Vote them out

To the fiscal conservatives...address your scorn towards the following legislators for passing the Twins stadium bill.

Unofficial Recorded Roll Call Floor Vote for
H.F. NO. 2480
CALENDAR FOR THE DAY
Passage
76 YEA and 55 Nay

Date: 4/26/2006 -- Journal Page

* Please see the Journal of the House for official recorded roll call votes.

Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Abeler, Anderson, I., Atkins, Beard, Blaine, Bradley, Brod, Charron, Cox, Cybart, Davids, Demmer, Dempsey, Dill, Dorman, Dorn, Eastlund, Eken, Entenza, Finstad, Fritz, Garofalo, Gazelka, Gunther, Hamilton, Haws, Heidgerken, Hilstrom, Hoppe, Hortman, Hosch, Huntley, Johnson, R., Juhnke, Kelliher, Koenen, Lanning, Lesch, Lieder, Lillie, Magnus, Marquart, McNamara, Meslow, Moe, Murphy, Nelson, M., Nelson, P., Nornes, Ozment, Pelowski, Penas, Peterson, A., Peterson, N., Poppe, Rukavina, Ruth, Sailer, Samuelson, Scalze, Sertich, Severson, Sieben, Simon, Simpson, Slawik, Solberg, Sviggum, Sykora, Thao, Thissen, Tingelstad, Urdahl, Wardlow, Welti

For those who voted for this I wish them a nasty primary battle within their party and a sound defeat in their general election.

If the stadium was so important then let those who ACTUALY and DIRECTLY benefit from the stadium (the fans, the corporations who purchase skyboxes, the employees, etc) pay for it through their purchases and payments.

Let's pick out some key anti-fiscally responsible provisions.

The acquisition and betterment of a ballpark by the authority must be conducted pursuant to this act and are not subject to Minnesota Statutes, sections 473.165 and 473.173. Minnesota Statutes, section 116J.994, does not apply to any transactions of the county, the authority, or other governmental entity related to the ballpark or public infrastructure, or to any tenant or other users of them.

There is the exemption from the state law requiring this type of project to be put to a direct citizen's vote.

The authority may equip, improve, operate, manage, maintain, and control the ballpark and related facilities constructed, remodeled, or acquired under this act, subject to the rights and obligations transferred to and assumed by the team or other user under the terms of a lease or use agreement.

Yep, that means RENOVATIONS would be subject to the exemptions of this bill. That is there is an exemption from the requirement to allow citizens to vote on major expenditures are set aside for the building of the stadium (remember the gay marriage amendment people said that the people of Minnesota should be allowed to decide on their own rules?) and that exemption carries to all maintenance, renovations, etc. If the newly created bureacracy called Minnesota Ballpark Authority decides they want to put a roof on the stadium they will be exempted from putting it to a vote of the citizens.

The authority may conduct research studies and programs; collect and analyze data; prepare reports, maps, charts, and tables; and conduct all necessary hearings and investigations in connection with its functions.

And all of the studies and commissions to decide if they should put a retractable roof on in 8 years will be paid for through tax money at the whim of the Authority.

And what about local control?

Local units of government may not impose restrictions or conditions on ballpark and public infrastructure land use approvals except those which are based on reasonable land use grounds and criteria which are within their jurisdiction to apply.

Yep, love that local control.

The team must agree to contribute $125,000,000 toward ballpark costs, less a proportionate share of any amount by which actual ballpark costs may be less than a budgeted amount of $360,000,000. The team contributions must be funded in cash during the construction period. In addition to any other team contribution, the team must agree to assume and pay when due all cost overruns for the ballpark costs that exceed the budget, excluding land, site improvements, and public infrastructure.

Hmm, anyone want to bet that the cost overruns will be disguised by adjusting the budget? Or claiming that the overruns were related to "site improvements"? I bet landscaping falls under that open phrase, but I am new to this whole process.

I hate this too:

Materials, supplies, and equipment used or consumed in, and incorporated into the construction or improvement of the ballpark, and public infrastructure constructed pursuant to sections 3 to 12, are exempt.

Don't exempt them...rededicate those taxes to pay for the construction. I know, it seems like a circular reference but the same thing happens for public employees. Their taxes on their income go to pay their income. Don't exempt these purchases from taxes. That in itself is another government subsidy beyond infrastructure.

There is so much in the bill for fiscal conservatives to point at. The last one is this anti-free market provision:

The authority must ensure that a ballpark constructed under this act be, to the greatest extent practicable, constructed of American-made steel.

OK, and then Pawlenty signs this and he is still able to be considered a small-government, local control, fiscal conservative? Give me a break.

On the scoreboard note...Both Krinkie and Knoblach voted against this bill. To each of them I give + 4. I had a post a while ago detailing what varioius legislators position on the stadium issue was. Bachmann never returned the phone call...for that as a Congressional Candidate is unacceptable and I deduct 3 points.