Area needs Don Taylor

There is a good letter to the editor in the Chisago County Press, July 3, 2008. It is not online so it is reproduced here.

To the Editor,

I read Jeremy Kalin’s letter to the editor and it left me troubled. It puzzled me why my legislator is taking time to inform me that there are families in my county who have to choose which member of the family is going to be allowed to eat on a particular night. Jeremy’s answer is to forego campaign literature (he still passes out stickers) at parades and collect food for the poor. If that is Jeremy’s answer, it falls short.

If Jeremy knows of families who truly need help, he should be directing them to the many government and private helping organizations in Chisago County. There is no need for families to go hungry. Churches help. Families help. Individuals help. Schools collect good [sic]. Organizations like the Boy and Girl Scouts collect food. The Post Office workers collect food. School lunches are subsidized for those who need help. There is no shortage of caring in Chisago County. The difference is this: a legislator is in a unique position to help the poor or at least make sure they are not hurt.

Jeremy Kalin hurt the citizens in need in Chisago County by voting to raise the gas tax. No one is hurt more by an increase in the gas tax than the poor. During a time of economic downturn and rising gas prices, Jeremy voted to raise the gas tax. Not only do the poor pay for [sic] tax for their own gasoline, they pay the increased gas tax for the transportation of all their food, clothing and everything else they buy.

Kalin voted to raise vehicle license tab fees by at least $25. That’s $50 per year for a two-car working family. Kalin increased the tax on propane and natural gas which also hits the poor. And in some locations, the sales tax on vehicle purchases will increase. Besides that, there is a new tax on cans of paint.

How are the poor suppose to get to work? How are the poor suppose to heat their homes? Kalin made life worse for the poor and he should be ashamed.

When I see Jeremy and his little red wagons at the parades, I am reminded of the harm he did to the people in need all over the state of Minnesota and I am reminded that we need a representative who really cares and understands the people of this county. We need Don Taylor.

Galen Strovers

___________________________________________

Update: This letter was also published in the Post Review.

Illegal Immigration, or How to get more Democrats elected

You have to wonder if some of our bleeding heart supporters of the sanctuary cities, illegal immigration and over all watering down of our once strong and vibrant society have had to use any public services lately. Kalin and Olseen should be at an age where they should begin to need some medical care, or take a parent (unless they have "people" to do that) to a doctor visit. As a member of the sandwich generation, I have had both sides, kids and elderly parents needing care in emergency situations from Mpls. to the northern tier hospitals. Would that either of these men could sit through the ordeal, listen to the Dr. and pharmacists venting when you finally get through the immigrants in front of you with no insurance.

Our medical and peace officers are being strained and stressed to pick up the slack that these politicians create. Just in one afternoon spent in the ER, the attending physician lost it, began swearing and slamming things around, as he got the call that another Somali cab driver was coming in for FREE MEDICAL care. He was furious, and asked anyone who would listen why they, and the politicians who support them, thought his services were so cheap. The officer who brought him in was angry, as he commisserated with the Dr. that immigrants do not need to learn the traffic rules, cannot read the signs, and are totally arrogant about their demands for immediate care, arguing that the other driver was at fault when witnesses provided plenty of testimony to the contrary. Insurance? talk to the cab company.

While Kalin and Olseen share the trait of arrogance with these people, let them experience just a month of taking care of a sick family member through our declining medical systems. Wait in line at an in-house pharmacy for three hours for one .75 cent pain killer, while the mass in front of you gets their hundreds of dollars of prescriptions for free. Have the pharmicist apologize and vent on you how they can't handle it anymore, they are soo sorry your loved one had to wait in line, obviously sick, while the party went on in line with the laughter, cell phone conversations and rude behaviours created by democratic largesse. Would an acknowledgement of how incredible America is with this treatment of the poor (Palm cell phones, SUV waiting outside), a tiny show of gratitude instead of arrogance, change my perception? I am naive enough to think maybe, but I won't hold my breath. My ancestors came here, worked the farms as indentured servants, rose through education, and gave my generation a future on their backs. This new wave wants it all now.

The immigrant of the past came with humble expectation, dreams and a burning desire to work to become American. The immigrant of today comes with arrogance, expectations of immediate gratification and the nod and a wink that they do not need to become American, just reap the benefits of the system. You do not need to learn the language, assimilate in the schools, learn our culture, or adopt our civility. A generalization, yes. But one the past months has impressed on me over and over. The strident cry of give me, give me, give me, and get out of my way while I take it. This is not what my great grandparents gave up everything for, and I am angry that Kalin and Olseen can be selfish enough to glibly give it all away. People like them will never see the truth of the situation they are creating.

A Big Fat Zero

The Taxpayers League of Minnesota has published its annual scorecard for Minnesota Senators and Representatives. Download it here, save it and peruse it.

Representative Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) scored a big fat goose egg on all twelve issues. In other words, he has never seen a tax increase he did not like.

And wonder of wonders, Senator Rick Olseen (D-17) tied with Kalin with a zero rating. He too has never seen a tax increase he did not like.

If it were not for Governor Pawlenty’s veto pen and the legislature’s failure to override, Chisago County taxpayers would be in tax overload. These elected officials do not represent Chisago County taxpayers.

Kalin’s Opinion Letter

The following is a letter to the editor in the January 9th Star Tribune by Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B). Source: Strib and here.

THE FUTURE OF JOBZ
Make it transparent

The Jan. 4 editorial "Make JOBZ more accountable to public" [find it here] made a very good point, but omitted a missed opportunity last legislative session.

My home, Chisago County, is home to two high-profile JOBZ projects: Andersen Windows in North Branch and Polaris Industries in Wyoming. The return on our public investment in these projects is unknown -- even basic facts are unclear. The state's Department of Employment and Economic Development job-growth numbers significantly differ from those reported to our local economic development authorities.

I authored the 2007 JOBZ Oversight Bill, a bipartisan bill to provide the state auditor access to confidential tax-return data related to JOBZ projects -- on an ongoing basis, rather than only for special reports by the legislative auditor. My JOBZ oversight provision was included in the Omnibus Tax Bill, passed by the Legislature but vetoed by the governor.

The bill was praised by all sides of the JOBZ debate. Those who think JOBZ is great believe that more oversight would show a successful program. JOBZ skeptics like myself believe more oversight will expose its failures. Unfortunately, the veto stamp left all of us unsatisfied, still waiting for more information, again.

The governor and the Legislature must embrace oversight and transparency at every turn possible. Only after making information readily accessible to policymakers and the public can we ask the key question: Is JOBZ providing a good return on our public investment?

REP. JEREMY KALIN, DFL-NORTH BRANCH

___________________________________________

The January 3^rd editorial makes it clear the Office of the Legislative Auditor will provide its report on JOBZ in February. Not many would support not requiring accountability of the use of tax dollars in private economic development.

Kalin authored the 2007 JOBZ Oversight Bill. He bemoans, "My JOBZ oversight provision was included in the Omnibus Tax Bill, passed by the Legislature but vetoed by the governor." Kalin blames the Governor, but Kalin should be blaming fellow liberal, Larry Pogemiller.

Governor Pawlenty vetoed the Omnibus Tax Bill because it contained a provision to index the expenditures of the bill to inflation. Pawlenty had written a letter to the Senate to warn them of this potential veto. According to Sarah Janecek, "Pogemiller added the inflation provision to the tax bill and did not tell Tax Committee Chair Bakk he did that." Read her full story here.

Kalin’s bill was probably beneficial and probably would have been signed by the Governor under different circumstances. But rather than nailing the real culprit, Pogemiller, Kalin nails Pawlenty. Come on! Be a man! Lay the blame where it belongs. Tell the whole truth. Pawlenty was true to his forewarning. Pogemiller pulled a fast one on the legislature.

Even with Kalin’s good intentions in that bill, it’s hard to respect a politician who puts politics before people.

Pitt Appeals Firing

Now that Sonia Pitt has appealed her firing from Mn/DOT, maybe Tarryl Clark will learn a lesson in patience. Earlier we had noted that she said, "Pitt's firing was welcome "but three months late"."

Mn/DOT was wise to take its time to make a proper case for firing its employee, knowing that it could be appealed. It takes time to dot the "i"s and cross the "t"s, not just to prepare the case for the firing, but be prepared for an appeal.

Meanwhile, Steve Murphy and other Democrats have been castigating Mn/DOT for its incompetency. For all their eagerness to get rid of Pitt (Jeremy Kalin included), what will they say if Pitt is reinstated? I suppose they will condemn Mn/DOT for being incompetent once again.

Kalin doesn’t know Barrett answered him

The following letter to the editor from Kalin (D-17B) appeared in the October 18, 2007, issue of the Chisago County Press. It is reproduced here for the convenience of the reader since it is not online.

Let’s stick to the facts
To the editor:
I am writing to correct factual misstatements in Bob Barrett’s letter last week’s County Press. He disagrees with my effort for more accountability from MnDOT, and I respect him for expressing his views. However, I want to be sure that we are all working from the same basic facts.

First, stipends for the losing bidders of the I-35W design competition were originally set at $300,000 for each of the three losing design teams. Later, that amount was increased to $400,000 and then finally set at $500,000. Assistant Commissioner Bob McFarlin explained the increase due to adding a "light-rail ready" component to the bridge. However, on Public Radio’s Midday show on October 1, Linda Figg, the lead designer of the winning project, said the light-rail ready addition was "very easily incorporated into the design." McFarlin has yet to clarify the increased stipends in light of Ms. Figg’s statement.

Second, the letter writer accused me of making "false allegations" that a MnDOT employee spent as much as $26,000 of public money on personal travel. I only wish it were false. Sonia Morphew Pitt is being investigated by James Nobles, Legislative Auditor, for exactly this reason. Further, Mr. Nobles publicly stated that MnDOT likely violated the law by not alerting him of the possible violation when they learned of it. I have spoken personally with Mr. Nobles, and asked him to also verify that Ms. Pitt, the director of emergency management for MnDOT, is trained and certified in emergency management. An initial report is due in several weeks.

My hope is to have a bipartisan discussion about the best transportation policy options to make Minnesota’s roads, bridges and transit safe and well-maintained. To do so, we must all work from a common ground of verified facts.

Rep. Jeremy Kalin

___________________________________________

Kalin is correct that facts are essential to a discussion about transportation. But Kalin can’t seem to get it straight what Bob Barrett wrote.

Point 1
Kalin claims Barrett "...disagrees with my effort for more accountability from MnDOT."

Barrett actually agrees with him for he previously wrote, Kalin "...rightfully complained that a MNDOT employee responsible for emergency management stayed at an east coast business conference and couldn’t be bothered to come home for 10 days after the bridge collapsed. This is a good and important question and deserves, at minimum, an honest answer."

Barrett is right. Kalin is wrong.

Point 2
Without any stated acknowledgment, by using the word "stipend" in the most recent letter, Kalin accepts Barrett’s corrective that "bonus" was the improper term for the stipends paid to the losing bridge bidders.

Barrett is right. Kalin now accepts the right term without acknowledging correction.

Point 3
While Barrett stated factually that "Stipends are common in very large design-build transportation projects and are paid out for legitimate public purposes," his main point was that Kalin used the term "excessive bonus" which makes it sound "...much more sinister..."

Barrett won this one as well, because Kalin stripped the prejudicial terminology from his discussion of the stipends in his letter above. (Kalin’s stipend paragraph above is written factually.) Kalin has a right to question the size of the stipends, but the size of stipends is dictated by state law. See here. As a Representative, he should know that.

Point 4
Kalin claimed Barrett "...accused me of making "false allegations" that a MnDOT employee spent as much as $26,000 of public money on personal travel" (italics added). Kalin misquoted Barrett who actually said Kalin made "...false accusations that this employee spent $26,000 of taxpayer paid travel on what Kalin referred to as "personal pleasure"." Kalin originally said, "...up to $26,000 of her taxpayer-paid travel was for personal pleasure" (italics added, see source).

Bear with me. Let’s sort this out to learn Kalin’s methodology of fudging on the facts.

Point 4a
Barrett is right again. Kalin now tones down "personal pleasure" to "personal travel." That doesn’t sound as bad.

Point 4b
The $26,000 comes from a Star Tribune article which states:

"Since July 2006, Pitt has scheduled 17 out-of-state business trips for herself, including an eight-day training session that was scheduled to start today in Emmitsburg, Md., for "crisis communication during emergency situations."

Including per diem payments, hotel, air fare, registration fees, ground travel and other expenses, all the trips combined cost at least $26,400, documents show."

Clearly not all $26,400 was for personal pleasure because at least one training session is identified. Kalin hedged his words by saying, "...up to $26,000 of her taxpayer-paid travel was for personal pleasure" (italics added, see our earlier comments).

Kalin hedged his words, but clearly intended to make this sound as bad as possible. Barrett identified it as a false accusation because he apparently looked at the intent of the statement.

Barrett is right because Kalin’s intention is obvious, while he tried to cover it up with "up to."

Kalin wants facts, but Kalin can’t even represent Barrett accurately. There is major spin in almost everything Kalin writes.

A Good Assessment

The following is a letter to the editor in the October 11, 2007 issue of the Chisago County press. Since it is not online, it is reproduced here for the benefit of our readers.

Kalin should redirect energy

To the editor:
Instead of working towards a solution in regards to the bridge tragedy Rep. Kalin continues to politicize the tragedy for partisan political gain. Unfortunately much of what Kalin had to say in last week’s paper was nothing more than speculation, innuendo, falsehoods and political spin.

Just four months ago Rep. Kalin voted to spend over $4.1 billion on various transportation related projects (few of which were related to safety) and now he can’t find the rationale for approving what he referred to as an "unprecedented" cash advance of $200 million to kick start the building of a new I-35W bridge until federal money shows up. It seems that Kalin thinks the public should be concerned because MNDOT didn’t have $200 million sitting in the bank on July 31 waiting for a bridge to fall down. Maybe someone should tell Mr. Kalin that a bridge falling down IS "unprecedented" in Minnesota and his help may be required to get a replacement bridge built.

Among the other complaints Kalin had from last week is that "excessive bonuses" of $600,000 are being paid to the losing bidders of the I-35W bridge rebuild. I realize that Mr. Kalin has no background in bridge building or finances, but that’s a poor excuse for not being truthful on the issue. The fact is that these payments are called "stipends" and not "bonuses". Stipends are common in very large design-build transportation projects and are paid out for legitimate public purposes. But, admittedly, the term "excessive bonus" sounds much more sinister in the paper.

Continuing on, Kalin then rightfully complained that a MNDOT employee responsible for emergency management stayed at an east coast business conference and couldn’t be bothered to come home for 10 days after the bridge collapsed. This is a good and important question and deserves, at minimum, an honest answer. However, not stopping there, he went on to make false accusations that this employee spent $26,000 of taxpayer paid travel on what Kalin referred to as "personal pleasure".

The rest of Kalin’s article was nothing more than an Eddie Haskell like exercise of telling people what he thinks they want to hear under the guise of sounding thoughtful and dispassionate. It’s too bad this energy can’t instead be used on the productive work of getting a new bridge built and making our roads and bridges safer.

Bob Barrett
Shafer

The Ethanol Scam

In a mailed political flyer referenced here, Rep. Jeremy Kalin (17B) declared:

As a legislator, Rep. Kalin chief-authored a bill that secured $200,000 for Chisago County to study the feasibility of a cellulosic ethanol plant in our country. Prairie-grass ethanol has been proven to be much more environmentally-friendly than corn-based ethanol.

___________________________________________

The corn-to-ethanol scam and prairie grass or switchgrass-to-ethanol scheme is discussed in an article that someone recently sent to me. The Rolling Stone Magazine is not exactly a robust conservative sector in society so perhaps liberals will give an ear to its message. There is some unnecessary crude language in the article, but get past it to the analysis that it provides.

This article is a good starting point to challenge Kalin’s dream for Chisago County.

The Ethanol Scam: One of America's Biggest Political Boondoggles

The great danger of confronting peak oil and global warming isn't that we will....do nothing while civilization collapses, but that we will plunge after "solutions" that will make our problems even worse. Like believing we can replace gasoline with ethanol, the much-hyped biofuel that we make from corn.

Read the rest of the article by Jeff Goodell. It seems so many big-oil hating liberals have bought into big-corn.

More on Kalin’s Small Potatoes

The total price of replacing the I-35W bridge and related costs could reach $393 million according to the Pioneer Press.

All of us should be concerned with the enormous cost of this project. While many Dems are aghast at the price tag, Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) is still counting the small potatoes. See his press release which was also published in the various local newspapers this week.

Probably more than $393 million will be spent, but Kalin is locked on to two small dollar figures when compared to the hundreds of millions: 1. “...up to $26,000 of her [Mn/DOT's Sonia Morphew Pitt] taxpayer-paid travel was for personal pleasure...” and 2. “...excessive bonuses going to the losing bidders of the 35W bridge contract – to the tune of $600,000...”

Regarding the first point, the personnel review underway may very well disclose some improper use of tax dollars, but it would probably be far less than $26,000. No one who pays taxes wants government waste, but Kalin is so occupied with this that he has not expressed any proper concern in his latest article about the extremely large cost of the project.

Second, his complaint about excessive bonuses for the losing bidders ignores that it is required by state statute. Chapter 161.3426, Subd. 3 mandates:

"The commissioner shall award a stipulated fee not less than two-tenths of one percent of the department's estimated cost of design and construction to each short-listed, responsible proposer who provides a responsive but unsuccessful proposal."

Doing this math yields a $500,000 stipend for each unsuccessful design-build bidder on a $250 million project. It’s time our legislator reads the requirement of the statutes and quits attacking the Pawlenty/Molnau administration for supposed incompetence in this area. Whether a Republican or Democrat administration, this is the law–end of matter.

The design-build concept is relatively new to state law. According to former legislator Phil Krinkie, this provision was put in place in 2001 to fast track the Hiawatha Light Rail Line and was supposed to save money. The stipend that consumes Kalin is small potatoes compared to the rest of the provisions of the law. Rather than taking the lowest bidder, it provides for accepting the bid of “best value.”

Mn/DOT has selected the highest bid–$57 million more than the low bid. Another $27 million can be had through bonuses. And this bidder has the longest work schedule by more than two months. These are issues that Kalin should be pursuing because these are the big potatoes.

The real problem is the “best value” law which is administered by bureaucrats which has given us the boondoggle of the excessive cost of LRT, now the bridge, and more to come. The idea isn’t working and should be removed from state law. The lowest, qualified bidder system worked well.

Eventually Kalin may complain about these excessive costs, but it is doubtful he will address the law that creates it because that law caters to liberal thinking. He’d rather use the small potatoes improperly or merely potentially to attack a Republican administration than address true government waste.

Oh the Liberal Finger-pointing!
Another Kalin Press Release

Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) has posted his latest accusatory piece.

"OP/ED COLUMN
LEADERSHIP AND HONESTY ARE SORELY NEEDED

When the 35W bridge collapsed, taking 13 lives with it, Governor Pawlenty sounded like the leader we all wanted him to be. He assured us that he would do what it takes to ensure that all of Minnesota's roads and bridges are safe, even it if meant raising taxes.

When legislators questioned Lt. Gov. Molnau and her staff on August 15 and 22, MnDOT assured us that they would have no cash problems. Other projects would not suffer, the Lt. Gov. reassured us.

Since then, we've learned of excessive bonuses going to the losing bidders of the 35W bridge contract – to the tune of $600,000 total. We've learned that MnDOT's director of Emergency Management, Sonia Morphew Pitt, couldn't be bothered to come home for 10 days after the bridge collapsed, and that up to $26,000 of her taxpayer-paid travel was for personal pleasure. And, we've learned that MnDOT management, when made aware of Ms. Pitt's excesses, failed to alert the Legislative Auditor as required by law.

To top it all off, Lt. Gov. Molnau has since admitted that she didn't tell the legislature the truth. She has asked the legislature to give her an unprecedented cash advance of almost $200 million. If she doesn't get her way, projects in the works will be delayed or halted altogether.

What's the Governor's response to Minnesotans? Don't worry. Be happy.

It's a cute slogan. But it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in MnDOT, or in Minnesota's infrastructure. The Governor and the Lieutenant Governor need to come clean regarding MnDOT's ongoing financial troubles. Only then can the legislature, and every Minnesotan, be confident that increased investment will be responsibly managed by the Pawlenty/Molnau administration. And only then will we be certain that our state is on the responsible path to better roads, safer bridges, and adequate transit options.

___________________________________________

It’s all Lt. Governor Molnau’s fault according to Kalin, and Pawlenty’s. He does not acknowledge that the financial crunch Mn/DOT is experiencing is due to a potential veto of the transportation bill by President Bush. The bill provides $195 million to the state for the start of the I-35 bridge. But President Bush has threatened to veto it because of the “irresponsible and excessive level of spending” in it.

Because the $195 million federal money may not arrive in time, Mn/DOT may need to delay some other projects, for example see here and here to free up money for starting the construction of the I-35 bridge.

Mn/DOT has asked the Legislative Advisory Commission (LAC) for the possible approval of $195 million of state money to start the project.

The LAC is reluctant to approve this large sum because the commission deals with smaller figures. And if this would be approved, there are concerns that the federal money may not come through.

This is indeed a problem for state officials, but it would not exist if the federal dollars were there, something Kalin does not acknowledge.

Of course the Dems blame Pawlenty for not allowing transportation funding in the special session. Governor Pawlenty wisely prevented a feeding frenzy by the Dems who saw the bridge tragedy as an opportunity to spend money like drunken sailors.

Ironically, a similar feeding frenzy is occurring at the federal level as Congress (Dems and Republicans) loaded up the transportation bill with excessive pork which the President has threatened to veto.

Kalin wants leadership out of Minnesota Republicans. When will he demand leadership out of his fellow liberals who gorge at the public trough? The porkers get so greedy that they are willing to jeopardize the funding of a collapsed bridge. If the federal transportation bill were fair, Bush would sign it and Minnesota’s bridge funding problem would be solved. But liberals sense they can take advantage of a tragedy and federal funding failure to open the state floodgates for even more funding. The Governor alone holds back that flood. Keep it up Governor. You have our support.

Kalin wants honesty from the Governor. How about a wee bit of honesty from Kalin? Liberal greed at the federal level is creating a funding problem here. We’re sick of the dishonesty of liberal politicians.

It’s time for our local Representative to demonstrate leadership by actually working harmoniously toward a solution together with Republicans. “People before politics” is only a slogan; now let’s see you put it into action.

Kalin Press Release

After Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) pandered to the media about the bridge stipends, he followed with a letter to Lt. Governor and Commissioner of Transportation, Carol Molnau, on September 20, 2007. His press release can be viewed here.

In it, he adds six more issues to the petty one above. (See our previous post.) He should be given a 15 yard penalty for "piling on." This is unsportsmanlike conduct. Molnau is trying to restore Minnesota to normality after the collapse of the most used bridge in the state. She’s as busy as a cat on a hot tin roof with work, but Kalin has to badger her. Kalin is more interested in politicizing a tragedy than creating a climate for the Transportation Department to get the job done timely and properly.

Ignoring the fact that he had already admitted that as a legislator he knew of the $300k stipend for each of the three losing bridge bidders, now he condemns the $1.5 million in stipends as frivolous spending. He ratchets up his rhetoric from the $900,000 expected stipend to $1.5 million. He should have expected the extra $600,000 in stipends when liberals pushed for light rail in the bridge design.

Whatever waste is discovered after investigating the "absence" of a Mn/DOT employee during the bridge collapse will not go very far toward repairing one of the "...endangered bridges..." he is so concerned about. The employee review will tell if discipline is needed, but any potentially wasted dollars are less than minuscule compared to the cost of repairing one deficient bridge. Where is his sense of proportion? Political opportunists make voters cynical.

Why does a liberal suddenly become concerned about frivolous spending when he voted for frivolous tax increases a few months ago? What is $600,000 compared to $5,000,000,000 proposed in bills by the Dems? It’s frivolous when he says it’s frivolous and he ignores the fact that light rail was included in the bridge design by a Republican administration on the insistence of libs.

Kalin does not have a sense of proportion. What is the importance of starting the Rush Line Commuter Bus service compared to the replacement of the failed I-35 bridge? The commuter delay caused by the congested North Branch TH 95 bridge is nothing compared to no bridge over the Mississippi River. Like a petulant kid, Kalin has to have answers to his petty questions now. It would be good for Molnau to ignore him; answers will be forth coming after the crisis is handled.

When does a Liberal Complain

about Spending Money?

Late afternoon on Wednesday, Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B) called WCCO radio (and others) to say the three companies with the losing bids for the I-35 bridge would be receiving $500,000 each instead of the $300,000 stipend he knew would be granted. WDFL Don Shelby eagerly asked pandering Kalin to inform him about his investigation into the matter so that he could report on it.

This article had reported on the $500,000 stipend on September 14 (5 days before bid award), explaining the rationale for offering stipends to the losing bidders.

Mn/DOT did not design the bridge project and put it out for bid. Rather, each bidding company used the design-build method. The stipend covers at least some of the design costs of the bidding company. An article, in which Kalin’s complaint is registered, also explained the rationale of the stipend.

A bid-losing company can choose to turn down the stipend. If it accepts the stipend, the state gets the right to use any ideas submitted in its design and bid. Thus the state may benefit from information that it can use on this or any other project in the future. Of course that benefit is not known in advance.

On September 14, the above article explained the increase from $300k to $500k:

"Department spokesman Kevin Gutknecht said the stipend increase reflects heightened expectations, including a requirement that the bridge be reinforced to accommodate a future light-rail line."

After the bidding companies had already done work on the design-build project, they were asked to modify it to accommodate light-rail. Kalin’s liberal friends pushed hard for light-rail inclusion on the bridge. In a liberal’s mind, such a demand is not the driving force for an increased stipend; a Republican administration that believes in paying for a requested product must be blamed. Kalin doesn’t live in a real world of cost and benefit. Despite his "people before politics" mantra, he lives in the mud-slinging world of jacking himself up by wacking Republicans and pandering for votes.

Kalin balked at the $600,000 extra stipend expense, but said nothing about the $50 million extra cost of the bid accepted by the state which has been protested by two losing bidders. Kalin missed the big money and choked on the small potatoes. That does not bode well for Chisago County taxpayers who will be expected to keep forking out the dough for his projects.

Who is Jeremy Kalin?

Someone who made a comment on this blog asked this question. To learn about him, you can keep track of him and his thinking by using at least the following means.

• His own web site.
• His blog which has a link on his web site.
• Also watch his government space as a state representative.
• His postings on the liberal DailyKos number in the hundreds. (This is worth mining. I doubt anyone has had the time to find all his liberal nuggets in these posts.)
• Even if you don’t subscribe to the local papers, you can learn some information about Kalin by clicking on the links to them that are on this blog.
• It is also enlightening to google his name.
• Please read an earlier post that I made on this blog for more information.

The person who asked if Kalin owns land or ever paid taxes in Chisago County should check the public records at the courthouse and report back. All property tax records for the current year can be located on the Chisago County web site here. Just type in his address.

The primary purpose of this blog is education in political matters. The invention of the Internet (yah the Goracle did it!) and blogging is as important in our time as Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press more than five hundreds years ago. Let’s use it!

Knowledge and the dissemination of knowledge will overcome ignorance, which too often has carried the day in politics.

So who is Jeremy Kalin? He is someone who should be former Representative Kalin.

Local Government Aid

Our Chisago County cities have just completed establishing their proposed budgets for next year. After public review during Truth in Taxation hearings, usually in December, these budgets can be adjusted, but not increased.

A Minnesota city has many sources of revenue, the two largest usually being property taxes and Local Government Aid (LGA).

Rep. Jeremy Kalin (D-17B), as we have noted before here and here, touts that he was "Fighting for Property Tax Relief." He laments that "...property tax hikes will continue another year" because Governor Pawlenty vetoed the bill. Kalin promises to "...deliver real property tax help for our area."

Of course, Kalin is not being honest. Surprise, surprise! "Property tax relief" comes at the expense of sales taxes and income taxes paid by you. The very ones who pay city property taxes, pay sales taxes and income taxes to the state, which gives your tax money to the cities in the form of LGA.

So the state takes money little by little from you throughout the year during each purchase and from your paycheck and gives it to the city. Then when you pay your property taxes twice a year, it doesn’t feel as bad as if you would have to pay all of it to the city on your own. Whatever taxes you pay now would essentially double in May and October if LGA did not exist. It’s called "feel good" taxation and Kalin wants you to "feel good" so you vote for him.

LGA began in 1971. Since 1991, counties have no longer received LGA. LGA payments to townships ceased in 2002. LGA payments to cities have been increasing to the present.

Check out this web site. Select your city to see the LGA payments it received from 2002-2007.

Cities get used to LGA and would not know how to budget without it. How did our parents and grandparents ever fund city property taxes without LGA prior to 1971?

If townships and counties can fund their budgets without LGA, then why can’t cities? If we, as taxpayers, are able to pay township and county taxes on our own, without LGA, then why can’t we pay city property taxes on our own?

If local taxpayers were truly responsible for all that a city expends, without LGA, then our local city budgets would be much lower. We would not be fooling ourselves about the amount of property taxes we actually pay. LGA is a hidden tax that shields city council members from tremendous heat from local taxpayers. LGA destroys council member accountability.

Kalin, forget your kind of "property tax relief" through LGA. I want my kind of property tax relief through making my council members fully accountable for how much of my money they spend. LGA should be abolished for cities. A side benefit would be that Kalin couldn’t crow so loud.

More on Kalin's Post

After I wrote the previous post, I found that Patrick Tepoorten had written a commentary for the Post Review that also analyzes Kalin's post at his legislative web site. Tepoorten elaborates on their exchange.

Kalin Responds to Tepoorten

On July 3rd Patrick Tepoorten commented on Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 which was referenced here in this blog on July 12th. Subsequently, Rep. Jeremy Kalin (DFL-17B) posted a press release on July 16th which can be read here. On August 8th, Tepoorten analyzed Kalin’s post which can be found here under the title "Not sure the argument."

Tepoorten demonstrates conclusively that Kalin failed to analyze his article correctly and missed his point.

If our state representative cannot accurately identify and represent the argument in this brief and simple article, how can he analyze a complicated bill in behalf of Chisago County voters? Fair and accurate analysis is essential in the realm of ideas to be able to interact at the next level of discussion. How can Kalin develop or support good energy policy if he cannot understand the simple argument of a local news reporter and commentator?

Being a typical politician, Kalin devoted just 3 paragraphs taking Tepoorten to task, while not answering him, and then in the rest of his press release touted his own energy bill. This is known as diversion; drag in a red-herring to side track the real issue and sound good in the end even though one has not answered the original points.

At any time, Kalin could have issued a press release on his own energy bill without using Tepoorten’s commentary as a springboard. Kalin can tout his energy bill all day and it will not answer what Tepoorten said about Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act of 2007.

I am interested in reading a Tepoorten article analyzing Kalin’s energy bill.

A Companion of Kalin’s Flyer

His Flyer was Posted Earlier

The following is Rep. Jeremy Kalin’s (DFL-17B) column in the May 3, 2007 issue of the Chisago County Press. It is available here, but it is reproduced below in case it is no longer available on his web site.

This is rather long, but it needs to be read and understood by Republicans and Democrats. The bill was eventually vetoed by Governor Pawlenty, but we need to understand Kalin’s thinking.

___________________________________________

PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FOR CHISAGO COUNTY
Last week, the House passed the cornerstone of our finance reform bills – the House Property Tax Relief bill. I thought long and hard about the bill, and researched the impacts and benefits for Chisago County. In the end, I decided to vote for the significant property tax reductions in the bill.

I promised in the campaign to put people before politics. As you may have read, our property tax cuts are financed by a 4th tier income tax at $431,000 for married couples filing jointly. Although the bill is revenue neutral – the tax cuts are equal to the increase in other areas – it's the top tier income tax that's gotten the most attention. As a result, the political consultants in St. Paul all advised me to do the easy political thing, and vote no.

But I was elected to vote my conscience – not to follow the easy political path. I looked carefully at the numbers provided by the independent and non-partisan House Research staff, and I listened intently to the debate on the House floor.

Throughout my deliberation, I kept returning to this simple fact: only 61 households in Chisago County would be affected by the top tier income tax rate – and nearly every homeowner and Main Street business owner in Chisago County will see real property tax cuts from the Property Tax Relief bill.

On the campaign trail, I heard from almost every single person – reduce my property taxes. Democrats, Republicans and everywhere in between – we're all hungry for property tax relief.

I decided I would vote for real property tax reform at every opportunity. While I'm working closely with Governor Pawlenty on conservation issues, I voted against his tax bill that included $492 Million in more property tax hikes. Our property taxes would go up another 10% for homestead residential property, and at least 4% for commercial business property, under the Governor's plan.

Instead, I voted for the House Property Tax Relief bill. The bill would bring a total of $606,921 in more Local Government Aid to Center City, Chisago City, Harris, Lindstrom, North Branch, Rush City, Shafer, Stacy and Taylors Falls. It also would bring $209,929 more to Chisago County's budget to limit property tax hikes at the county level. Add to this the Taylors Falls Border City Development Zone funding I authored, and the $3,059,802 in school levy reduction aid I voted for in the Education bill, and that's a total of nearly $4 Million in direct property tax help for Chisago County.

The Property Tax Relief bill also includes a new Homestead Credit State Refund to ensure even more targeted property tax reductions, based on the ability to pay. There's a total of $223 Million statewide for this new credit.

I am sure that some will try to sling political mud and paint my vote as a tax hike – which it's not. It's a true reform package, one that recognizes that the state budget cuts of 2003 and 2005 shifted state taxes onto the backs of seniors, farmers, families and Main Street businesses through higher property taxes. The 2007 Property Tax Relief bill restores fairness to the whole tax system, and provides real cuts on our property tax statements.

___________________________________________

Notice the name of this bill is the Property Tax Relief bill which he said contained "significant property tax reductions." But now we get to the nitty-gritty of it: "property tax cuts are financed by a 4th tier income tax."

So it’s not tax relief after all; it’s tax intensification. In putting "people before politics," Kalin thinks it is fair to tax some to give tax relief to others and not call it a tax bill and a tax hike. Dems just cannot be straight forward in the use of language, always obfuscating what they don’t want you to know.

Summing it up, Kalin contends, "I am sure that some will try to sling political mud and paint my vote as a tax hike – which it's not. It's a true reform package...[that] provides real cuts on our property tax statements."

Wow! He can’t even recognize that he voted for a tax hike! In putting people before politics, he forgot about those 61 households in Chisago County who would have had to pick up the tab for the rest of us if this bill had not been vetoed. His politics has already gotten in the way of people.

Tax Hocus Pocus

The flyer below came from Rep. Jeremy Kalin (DFL-17B) in a recent Chisago County Press. Click on it to enlarge.

Rep. Kalin wrote:

Fighting for Property Tax Relief

"Rep. Kalin voted at least 6 times for significant property tax relief for Chisago County. Unfortunately, the Governor vetoed these bills, meaning property tax hikes will continue another year. The most aggressive property tax reform measures would have provided $543 million in tax cuts for property tax payers statewide. Jeremy is already at work looking at other solutions that will deliver real property tax help for our area."

___________________________________________

The knight-in-shining-armor wants you to believe the state will provide property tax relief for you. Apparently this Dem wants you to believe the state magically has money to contribute towards your tax bill so you won’t need to carry the whole load.

Where would the state get the $543 million so that it could reduce your taxes? Duh! The state gets it from you! The state collects taxes from you and then gives it to your city, township, county and school district to pay part of your local taxes. Of course you pay all of it.

Pull your 2007 real estate tax bill out of your file. Look at lines 3, 4, 5 and 6.

• Line 3 is your property tax.
• Line 4 is the "Aid paid by the State of Minnesota to reduce your property tax."
• Line 5 is "Homestead and agricultural credits paid by the State of Minnesota to reduce your property tax."
• Line 6 is your property tax after credits.
• Line 6 is about half of what line 3 is.

If you pay $3,000 of tax, for example, on your home property, the state pays about $3,000 to your local governments as well. In the end, you would be paying about $6,000 to fund local government. Half is paid directly out of your right pocket to the county which disperses it to the other jurisdictions. The other half is paid by you out of your left pocket through sales tax and income tax to the state, which gives it to local government. In the end, you paid all $6,000.

Consequently, for Kalin to be so magnanimous to vote for $543 million of tax relief for you and others, he had to raise tax revenue from you and others to pay for it. Is this tax relief? No it is additional state taxation that is used to supplement local taxation. A tax revenue increase is called tax relief. Kalin and the Dems must think we are dumb.

If residential taxpayers would have to pay for the whole tax bill (for example, $6,000) directly to local government, rather than $3,000 directly and $3,000 indirectly, we would see much more accountability in local government.

If Kalin were honest, he would have stated, "I voted to raise $543 million in taxes from you to give it back to you." Aren’t politicians good to us?!