Mr. Dahle Goes to St. Paul

I received a call today from a man in LeSueur.  I had knocked on his door last weekend, and he told me he was fed up with the “crap” that the Republican Party was shoving in his mailbox and that I had his vote.  He was probably referring to the negative ads citing spending for gorilla cages, polar bears, or sculpture gardens, all part of a recent capital investment bill.  While I am not inclined to acknowledge what my opponents are up to, I will gladly provide some context to this piece of legislation.

The Senate’s version of the Capital Investment Bill is developed following hundreds of meetings that are held around the state.  By the time it is heard on the Senate floor, it is a wide-ranging piece of legislation, which includes investments in public infrastructure throughout Minnesota.  While it is easy to cherry-pick one or two items out of the hundreds included in these investment packages and criticize the vote, a look at the bigger picture reveals an investment in Minnesota while preserving past investments made by our citizens.

One could vote against the Como Zoo, the Ordway Theater and the sculpture garden in Minneapolis. But to do so, one would have to also vote against millions of dollars in investment for education, the environment, health care, our veterans, and the creation of more than 10,000 jobs.  In and near my own district, the bonding bill included money for parks and trails, the Minnesota Valley Regional rail line,  correctional facilities, and the deaf and blind academies.  I staunchly support job creation via projects like these, no matter where in Minnesota they are located.

Among the hundreds of other items included in the capital investment bills were funds for the U of M, our state colleges, flood prevention, financing for infrastructure in rural Minnesota, improvements for roads and bridges, early childhood facilities, RIM (Reinvest in Minnesota), and vital dollars for our veterans homes.  The Como Zoo project alone created more than 1,000 jobs.

When this bill was heard in the full Senate, I was part of a bipartisan landslide (57 ayes, 10 nays) that voted to pass it and send it to the Governor for his approval.  The debt service on the bonds for these projects was well within the limits set to maintain our AAA bond rating as a state.  With construction costs coming in under bid, interest rates at all time lows, this was the right time to invest in Minnesota and get people back to work.

I will continue to run a positive campaign and I will continue to welcome a phone call or two from my constituents who are ready to send me back to St. Paul.  I look forward to working with them and for them.

This past Thursday, after a couple of hours greeting State Fair visitors from the Minnesota Senate booth, I headed south to Savage to step aboard a barge for a trip down the Minnesota and Mississippi River towards St. Paul.  The trip was sponsored by the Highway 169 Corridor Coalition as over 100 members made the 3 hour trip. We often think of the Hwy 169 corridor as roads and rail, but we cannot overlook the importance of the river in making this area a truly inter modal transportation network.

The 3 R’s (road, river, and rail) along Hwy 169 are economically vital for funneling freight into the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro Region from the Mankato area and southern Minnesota. This area produces almost half of Minnesota’s corn, soybeans and ethanol, which makes Minnesota third in the nation for production among all states. Other major commodities moving along this corridor include aggregates, clay and sand, hogs, manufactured goods and food products.  The corridor connects major producers of ethanol, biodiesel and their byproducts to markets and refiners along ‘ethanol alley,’ the southwest freight corridor formed by Highway 60 and the Union Pacific Railroad.

The Ports of Savage are important for grain exports via the Minnesota and Mississippi River systems, guaranteeing low-cost, competitive transportation to regional and world markets for Minnesota farmers. The corridor is expected to play a future role in expanding access from western Minnesota agricultural producers to the Ports of Savage via routes capable of bypassing Metro congestion.  This is good news for the communities in my district along the corridor as we work to put together a long range plan of maximizing economic development for the area.

This afternoon, I was fortunate to meet with several regional participants in a discussion regarding the Dan Patch Railroad corridor with the main question “where do we go from here?”  Representative David Bly and Representative Alice Hausmann led the discussion, held at St. Olaf College.  Over the last 3 years I have passed bills out of the Minnesota Senate which in effect would have removed the gag order placed in statute several years ago not allowing any appropriation of money to a Dan Patch study or planning. Opposition in the House killed the bill.

There are several challenges, but a well planned local approach from the ground up would offer the best chance to achieving alternative transit options to the Twin Cities.  Two big challenges involve governance and funding. With the Met Council representing the 7 county metro area and MnDOT taking on much of the transportation planning for outstate Minnesota, the challenge lies in how to find common ground that ultimately leads to a workable statewide rail plan.  The current statewide rail plan relies on existing rail and infrastructure, important given the difficulty in gaining additional right of way. That’s why the Dan Patch should be a part of the picture.

There are at least 17 separate funding sources in the Cedar Transit corridor.  What funding sources would be available for the Dan Patch, should the statute be changed.  Should we consider other routes?  What is feasible?  How does rail tie in with existing transportation hubs?  Can existing bus service be expanded? What is the best mode of transportation for a given corridor?  Can we get buy-in from cities and counties along the way?  Groups like SCALE (Scott County Assoc. for Leadership and Efficiency) has already included the Dan Patch Line as part of their legislative priorities.

There will be other meetings planned, perhaps as early as August, to discuss the Dan Patch corridor and regional transportation options.  We are encouraged by the renewed interest.

This past Thursday I attended a meeting of the Highway 169 Corridor Coalition held in Belle Plaine. The mission of the group, which started a couple of years ago, is to bring attention to the needs of the corridor from Mankato in Blue Earth County to Bloomington and Edina in Hennepin County. In the spring of 2009, the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition was officially established to advocate for the corridor.
US-169 is a robust, multi-modal transportation corridor that is important to the state and the communities along the corridor. Challenges to its ongoing success include relieving congestion, especially near I-494, identifying US-169 as an important regional transit corridor, enhancements to important connections between rail, road, and transit within the corridor, safety, economic development along the route, and connecting the metro area to important SE Minnesota markets and businesses.
The coalition includes members from nearly all of the communities along the corridor and meetings include mayors, city council members, county engineers, county commissioners and administrators, Region 9 Development Commission representatives, and others with a vested interest in the corridor. On this particular evening, Senator Claire Robling, Representative Mike Beard, and I took questions about how we can cooperate in finding ways to move Hwy 169 projects and priorities forward. As legislators, we can assist with efforts to secure funding through federal dollars, the state general fund and bonding, county and city funding, and cooperative efforts between private and public entities at all levels.
There is great interest in the communities along the corridor to see projects completed. These projects include interchanges, bypasses, and reconfiguring of access and frontage roads. Cities like LeSueur see new upgrades such as the LeSueur Hill interchange as a way to promote economic development, increase employment, promote safety, connect the community, stabilize access to other highways, and support increased mobility along the corridor. Currently, as part of its efforts to ensure the continuing viability of US-169, the U.S. Highway 169 Corridor Coalition is building on extensive studies and plans that have already been completed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
To learn more about the coalition: http://www.us169corridorcoalition.com

This past week I spoke at a meeting of the Northfield Downtown Development Corporation along with Representative David Bly. A few days later I spoke at at a gathering of the New Prague Chamber of Commerce along with Representative Laura Brod. With a couple of dozen persons on hand, the topics focused on the recently completed legislative session and the outlook for the next session. Of course there were some concerns expressed about Local Government Aid cuts, rising property taxes, the next state budget, the overall economy, and the health of our downtown businesses.

The legislature did enact several enact several measures designed to improve our business climate. In addition to a $680 million capital investment bill, the House and Senate passed the Angel Investor Tax credit, equal to 25% of taxpayer’s investments in small Minnesota businesses involved in high-tech, bio science, and green manufacturing industries. The Historic structure rehabilitation tax credit (20% of the rehabilitation costs) designed to assist in upgrading historic buildings, was passed along with a Research and Development tax credit. This credit is designed to spur innovations within Minnesota companies by increasing the current 5% tax credit to a 10% tax credit. it also expands eligibility for the tax credit to partnerships and LLC’s, rather than just corporations.

The legislature also directed the Dept. of Employment and Economic development (DEED) to identify at risk businesses in the state and develop tools the state can use to retain and attract new businesses. It also creates a fast action economic response team that would work with at risk businesses to ensure they are utilizing state services and identify their needs to ensure they are being met. The response team would also assist out of state businesses looking to relocate in Minnesota. The Senate also passed a bill that was into law that prescribes DEED to raise private funds for the Office of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development and maintain a virtual network of resources that are available for new Minnesota business ventures and entrepreneurs.

Finally, the legislature passed a bill this session to fund a comparative study to look at the effects of state regulations on costs and delays in starting a small business in MN, Wisconsin, Iowa, and the Dakotas as well as the typical costs that go along with businesses in retail, manufacturing, and services industries. The study will be conducted by a state higher education institution, and will serve as a guide for future lawmakers as they outline the state’s economic development strategy.

I will be holding several town meetings this coming Saturday, February 20. I am interested in hearing your concerns about the budget, policy, or any other issues you may have. If you cannot make one of the town meetings this Saturday, I will be holding several others at locations around District 25 over the next month or so. I hope to see you there.

LeSueur Town Hall Meeting
10am LeSueur City Library
118 Ferry Street, LeSueur

Belle Plaine Town Hall Meeting
Noon Belle Plaine Public Library
125 West Main Street, Belle Plaine

Arlington Town Hall Meeting
3:30pm Arlington City Hall Chambers
204 Shamrock Drive, Arlington

As always, feel free to contact me at the Capitol. I can be reached at 651 296-1279 or sen.kevin.dahle@senate.mn

The US Fish and Wildlife Service has been purchasing land in the Minnesota River Valley with the intent to provide additional acreage to the National Wildlife Refuge already in place there. That is an admirable and worthwhile goal. Unfortunately, they have decided to ban snowmobile use on newly acquired lands, specifically on trails that have been in existence there since the 1970s. These trails have successfully co-existed with those uses outlined in the Fish and Wildlife Service’s guidelines since the trail’s inception. Snowmobiling groups and I have been working with our representatives in Congress as well as those at the Fish and Wildlife Services in hopes of finding a solution to the problem before the first snowfall. Even a waiver for conditional use of the established Grant-in-Aid snowmobile trail this winter season seems to be a reasonable compromise.
There is much at stake. The city of Henderson depends on the patronage of snowmobile traffic to help them through the winter months. Other cities will also be impacted by dwindling patronage if this vital link in the trail system is unavailable. In addition, local fire and rescue utilize the established trails to access the river bottom lands. Reduction in this accessibility affects their plans in the event of emergency situations. Snowmobiling is a favorite winter pastime for thousands of Minnesotans. Snowmobiling also helps provide a large number of recreation opportunities for other trail users since the majority of snowmobile trails in Minnesota are open for multiple uses and help provide important winter access, services, and trailheads. Rerouting of the existing trail, in this case a steep ditch, poses many safety issues including the crossing of county roads, many without shoulders.
Snowmobiling provides opportunities for families and friends to enjoy wintertime companionship while experiencing splendid scenery like no other season offers. These opportunities combine to help teach respect and conservation of the environment, while instilling a strong appreciation for private and public lands.

“This country will not be a permanently good place for any of us to live unless we make it a reasonably good place for all of us to live.” – Theodore Roosevelt, 1912

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to speak before the Northfield Rotary Club, providing a brief summary of the just completed legislative session. Representative David Bly also shared in the wrap up. The Northfield Rotary is a great group of local citizens who meet every Thursday for lunch at the Northfield Country Club. I want to extend thanks to Doug Crane for the invitation and Laurie Williams, Rotary President and Rick Estenson, President Elect, for their hospitality and fellowship. The Rotary Club, a nationwide service organization, incorporates the Four-Way Test as part of their philosophy of service. Those four questions:
1. Is it the truth?
2. Is it fair to all concerned?
3. Will it build goodwill and better friendships?
4. Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
As part of my presentation, I suggested that politicians and elected officials would do well to consider these four truths in carrying out good government. We should always be truthful in our relations with constituents or fellow legislators. We should be up front and honest as we explain our motives and reasoning behind our votes on issues and policy. People should expect their politicians to be fair and forthcoming in the daily dialogue that guide our decisions.
This past session I was chief author of 32 bills and co-author on an additional 34 pieces of legislation. Many of those bills were signed into law by the Governor. The bills covered a wide range of topics: from energy conservation, transportation, education, commerce and consumer protection, health care, and other topics. Not all legislation can build goodwill or better friendships, but I can honestly say the process, more often than not, can promote a better understanding and consensus among the many stakeholders… even those with divergent opinions. I look forward to working with them again.
I am proud of the many successes I experienced this past session. I would like to think that bills I have authored will indeed be “beneficial to all concerned.” After all, elected officials have an obligation to serve their constituents. Members of community service organizations, such as the Rotary Club, Sertoma, the Lions Club, and others are under no such obligation to serve. But we are all better off because they do. That is the truth.
Bills I have authored this session can be found at:

<a href=”https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/revisor/pages/search_status/status_results.php?body=Senate&search=author&session=0862009&legid=15288&submit_author=GO”>

A recent editorial criticized the House and Senate DFLers for raising taxes. What the editorial failed to mention is the fact that both the House and Senate cut spending more than the Governor. The editorial goes on to criticize a House plan that “eliminates deductions on…most astonishing – mortgage interest.” It’s unfortunate that the editorial board failed to do some homework on this House provision. A closer look reveals the truth about the mortgage interest deduction proposal.

First of all, the bill does NOT impact the federal mortgage interest deduction, which represents most of the tax benefit for homeowners. It only impacts the much smaller state portion, and in a positive way for most. The House tax bill converts the mortgage interest deduction into a credit so that all taxpayers qualify for an equal percentage tax benefit.

Consider the following scenarios:

A married couple, $40,000 of income, $75,000 home, and working hard to pay about $6000 in mortgage interest. They don’t have enough other deductions; therefore, they don’t itemize. Their current state tax benefit is $0. Under the House proposal they will get a credit of $140.

A married couple, two kids, $100,000 of income, $200,000 home – relatively modest for their income, paying about $13,000 a year in mortgage interest. Their current state tax benefit equals about $400. Under this proposal, they’ll get a credit of $420 or $20 more.

Married couple, two kids, $100,000 of income, paying about $25,000 in mortgage interest. Their current law gives them a state tax benefit of $1,180. Their home is worth twice as much as the first example but their state tax benefit is three times as big! Under this proposal, they’ll get the same $420 credit as the married couple in the $200,000 home. Under current law, the bigger the home, the higher the income, the bigger the benefit – the House proposal reforms this impact.

Married couple two kids, $500,000 of income, million-dollar home, paying mortgage interest of $60,000. Under current law they receive tax benefits of $1,750. Under the House proposal, they would receive $420.

The bill creates a credit that provides the same benefit for everyone, up to $10,000 of interest. The Senate tax bill does not include this proposal. They do have a provision that would eliminate the mortgage interest deduction on a second home. Fifteen states do not have a mortgage interest deduction at all. The House proposal is similar to what is currently in place in Wisconsin.

I am not sure what the final tax bill’s provisions regarding mortgage interest will look like when it arrives on the Governor’s desk. Given the enormous budget deficit facing the state, subsidizing $1 million mortgages is no longer affordable. I would hope the correct information regarding the House and Senate budget plans are reported accurately so proper discussion can ensue.

On Thursday, the Minnesota Senate set targets to resolve the budget deficit. Last week we received the final budget forecast which gives us the most accurate picture of the kind of revenue Minnesota can expect over the next several years. It may not come as a surprise to know that the news is not pretty. We are in one of the worst economic downturns in recent memory.
I would like to respond to my constituents who have criticized the legislature for not presenting its own budget in a timely manner. Every Senator and every Representative has been working on this issue from the start. There is a complex array of factors involved when making budget decisions that affect so many Minnesotans. Difficult and gut wrenching cuts will be made that affect our elderly, the disabled, our children, and the poor. Budgets impacting cities and towns, police and fire protection, libraries and homeless shelters are being considered. Farmers, veterans, small and large business owners, nurses, and college students will be affected. Each cut comes with tentacles that reach deep into other programs. We, as legislators, are not only listening to what the public has to say, but also striving to understand the consequences of each cut. Given the choice between a hastily assembled budget for expediency sake and one that represents deep consideration to those affected, I believe my constituents would prefer the latter.
Some have criticized our desire to take time and listen to Minnesotans as a meaningless excursion. I attended one of these sessions in Burnsville where nearly 300 citizens attended (6500 persons attended similar sessions statewide) to weigh in on the budget process, sharing their hopes and fears, concerns, and advice. The old, the young, the strong and the frail, and some of our most vulnerable citizens welcomed the opportunity to say a few words to members of the legislature. We listened. In a representative democracy, if we cease to listen, we cease to represent. That experience, more than anything, gave meaning to the tough decisions that stand before us.
The Senate DFL plan balances the budget and addresses the long-term budget problems. It does not raid the Health Care Access Fund that providers pay into to help those who have difficulty paying their medical bills. Seven percent across-the-board cuts ensure that no one group unfairly shoulders the entire burden. Our difficult choices will save owners from increased property taxes, which have skyrocketed to almost 70% from 2002-2008, mainly because of cuts in Local Government Aid.
I have never criticized the Governor’s budget. There may be much I do not agree with, but I realize that we will need to recognize the same factors that went behind his decisions as we hope he does ours. These difficult economic times call for compromise and cooperation and the opportunity for all citizens to have a say in the process every step of the way. In two months the legislature will adjourn. We welcome input from Minnesotans on proposed solutions. As we have done so successfully in the past…let’s figure this out together.