rank high on the agency's...priority projects." Back then, MnDOT's spokesman hinted that the expansion ranked behind "really important projects."
Gov. Dayton's facade is that of a nice guy. When politics are involved, he's a sharp-elbowed ideologue. I'm betting that he's only supporting the I-94 expansion to get support for a massive tax increase to pay for his light rail projects. Minnesotans are taxed too much already. The last thing we need is to raise taxes to support failed light rail projects.
When Steve Murphy's Transportation Tax Bill passed in 2008, I predicted that the DFL would whine that the tax increase wasn't enough to add lanes to roads. I also predicted that they'd be back for another massive tax increase. It took them longer than I expected but they're back asking for another major tax increase.
Expanding I-94 is the right thing to do. That's why Michele Bachmann fought for it. Gov. Dayton isn't as interested in doing the right thing as he is interested in playing politics with economic growth. Gov. Dayton didn't like the expansion until he was pressured by David Fitzsimmons, Mary Kiffmeyer and other Republicans from central Minnesota.
Minnesota needs a governor who does the right thing for the right reasons. We don't need a governor who moistens his finger before making a policy decision.
Posted Monday, November 18, 2013 12:13 PM
No comments.
