I have just about beaten this thing to death, here are some new thoughts.
Tina pays taxes in Rochester and I think that she is bothered by the potential of wasting $5 million, that she took action. She did so knowing full well that this would be unpopular. I think her actual bill is a good compromise because it draws attention, but is unlikely change the end result.
“What I am doing here is letting the city council make the decision. If I was on the city council, I would vote no. But I think that’s a decision that they, as local officials, should be making,” she said.
Second, If I represented Stewartville I would handle this very differently. I took an oath to work for Rochester, allowing the wasting of money on foolish projects is violation of that oath. If I represented Stewartville, or if Tina did, comments would likely be different.
Third, the hypocrisy of the Chamber of Commerce who refused to stand with Rochester when the state cut promised LGA to Rochester suddenly getting religion on the state keeping promises is disappointing. The argument that proposed uses are within the law ignores the fact that no laws exist, because this was a maneuver by Greg Davids at the last minute. No one ever considered this, so no real laws exist. As I stated before the Chamber’s policy is pro-sprawl, pro-developer subsidy, and pro-redistributionism.
Forth, I am less concerned about sharing the dollars than I am about the dollars being wasted. Stewartville’s builder / developer giveaway is the perfect example of using public dollars to benefit a few individuals with no net regional benefit. I wish this proposed law required all projects to create net region wide economic development and prevented competition between cities sharing this money.
Fifth, I will track how all $5 million is spent, thus far Pine Island and Stewartville are proposing wasteful spending. Kasson on the other hand in contributing a similar amount to DMC. I hope that most of this money is not wasted. I would ask every community to ask them selves, is our proposed use better or worse than DMC. If they can not create proposals that are superior to DMC, they should support that instead.
Edit: whew… spell check is working again, that was scary…