|
|
More phases coming says VenturaBy T.W. Budig Waving an imaginary samurai sword over his head, Gov. Ventura Friday (May 17) off-air at his radio show called himself ìSamurai Governor,î taking whacks at a pretend bonding bill. Venturaís gubernatorial reenactment of the old John Belushi skit was not without more recent significance. The Ventura Administration issued a list of possible bonding bill cuts, the items totalling some $243 million. But Ventura said the list could be only a Phase One. Therel could be a Phase Two, a Phase Three, said Ventura. ìHad they (the Legislature) balanced the budget out instead of shifts and putting things off for next year, I would be much more amenable to a larger bonding bill,î said Ventura. ìBut when they havenít done that, itís much more difficult,î said Ventura. In explaining the $243 million in potential line-item vetoes, Ventura said there was no connection between the cuts and the absence of Northstar Commuter Rail funding in the current bonding bill. Paying debt service on the bonding bill is a greater concern to him than funding commuter rail ñ though he believes it ought to be funded, said Ventura. The governor dismissed the idea that the bonding items on the list were selected as a means of getting back at lawmakers blocking Northstar funding. ìIím not the type of person who would do that,î said Ventura. But found on the list is a $1 million project for the Rochester Art Center. Also listed is a $3.2 million for the St. Cloud Convention Center. By happenstance, one House bonding conference committee conferee is from Rochester. And the chairman of the House capital bonding committee, Rep. Jim Knoblach, happens to call St. Cloud home. But Ventura said the administration used the legal guidelines of whatís appropriate for the bonding bill in drawing up the list of possible cuts. Still, Ventura last week indicated that his veto hand would be guided by the worth he sees in Northstar. ìAll bonding bill projects will have to rise to the level of regional or state importance as Northstar would in order for me to be supportive of them,î said Ventura. The governor said he still has his celebrated pig stamp on his desk. The stamp, which leaves an impression of a pigís head when properly inked and pressed onto paper, is Venturaís way of signifying ìporkî or government waste. Ventura has 14 days to veto the bonding bill after its submission because thereís no chance of the Legislature coming back and attempting a veto override. Action on Twins stadium The Legislature Saturday (May 18) in a historic action approved legislation to build a $330 million Twinsí baseball stadium. The last stadium bill that passed the Legislature ñ the bill that built the Metrodome ñ passed in 1979. ìIf you put a bill that you donít hurt a little bit in, itís not a good bill if youíve got people and parties all happy,î said Rep. Harry Mares, R, White Bear Lake, bill author in the House. ìA good bill is where thereís a lot of compromise ñ and thatís what we have in this bill,î he said. The bill, which resembles a stadium proposal advanced by the Ventura Administration, makes use of favorable investment to bonding rates in financing the stadium. Under the legislation, the Twinsí owners and private investors must provide $120 million in cash up front. These monies would be invested, interest earned on the investment paying debt service for $330 million in state-issued taxable revenue bonds. Though the bill is site neutral, a potential host community must hold a referendum no later than Sept. 30, 2002, to gain voter approval for raising food, liquor and lodging taxes up to five percent. These taxes would sunset once the bonds are paid off. Other revenues enhancing options are provided the host city ñ the host city would be actual stadium owners. Stadium debt payment of at least $12 million a year will be made by the Twins and host city. Host cities can spend no more than $50 million on infrastructure for the ballpark, stipulates the bill. Twinsí officials have been noncommittal about the stadium proposal. ìThey did not say ëyesí and they did not say ëno,íî said Mares, asked on the House floor whether the Twins were receptive to the bill. In the House, debate on the Twinsí stadium bill continued for two hours. Rep. Loren Jennings, DFL, Harris, saying he hadnít expected a stadium bill to ever reach the House floor. But Jennings warned lawmakers that they can expect their political opponents ñ Republicans, DFLers, it doesnít matter ñ to use their stadium vote against them during the upcoming election. Though warned, the House passed the stadium bill by a 72 to 61 vote. Local lawmakers voting for: Abeler, Bernardy, Haas, Jennings, McElroy, Ozment, Westerberg, and Wolf. Voting against: Eastlund, Erickson, Gerlach, Goodwin, Hackbarth, Holberg, Koskinen, Krinkie, Lindner, Olson, Pawlenty, Schumacher, Tingelstad, Vandeveer, and Wilkin. Other elements of the bill include: ïThe Minnesota Sports Facility Commission will be expand. ïThe Twins are required to play all home games, including pre- and post-season, in the ballpark for 30 years ñ no escape clause. ïA football stadium is creates with the sports facility commission required to place some $500,000 from its reserves and sale of the Metrodome into the football stadium account. Some controversy followed the bill, with Minneapolis city officials objecting to a provision in the bill disallowing cities from forming partnerships with counties. Sen. Dean Johnson, DFL, Willmar, Senate bill author, said it was a matter of fairness. But Minneapolis Mayor R.B. Rybak, whoís efforts are gain the stadium are hamstrung by a $10 million spending limit imposed by city voters, questioned whether the City of St. Paul is well suited as a potential host city. Voters in that city had already turned away one ballpark referendum, said Rybak. To try to push another tax burden seems a ìrisky business,î said the mayor. ©ECM Post Review |