Blueman is suffering from a cold, and is chilling out with Bluewoman watching...West Wing Season 4 tonight. Since I am hopped up on cold meds, I'll probably be asleep well before midnight...anyway...
2007 was a great year of blogging. There are so many people to thank for your advice and support over the past year. I appreciate the comments from the readers. Your feedback is always appreciated!
So, what will Blueman work on in 2008? Lots of the same stuff from 2007, but with perhaps more snarkiness.
Winter Soldier 2008.
Elwyn Tinklenberg's taconite connections.
CD 6 endorsement race coverage.
FEC report tracking.
Candidate interviews HD 19A, 19B, 18B and others.
MinnCan pipeline coming near Cokato.
And more...
Thanks for a great 2007 and best wishes to all of you for 2008!
Monday, December 31, 2007
Congressional Bulk Mailings
Dump Bachmann has an interesting post up.
The Grand Forks Herald has the Minnesota connection.
13th out of over 400! Good job Mark!
Now if he could just get his sign down in Buffalo. A year later, after he last used his office in Buffalo, his Congressional sign still stands near the intersection of Hwy 55 and Hwy 25, near the Pizza Hut.
The Grand Forks Herald has the Minnesota connection.
Minnesotan's mail
Ex-U.S. Rep. Mark Kennedy spent $152,000 in taxpayer-funded mailings last year, more than any other House member from Minnesota.
Kennedy, a Republican who lost to Democrat Amy Klobuchar in the 2006 Senate race, was 13th of all House members in mailing expenses. Three other Minnesota House members - Republicans Jim Ramstad and John Kline, and Democrat Jim Oberstar - were also among the top 100.
Some critics call the mailings a waste of taxpayer money, and a way to help incumbents cement their place in Congress by showcasing the members' accomplishments.
Kennedy was out of the country and unavailable for comment, a former campaign spokeswoman said. But the other three House members all defended use of the mailings - also known as franking.
Seventh District Congressman Democrat Collin Peterson spent $9,600 on mailings.
13th out of over 400! Good job Mark!
Now if he could just get his sign down in Buffalo. A year later, after he last used his office in Buffalo, his Congressional sign still stands near the intersection of Hwy 55 and Hwy 25, near the Pizza Hut.
From the Archives V: Inside MnDOT January 21, 2003
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 21, 2003, Tuesday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; Motivation can be costly at MnDOT; Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
The committees that plan the Minnesota Department of Transportation's annual two-day conferences in Bloomington say they handpick keynote speakers to get "experts in topics relevant" to the agency.
But the featured speakers in recent years weren't hired for their knowledge of asphalt or their command of cost-efficient design.
Last year, for instance, the 1,200 or so who attended the conference at the Radisson South Hotel were treated to an hourlong speech titled "The Rise, Fall and Rise of Harley-Davidson." The speaker, a marketing consultant, was paid $10,750.
A speech the next day was titled "Build a Bridge . . ." But it had nothing to do with concrete and steel. Rather, taxpayers spent $14,045 for engineers to spend an hour with a motivational speaker who writes about communication between the sexes.
Speakers at the past five MnDOT conferences have talked about taking risks, adjusting to change, the use of humor at work and similar topics. Their fees, which included expenses, averaged $8,800.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty criticized the expenditures when he learned about them from a reporter. "When you see contracts for speakers on, you know, the rise and fall of Harley-Davidson or whatever some of these other topics are . . . that doesn't really reflect a sense of priorities or focus," he said.
In a prepared statement, MnDOT defended the selection of speakers. It said the conferences include sessions related both to transportation and organizational development.
"The Commissioner's Office sets the criteria," the agency said. "The speaker from Harley Davidson Corporation addressed how his company resurrected itself by turning its attention to the customer," it said, adding that he also has spoken to other states' transportation departments.
The agency said its conferences draw both employees and transportation partners. It rents booths to vendors and charges a fee for attendance, but most of those attending are employees, and the agency pays their fees.
MnDOT has increased its spending on the event by about 61 percent, from $136,173 in 1999 to $219,300 last year, according to records obtained by the Star Tribune under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
During the past four conventions, MnDOT spent a total of $664,231 more than it recovered from vendors' fees and other income, records show. Keynote speaker contracts for the four years totaled $114,430.
Some examples from the 2001 conference:
- $11,650 for a former ski champion's motivational speech.
- $12,950 for a team-building consultant who talked about ways managers can use fun to revitalize workers.
- $5,000 for a speech on "Intelligent Risk Taking."
MnDOT has canceled its 2003 conference, citing budget constraints.
Despite a tight budget, 34 go to Alaska conference
In addition to its own conferences, MnDOT participates in the annual conference of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
The 2002 conference was held in Alaska in October. The agency initially sought permission from the Department of Employee Relations to send 25 people, noting that Minnesota would be host of the conference this year.
Bill Eisele, a division manager in the Employee Relations Department, cautioned MnDOT about sending so many. "I realize the necessity of your [conference] committee chairs going since you will be hosting the conference next year. However, have you considered the negative press if this ever got out?" he wrote in a July e-mail to Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations.
Citing the limitations of Gov. Jesse Ventura's administration on travel to save costs, Eisele asked Biser whether MnDOT could say that it actually would have sent more if money wasn't so tight.
Biser responded that he had reduced the number of employees who would go in preparation for the Minnesota convention to 20. But he added that MnDOT was planning to send 20 others for general purposes.
Eisele said MnDOT's travel request was the largest that he had encountered. MnDOT officials eventually persuaded the Employee Relations Department to authorize travel for as many as three dozen employees, he said.
MnDOT sent 34 people at a cost of about $100,000, records show.
Doug Weiszhaar, who recently resigned as acting commissioner of MnDOT, defended the size of the MnDOT delegation in a written response to the Star Tribune. He said it was necessary to gather information to ensure a successful conference here this year. He said the event would bring more than $2 million to Minnesota's economy.
However, Pawlenty reacted strongly when told about the trip in a recent interview. "That's just, that's just outrageous," he said.
The size of the Alaska delegation and the expenditures on speakers for MnDOT's own annual conference indicate problems in the department's leadership that need correcting, he said.
Comedians among those hired to speak to staff
MnDOT also hires local speakers throughout the year for much smaller fees. Each year, it gets general approval from the state Department of Administration for these small, routine contracts. Records show that MnDOT budgeted $510,000 for a category labeled "trainers and speakers" over the past three years.
"This category includes short, informal training sessions such as welding and concrete techniques, stress management and supervisory skills," MnDOT told Administration. "Subjects may range from new developments in specialized engineering areas to employee safety to motivational speakers at district annual meetings."
But MnDOT also used those contracts to hire comedians and other entertainers.
For instance, MnDOT paid $200 to Jerome Mayne for a 20-minute comedy routine during an employee meeting in December 2001.
"It was so dry. I mean, light rail, budget and all this," Mayne said about the meeting. "And then here's Jerome coming in, in the middle of the morning, trying to make 'em laugh. It was one of the hardest gigs I've ever done."
Although his contract says he was hired as a motivational speaker, Mayne said his appearance was strictly a stand-up gig. "I think they did that for billing," he said.
MnDOT engineer Michael Martilla signed the contract. At first, he said Mayne had indeed been hired as a motivational speaker. But when told what Mayne had said, Martilla responded: "Well, motivation can be, come in many different forms. And comedy certainly can be motivating also."
MnDOT also paid $1,850 to two popular comedians from Glenwood, Minn., who bill themselves as Tina & Lena. Their contract shows them as the "keynote speakers" for an annual employee outing in Fergus Falls. Annette Hustad (Lena) said the pair was asked to talk about "humor and harmony in the workplace."
The 'Tinklenberg Zone': A staff-produced parody video
On occasion, MnDOT does its own entertaining.
Shortly after Elwyn Tinklenberg, then transportation commissioner, excoriated state House Republicans last year for killing his funding wish list, his staff produced a tongue-in-cheek video promoting their boss. The 9 1/2-minute tape, titled "Tinklenberg Zone," cost at least $2,900 in employee time and expenses. A MnDOT employee played the role of Tinklenberg.
Gary Pettis, a MnDOT communications manager, explained the production this way in a letter to a Star Tribune reporter:
"The main idea behind the video came from the occurrences surrounding Mn/DOT Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg, Chief of Staff Margo LaBau, and Federal Affairs Liaison Dan Krom's return trip from Washington D.C. to Minnesota right after September 11th. The group could not return to the Twin Cities via the airlines, as airports and air traffic nationwide were shut down.
"Their only remedy was to find a rental car and drive it back to Minnesota. You can imagine what a somber drive that was. Therefore, the video's objective was to show that it is all right to laugh and to have fun. My department took the concept of the 'many faces of the commissioner' and produced a humorous video."
It was played at a June 26 manager's meeting, nine months after the terrorism attacks.
Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, whom Pawlenty has named transportation commissioner, said taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for frivolities or services that don't relate to transportation. "I agree with people having a good time," she said. "I just don't know that state tax dollars . . . should pay for it.
"If it's not a benefit to the taxpayers of the state as it relates to MnDOT," Molnau said, "then we probably ought not be doing it."
INSIDE MnDOT; Motivation can be costly at MnDOT; Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
The committees that plan the Minnesota Department of Transportation's annual two-day conferences in Bloomington say they handpick keynote speakers to get "experts in topics relevant" to the agency.
But the featured speakers in recent years weren't hired for their knowledge of asphalt or their command of cost-efficient design.
Last year, for instance, the 1,200 or so who attended the conference at the Radisson South Hotel were treated to an hourlong speech titled "The Rise, Fall and Rise of Harley-Davidson." The speaker, a marketing consultant, was paid $10,750.
A speech the next day was titled "Build a Bridge . . ." But it had nothing to do with concrete and steel. Rather, taxpayers spent $14,045 for engineers to spend an hour with a motivational speaker who writes about communication between the sexes.
Speakers at the past five MnDOT conferences have talked about taking risks, adjusting to change, the use of humor at work and similar topics. Their fees, which included expenses, averaged $8,800.
Gov. Tim Pawlenty criticized the expenditures when he learned about them from a reporter. "When you see contracts for speakers on, you know, the rise and fall of Harley-Davidson or whatever some of these other topics are . . . that doesn't really reflect a sense of priorities or focus," he said.
In a prepared statement, MnDOT defended the selection of speakers. It said the conferences include sessions related both to transportation and organizational development.
"The Commissioner's Office sets the criteria," the agency said. "The speaker from Harley Davidson Corporation addressed how his company resurrected itself by turning its attention to the customer," it said, adding that he also has spoken to other states' transportation departments.
The agency said its conferences draw both employees and transportation partners. It rents booths to vendors and charges a fee for attendance, but most of those attending are employees, and the agency pays their fees.
MnDOT has increased its spending on the event by about 61 percent, from $136,173 in 1999 to $219,300 last year, according to records obtained by the Star Tribune under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
During the past four conventions, MnDOT spent a total of $664,231 more than it recovered from vendors' fees and other income, records show. Keynote speaker contracts for the four years totaled $114,430.
Some examples from the 2001 conference:
- $11,650 for a former ski champion's motivational speech.
- $12,950 for a team-building consultant who talked about ways managers can use fun to revitalize workers.
- $5,000 for a speech on "Intelligent Risk Taking."
MnDOT has canceled its 2003 conference, citing budget constraints.
Despite a tight budget, 34 go to Alaska conference
In addition to its own conferences, MnDOT participates in the annual conference of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
The 2002 conference was held in Alaska in October. The agency initially sought permission from the Department of Employee Relations to send 25 people, noting that Minnesota would be host of the conference this year.
Bill Eisele, a division manager in the Employee Relations Department, cautioned MnDOT about sending so many. "I realize the necessity of your [conference] committee chairs going since you will be hosting the conference next year. However, have you considered the negative press if this ever got out?" he wrote in a July e-mail to Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations.
Citing the limitations of Gov. Jesse Ventura's administration on travel to save costs, Eisele asked Biser whether MnDOT could say that it actually would have sent more if money wasn't so tight.
Biser responded that he had reduced the number of employees who would go in preparation for the Minnesota convention to 20. But he added that MnDOT was planning to send 20 others for general purposes.
Eisele said MnDOT's travel request was the largest that he had encountered. MnDOT officials eventually persuaded the Employee Relations Department to authorize travel for as many as three dozen employees, he said.
MnDOT sent 34 people at a cost of about $100,000, records show.
Doug Weiszhaar, who recently resigned as acting commissioner of MnDOT, defended the size of the MnDOT delegation in a written response to the Star Tribune. He said it was necessary to gather information to ensure a successful conference here this year. He said the event would bring more than $2 million to Minnesota's economy.
However, Pawlenty reacted strongly when told about the trip in a recent interview. "That's just, that's just outrageous," he said.
The size of the Alaska delegation and the expenditures on speakers for MnDOT's own annual conference indicate problems in the department's leadership that need correcting, he said.
Comedians among those hired to speak to staff
MnDOT also hires local speakers throughout the year for much smaller fees. Each year, it gets general approval from the state Department of Administration for these small, routine contracts. Records show that MnDOT budgeted $510,000 for a category labeled "trainers and speakers" over the past three years.
"This category includes short, informal training sessions such as welding and concrete techniques, stress management and supervisory skills," MnDOT told Administration. "Subjects may range from new developments in specialized engineering areas to employee safety to motivational speakers at district annual meetings."
But MnDOT also used those contracts to hire comedians and other entertainers.
For instance, MnDOT paid $200 to Jerome Mayne for a 20-minute comedy routine during an employee meeting in December 2001.
"It was so dry. I mean, light rail, budget and all this," Mayne said about the meeting. "And then here's Jerome coming in, in the middle of the morning, trying to make 'em laugh. It was one of the hardest gigs I've ever done."
Although his contract says he was hired as a motivational speaker, Mayne said his appearance was strictly a stand-up gig. "I think they did that for billing," he said.
MnDOT engineer Michael Martilla signed the contract. At first, he said Mayne had indeed been hired as a motivational speaker. But when told what Mayne had said, Martilla responded: "Well, motivation can be, come in many different forms. And comedy certainly can be motivating also."
MnDOT also paid $1,850 to two popular comedians from Glenwood, Minn., who bill themselves as Tina & Lena. Their contract shows them as the "keynote speakers" for an annual employee outing in Fergus Falls. Annette Hustad (Lena) said the pair was asked to talk about "humor and harmony in the workplace."
The 'Tinklenberg Zone': A staff-produced parody video
On occasion, MnDOT does its own entertaining.
Shortly after Elwyn Tinklenberg, then transportation commissioner, excoriated state House Republicans last year for killing his funding wish list, his staff produced a tongue-in-cheek video promoting their boss. The 9 1/2-minute tape, titled "Tinklenberg Zone," cost at least $2,900 in employee time and expenses. A MnDOT employee played the role of Tinklenberg.
Gary Pettis, a MnDOT communications manager, explained the production this way in a letter to a Star Tribune reporter:
"The main idea behind the video came from the occurrences surrounding Mn/DOT Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg, Chief of Staff Margo LaBau, and Federal Affairs Liaison Dan Krom's return trip from Washington D.C. to Minnesota right after September 11th. The group could not return to the Twin Cities via the airlines, as airports and air traffic nationwide were shut down.
"Their only remedy was to find a rental car and drive it back to Minnesota. You can imagine what a somber drive that was. Therefore, the video's objective was to show that it is all right to laugh and to have fun. My department took the concept of the 'many faces of the commissioner' and produced a humorous video."
It was played at a June 26 manager's meeting, nine months after the terrorism attacks.
Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, whom Pawlenty has named transportation commissioner, said taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for frivolities or services that don't relate to transportation. "I agree with people having a good time," she said. "I just don't know that state tax dollars . . . should pay for it.
"If it's not a benefit to the taxpayers of the state as it relates to MnDOT," Molnau said, "then we probably ought not be doing it."
From the Archives IV: Inside MnDOT January 21, 2003
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 21, 2003, Tuesday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT has worked hard to spin its image; It kept a tight grip on public information and a close eye on its adversaries. One top official suggested deleting records.
Pat Doyle; Dan Browning; Staff Writers
When ethical concerns threatened federal light-rail funding a few years ago, the Minnesota Department of Transportation swung into high gear.
Publicly, the department pledged to correct an apparent conflict of interest involving a $32 million contract.
Behind the scenes, a top MnDOT official contemplated another strategy: a campaign that included shifting blame, criticizing federal authorities and destroying public documents on the matter.
Besides building highways, the department has devoted much effort toward plotting or executing ways to protect itself from critics, shape public opinion on controversial projects and keep some of its activities hidden. E-mail correspondence and other internal documents examined by the Star Tribune offer an inside look.
Shannon Beaudin Klein, until recently MnDOT's public-relations director, said the agency worked hard to provide complete and accurate information to the public. She said that some of the ideas it considered ultimately were rejected as inappropriate.
The light-rail dispute surfaced in 2000, after the Federal Transit Administration said it would not fund the project unless MnDOT sought new bids for a project-management contract. It said that the New York firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas had been in a position to use inside information to win the job.
In August of that year, a judge refused to block the Transit Administration's decision. Within days, MnDOT Chief of Staff Margo LaBau discussed strategy with Parsons Brinckerhoff.
In a summary of the discussion, David Warner, a Parsons Brinckerhoff executive, wrote that LaBau had wondered whether the company "could somehow cause" a locally prominent person to write a letter to the editor or an opinion article about the decision. The message would be, in effect, that "it's unfortunate that the judge felt compelled to make the decision he did due to the heavy-handed action of a large Federal bureau threatening a local agency with the withdrawal of funding."
Warner added that LaBau hoped Parsons Brinckerhoff would submit a new bid. (It didn't.)
Warner sent LaBau a copy of his summary for her to review. She responded with an e-mail urging caution:
"Dave, Just a few thoughts, anything written down can be discoverable under data privacy act so you might want to delete the part about MnDOT hoping you will participate in a re-bid.
Someone might interpret that as another bizarre basis for 'unfair advantage.' That might be better left for a phone call.
"I would also appreciate it if you would not put in writing about the Opinion Editorial Piece," she wrote, explaining that it could upset the Metropolitan Council, which influences transportation planning in the Twin Cities area. "I am a little out on the limb and MC likes to shake it whenever they are not getting their way."
She added: "I will be deleting your message and the response from my mailbox and my delete file. Nothing like operating with paranoia!"
LaBau's note to Warner was preserved in an agency computer backup.
LaBau, who resigned in October, declined repeated requests for interviews.
Linda Bjornberg, MnDOT's official recordkeeper, said a subordinate who tried to acquire LaBau's e-mails at the request of the Star Tribune last year was upset when she learned that LaBau was routinely deleting them.
"I know people suggest if they don't like something, it should be gotten rid of, they should destroy it," Bjornberg said. "I mean, legally, we can't do that. And I can't in good conscience follow instructions like that."
Warner, in a recent interview, said he didn't know of any instances of a locally prominent person complying with LaBau's request to write a critical opinion piece about the judge's decision. But he said the president of Parsons Brinckerhoff in New York might have prepared an article on the subject about that time.
Agency sought 'research' on Hwy. 55 protesters
The light-rail transit (LRT) project and the related rerouting of Hwy. 55 in south Minneapolis were frequent sources of controversy for MnDOT. And the department tapped a large in-house public-relations team to get its story out.
One of its challenges came from protesters who opposed the rerouting. The project shifted the road closer to Minnehaha Park, requiring the felling of oak trees and causing concern that sites important to American Indians would be disturbed. Dozens of people were arrested in the protests.
Soon after Elwyn Tinklenberg became commissioner in 1999, LaBau brainstormed with Paul Leegard, an acquaintance whom MnDOT later hired, about ways to defuse the protests. He urged her to avoid responses that might give the demonstrators credibility and rally them into a formal organization.
"I would suggest you stop referring to them as a group," he wrote in an August 1999 e-mail.
"Start referring to individuals but not by name but by negative characteristics."
He triggered a quick response.
"Interesting you should say that about the protestors," LaBau replied. "I hired a consultant on Friday to do some 'research' about the protestors and the organizations they represent. I also want to find out who some of the high level environmental and native American people are who would have a vested interest in discrediting this group.
"I know their [sic] out there, I just have to find them!"
A MnDOT memo dated three days later describes a plan to begin "an aggressive public awareness and crisis communication campaign" on the Hwy. 55 project that included initiating a "small contract" with the Bloomington public-relations firm Himle Horner.
MnDOT drafted a $5,000 contract for Himle Horner the next month to "conduct research . . . related to groups interested in the project" and "identify possible third party supporters who might be willing to assume an advocacy role." Under a heading labeled "Background," the agency wrote, "Working with a firm specializing in crisis communication will enhance our ability to minimize distruption [sic] of project and maximize public relations opportunities."
Thomas Horner, a partner in the firm, said in an interview that MnDOT "spoke to us about the challenges they were facing on Hwy. 55. . . . We came in and said . . . your efforts ought to be focused on building an understanding of the value that Hwy. 55 has to the broader community. Don't just make it a [case of] road construction versus opponents of road construction."
MnDOT and Himle Horner say their dealings on Hwy. 55 never went beyond that free advice. "Himle Horner would never be associated with a campaign that has as a goal to discredit others," Horner said. His partner, John Himle, stated: "We never received any contract."
MnDOT documents show that the unsigned contract was abruptly withdrawn after Himle made critical remarks about MnDOT at a public meeting. Judy Melander, then a top public-relations official at the agency, alerted management that Himle's remarks had spurred news coverage that "doesn't read very well for MnDOT and the LRT project."
Within hours, Melander and the supervising engineer for the metro area were discussing whether Himle had a possible conflict of interest because he served on the light-rail management committee and the Metropolitan Airports Commission. In a recent interview, Melander said she hadn't realized that Himle served those roles when she prepared the contract.
Corralling message into 'one voice'
Since fiscal year 2001, the department's public-relations activities have been consolidated in a single office with a budget of about $3 million a year. Before Beaudin Klein left, she was making $50.13 an hour, more than all but a few of MnDOT's top engineers, to direct those efforts.
Some of the $3 million is spent on internal communications and providing information about road closures and similar public-service announcements. Outside of that budget are certain consulting contracts paid through other MnDOT units, such as one for $280,000 with the Minneapolis public-relations firm LaBreche Murray to promote the Northstar bus corridor.
An e-mail that circulated among MnDOT's public-relations employees and others in late 1999, before the consolidation, referred to an "approach to combatting the negative media that the [light-rail] project is receiving."
A few months later, LaBau issued a directive informing subordinates of a policy that put Melander in a commanding role, the beginning of the centralization.
"All inquiries from reporters should be routed through Judy irregardless [sic] of the topic," LaBau wrote. On some of the more sensitive issues, she said, public-relations supervisors might sit in on interviews.
Also about that time, the public-relations department was discussing ways to polish the agency's image. "We are restructuring communications along a public relations/advertising/marketing agency model to better deliver our products and services to our customers throughout the agency and to ensure that we are Speaking With One Voice," wrote Megan Lewis, then a MnDOT employee, who helped develop the plan.
MnDOT staff members spent months discussing whether to change the department logo and other marketing strategies before dropping those plans. And a MnDOT work group identified what it called "natural adversaries" to the agency's use of the Internet to provide transportation information. Those included the Legislature, unspecified state agencies and "some taxpayers who question every state agency expenditure."
Asked about the reference to adversaries before her departure, Beaudin Klein said that MnDOT "considers legislators to be key stakeholders" and that "the tactics in the plan are clearly focused on providing information and making it more easily available" to everyone via the Internet.
Some employees balked at plans for a formal statewide media policy. John Bray, who was a public-affairs director for northeastern Minnesota, tried to explain that knowledgeable employees in his regional offices had been answering questions successfully for the agency for years.
"In other words, we do not have, and would not want to have, a hard and fast rule or bureaucratic maze regarding 'who can talk to the media' and this open forum relationship has well served us for nearly twenty years," he wrote in a memo.
Beaudin Klein responded, calling Bray's comments "unacceptable" and stressing that the new policy was not open to debate.
"This decision was made at the executive level and has the full support of the commissioner," she wrote. "I am seriously disappointed that a communications person is objecting to having a policy in place that will help the agency communicate with one voice."
Bray later wrote Beaudin Klein to pledge his support for the new statewide media policy, which he said mirrored the approach used by his regional office. After a couple of more e-mail exchanges, Mike Robinson, a district engineer, stepped in and said Bray had been misunderstood. "Now, can we kiss and make up?"
More recently, a top public-relations official tried to stop a senior MnDOT engineer, Richard Stehr, from talking publicly about an e-mail he wrote to a subordinate, Tim Henkel.
Henkel had written to Stehr in fall 2001 about concerns that he and his colleagues had regarding Philip Cohen, a lobbyist and former business associate of Tinklenberg's. He noted that Cohen was meeting with the commissioner and feared that he was using his influence to get around the agency's normal procedures and advance improvements to Hwy. 10 in the northwest Twin Cities suburbs.
In an e-mail, Stehr replied that Cohen would "take advantage of his friendship with the Commissioner to secure meetings with the Commissioner to discuss Phil's agenda. We are not going to stop that." He told Henkel "to expect that politics will influence the outcome."
MnDOT declined to make the authors of the e-mail exchange available individually to elaborate on their correspondence. Instead, the agency offered a group interview with a public-relations officer present.
MnDOT spokeswoman Lucy Kender interrupted when a Star Tribune reporter asked Stehr in an interview on another subject whether he cared to comment about the e-mails.
"No, he doesn't," Kender said.
Stehr seemed surprised by the interruption. Kender continued: "Because, Dick, you don't."
Stehr started to respond anyway, and Kender cut him off: "No! Dick, I advise you not to answer that because we've gone around on this several times." She said the agency would reply in writing. Stehr said he didn't mind answering, and Kender finally relented. "I'm the adviser. I can only go that far," she said.
Stehr said that Tinklenberg never asked him to give special consideration to Cohen or anyone else.
In a separate interview, Tinklenberg said: "The proof was in the pudding. . . . [The project] was not changed."
MnDOT was cool to legislators' queries
When it comes to persuasion, MnDOT has been known to play hardball.
Three years ago, MnDOT's Rochester district engineer, Nelrae Succio, met with Dave Bishop, then a Republican state representative from Rochester, to discuss the legislator's hopes for the renovation of Hwy. 52.
Bishop was worried that his opposition to two of Gov. Jesse Ventura's favorite proposals, light rail and a unicameral Legislature, would hurt Hwy. 52's chances, Succio reported in an e-mail to LaBau and MnDOT government-relations director Tim Worke.
"He wanted a guarantee from the Commissioner that Mn/DOT would not allow this to play into our decision-making if funding does become available," Succio wrote.
LaBau responded bluntly. "Bishop needs a Civics lesson, the commissioner reports to the Governor and not the Legislature, he also does not function independantly [sic], he can't guarantee that if Bishop ticks off the Governor that he won't respond by telling El [Tinklenberg] to bury TH 52," she wrote. "Children!"
MnDOT feuded with other legislators, some of whom accused it of withholding public information on light rail.
A memo from MnDOT supervisor Robert Winter to colleagues told of how an aide to Rep. Phil Krinkie, R-Shoreview, was upset because he couldn't get information about the cost of the light-rail project and believed MnDOT was withholding information from legislators.
Krinkie, a leading critic of the Hiawatha light-rail line, had asked MnDOT for information on it under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The law says that state data are presumed public unless specifically exempt from disclosure and that they must be turned over in a reasonable time after a request.
Krinkie's requests rankled LaBau. "Doesn't this guy have a real job?" she wrote in one e-mail to a colleague.
MnDOT researched statutes in search of justifications for withholding information. As the Legislature debated the merits of light rail, Laurie Steiger, a lawyer in the department, suggested in an e-mail to LaBau that the agency could invoke some provisions of the Data Practices Act to delay release of a preliminary cost-benefit analysis of the project if the analysis somehow could be linked to a new budget proposal.
Steiger also suggested a tactic "to buy time and show a good faith effort" to comply with the Data Practices Act. When someone asked to see the analysis, she wrote, MnDOT could appeal to the Department of Administration for an opinion on whether it was public. (Such opinions generally take one to two months.) Then the agency could also buy time by asking the attorney general for an opinion, she wrote: "Their opinion trumps Administration's opinion."
Steiger also considered more long-shot strategies, such as trying to classify the government information as a trade secret. "This one might be quite a stretch," she conceded.
Asked to comment, Steiger wrote that she has "never encouraged Mn/DOT to suppress public information or delay release" of information "once we know that the classification is clearly public."
Beaudin Klein, who joined MnDOT after the Steiger e-mail, said the agency "responded as promptly in providing information to opponents as [to] supporters."
But MnDOT's new commissioner, Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, says the agency hasn't been prompt.
"Even though it's public information, it's never been easy to get the full information," said Molnau, who previously was chairwoman of the House Transportation Finance Committee.
When it came to light rail, she said, "we nearly had to subpoena it."
Third of three parts
- Published Sunday: MnDOT has hired consultants in ways that bend and break the rules.
- Published Monday: For years, the department has battled the state government watchdogs who are supposed to hold it accountable.
- Today's report: A behind-the-scenes look at MnDOT's efforts to deal with controversy and unify its message.
ABOUT THIS SERIES
Star Tribune reporters reviewed hundreds of individual constracts and thousands of government documents - including e-mails, memos and other correspondence - provided under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. They also interviewed dozens of public officials, private contractors, lobbyists and others. To comment, contact:
INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT has worked hard to spin its image; It kept a tight grip on public information and a close eye on its adversaries. One top official suggested deleting records.
Pat Doyle; Dan Browning; Staff Writers
When ethical concerns threatened federal light-rail funding a few years ago, the Minnesota Department of Transportation swung into high gear.
Publicly, the department pledged to correct an apparent conflict of interest involving a $32 million contract.
Behind the scenes, a top MnDOT official contemplated another strategy: a campaign that included shifting blame, criticizing federal authorities and destroying public documents on the matter.
Besides building highways, the department has devoted much effort toward plotting or executing ways to protect itself from critics, shape public opinion on controversial projects and keep some of its activities hidden. E-mail correspondence and other internal documents examined by the Star Tribune offer an inside look.
Shannon Beaudin Klein, until recently MnDOT's public-relations director, said the agency worked hard to provide complete and accurate information to the public. She said that some of the ideas it considered ultimately were rejected as inappropriate.
The light-rail dispute surfaced in 2000, after the Federal Transit Administration said it would not fund the project unless MnDOT sought new bids for a project-management contract. It said that the New York firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas had been in a position to use inside information to win the job.
In August of that year, a judge refused to block the Transit Administration's decision. Within days, MnDOT Chief of Staff Margo LaBau discussed strategy with Parsons Brinckerhoff.
In a summary of the discussion, David Warner, a Parsons Brinckerhoff executive, wrote that LaBau had wondered whether the company "could somehow cause" a locally prominent person to write a letter to the editor or an opinion article about the decision. The message would be, in effect, that "it's unfortunate that the judge felt compelled to make the decision he did due to the heavy-handed action of a large Federal bureau threatening a local agency with the withdrawal of funding."
Warner added that LaBau hoped Parsons Brinckerhoff would submit a new bid. (It didn't.)
Warner sent LaBau a copy of his summary for her to review. She responded with an e-mail urging caution:
"Dave, Just a few thoughts, anything written down can be discoverable under data privacy act so you might want to delete the part about MnDOT hoping you will participate in a re-bid.
Someone might interpret that as another bizarre basis for 'unfair advantage.' That might be better left for a phone call.
"I would also appreciate it if you would not put in writing about the Opinion Editorial Piece," she wrote, explaining that it could upset the Metropolitan Council, which influences transportation planning in the Twin Cities area. "I am a little out on the limb and MC likes to shake it whenever they are not getting their way."
She added: "I will be deleting your message and the response from my mailbox and my delete file. Nothing like operating with paranoia!"
LaBau's note to Warner was preserved in an agency computer backup.
LaBau, who resigned in October, declined repeated requests for interviews.
Linda Bjornberg, MnDOT's official recordkeeper, said a subordinate who tried to acquire LaBau's e-mails at the request of the Star Tribune last year was upset when she learned that LaBau was routinely deleting them.
"I know people suggest if they don't like something, it should be gotten rid of, they should destroy it," Bjornberg said. "I mean, legally, we can't do that. And I can't in good conscience follow instructions like that."
Warner, in a recent interview, said he didn't know of any instances of a locally prominent person complying with LaBau's request to write a critical opinion piece about the judge's decision. But he said the president of Parsons Brinckerhoff in New York might have prepared an article on the subject about that time.
Agency sought 'research' on Hwy. 55 protesters
The light-rail transit (LRT) project and the related rerouting of Hwy. 55 in south Minneapolis were frequent sources of controversy for MnDOT. And the department tapped a large in-house public-relations team to get its story out.
One of its challenges came from protesters who opposed the rerouting. The project shifted the road closer to Minnehaha Park, requiring the felling of oak trees and causing concern that sites important to American Indians would be disturbed. Dozens of people were arrested in the protests.
Soon after Elwyn Tinklenberg became commissioner in 1999, LaBau brainstormed with Paul Leegard, an acquaintance whom MnDOT later hired, about ways to defuse the protests. He urged her to avoid responses that might give the demonstrators credibility and rally them into a formal organization.
"I would suggest you stop referring to them as a group," he wrote in an August 1999 e-mail.
"Start referring to individuals but not by name but by negative characteristics."
He triggered a quick response.
"Interesting you should say that about the protestors," LaBau replied. "I hired a consultant on Friday to do some 'research' about the protestors and the organizations they represent. I also want to find out who some of the high level environmental and native American people are who would have a vested interest in discrediting this group.
"I know their [sic] out there, I just have to find them!"
A MnDOT memo dated three days later describes a plan to begin "an aggressive public awareness and crisis communication campaign" on the Hwy. 55 project that included initiating a "small contract" with the Bloomington public-relations firm Himle Horner.
MnDOT drafted a $5,000 contract for Himle Horner the next month to "conduct research . . . related to groups interested in the project" and "identify possible third party supporters who might be willing to assume an advocacy role." Under a heading labeled "Background," the agency wrote, "Working with a firm specializing in crisis communication will enhance our ability to minimize distruption [sic] of project and maximize public relations opportunities."
Thomas Horner, a partner in the firm, said in an interview that MnDOT "spoke to us about the challenges they were facing on Hwy. 55. . . . We came in and said . . . your efforts ought to be focused on building an understanding of the value that Hwy. 55 has to the broader community. Don't just make it a [case of] road construction versus opponents of road construction."
MnDOT and Himle Horner say their dealings on Hwy. 55 never went beyond that free advice. "Himle Horner would never be associated with a campaign that has as a goal to discredit others," Horner said. His partner, John Himle, stated: "We never received any contract."
MnDOT documents show that the unsigned contract was abruptly withdrawn after Himle made critical remarks about MnDOT at a public meeting. Judy Melander, then a top public-relations official at the agency, alerted management that Himle's remarks had spurred news coverage that "doesn't read very well for MnDOT and the LRT project."
Within hours, Melander and the supervising engineer for the metro area were discussing whether Himle had a possible conflict of interest because he served on the light-rail management committee and the Metropolitan Airports Commission. In a recent interview, Melander said she hadn't realized that Himle served those roles when she prepared the contract.
Corralling message into 'one voice'
Since fiscal year 2001, the department's public-relations activities have been consolidated in a single office with a budget of about $3 million a year. Before Beaudin Klein left, she was making $50.13 an hour, more than all but a few of MnDOT's top engineers, to direct those efforts.
Some of the $3 million is spent on internal communications and providing information about road closures and similar public-service announcements. Outside of that budget are certain consulting contracts paid through other MnDOT units, such as one for $280,000 with the Minneapolis public-relations firm LaBreche Murray to promote the Northstar bus corridor.
An e-mail that circulated among MnDOT's public-relations employees and others in late 1999, before the consolidation, referred to an "approach to combatting the negative media that the [light-rail] project is receiving."
A few months later, LaBau issued a directive informing subordinates of a policy that put Melander in a commanding role, the beginning of the centralization.
"All inquiries from reporters should be routed through Judy irregardless [sic] of the topic," LaBau wrote. On some of the more sensitive issues, she said, public-relations supervisors might sit in on interviews.
Also about that time, the public-relations department was discussing ways to polish the agency's image. "We are restructuring communications along a public relations/advertising/marketing agency model to better deliver our products and services to our customers throughout the agency and to ensure that we are Speaking With One Voice," wrote Megan Lewis, then a MnDOT employee, who helped develop the plan.
MnDOT staff members spent months discussing whether to change the department logo and other marketing strategies before dropping those plans. And a MnDOT work group identified what it called "natural adversaries" to the agency's use of the Internet to provide transportation information. Those included the Legislature, unspecified state agencies and "some taxpayers who question every state agency expenditure."
Asked about the reference to adversaries before her departure, Beaudin Klein said that MnDOT "considers legislators to be key stakeholders" and that "the tactics in the plan are clearly focused on providing information and making it more easily available" to everyone via the Internet.
Some employees balked at plans for a formal statewide media policy. John Bray, who was a public-affairs director for northeastern Minnesota, tried to explain that knowledgeable employees in his regional offices had been answering questions successfully for the agency for years.
"In other words, we do not have, and would not want to have, a hard and fast rule or bureaucratic maze regarding 'who can talk to the media' and this open forum relationship has well served us for nearly twenty years," he wrote in a memo.
Beaudin Klein responded, calling Bray's comments "unacceptable" and stressing that the new policy was not open to debate.
"This decision was made at the executive level and has the full support of the commissioner," she wrote. "I am seriously disappointed that a communications person is objecting to having a policy in place that will help the agency communicate with one voice."
Bray later wrote Beaudin Klein to pledge his support for the new statewide media policy, which he said mirrored the approach used by his regional office. After a couple of more e-mail exchanges, Mike Robinson, a district engineer, stepped in and said Bray had been misunderstood. "Now, can we kiss and make up?"
More recently, a top public-relations official tried to stop a senior MnDOT engineer, Richard Stehr, from talking publicly about an e-mail he wrote to a subordinate, Tim Henkel.
Henkel had written to Stehr in fall 2001 about concerns that he and his colleagues had regarding Philip Cohen, a lobbyist and former business associate of Tinklenberg's. He noted that Cohen was meeting with the commissioner and feared that he was using his influence to get around the agency's normal procedures and advance improvements to Hwy. 10 in the northwest Twin Cities suburbs.
In an e-mail, Stehr replied that Cohen would "take advantage of his friendship with the Commissioner to secure meetings with the Commissioner to discuss Phil's agenda. We are not going to stop that." He told Henkel "to expect that politics will influence the outcome."
MnDOT declined to make the authors of the e-mail exchange available individually to elaborate on their correspondence. Instead, the agency offered a group interview with a public-relations officer present.
MnDOT spokeswoman Lucy Kender interrupted when a Star Tribune reporter asked Stehr in an interview on another subject whether he cared to comment about the e-mails.
"No, he doesn't," Kender said.
Stehr seemed surprised by the interruption. Kender continued: "Because, Dick, you don't."
Stehr started to respond anyway, and Kender cut him off: "No! Dick, I advise you not to answer that because we've gone around on this several times." She said the agency would reply in writing. Stehr said he didn't mind answering, and Kender finally relented. "I'm the adviser. I can only go that far," she said.
Stehr said that Tinklenberg never asked him to give special consideration to Cohen or anyone else.
In a separate interview, Tinklenberg said: "The proof was in the pudding. . . . [The project] was not changed."
MnDOT was cool to legislators' queries
When it comes to persuasion, MnDOT has been known to play hardball.
Three years ago, MnDOT's Rochester district engineer, Nelrae Succio, met with Dave Bishop, then a Republican state representative from Rochester, to discuss the legislator's hopes for the renovation of Hwy. 52.
Bishop was worried that his opposition to two of Gov. Jesse Ventura's favorite proposals, light rail and a unicameral Legislature, would hurt Hwy. 52's chances, Succio reported in an e-mail to LaBau and MnDOT government-relations director Tim Worke.
"He wanted a guarantee from the Commissioner that Mn/DOT would not allow this to play into our decision-making if funding does become available," Succio wrote.
LaBau responded bluntly. "Bishop needs a Civics lesson, the commissioner reports to the Governor and not the Legislature, he also does not function independantly [sic], he can't guarantee that if Bishop ticks off the Governor that he won't respond by telling El [Tinklenberg] to bury TH 52," she wrote. "Children!"
MnDOT feuded with other legislators, some of whom accused it of withholding public information on light rail.
A memo from MnDOT supervisor Robert Winter to colleagues told of how an aide to Rep. Phil Krinkie, R-Shoreview, was upset because he couldn't get information about the cost of the light-rail project and believed MnDOT was withholding information from legislators.
Krinkie, a leading critic of the Hiawatha light-rail line, had asked MnDOT for information on it under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. The law says that state data are presumed public unless specifically exempt from disclosure and that they must be turned over in a reasonable time after a request.
Krinkie's requests rankled LaBau. "Doesn't this guy have a real job?" she wrote in one e-mail to a colleague.
MnDOT researched statutes in search of justifications for withholding information. As the Legislature debated the merits of light rail, Laurie Steiger, a lawyer in the department, suggested in an e-mail to LaBau that the agency could invoke some provisions of the Data Practices Act to delay release of a preliminary cost-benefit analysis of the project if the analysis somehow could be linked to a new budget proposal.
Steiger also suggested a tactic "to buy time and show a good faith effort" to comply with the Data Practices Act. When someone asked to see the analysis, she wrote, MnDOT could appeal to the Department of Administration for an opinion on whether it was public. (Such opinions generally take one to two months.) Then the agency could also buy time by asking the attorney general for an opinion, she wrote: "Their opinion trumps Administration's opinion."
Steiger also considered more long-shot strategies, such as trying to classify the government information as a trade secret. "This one might be quite a stretch," she conceded.
Asked to comment, Steiger wrote that she has "never encouraged Mn/DOT to suppress public information or delay release" of information "once we know that the classification is clearly public."
Beaudin Klein, who joined MnDOT after the Steiger e-mail, said the agency "responded as promptly in providing information to opponents as [to] supporters."
But MnDOT's new commissioner, Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, says the agency hasn't been prompt.
"Even though it's public information, it's never been easy to get the full information," said Molnau, who previously was chairwoman of the House Transportation Finance Committee.
When it came to light rail, she said, "we nearly had to subpoena it."
Third of three parts
- Published Sunday: MnDOT has hired consultants in ways that bend and break the rules.
- Published Monday: For years, the department has battled the state government watchdogs who are supposed to hold it accountable.
- Today's report: A behind-the-scenes look at MnDOT's efforts to deal with controversy and unify its message.
ABOUT THIS SERIES
Star Tribune reporters reviewed hundreds of individual constracts and thousands of government documents - including e-mails, memos and other correspondence - provided under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. They also interviewed dozens of public officials, private contractors, lobbyists and others. To comment, contact:
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Top 7 story lines in 2007
So much to sort through and consider. In coming up with the order of importance, we weighed the amount of traffic and the number of stories that were cross posted or linked elsewhere.
Lots of great stories were left off the final list. Some of them include the per diem follies of Randy Demmer and our other fiscal conservatives, school levies passing in Dassel Cokato and Glencoe Silver Lake, the statewide smoking ban, and other legislative endeavors.
Mark Olson was even spared from the Top 7, but to be fair, we could just do a Top 7 for him alone!
Beyond becoming engaged to Bluewoman in Washington DC, with a 11/8/08 wedding date, here are the Top 7 Blueman story lines for 2007. I'm looking forward to a stronger 8 in 08!
3. Michele Bachmann. Dump Bachmann will do this more justice, but just off hand...
Groping the President, votes against working and middle class Minnesotan's, her Iran quotes, and a slew of other stories.
2. Luke Hellier and the MnSCU Board of Trustee's. I drew the ire of righty bloggers and radio talk show hosts for this one, and we were dead on. The issue is still closely followed by the statewide student associations. MSUSA, the 4 year student association, is anxiously awaiting their replacement to the MnSCU Board, a mere 6 months late now. It's much worse for MSCSA, the 2 year student association. Their student representative has served 18 months past the end of her initial appointment, without replacement.
Meanwhile, Governor Pawlenty spends his time pimping John McCain.
1. Walter Reed Scandal / Veterans Suicide. Support Our Troops, Liberate Iraq was the slogan on the lawnsign. Too bad it never carried over to when our brave men and women came home.
Being treated in despicable conditions at Walter Reed and other military and VA hospitals across the US, it took a Washington Post story to break this scandal wide open. Miles from the concrete palace our President resides in, our soldiers and Veterans were second class citizens.
Suicide rates of veterans also rose and remain more than double of "normal" society. Minnesota has lost no less than 16 Iraq or Afghanistan Veterans under the age of 30, since 2005.
It's a story that should be number 1 in more places than just Blueman and will remain a focal point of my blog.
Lots of great stories were left off the final list. Some of them include the per diem follies of Randy Demmer and our other fiscal conservatives, school levies passing in Dassel Cokato and Glencoe Silver Lake, the statewide smoking ban, and other legislative endeavors.
Mark Olson was even spared from the Top 7, but to be fair, we could just do a Top 7 for him alone!
Beyond becoming engaged to Bluewoman in Washington DC, with a 11/8/08 wedding date, here are the Top 7 Blueman story lines for 2007. I'm looking forward to a stronger 8 in 08!
7. Urdahl and Shimanski Townhall Forum. For someone who paints himself as a "moderate" one would have to ask why they hang out with such extreme company.
While the forum itself, billed as a townhall forum and appeared to be a rally, was interesting, the festivities afterwards were even better.
Toe to toe with Dean Urdahl was an awful lot of fun, interesting too. We discussed Rep Urdahl's flip flop of the Transportation vote.
Apparently, Urdahl's vote to sustain the Governor's Transportation veto had nothing to do with transportation. As a scholar of government, I ought to know that. Urdahl said quite a bit tonight, not going to lie...but apparently neither myself nor his wife understands what he does.
Bottomline, he flip flopped. Said he'd support a gas tax increase in October 2006, voted for it in the original bill, and flopped after the Governor called him to the carpet.
Despite this forum and run in, it only makes #7 on the list.
6. MinnCan pipeline. Nice to see the MinnCann pipeline taking shape just outside of Cokato (between the high school and the golf course). While the story remained on the periphery of Minnesota news in 07, the pipelines garnered a lot more attention after the accident at Clearbrook.
We'll get photos up after the New Year!
5. Elwyn Tinklenberg's resistance to abide by the DFL endorsement. As a Local Unit DFL official, I have sworn to support DFL endorsed candidates. Does it bother anyone else that when asked about the endorsement, Tinklenberg cannot give a straight answer?
At the November 15th forum at St Cloud State University, Tinklenberg stated his intentions on the endorsement. From the SC Times.
The DFL race would appear to be up to party delegates to decide, as Tinklenberg, who had avoided saying he would abide by the party's endorsement process earlier, appeared to commit Thursday.
"I supported the party's endorsed candidate before," he said of his 2006 endorsement loss to Patty Wetterling. "I will certainly do that again."
Olson reiterated his previous commitment to abide by the endorsement process.Yet, on December 13th at the SD 19 DFL meeting in Buffalo, Elwyn had this to say about the endorsement.
"We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."
Which left many potential delegates asking the question, "What, what does that mean?"
Elwyn came back with "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and fair process."
Call me naive, but it sounds to me like someone who's prepping for a primary!
4. Dean Urdahl flip flops on Transportation. While admitting that Governor Pawlenty's Transportation plan underfunded roads in Greater Minnesota, Urdahl put politics before the people. Whats even more shameful of this vote was that Urdahl told County Commissioners that he would support a gas tax increase, during the 06 campaign cycle.
I expect more antics from Rep Urdahl now that he's in the minority. Let me guess, he'll work to address school funding reforms he did little about when he was in the majority.
3. Michele Bachmann. Dump Bachmann will do this more justice, but just off hand...
Groping the President, votes against working and middle class Minnesotan's, her Iran quotes, and a slew of other stories.
2. Luke Hellier and the MnSCU Board of Trustee's. I drew the ire of righty bloggers and radio talk show hosts for this one, and we were dead on. The issue is still closely followed by the statewide student associations. MSUSA, the 4 year student association, is anxiously awaiting their replacement to the MnSCU Board, a mere 6 months late now. It's much worse for MSCSA, the 2 year student association. Their student representative has served 18 months past the end of her initial appointment, without replacement.
Meanwhile, Governor Pawlenty spends his time pimping John McCain.
1. Walter Reed Scandal / Veterans Suicide. Support Our Troops, Liberate Iraq was the slogan on the lawnsign. Too bad it never carried over to when our brave men and women came home.
Being treated in despicable conditions at Walter Reed and other military and VA hospitals across the US, it took a Washington Post story to break this scandal wide open. Miles from the concrete palace our President resides in, our soldiers and Veterans were second class citizens.
Suicide rates of veterans also rose and remain more than double of "normal" society. Minnesota has lost no less than 16 Iraq or Afghanistan Veterans under the age of 30, since 2005.
It's a story that should be number 1 in more places than just Blueman and will remain a focal point of my blog.
From the Archives III: Inside MnDOT January 20,2003
The second story of the January 20th Inside MnDOT series.
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 20, 2003, Monday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; Allegations about MnDOT were kept quiet; Lawyer had drawn up document on contracting practices
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
Top officials responsible for overseeing state contracts and access to public records tried to keep some allegations against the Minnesota Department of Transportation from public view.
After the federal government criticized a light-rail contract in early 2000, the state Department of Administration commissioned a review of MnDOT's consulting contracts. Don Lewis, a lawyer in the Minneapolis firm of Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson, produced a summary report and a list of 45 allegations from MnDOT and Administration employees. They included:
- Poor contract management that led to statute violations.
- Excessive use of contracts issued without competition or justification.
- Allowing contracts to grow beyond their original scope.
- Improper influence by contractors.
- Contractor overcharges.
- Failure to meet hiring goals for firms owned by women and minority members.
Kent Allin, who oversees the Administration division that reviews state contracts, released a copy of the allegations last spring when the Star Tribune asked for it under the state public-records law.
Allin said one of his bosses, Deputy Commissioner Kirsten Cecil, chewed him out for that. "She was upset with me because she believed they had all been destroyed," he said.
Cecil, whose department has a unit that interprets state law involving the public's access to government records, said she did not tell anyone to destroy any documents. She said she believed that the allegations should not have been released, citing attorney-client privilege, and that Lewis should have retained the list. Lewis said Cecil did return several copies of the paperwork.
Contract disputes prompted outside review
Administration decided to hire Lewis after the Federal Transit Administration warned that a $32 million light-rail contract had been awarded to a company with a potential conflict of interest.
Even before the review was initiated, the Administration Department was in a difficult spot. Minnesota law required it to oversee government contracts. But MnDOT wanted exemptions from such scrutiny, and it was accusing Administration of slowing down important projects, such as light rail, over minor technical shortcomings in its contracts.
"Meanwhile, my staff was telling me that MnDOT is a bad actor, they're bullies, they're arrogant, they're pushing the envelope," said David Fisher, administration commissioner at the time. "In fact, they were saying things like there's illegality going on."
Fisher met with Elwyn Tinklenberg (then transportation commissioner) and members of the governor's staff. MnDOT agreed to pay for an outside review. Fisher said he picked Lewis because he knew and trusted him. He wrote in an internal memo that he expected Lewis to "establish the integrity of the contracting process." But Allin balked at Fisher's choice of words.
"It could be read to suggest that we are looking to exonerate the 2 departments," he cautioned in an e-mail, referring to Administration and MnDOT. "The results also suggest that the investigator will fix the problems." Lewis agreed with Allin.
Fisher rewrote his memo to say reviewers should identify concerns and make recommendations.
Meanwhile, the Administration Department kept the investigation quiet. It killed a news release it had prepared to announce the review. Lewis' $55,000 contract required him only to issue an oral report, leaving Administration the option of a written report.
Allin warned Fisher not to mislead the public.
"I believe it would be a terrible mistake to tell the press that everything is hunky-dory with the LRT contracts and not disclose that we have a pending investigation of DOT contracting," he wrote. "The Gov's office may be trying to save light rail. That's a fine goal, but not at the expense of your and my personal reputations for integrity which will be seriously damaged when that fact comes to light."
List of allegations dropped from revised report
Lewis' firm collected the allegations in spring 2000 during interviews with a handful of MnDOT employees and Administration Department contract regulators. The attorney briefed top Administration officials about his preliminary findings that April.
According to notes from that meeting, Lewis did not find any "major integrity" issues, such as kickbacks or financial conflicts of interest. But he told the Star Tribune recently that MnDOT's shortcomings called for more scrutiny by the state.
"There were clearly issues of compliance with state law," he said.
Lewis summarized the allegations and distributed a document itemizing the details. Fisher said he asked Lewis to write a report that could be shared with MnDOT.
Despite what he learned, Fisher concluded that MnDOT could clean its own house. When he received Lewis' final written report in June 2000, he asked for revisions emphasizing Lewis' conclusion that there was no need for further independent investigation and that there were no apparent conflicts of interest.
When Fisher received the revised copy in July 2000, it emphasized that problems could be fixed through better management at MnDOT and did not require "major legislative or structural change."
A year after Lewis first briefed Administration about his findings, Allin sent Fisher a note discussing an independent audit that had been commissioned by the FTA. The audit, which had concluded five months earlier, found many deficiencies similar to those identified by Lewis. Among them: no record of competition on small purchases, failing to justify the selection of some vendors, shortcomings in procurement advertisements, working beyond the contract scope and failing to evaluate whether prices were reasonable.
Allin said that at a Nov. 9 meeting, "MnDOT was instructed to correct its deficiencies within 90 days. To date [April 11, 2001], that has not occurred."
Meanwhile, Administration failed to file a copy of the Lewis report with the Legislative Reference Library, as required by law, until this year.
After a Star Tribune reporter cited the law, Administration filed the revised report, without the list of allegations.
Lewis said that the list was an internal document and that he did not consider it to be part of his final report. But he submitted it to Administration at the department's request.
"There's no question it would be a useful document in terms of understanding a report," he said, "because it sort of fleshes out the issues."
Laura Bishop, assistant administration commissioner, later said that the failure to file a copy of the report for more than two years was an oversight.
Records show that Administration officials had considered claiming attorney-client privilege to keep Lewis' work confidential but decided to release the documents after Betsy Hayes, a department lawyer, argued that Lewis had been hired as a consultant, so no such privilege existed.
"I am sorry if my analysis of these documents has caused you further problems," Hayes wrote in a memo to her boss. "But, I've never known of . . . reports and audits of this nature, paid for with public dollars, [to be] something we would withhold from public scrutiny."
Memo:
"I believe it would be a terrible mistake to tell the press that everything is hunky-dory with the LRT contracts and not disclose that we have a pending investigation of DOT contracting. ... The Gov's office may be trying to save light rail. That's a fine goal, but not at the expense of your and my personal reputations for integrity which will be seriously damaged when that fact comes to light."
Kent Allin, then assistant commission of administration, to his supervisor, Administration Commissioner David Fisher, in 2000.
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 20, 2003, Monday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; Allegations about MnDOT were kept quiet; Lawyer had drawn up document on contracting practices
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
Top officials responsible for overseeing state contracts and access to public records tried to keep some allegations against the Minnesota Department of Transportation from public view.
After the federal government criticized a light-rail contract in early 2000, the state Department of Administration commissioned a review of MnDOT's consulting contracts. Don Lewis, a lawyer in the Minneapolis firm of Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson, produced a summary report and a list of 45 allegations from MnDOT and Administration employees. They included:
- Poor contract management that led to statute violations.
- Excessive use of contracts issued without competition or justification.
- Allowing contracts to grow beyond their original scope.
- Improper influence by contractors.
- Contractor overcharges.
- Failure to meet hiring goals for firms owned by women and minority members.
Kent Allin, who oversees the Administration division that reviews state contracts, released a copy of the allegations last spring when the Star Tribune asked for it under the state public-records law.
Allin said one of his bosses, Deputy Commissioner Kirsten Cecil, chewed him out for that. "She was upset with me because she believed they had all been destroyed," he said.
Cecil, whose department has a unit that interprets state law involving the public's access to government records, said she did not tell anyone to destroy any documents. She said she believed that the allegations should not have been released, citing attorney-client privilege, and that Lewis should have retained the list. Lewis said Cecil did return several copies of the paperwork.
Contract disputes prompted outside review
Administration decided to hire Lewis after the Federal Transit Administration warned that a $32 million light-rail contract had been awarded to a company with a potential conflict of interest.
Even before the review was initiated, the Administration Department was in a difficult spot. Minnesota law required it to oversee government contracts. But MnDOT wanted exemptions from such scrutiny, and it was accusing Administration of slowing down important projects, such as light rail, over minor technical shortcomings in its contracts.
"Meanwhile, my staff was telling me that MnDOT is a bad actor, they're bullies, they're arrogant, they're pushing the envelope," said David Fisher, administration commissioner at the time. "In fact, they were saying things like there's illegality going on."
Fisher met with Elwyn Tinklenberg (then transportation commissioner) and members of the governor's staff. MnDOT agreed to pay for an outside review. Fisher said he picked Lewis because he knew and trusted him. He wrote in an internal memo that he expected Lewis to "establish the integrity of the contracting process." But Allin balked at Fisher's choice of words.
"It could be read to suggest that we are looking to exonerate the 2 departments," he cautioned in an e-mail, referring to Administration and MnDOT. "The results also suggest that the investigator will fix the problems." Lewis agreed with Allin.
Fisher rewrote his memo to say reviewers should identify concerns and make recommendations.
Meanwhile, the Administration Department kept the investigation quiet. It killed a news release it had prepared to announce the review. Lewis' $55,000 contract required him only to issue an oral report, leaving Administration the option of a written report.
Allin warned Fisher not to mislead the public.
"I believe it would be a terrible mistake to tell the press that everything is hunky-dory with the LRT contracts and not disclose that we have a pending investigation of DOT contracting," he wrote. "The Gov's office may be trying to save light rail. That's a fine goal, but not at the expense of your and my personal reputations for integrity which will be seriously damaged when that fact comes to light."
List of allegations dropped from revised report
Lewis' firm collected the allegations in spring 2000 during interviews with a handful of MnDOT employees and Administration Department contract regulators. The attorney briefed top Administration officials about his preliminary findings that April.
According to notes from that meeting, Lewis did not find any "major integrity" issues, such as kickbacks or financial conflicts of interest. But he told the Star Tribune recently that MnDOT's shortcomings called for more scrutiny by the state.
"There were clearly issues of compliance with state law," he said.
Lewis summarized the allegations and distributed a document itemizing the details. Fisher said he asked Lewis to write a report that could be shared with MnDOT.
Despite what he learned, Fisher concluded that MnDOT could clean its own house. When he received Lewis' final written report in June 2000, he asked for revisions emphasizing Lewis' conclusion that there was no need for further independent investigation and that there were no apparent conflicts of interest.
When Fisher received the revised copy in July 2000, it emphasized that problems could be fixed through better management at MnDOT and did not require "major legislative or structural change."
A year after Lewis first briefed Administration about his findings, Allin sent Fisher a note discussing an independent audit that had been commissioned by the FTA. The audit, which had concluded five months earlier, found many deficiencies similar to those identified by Lewis. Among them: no record of competition on small purchases, failing to justify the selection of some vendors, shortcomings in procurement advertisements, working beyond the contract scope and failing to evaluate whether prices were reasonable.
Allin said that at a Nov. 9 meeting, "MnDOT was instructed to correct its deficiencies within 90 days. To date [April 11, 2001], that has not occurred."
Meanwhile, Administration failed to file a copy of the Lewis report with the Legislative Reference Library, as required by law, until this year.
After a Star Tribune reporter cited the law, Administration filed the revised report, without the list of allegations.
Lewis said that the list was an internal document and that he did not consider it to be part of his final report. But he submitted it to Administration at the department's request.
"There's no question it would be a useful document in terms of understanding a report," he said, "because it sort of fleshes out the issues."
Laura Bishop, assistant administration commissioner, later said that the failure to file a copy of the report for more than two years was an oversight.
Records show that Administration officials had considered claiming attorney-client privilege to keep Lewis' work confidential but decided to release the documents after Betsy Hayes, a department lawyer, argued that Lewis had been hired as a consultant, so no such privilege existed.
"I am sorry if my analysis of these documents has caused you further problems," Hayes wrote in a memo to her boss. "But, I've never known of . . . reports and audits of this nature, paid for with public dollars, [to be] something we would withhold from public scrutiny."
Memo:
"I believe it would be a terrible mistake to tell the press that everything is hunky-dory with the LRT contracts and not disclose that we have a pending investigation of DOT contracting. ... The Gov's office may be trying to save light rail. That's a fine goal, but not at the expense of your and my personal reputations for integrity which will be seriously damaged when that fact comes to light."
Kent Allin, then assistant commission of administration, to his supervisor, Administration Commissioner David Fisher, in 2000.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
The Hills are Alive...(Updated)
...with the Sound of Music.
Blueman's going to get some culture today. Imagine that, Blueman at a musical.
I wonder if Bluewoman will allow me to use her Blackberry to live blog it?
Probably not...
I doubt I'd get away with smuggling anything into the show either (Budweiser commercial).
After all, I do drag Bluewoman to a few DFL events and she smiles when her favorite US Senate candidate sits at our table (twice)...it's time to take one for the team!
All kidding aside, I actually think this will be a good time!
*Update*
Wow, it was an impressive show. The singing was amazing!
Blueman's going to get some culture today. Imagine that, Blueman at a musical.
I wonder if Bluewoman will allow me to use her Blackberry to live blog it?
Probably not...
I doubt I'd get away with smuggling anything into the show either (Budweiser commercial).
After all, I do drag Bluewoman to a few DFL events and she smiles when her favorite US Senate candidate sits at our table (twice)...it's time to take one for the team!
All kidding aside, I actually think this will be a good time!
*Update*
Wow, it was an impressive show. The singing was amazing!
From the Archives II: Inside MnDOT Jaunary 20, 2003
This series is one of several reasons I cannot support Elwyn Tinklenberg. Running on his Transportation record against Bachmann makes him too vulnerable. I'll continue to post the remainder of the series, but Tinklenberg's involvement needs to be discussed.
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 20, 2003, Monday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts.
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
Second of three parts
On the bookcase next to Gerald Joyce's desk is a cat-litter scoop labeled "In Case of MnDOT."
Joyce is a contract regulator for the state Department of Administration. For more than a decade, he has reviewed efforts by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to hire consultants and expand contracts without seeking competitive bids. His patience ran out long ago.
"The dollar sign at MnDOT means 'only,' " he said. "It's only 20 million. Or it's only 10 million."
The Administration Department has final responsibility for most contracts between state departments and industry. Many MnDOT engineers view the Administration watchdogs as rule-bound nitpickers who don't understand the real-world measures needed to get roads, bridges and rail lines built.
In turn, Joyce and his colleagues have accused MnDOT of using improper tactics to evade their authority. But as the quarrel heated up during the Ventura administration, their commissioner gave much of that authority away.
By 2001, the strain of a $675 million light-rail project and a special $459 million road and bridge program pushed the departments to the breaking point. So David Fisher, then administration commissioner, and Elwyn Tinklenberg, then transportation commissioner, worked out their own solution to expedite contracts, which Fisher referred to in a document as the Big Fix.
Among other things, two MnDOT employees were given authority to bypass Administration regulators on most contracts, and a fast-track review process was begun.
At about the same time as those issues were being worked out, Tinklenberg agreed to contribute part of the money MnDOT collects from leasing space on radio towers along state highways to a new technology enterprise fund administered by Fisher.
Meanwhile, both agreed that their staffs wouldn't publicly criticize each other.
Tinklenberg, who stepped down in October, has declined recent requests to comment. Fisher, whose term ended in early January, flatly denied any connection between his decision to yield on contract issues and MnDOT's promised payments to the technology fund.
But Betsy Hayes, a lawyer in the Administration Department, said she worries that people might think there was an agreement to relax oversight in exchange for a promise of future funding.
"I think that it would be improper for us to try to get into the minds of what the two commissioners were contemplating, exactly," Hayes said recently. "But certainly one of the things that we try to do, or I try to do when I'm advising people, is to not create an appearance of improprieties. And I think that is a concern here with me."
Light-rail project was a source of tension
The Hiawatha Avenue light-rail transit project (LRT), a centerpiece of former Gov. Jesse Ventura's election campaign, was already barreling down the tracks when Tinklenberg became commissioner in January 1999. To fulfill the promises of his boss, he would need to get the line built, fast.
Within months of his appointment, he and his deputies were angling for less oversight.
In June 1999, Margo LaBau, Tinklenberg's chief of staff, wrote of the concern in an e-mail to Doug Weiszhaar, a prospective deputy commissioner. "We need some broader authority in letting contracts for professional services," she said, "especially as it relates to LRT and commuter rail."
Over at Administration, Fisher already had demanded to be notified in writing anytime one of his staff members was planning to reject a request from the legislative or executive branches. The department, he observed, had a reputation for being an impediment.
To Fisher's chagrin, it became known in his department as his "Just (don't) say no" policy.
In a recent interview, he explained: "Rather than have things just stop dead in their tracks and then . . . well up in the governor's office or the commissioner's office in a complaint, let's address it up front. Let's work with these guys and see if something can be done."
Nonetheless, Kent Allin, an assistant administration commissioner who oversaw the department's contract regulators, warned Fisher of possible trouble on the $3.2 million contract for preliminary design work on light rail. The Minneapolis engineering firm BRW Inc. (now owned by URS Corp. of San Francisco) had the contract; the New York firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas was a subcontractor.
MnDOT wanted Administration to approve two large amendments that would change the nature of the original contract with BRW and increase its cost ceiling by nearly 75 percent. Such dramatic changes generally require competitive proposals to ensure that taxpayers get the best deal.
But Fisher told his staff that he wanted to get the contract "on the ground ASAP." Noting that Tinklenberg had personally asked him to approve the amendments, he ordered it done.
In an e-mail to his staff, Allin described the situation as a mess: "Supplement #1 is for $900K.
The work has been largely completed without the amendment ever being executed. That's a clear violation of state law and something we try hard to avoid."
Allin told his staff that "given the massive water already over the dam," they would need to document the facts leading up to the situation so the department could justify signing the amendment.
Administration also agreed to expedite the second amendment, worth $1.5 million, though it considered the work beyond the scope of the original contract.
Ask the watchdogs why it's important to have an independent review of MnDOT's contracting procedures, and they point to a time in 1999 when they stopped the department from sidestepping a pending competitive bidding process to give a $32 million light-rail management contract directly to Parsons Brinckerhoff.
The agency initially advertised for proposals, but before the responses were due, MnDOT officials privately had asked Parsons Brinckerhoff to submit a proposal for what what was initially estimated to be a $20 million job.
Allin said that Fisher already had given his tentative approval, but that his staff raised red flags.
"This is a $20,000,000, highly visible project that is very susceptible to law suits," regulators wrote. "The advertising process should be followed!"
Fisher ultimately sided with his staff and told MnDOT to seek bids. But MnDOT said it needed a transit expert right away to help meet a funding deadline. Fisher said that's why he agreed to let MnDOT add a third amendment to the BRW contract, for $1.1 million, allowing an employee of subcontractor Parsons Brinckerhoff to serve as interim project manager while bids were sought.
Parsons Brinckerhoff bid on the project and won, sparking allegations of a conflict of interest.
Federal authorities said the process appeared tainted, and they ordered the state to redo it.
MnDOT scaled back the job, which was won by O'Brien Kreitzberg (now owned by URS) with a bid of $15.4 million. Parsons Brinckerhoff didn't submit a new bid.
The battle goes to the Legislature
Despite Fisher's accommodations, MnDOT concluded that his regulators had become too much of an irritant.
"I don't know who the problem here is but it is shaping up to look like Admin is going to give us a problem on everything with LRT," LaBau e-mailed a colleague. Another MnDOT manager wrote, "We cannot meet aggressive schedules if we continue to encounter this kind of delay on a relatively easy straight forward contract."
Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations for MnDOT, said in an interview that his agency's engineers look at state contracting laws and Administration's oversight as nettlesome paperwork, while the watchdogs at Administration "see themselves as . . . the altruistic steward of the taxpayers."
"If our engineer guys had their way," Biser said, "Admin would be out of our hair forever, legislatively."
In late 2000, with the next legislative session on the horizon, MnDOT pressed for greater autonomy. The agency supported proposals that would let it select consultants without competitive bidding on contracts worth as much as $50,000 (lifting a $5,000 limit) and would loosen other requirements on contracts worth as much as $100,000.
Joyce joined Heather Pickett, an attorney who had worked at MnDOT for four years before she joined Administration, in opposing the proposals. In a memo to their bosses, they said that if the ideas were approved, the same contractors would be chosen over and over.
"We have seen this in practice, so it's not just a theory," they said. "The small contractor will be lost in the shuffle."
They said the biggest losers would be firms owned by minority members and women. Two 1999 audits of MnDOT's contracts had found underrepresentation of such firms. The problem was worst with respect to contracts below $75,000, for which agency personnel have greater discretion in choosing a contractor. The audit found what it called "active discrimination rather than passive discrimination" on those contracts.
Joyce and Pickett also argued that selecting contractors without competition can lead to higher prices. They noted that Joyce had once saved the state $70,000 by forcing his own department to drop a no-bid approach.
"We think DOT has forgotten the value of a dollar," Pickett wrote. "Ultimately, DOT has given us no reason to trust that it will use the new levels wisely and fairly."
But the Associated General Contractors, a trade group, pushed a bill to wrest the department free from Administration scrutiny, insisting it would speed the contracting process. State Sen. Mark Ourada, a Republican from Buffalo who works for a paving contractor, agreed to spearhead the legislation. It passed, but other legislation later reinstated Administration's authority over MnDOT.
With their relationship fraying, Administration and MnDOT began making lists of their gripes.
MnDOT said Administration rejected too many no-bid contracts, demanded too many explanations for amending contracts and wasn't willing to allow reasonable risks on high-priority projects. MnDOT accused regulators of making arbitrary and inconsistent decisions on matters they didn't understand.
In response, Allin asked Pickett for a list of MnDOT problems. She produced 23 pages of them that were later condensed to two pages and dubbed "DOT Horror Stories."
Pickett calculated that in 2000, MnDOT sought to hire 41 percent of its consultants without requiring them to bid for the work. "Requests must be carefully reviewed because the approval of the request may cause political backlash or a lawsuit," she said.
Allin, in a recent interview, said that he never circulated the list outside of his department but that he wanted it in case he needed it in the fight with MnDOT.
Fisher, Tinklenberg and the 'Big Fix'
On Feb. 15, 2001, Fisher visited Tinklenberg in his office to discuss contracting issues. It was just the two of them, Fisher later told his staff in an e-mail. Fisher said Tinklenberg asked whether certain MnDOT officials could sign consulting contracts without going through Administration, "to move some things that are 'hot' currently."
At about the same time, Fisher, a technology buff who had been vice president of and general counsel to a telecommunications firm, was pushing a bill to establish a fund that would pay for statewide computer integration and related activities. He wanted MnDOT to contribute a fifth of the revenue it receives from leasing unused space on radio towers along highways.
Fisher sent Allin a handwritten note saying Administration should consider advancing MnDOT's contracts when "both the Governor and Legislature are pressing hard for MnDOT to move speedily with road/bridge work. This pertains specifically and solely to the $500 million appropriated in the 2000-2001 session."
Allin said he interpreted that as a directive "to go easier on MnDOT."
Fisher said he wasn't suggesting a free ride. "I wanted to make sure we removed doubt about Admin being a roadblock," he said. "It did not say treat them differently in terms of compromising principles."
In April, records show, Fisher agreed to fast-track MnDOT's consulting contracts and to give two MnDOT employees authority to sign most of them on his behalf.
Tinklenberg agreed to give 20 percent of the tower lease money to Fisher's fledgling technology fund and to help him with other technology projects when possible, the records show.
Finally, the two commissioners agreed to "assure that no agency representative criticizes the other agency to any non-agency party."
In an interview, Fisher said the fact that the issues were listed in the same document does not mean one was traded for the other.
"I can tell you . . . there is no context or connection," he said. "They are just a collection of issues."
A watchdog gets fired, but later is reinstated
Fisher fired Allin after the Star Tribune reported last March that Allin and his staff had written memos strongly critical of MnDOT contracting practices. Allin got a lawyer and was quickly reinstated as director of the contract-oversight division, although he was stripped of the title of assistant commissioner. He said he was barred from speaking publicly about his department without approval.
Seven of his colleagues complained in a September letter to a Star Tribune reporter that Allin had been sidelined. "We wish more elected and appointed officials showed his commitment to the state's best interest," they wrote.
Administration eventually allowed Allin to speak with a reporter, with a superior present. He said he hopes to have his authority reinstated under the administration of Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who took office this month. (Early this month, Allin dropped possible legal claims against the state in exchange for $150,000 and a statement from Fisher to his colleagues describing him as a valued public servant.)
Tinklenberg resigned in October without contributing to Fisher's fund.
In an undated memo to himself, Fisher concluded that Administration was not an obstacle to MnDOT's contracts but that the agency wouldn't be happy unless it was autonomous, which has largely been accomplished.
Fisher's "delegations of authority" permitting MnDOT to sign most of its own consulting contracts expired with his term on Jan. 6. Fisher's replacement, Brian Lamb, recently reinstated them to keep things running smoothly, Allin said. But he added that Lamb wanted assurances that he could reconsider.
Said Allin: "I think this department should take a tougher position with respect to MnDOT. When I was terminated, I was told one reason was for not following the policy of appeasement of MnDOT.
"And I can understand the pressures to move DOT's agenda, which I think is important, but I think there has to be public accountability for MnDOT contracts, and we've let that go . . . through the delegations and through the eagerness to make MnDOT happy at any cost."
Lamb said in a recent interview that he didn't have enough information to say what he will do. But philosophically, and especially in light of the projected budget shortfall, Lamb said he was open to letting other agencies pick up some of Administration's tasks, such as supervising contract procedures.
Any such moves would require "a fair amount of care and attention," he said, adding that he would have to feel comfortable that "the state and the taxpayers are held in . . . the forefront of any decisions."
Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, who has been named to serve a dual role by leading MnDOT, said she expects that Administration will oversee her department's contracts through random audits, a process Fisher started.
"So our job then is to make sure that every contract is done appropriately," Molnau said, "because we have no idea which contracts they'll be looking at."
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) January 20, 2003, Monday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts.
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
Second of three parts
On the bookcase next to Gerald Joyce's desk is a cat-litter scoop labeled "In Case of MnDOT."
Joyce is a contract regulator for the state Department of Administration. For more than a decade, he has reviewed efforts by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to hire consultants and expand contracts without seeking competitive bids. His patience ran out long ago.
"The dollar sign at MnDOT means 'only,' " he said. "It's only 20 million. Or it's only 10 million."
The Administration Department has final responsibility for most contracts between state departments and industry. Many MnDOT engineers view the Administration watchdogs as rule-bound nitpickers who don't understand the real-world measures needed to get roads, bridges and rail lines built.
In turn, Joyce and his colleagues have accused MnDOT of using improper tactics to evade their authority. But as the quarrel heated up during the Ventura administration, their commissioner gave much of that authority away.
By 2001, the strain of a $675 million light-rail project and a special $459 million road and bridge program pushed the departments to the breaking point. So David Fisher, then administration commissioner, and Elwyn Tinklenberg, then transportation commissioner, worked out their own solution to expedite contracts, which Fisher referred to in a document as the Big Fix.
Among other things, two MnDOT employees were given authority to bypass Administration regulators on most contracts, and a fast-track review process was begun.
At about the same time as those issues were being worked out, Tinklenberg agreed to contribute part of the money MnDOT collects from leasing space on radio towers along state highways to a new technology enterprise fund administered by Fisher.
Meanwhile, both agreed that their staffs wouldn't publicly criticize each other.
Tinklenberg, who stepped down in October, has declined recent requests to comment. Fisher, whose term ended in early January, flatly denied any connection between his decision to yield on contract issues and MnDOT's promised payments to the technology fund.
But Betsy Hayes, a lawyer in the Administration Department, said she worries that people might think there was an agreement to relax oversight in exchange for a promise of future funding.
"I think that it would be improper for us to try to get into the minds of what the two commissioners were contemplating, exactly," Hayes said recently. "But certainly one of the things that we try to do, or I try to do when I'm advising people, is to not create an appearance of improprieties. And I think that is a concern here with me."
Light-rail project was a source of tension
The Hiawatha Avenue light-rail transit project (LRT), a centerpiece of former Gov. Jesse Ventura's election campaign, was already barreling down the tracks when Tinklenberg became commissioner in January 1999. To fulfill the promises of his boss, he would need to get the line built, fast.
Within months of his appointment, he and his deputies were angling for less oversight.
In June 1999, Margo LaBau, Tinklenberg's chief of staff, wrote of the concern in an e-mail to Doug Weiszhaar, a prospective deputy commissioner. "We need some broader authority in letting contracts for professional services," she said, "especially as it relates to LRT and commuter rail."
Over at Administration, Fisher already had demanded to be notified in writing anytime one of his staff members was planning to reject a request from the legislative or executive branches. The department, he observed, had a reputation for being an impediment.
To Fisher's chagrin, it became known in his department as his "Just (don't) say no" policy.
In a recent interview, he explained: "Rather than have things just stop dead in their tracks and then . . . well up in the governor's office or the commissioner's office in a complaint, let's address it up front. Let's work with these guys and see if something can be done."
Nonetheless, Kent Allin, an assistant administration commissioner who oversaw the department's contract regulators, warned Fisher of possible trouble on the $3.2 million contract for preliminary design work on light rail. The Minneapolis engineering firm BRW Inc. (now owned by URS Corp. of San Francisco) had the contract; the New York firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas was a subcontractor.
MnDOT wanted Administration to approve two large amendments that would change the nature of the original contract with BRW and increase its cost ceiling by nearly 75 percent. Such dramatic changes generally require competitive proposals to ensure that taxpayers get the best deal.
But Fisher told his staff that he wanted to get the contract "on the ground ASAP." Noting that Tinklenberg had personally asked him to approve the amendments, he ordered it done.
In an e-mail to his staff, Allin described the situation as a mess: "Supplement #1 is for $900K.
The work has been largely completed without the amendment ever being executed. That's a clear violation of state law and something we try hard to avoid."
Allin told his staff that "given the massive water already over the dam," they would need to document the facts leading up to the situation so the department could justify signing the amendment.
Administration also agreed to expedite the second amendment, worth $1.5 million, though it considered the work beyond the scope of the original contract.
Ask the watchdogs why it's important to have an independent review of MnDOT's contracting procedures, and they point to a time in 1999 when they stopped the department from sidestepping a pending competitive bidding process to give a $32 million light-rail management contract directly to Parsons Brinckerhoff.
The agency initially advertised for proposals, but before the responses were due, MnDOT officials privately had asked Parsons Brinckerhoff to submit a proposal for what what was initially estimated to be a $20 million job.
Allin said that Fisher already had given his tentative approval, but that his staff raised red flags.
"This is a $20,000,000, highly visible project that is very susceptible to law suits," regulators wrote. "The advertising process should be followed!"
Fisher ultimately sided with his staff and told MnDOT to seek bids. But MnDOT said it needed a transit expert right away to help meet a funding deadline. Fisher said that's why he agreed to let MnDOT add a third amendment to the BRW contract, for $1.1 million, allowing an employee of subcontractor Parsons Brinckerhoff to serve as interim project manager while bids were sought.
Parsons Brinckerhoff bid on the project and won, sparking allegations of a conflict of interest.
Federal authorities said the process appeared tainted, and they ordered the state to redo it.
MnDOT scaled back the job, which was won by O'Brien Kreitzberg (now owned by URS) with a bid of $15.4 million. Parsons Brinckerhoff didn't submit a new bid.
The battle goes to the Legislature
Despite Fisher's accommodations, MnDOT concluded that his regulators had become too much of an irritant.
"I don't know who the problem here is but it is shaping up to look like Admin is going to give us a problem on everything with LRT," LaBau e-mailed a colleague. Another MnDOT manager wrote, "We cannot meet aggressive schedules if we continue to encounter this kind of delay on a relatively easy straight forward contract."
Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations for MnDOT, said in an interview that his agency's engineers look at state contracting laws and Administration's oversight as nettlesome paperwork, while the watchdogs at Administration "see themselves as . . . the altruistic steward of the taxpayers."
"If our engineer guys had their way," Biser said, "Admin would be out of our hair forever, legislatively."
In late 2000, with the next legislative session on the horizon, MnDOT pressed for greater autonomy. The agency supported proposals that would let it select consultants without competitive bidding on contracts worth as much as $50,000 (lifting a $5,000 limit) and would loosen other requirements on contracts worth as much as $100,000.
Joyce joined Heather Pickett, an attorney who had worked at MnDOT for four years before she joined Administration, in opposing the proposals. In a memo to their bosses, they said that if the ideas were approved, the same contractors would be chosen over and over.
"We have seen this in practice, so it's not just a theory," they said. "The small contractor will be lost in the shuffle."
They said the biggest losers would be firms owned by minority members and women. Two 1999 audits of MnDOT's contracts had found underrepresentation of such firms. The problem was worst with respect to contracts below $75,000, for which agency personnel have greater discretion in choosing a contractor. The audit found what it called "active discrimination rather than passive discrimination" on those contracts.
Joyce and Pickett also argued that selecting contractors without competition can lead to higher prices. They noted that Joyce had once saved the state $70,000 by forcing his own department to drop a no-bid approach.
"We think DOT has forgotten the value of a dollar," Pickett wrote. "Ultimately, DOT has given us no reason to trust that it will use the new levels wisely and fairly."
But the Associated General Contractors, a trade group, pushed a bill to wrest the department free from Administration scrutiny, insisting it would speed the contracting process. State Sen. Mark Ourada, a Republican from Buffalo who works for a paving contractor, agreed to spearhead the legislation. It passed, but other legislation later reinstated Administration's authority over MnDOT.
With their relationship fraying, Administration and MnDOT began making lists of their gripes.
MnDOT said Administration rejected too many no-bid contracts, demanded too many explanations for amending contracts and wasn't willing to allow reasonable risks on high-priority projects. MnDOT accused regulators of making arbitrary and inconsistent decisions on matters they didn't understand.
In response, Allin asked Pickett for a list of MnDOT problems. She produced 23 pages of them that were later condensed to two pages and dubbed "DOT Horror Stories."
Pickett calculated that in 2000, MnDOT sought to hire 41 percent of its consultants without requiring them to bid for the work. "Requests must be carefully reviewed because the approval of the request may cause political backlash or a lawsuit," she said.
Allin, in a recent interview, said that he never circulated the list outside of his department but that he wanted it in case he needed it in the fight with MnDOT.
Fisher, Tinklenberg and the 'Big Fix'
On Feb. 15, 2001, Fisher visited Tinklenberg in his office to discuss contracting issues. It was just the two of them, Fisher later told his staff in an e-mail. Fisher said Tinklenberg asked whether certain MnDOT officials could sign consulting contracts without going through Administration, "to move some things that are 'hot' currently."
At about the same time, Fisher, a technology buff who had been vice president of and general counsel to a telecommunications firm, was pushing a bill to establish a fund that would pay for statewide computer integration and related activities. He wanted MnDOT to contribute a fifth of the revenue it receives from leasing unused space on radio towers along highways.
Fisher sent Allin a handwritten note saying Administration should consider advancing MnDOT's contracts when "both the Governor and Legislature are pressing hard for MnDOT to move speedily with road/bridge work. This pertains specifically and solely to the $500 million appropriated in the 2000-2001 session."
Allin said he interpreted that as a directive "to go easier on MnDOT."
Fisher said he wasn't suggesting a free ride. "I wanted to make sure we removed doubt about Admin being a roadblock," he said. "It did not say treat them differently in terms of compromising principles."
In April, records show, Fisher agreed to fast-track MnDOT's consulting contracts and to give two MnDOT employees authority to sign most of them on his behalf.
Tinklenberg agreed to give 20 percent of the tower lease money to Fisher's fledgling technology fund and to help him with other technology projects when possible, the records show.
Finally, the two commissioners agreed to "assure that no agency representative criticizes the other agency to any non-agency party."
In an interview, Fisher said the fact that the issues were listed in the same document does not mean one was traded for the other.
"I can tell you . . . there is no context or connection," he said. "They are just a collection of issues."
A watchdog gets fired, but later is reinstated
Fisher fired Allin after the Star Tribune reported last March that Allin and his staff had written memos strongly critical of MnDOT contracting practices. Allin got a lawyer and was quickly reinstated as director of the contract-oversight division, although he was stripped of the title of assistant commissioner. He said he was barred from speaking publicly about his department without approval.
Seven of his colleagues complained in a September letter to a Star Tribune reporter that Allin had been sidelined. "We wish more elected and appointed officials showed his commitment to the state's best interest," they wrote.
Administration eventually allowed Allin to speak with a reporter, with a superior present. He said he hopes to have his authority reinstated under the administration of Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who took office this month. (Early this month, Allin dropped possible legal claims against the state in exchange for $150,000 and a statement from Fisher to his colleagues describing him as a valued public servant.)
Tinklenberg resigned in October without contributing to Fisher's fund.
In an undated memo to himself, Fisher concluded that Administration was not an obstacle to MnDOT's contracts but that the agency wouldn't be happy unless it was autonomous, which has largely been accomplished.
Fisher's "delegations of authority" permitting MnDOT to sign most of its own consulting contracts expired with his term on Jan. 6. Fisher's replacement, Brian Lamb, recently reinstated them to keep things running smoothly, Allin said. But he added that Lamb wanted assurances that he could reconsider.
Said Allin: "I think this department should take a tougher position with respect to MnDOT. When I was terminated, I was told one reason was for not following the policy of appeasement of MnDOT.
"And I can understand the pressures to move DOT's agenda, which I think is important, but I think there has to be public accountability for MnDOT contracts, and we've let that go . . . through the delegations and through the eagerness to make MnDOT happy at any cost."
Lamb said in a recent interview that he didn't have enough information to say what he will do. But philosophically, and especially in light of the projected budget shortfall, Lamb said he was open to letting other agencies pick up some of Administration's tasks, such as supervising contract procedures.
Any such moves would require "a fair amount of care and attention," he said, adding that he would have to feel comfortable that "the state and the taxpayers are held in . . . the forefront of any decisions."
Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau, who has been named to serve a dual role by leading MnDOT, said she expects that Administration will oversee her department's contracts through random audits, a process Fisher started.
"So our job then is to make sure that every contract is done appropriately," Molnau said, "because we have no idea which contracts they'll be looking at."
Friday, December 28, 2007
Olson LTE in the SC Times
Bob Olson, candidate for Congress in the 6th CD, was mentioned in a LTE in the SC Times today. Discussing Bachmann's recent no vote on the energy bill, a Clearwater resident said the following.
The Tinklenberg website still makes no mention of "the issues", three weeks after their campaign manager announced it was supposed to be "updated"...A news report in the Sunday St. Cloud Times quoted our congressional leaders on their opinions about the recent congressional session.
I found it interesting that Rep. Michele Bachmann claims that "Republicans kept a steady hand and we held together with the president" when she did exactly the opposite on the energy bill.
While not as good as it could have been, the energy bill signed by President Bush does mandate increased fuel efficiency standards and more use of biofuels.
Claiming that it is a "recipe for recession" and that there's "not one watt of new energy produced in this bill," Bachmann voted against it. Thankfully, she was in the minority, but it certainly makes one question her understanding of the energy situation in this country.
There is a candidate for the 6th District who has made it a priority to study alternative energy and its possibilities. He's businessman Bob Olson, and, according to his Web site, he wrote to Bachmann to share some very basic information with her before her vote.
However, she doesn't seem to want to look at new possibilities and would rather continue our dependence on foreign oil. It seems that bringing good jobs to this area while weaning us off foreign oil would be something folks in the 6th District would be interested in.
Bob Olson knows how to bring that possibility into a reality. Is Michele Bachmann really in tune with the people of her district?
From the archives: Inside MnDOT January 2003
Bob Olson Challenger, Elwyn Tinklenberg is prominently featured in this 2003 Startribune series titled, "Inside MnDOT". Since Tinklenberg is running on his Transportation record, a full disclosure and discussion of said record is appropriate.
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN)
January 19, 2003, Sunday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT swerves around the law; Agency flouted rules on consultants
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
When the Minnesota Department of Transportation lost a $17-an-hour employee, it quickly hired her as a $100-an-hour consultant and gave her a string of contracts, despite repeated warnings from regulators that others should have been considered for the work.
When MnDOT was in a hurry to clean up a site that was to become a maintenance yard for the state's first light-rail line, it put an engineering firm to work without having a binding contract or money in place admittedly violating state law.
Under pressure to build roads and rail, MnDOT increasingly has turned to outside consultants, paying them nearly $60 million last year. Laws and regulations exist to ensure that consulting contracts are reached fairly and competitively and that tax dollars are spent prudently. But the Star Tribune has found that MnDOT the third-biggest spender among state agencies, has played by its own rules.
A review of tens of thousands of government e-mails, memos and other documents shows that MnDOT often has avoided competition when awarding consulting contracts, has doubled or even tripled payments without bids and has broken laws by putting consultants to work before deals were approved or even funded.
Behind the scenes, state regulators have criticized such practices for years, describing the agency as a bully running roughshod over efforts to ensure fair contracting. Auditors, too, have criticized the way MnDOT handles consultants.
Even so, Elwyn Tinklenberg, who led MnDOT for nearly four years before resigning in October, has called the agency's procedures "reasonable and appropriate." During a radio appearance in August, he praised the agency's 5,300 employees, "who are working like crazy to do the best job they can with limited resources to protect the mobility of Minnesota."
But as a new administration settles in, the agency will probably face tougher scrutiny. Gov. Tim Pawlenty said the newspaper's findings raise questions about whether agency officials have been too close to some consultants, and he called some of MnDOT's spending decisions outrageous.
Pawlenty named Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as the agency's new commissioner. As a legislator, Molnau accused MnDOT of misrepresenting costs for the Hiawatha Avenue light-rail line and resisting scrutiny. During last year's campaign, she promised "major reforms."
In a recent interview, she said that employees already are suggesting improvements. "Our goal is accountability," she said. "So when we have contract issues, they will be done according to the standards."
Unlike typical construction work or purchases, consulting jobs need not go to the lowest bidder, agencies may consider a variety of subjective factors. But last week, the legislative auditor reported that six state agencies it surveyed, including MnDOT, broke laws or ignored sound management practices when hiring consultants.
The Department of Administration has the authority to approve or reject most state contracts. Regulators there have said that MnDOT gives them the most trouble; many of their complaints are evident in internal documents.
According to the Minnesota Department of Finance, the state spent $2.2 billion on professional or technical consultants from 1996 through late 2002, an average of about $303 million a year. MnDOT was the biggest spender, accounting for 16 percent of the total.
Some of that money has gone to large companies. Some has gone to individuals. In both situations, regulators have questioned whether it was distributed fairly or in ways that produce a good value for taxpayers.
One contract leads to another
One of those cases involved Carolyn Bacon.
MnDOT managers liked Bacon, who worked for them as an employee-development specialist in the early 1990s. About five months after leaving that $17.25-an-hour job in 1993, she returned part time as a $100-an-hour consultant, running meetings, planning retreats and reorganizing staff. She has received contracts worth $266,270, MnDOT records show.
Minnesota law forbids the hiring of consultants for jobs exceeding $5,000 if state employees are available. In addition, even small contracts are supposed to go through an informal bidding process. Heather Pickett, a contract watchdog for the Minnesota Department of Administration, questioned Bacon's contracts in 2000.
"It appears that Mn/DOT is giving a great deal of this type of work just to Ms. Bacon, especially when there are other people, as well as state employees, who could perform this work. Fair and open competition is the goal when selecting contractors," she wrote in a memo to the agency.
Pickett, a lawyer and former MnDOT employee herself, wrote that in the future, MnDOT would need to explain why it chose Bacon and whether competitors were sought.
Soon after, a $66,100 contract of Bacon's was due to expire. The agency wanted her to continue working so she could help in a staff reorganization. Pickett said she told the department to seek proposals from competitors.
MnDOT did. But meanwhile, it hired Bacon on a separate, no-bid, $5,000 contract to lead a retreat for managers who were planning the reorganization. Four days after the retreat ended, the department chose Bacon for a new contract worth $67,000.
The Administration Department, acting on a tip from a MnDOT source, looked into the contract. It found that:
- Weeks before the proposal was put out for bids, a MnDOT employee already had described the project in her notes as "Carolyn's Contract."
- The advertisement seeking proposals was too "sketchy" for competitors to understand, according to Pickett. She told MnDOT to fix it, but officials disregarded her directive.
- Three consultants submitted proposals. One was tossed for being 11 minutes late. Bacon's proposal, the only one without a time stamp, was accepted.
- The committee that selected Bacon included Richard Stehr, the senior engineer whose division first recruited her as a consultant, and two of his subordinates.
Auditors, regulators and even a former MnDOT manager have criticized such arrangements as a threat to the appearance of impartiality.
Administration Department regulators concluded that MnDOT had "preselected this contractor" even though it went through a competitive process. But they didn't recommend further investigation.
Kent Allin, then an assistant administration commissioner who oversaw state contracting, said there were frequent discussions in his department about the tension between contract regulators and MnDOT. "I'm trying to pick my words carefully," he said. "We were encouraged [not to] air the dirty laundry publicly or with the Legislature."
MnDOT denies committing any improprieties. Nancy Pfeiler, the staff member who described the project as "Carolyn's Contract," said she viewed it as a continuation of Bacon's work with the department.
Bacon said she didn't know why her proposal wasn't time-stamped. She defended her selection, saying she had worked for MnDOT for a long time and was familiar with the reorganization efforts. Stehr agreed: "I mean, she knew what we liked."
Competition is key, and often is avoided.
One type of arrangement criticized by both regulators and auditors is the single-source contract, in which an agency seeks to hire a contractor without competitive bids.
The law allows no-bid contracts if state employees cannot do the jobs and the selected firms are the only ones reasonably available for the work.
But Administration regulators have complained that MnDOT frequently has sought permission to handpick its consultants as much as 41 percent of the time in 2000 often with insufficient reasons.
Gerald Joyce, an Administration regulator, wrote in an internal memo that MnDOT often claimed it lacked time to advertise for competitors. But there often appeared to be enough time, he lamented, "for MnDOT to mishandle the contract and create a situation where work must begin or dire consequences will result, thus negating Admin's authority in enforcing a statute that was enacted for a very good reason, to ensure a fair contracting process that when properly utilized benefits all parties."
On several occasions, regulators said, MnDOT evaded or even broke the law by hiring contractors without competition and putting them to work without approval.
Sometimes MnDOT tries to justify its selections on grounds that it has worked with the companies before and they are familiar with the work, factors that might save money. But regulators say that those alone aren't sufficient reasons.
Even if a company originally competes for a job, the cost of a contract can grow as the agreement is amended, without competition, to add work.
The Star Tribune analyzed two MnDOT databases with nearly 2,100 consulting contracts. The analysis found 150 cases in which the value of amendments equaled or exceeded the amounts of the original contracts. Some involved relatively small deals, such as a $2,590 engineering contract that increased by $11,410. Others were much larger, such as a $750,000 materials testing contract that increased by $2.1 million.
One example involves Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) of St. Paul. In 1998, the department signed a three-year, $750,000 contract with SEH for road-design services. Two years into the contract, it tagged on an amendment for $750,000, citing the heavy workload.
It was among eight SEH contracts with supplements exceeding 60 percent of their original value. Taken together, the original contracts were worth $3.6 million, and the supplements added $3.3 million.
Generally speaking, state law allows agencies to amend contracts to order unexpected, related work or to deal with emergencies that involve public health and safety. MnDOT officials say they expand contracts out of necessity, generally to deal with unexpected problems or to avoid costly construction delays.
But regulators and auditors have noted that the practice can be used to skirt competitive-bidding requirements. They also say that supplements can be a sign that firms are allowed to bid low to win contracts and compensate with no-bid amendments.
Of the 2,100 contracts, nearly half had been amended. The original value of the contracts that were amended totaled $731 million; the amendments themselves totaled $422 million.
MnDOT officials said their databases were designed to track contracts, not to be used for analysis. They said they could not vouch for "the accuracy, reliability, suitability or completeness" of their data and warned that any conclusions drawn from them could be misleading or false.
However, the newspaper fixed many of the problems by clearing up inconsistencies in company names and using hard copies of contracts to fill in blanks. Spot checks afterward found relatively few errors.
A practice that can shut out competitors
Administration watchdogs say that when MnDOT chooses one contractor too often, others can't gain the experience to compete effectively.
Ed Knoyle, a software engineer from Bozeman, Mont., began telecommuting as a consultant for the agency in 1975. His contracts since 1996 have totaled $517,755. Some were awarded without competition.
When MnDOT wanted approvals for no-bid contracts with Knoyle, it typically said he had so much institutional knowledge and technical expertise that he had no peer.
MnDOT also sometimes awarded contracts for amounts just under the threshold that would have required competitive bids. It later amended the contracts, pushing total costs far above the threshold.
Joyce suggested that MnDOT may have been dodging the law in one such case involving Knoyle. In a February 1999 memo, he wrote that a Knoyle contract had started at $24,000, "conveniently below" the $25,000 bidding threshold, but that through amendments, it had nearly tripled in cost and had exceeded the original scope.
He approved the amendment that sparked his comments but said he wanted assurance, for his file, "that the original intent of this contract was never to be this large and all-encompassing. It appears that there may be even more amendments anticipated; if that's the case, I would recommend a new contract or some explanation of why no MnDOT employees can now perform these services."
Later that year, Pickett raised more questions about MnDOT's use of Knoyle. Citing a contract that had grown from $60,000 to $95,000, she said, "This is not an appropriate amendment. The new work is unrelated to the original contract and should have been a separate contract."
In summer 2001, MnDOT found a detour around some of the regulators' challenges. According to an internal memo, managers reviewed contracting rules and found that if they used a special type of contract and kept the amount under $20,000, the agency could hire Knoyle directly without competition. MnDOT officials approved a $10,000 contract for Knoyle to work on a mainframe computer and a separate $15,000 contract for him to work on a database.
Determining when a contract amendment is truly required can be difficult, said Gabriel Bodoczy, a former MnDOT official who oversaw consulting contracts for a decade before retiring in 1999. But he said that too many amendments are driven by consultants and not by the agency's needs.
Knoyle suggested that MnDOT extend one of his contracts a year ago, saying he had run out of work with two-thirds of the money remaining. An agency representative wrote back, asking whether he was looking for something to do.
Knoyle responded: "My time is less committed now. . . . Everybody just looks at each other and wonders who is supposed to be doing what. . . . What this means is that I will have more time available than I have recently, so yes, I am looking for projects if you have some in mind."
MnDOT extended the contract through June of this year.
Knoyle said his string of contracts stems from his ability to find a niche within MnDOT. He said that he follows the money, shifting to new projects as priorities change, but that MnDOT's employee turnover helps, too.
"A lot of times, I'm coming in and educating MnDOT employees how we got to where we are today, because I've been here 20 years and they've been here, you know, six months," he said. "I don't think we intended it to work out that way. It's just kind of how it turned out."
Why break the law? Speed plays a role
In its efforts to accelerate projects, MnDOT insists that it must sometimes violate statutes that prohibit contractors from starting work before money is set aside or before a contract is signed.
"It takes too damned long to get a project developed and on the ground," Tinklenberg said in an interview last spring.
The Star Tribune found dozens of examples in which the agency acknowledged breaking the law by starting work before contracts were signed or money was set aside.
In addition, Pickett complained in an internal document that MnDOT often steps around the rules when it decides it wants a particular consultant. The agency frequently asks for approval of no-bid contracts long after the work has begun, she said, even though "working without the benefit of a contract creates liability for the state."
In 1999, the agency wanted to hire Barr Engineering of Edina to draft a cleanup plan for part of the light-rail corridor. One reason it gave was that the company could produce a "scientifically and politically acceptable product the first time."
The Administration Department initially rejected MnDOT's request for a $125,000 contract, saying the agency had failed to meet criteria for avoiding competitive bidding. MnDOT eventually got permission to negotiate a contract with Barr after explaining that cleanup funds from a settlement with a previous owner were about to expire. The agency then put Barr to work without a binding contract and without dedicated money. MnDOT later acknowledged that it broke the law in doing so.
Barr did not finish the job in time to capture the cleanup funds. A MnDOT official later downplayed the failure, explaining to Administration regulators that the most important reason for moving so quickly was to avoid delays in light-rail construction.
Pickett ultimately signed the contract after much of the work was completed.
In a recent interview she said she was under intense pressure from MnDOT and was mindful that light rail was a priority for David Fisher, the administration commissioner at that time. "He directly said he was in favor of light rail and he wants to help wherever he can to get this thing on the tracks," she said. ". . . You can't fight every battle. You can only push so hard."
MnDOT says it takes risks that are legitimate
Starting work without final approvals can create liability for the state, say auditors and the state attorney general's office. Tinklenberg has said the agency weighs that against the threat of incurring financial penalties for delays or compromising public safety.
In an internal memo that itemized its quarrels with Administration watchdogs, MnDOT said it does not make it common practice to violate contracting laws. "However we realize that there are high priority projects for which we must take the risk and start work to meet delivery deadlines. . . . When long established supplier relationships are in place, we trust consultants to start projects for us."
Ron Gipp, MnDOT's chief auditor, called that "extraordinarily risky" for the state in a review of MnDOT's building contracts that was conducted jointly with Administration. Without a contract between the state and its consultant, the audit says, "neither party is bound to fulfilling any contractual obligation." And if disputes surface, "an increased risk of litigation may result."
MnDOT considered the risk low. It said in one internal document that if the number of violations is rising, "it may indicate that laws and policies need to change", not contracting practices.
Not everyone at MnDOT thinks it has come to that.
Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations, said the agency hasn't tried hard enough to live within the law. "We just blow it off, and that's not my style," he said. "We need to put emphasis on dotting our I's, crossing our T's, in a timely fashion."
He added that if the regular contracting process jeopardizes the department's basic mission, then changes in the law should be considered. "But you've got to give it your best effort, and we haven't done that," he said.
Pawlenty said his administration will review the contracting rules and procedures to see whether they make sense, "because one of the things we're going to do at MnDOT is . . . ask them to try to deliver projects more effectively, more efficiently and quicker. . . . Once we're convinced that the rules are appropriate, we've got to follow them."
An aborted project in Arden Hills illustrates the risk of taking shortcuts. MnDOT was planning to help redevelop the abandoned Army Ammunition Plant there, working with the city, the National Guard and Ramsey County.
Two years ago, a MnDOT project manager broke the law by telling Short Elliott Hendrickson to start design work on the project even though the $60,000 contract wasn't signed. The firm finished the job, but the city pulled out of the arrangement.
Here's how MnDOT explained the situation in a memo to Administration:
"In a nut shell, Mn/DOT was going to participate in this project, the vendor started work and as the contract progressed, partners changed their minds on participation. Mn/DOT backed out of the project and now we have this contract to cover the work that was done that we agreed to fund, prior to our backing out. Messy."
E-mail:
"MnDOT chooses to portray its 'business decisions' as reasons for doing things differently than the law requires, and claims sole authority for making those business decisions. Unfortunately, that is not how the law is written. We do not serve the public good by acting as MnDOT's shill in a game to play quick and loose with the law so that MnDOT can have its way. I missed somewhere the constitutional or statutory connection between 'what MnDOT wants' and the public good."
Paul Stembler, a contract watchdog for the Minnesota Department of Administration, to his colleagues in 1999.
Memo:
"It appears that Mn/DOT is giving a great deal of this type of work just to Ms. Bacon, especially when there are other people, as well as state employees, who could perform this work."
Heather Pickett, a contract watchdog for the state Department of Administration, to MnDOT in 2001.
E-mail:
"My time is less committed now. ... What this means
is that I will have more time available than I have recently, so yes, I am looking for projects if you have some in mind."
Ed Knoyle, a longtime consultant, writing to MnDOT in 2002.
A former MnDOT official said that consultants, not agency staff members, too often drive the contract process.
.
ABOUT MnDOT
Established: In its current form, 1976. Versions of the department date to 1905.
Purpose: "To develop and implement policies, plans and programs for highways, railroads, commercial waterways, aeronautics, public transit and motor carriers."
Scope: In terms of miles, Minnesota's state highway system is the 19th-largest in the United States.
Budget: $4.6 billion for 2002 and 2003. The gas tax, motor-vehicle registration fees and federal aid provide most of its revenue. The construction and maintenance of roads and bridges account for most of its spending.
Employees: About 5,300.
Leadership: Gov. Pawlenty has selected Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as as transportation commissioner.
MnDOT is state' leading user of consultants
Consultants who provide what the government calls professional and technical services are a growing force. According to the Minnesota Department of Finance, they have received $2.2 billion in state money since 1996, an average of $303 million a year. Among state agencies, the Minnesota Department of Transportation spends the most on such consultants. The top 10:
.
Average annual spending on
consultants in millions, Percent
Agency 1996-2002 of total
Transportation $49.6 26.4%
Investment Board 38.1 12.6
State colleges/
universities 34.3 11.3
Human services 33.7 11.1
Corrections 19.9 6.6
Administration 13.3 4.4
Pollution Control 12.3 4.1
Children, Families
and Learning 8.7 2.9
Health 7.9 2.6
Revenue 7.6 2.5
Dollar amounts not
adjusted for inflation
Agency's use of consultants has doubled
All state agencies
In millions of dollars
(See microfilm for chart.)
MnDOT
In millions of dollars
(See microfilm for chart.)
Source: Department of Finance
.
Playing favorites
After Allen Paulson retired from MnDOT in 1994, he won a string of consulting contracts.
A MnDOT official wanted to extend one of them in 1997 but was told it would require a competitive process. He responded, "I only want to hire Al Paulson," and told a subordinate to make sure the office that solicited proposals understood that.
One agency employee took offense. "Is this incriminating or what?" she wrote in a note on the file.
Paulson won the competition. He said in an interview that he was unaware of the memos.
"I suppose it looks a little bit like a smoking gun," he said. "But I suppose you could also say, well, that's good management to hire the most qualified person . . . and let's not play games and invite a lot of unqualified people to submit applications."
He said his MnDOT experience gives him an edge. "I'd like to think that I'm more efficient than anybody they could get, and perhaps they think that, too," he said.
Legal issues at core of conflicts
The Minnesota Department of Transportation has fought frequently with contract regulators over these three aspects of state law.
No-bid contracts: Except in emergencies, agencies must seek competition for most contracts unless "there is clearly and legitimately only a single source for the goods and services and the commissioner determines that the price has been fairly and reasonably established." (Minnesota statute 16C.10)
Jumping the gun: No payments may lawfully be made to a contractor unless the money has been "encumbered," or reserved. Minnesota law says, "An employee authorizing or making the payment, or taking part in it, and a person receiving any part of the payment, are jointly and severally liable to the state for the amount paid or received." An employee who knowingly violates this law may be fired. (16A.15)
Working without a contract: A contract is not valid and the state is not bound by it unless it has been signed by the company, the department entering the contract, the Department of Administration and the attorney general's office. (16C.05)
E-mail:
"Mn/DOT chose to put me in a situation where I can choose to violate the law, or stop work that has already begun. This is not a choice I can make for you."
_ Paul Stembler, a contract regulator, to his boss in 2001. He was being asked to sign a contract for work that began without approval.
.
INSIDE MnDOT
THE AUDIT TRAIL
Over the years, reviews of the contracting practices of the Minnesota Department of Transportation have identified consistent themes: ethical issues and a lack of competition and oversight.
.
1994
A joint review by MnDOT and the Federal Highway Administration found that:
- Some employees involved in selecting consultants and administering contracts sought or gained work with consultants for themselves, relatives and friends. Other employees believed that former colleagues who went to work for consultants used their connections to MnDOT to gain access and lobby for their firms.
- Consultants were used instead of staff members without a clear explanation for the decisions.
- Contract modifications were seldom rejected and were authorized without documentation of whether they were "clearly cost beneficial _ not payment for inefficiencies, overruns or unnecessary work." This was particularly true for modifications "responding to political or public requests."
1998
A MnDOT and Administration Department audit of the MnDOT's building construction program found that:
- Some contractors were given permission to proceed with work beyond the scope of their original contracts before agreements on the new work were formalized.
- More than half of the contracts reviewed lacked sufficient insurance coverage to protect the state in the event of a loss.
2000
An audit prompted by the Hiawatha light-rail project and commissioned by the Federal Transit Administration found that:
- Work went beyond the terms of existing contracts and was authorized before contracts were finalized, and there were ongoing problems with contractors who were failing to comply with federal prevailing wage requirements.
2001
A review commissioned by the Department of Administration and MnDOT following federal criticism of the light-rail management contract found that:
- Several MnDOT employees said it was "not uncommon" for work on consulting and construction projects to begin before they were fully approved, and that in some cases "backsheet adjustments" were made to contractors for their early work. "The issue has been a recurring one," the report noted.
- At least four consultants "appeared to benefit regularly from sole-source consideration."
2002
An internal MnDOT audit on the use of federal money found that:
- On two projects the agency used "backsheet adjustments" to pay for supplemental work that had been started before contracts were in place. The audit noted that audits for fiscal years 1998 through 2000 had found the same.
On a radio program last summer, Elwyn Tinklenberg, then MnDOT's leader, criticized the Star Tribune's investigation of the agency, saying that "it's all about issues that have already been covered in previous audits. And the audit reports continue to come back: MnDOT had not done anything wrong in its contracting. And as a matter of fact, its contracting procedures are reasonable and appropriate."
PUT THAT PERSON ON THE PAYROLL
Some consultants have become so familiar with MnDOT that concerns were raised about whether they might be construed as agency personnel.
One is Darlene Gorrill. MnDOT records show that since 1997 she has patched together mostly small technical writing contracts worth at least $219,000. That prompted the state Administration Department to warn that if the Internal Revenue Service looked into the matter, it might conclude she was an employee.
Other consultants were employees, which is against the law. For six years in the 1990s, the agency contracted with five of its employees to kill beavers in northwestern Minnesota. A MnDOT accounting technician wanted a reason to end the arrangement. Replied an Administration Department regulator: "Violation of state law and conflict of interest are as good [of] places to start as any."
MnDOT then stopped the practice.
HIRE HIM, OR HIRE NO ONE
In 1998, outgoing MnDOT Commissioner James Denn decided he needed former Democratic U.S. Rep. Tim Penny to coordinate a group of freight shippers advising the agency on policy and investment decisions. Penny was affiliated with the public-relations firm Himle Horner Inc., which got the no-bid, two-year, $32,000 contract. It called for Penny to organize eight meetings.
Apparently, Penny was more important than the job itself. MnDOT wrote in the contract that if it couldn't get him, the contract would be terminated. MnDOT later renewed the contract, saying it wanted Penny in part because he was a "political insider."
NO APPROVAL? START ANYWAY
Audits and contract watchdogs have faulted MnDOT for telling consultants to begin work before all the pieces were in place.
For example, in July 2001, former MnDOT employee Billie Branden got a $53,500 deal to administer drug tests. The agency told her to start before the contract was approved and without setting aside money to cover it.
Its reason? "Funds were not available because of [the] legislature's indecision."
ABOUT THIS SERIES
Star Tribune reporters reviewed hundreds of individual contracts and thousands of government documents, including e-mails, memos and other correspondence, provided under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. They also analyzed two Department of Transportation databases documenting more than 2,000 consulting contracts and interviewed dozens of officials from various state offices and the Legislature, as well as private contractors, lobbyists and others.
Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN)
January 19, 2003, Sunday, Metro Edition
INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT swerves around the law; Agency flouted rules on consultants
Dan Browning; Pat Doyle; Staff Writers
When the Minnesota Department of Transportation lost a $17-an-hour employee, it quickly hired her as a $100-an-hour consultant and gave her a string of contracts, despite repeated warnings from regulators that others should have been considered for the work.
When MnDOT was in a hurry to clean up a site that was to become a maintenance yard for the state's first light-rail line, it put an engineering firm to work without having a binding contract or money in place admittedly violating state law.
Under pressure to build roads and rail, MnDOT increasingly has turned to outside consultants, paying them nearly $60 million last year. Laws and regulations exist to ensure that consulting contracts are reached fairly and competitively and that tax dollars are spent prudently. But the Star Tribune has found that MnDOT the third-biggest spender among state agencies, has played by its own rules.
A review of tens of thousands of government e-mails, memos and other documents shows that MnDOT often has avoided competition when awarding consulting contracts, has doubled or even tripled payments without bids and has broken laws by putting consultants to work before deals were approved or even funded.
Behind the scenes, state regulators have criticized such practices for years, describing the agency as a bully running roughshod over efforts to ensure fair contracting. Auditors, too, have criticized the way MnDOT handles consultants.
Even so, Elwyn Tinklenberg, who led MnDOT for nearly four years before resigning in October, has called the agency's procedures "reasonable and appropriate." During a radio appearance in August, he praised the agency's 5,300 employees, "who are working like crazy to do the best job they can with limited resources to protect the mobility of Minnesota."
But as a new administration settles in, the agency will probably face tougher scrutiny. Gov. Tim Pawlenty said the newspaper's findings raise questions about whether agency officials have been too close to some consultants, and he called some of MnDOT's spending decisions outrageous.
Pawlenty named Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as the agency's new commissioner. As a legislator, Molnau accused MnDOT of misrepresenting costs for the Hiawatha Avenue light-rail line and resisting scrutiny. During last year's campaign, she promised "major reforms."
In a recent interview, she said that employees already are suggesting improvements. "Our goal is accountability," she said. "So when we have contract issues, they will be done according to the standards."
Unlike typical construction work or purchases, consulting jobs need not go to the lowest bidder, agencies may consider a variety of subjective factors. But last week, the legislative auditor reported that six state agencies it surveyed, including MnDOT, broke laws or ignored sound management practices when hiring consultants.
The Department of Administration has the authority to approve or reject most state contracts. Regulators there have said that MnDOT gives them the most trouble; many of their complaints are evident in internal documents.
According to the Minnesota Department of Finance, the state spent $2.2 billion on professional or technical consultants from 1996 through late 2002, an average of about $303 million a year. MnDOT was the biggest spender, accounting for 16 percent of the total.
Some of that money has gone to large companies. Some has gone to individuals. In both situations, regulators have questioned whether it was distributed fairly or in ways that produce a good value for taxpayers.
One contract leads to another
One of those cases involved Carolyn Bacon.
MnDOT managers liked Bacon, who worked for them as an employee-development specialist in the early 1990s. About five months after leaving that $17.25-an-hour job in 1993, she returned part time as a $100-an-hour consultant, running meetings, planning retreats and reorganizing staff. She has received contracts worth $266,270, MnDOT records show.
Minnesota law forbids the hiring of consultants for jobs exceeding $5,000 if state employees are available. In addition, even small contracts are supposed to go through an informal bidding process. Heather Pickett, a contract watchdog for the Minnesota Department of Administration, questioned Bacon's contracts in 2000.
"It appears that Mn/DOT is giving a great deal of this type of work just to Ms. Bacon, especially when there are other people, as well as state employees, who could perform this work. Fair and open competition is the goal when selecting contractors," she wrote in a memo to the agency.
Pickett, a lawyer and former MnDOT employee herself, wrote that in the future, MnDOT would need to explain why it chose Bacon and whether competitors were sought.
Soon after, a $66,100 contract of Bacon's was due to expire. The agency wanted her to continue working so she could help in a staff reorganization. Pickett said she told the department to seek proposals from competitors.
MnDOT did. But meanwhile, it hired Bacon on a separate, no-bid, $5,000 contract to lead a retreat for managers who were planning the reorganization. Four days after the retreat ended, the department chose Bacon for a new contract worth $67,000.
The Administration Department, acting on a tip from a MnDOT source, looked into the contract. It found that:
- Weeks before the proposal was put out for bids, a MnDOT employee already had described the project in her notes as "Carolyn's Contract."
- The advertisement seeking proposals was too "sketchy" for competitors to understand, according to Pickett. She told MnDOT to fix it, but officials disregarded her directive.
- Three consultants submitted proposals. One was tossed for being 11 minutes late. Bacon's proposal, the only one without a time stamp, was accepted.
- The committee that selected Bacon included Richard Stehr, the senior engineer whose division first recruited her as a consultant, and two of his subordinates.
Auditors, regulators and even a former MnDOT manager have criticized such arrangements as a threat to the appearance of impartiality.
Administration Department regulators concluded that MnDOT had "preselected this contractor" even though it went through a competitive process. But they didn't recommend further investigation.
Kent Allin, then an assistant administration commissioner who oversaw state contracting, said there were frequent discussions in his department about the tension between contract regulators and MnDOT. "I'm trying to pick my words carefully," he said. "We were encouraged [not to] air the dirty laundry publicly or with the Legislature."
MnDOT denies committing any improprieties. Nancy Pfeiler, the staff member who described the project as "Carolyn's Contract," said she viewed it as a continuation of Bacon's work with the department.
Bacon said she didn't know why her proposal wasn't time-stamped. She defended her selection, saying she had worked for MnDOT for a long time and was familiar with the reorganization efforts. Stehr agreed: "I mean, she knew what we liked."
Competition is key, and often is avoided.
One type of arrangement criticized by both regulators and auditors is the single-source contract, in which an agency seeks to hire a contractor without competitive bids.
The law allows no-bid contracts if state employees cannot do the jobs and the selected firms are the only ones reasonably available for the work.
But Administration regulators have complained that MnDOT frequently has sought permission to handpick its consultants as much as 41 percent of the time in 2000 often with insufficient reasons.
Gerald Joyce, an Administration regulator, wrote in an internal memo that MnDOT often claimed it lacked time to advertise for competitors. But there often appeared to be enough time, he lamented, "for MnDOT to mishandle the contract and create a situation where work must begin or dire consequences will result, thus negating Admin's authority in enforcing a statute that was enacted for a very good reason, to ensure a fair contracting process that when properly utilized benefits all parties."
On several occasions, regulators said, MnDOT evaded or even broke the law by hiring contractors without competition and putting them to work without approval.
Sometimes MnDOT tries to justify its selections on grounds that it has worked with the companies before and they are familiar with the work, factors that might save money. But regulators say that those alone aren't sufficient reasons.
Even if a company originally competes for a job, the cost of a contract can grow as the agreement is amended, without competition, to add work.
The Star Tribune analyzed two MnDOT databases with nearly 2,100 consulting contracts. The analysis found 150 cases in which the value of amendments equaled or exceeded the amounts of the original contracts. Some involved relatively small deals, such as a $2,590 engineering contract that increased by $11,410. Others were much larger, such as a $750,000 materials testing contract that increased by $2.1 million.
One example involves Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) of St. Paul. In 1998, the department signed a three-year, $750,000 contract with SEH for road-design services. Two years into the contract, it tagged on an amendment for $750,000, citing the heavy workload.
It was among eight SEH contracts with supplements exceeding 60 percent of their original value. Taken together, the original contracts were worth $3.6 million, and the supplements added $3.3 million.
Generally speaking, state law allows agencies to amend contracts to order unexpected, related work or to deal with emergencies that involve public health and safety. MnDOT officials say they expand contracts out of necessity, generally to deal with unexpected problems or to avoid costly construction delays.
But regulators and auditors have noted that the practice can be used to skirt competitive-bidding requirements. They also say that supplements can be a sign that firms are allowed to bid low to win contracts and compensate with no-bid amendments.
Of the 2,100 contracts, nearly half had been amended. The original value of the contracts that were amended totaled $731 million; the amendments themselves totaled $422 million.
MnDOT officials said their databases were designed to track contracts, not to be used for analysis. They said they could not vouch for "the accuracy, reliability, suitability or completeness" of their data and warned that any conclusions drawn from them could be misleading or false.
However, the newspaper fixed many of the problems by clearing up inconsistencies in company names and using hard copies of contracts to fill in blanks. Spot checks afterward found relatively few errors.
A practice that can shut out competitors
Administration watchdogs say that when MnDOT chooses one contractor too often, others can't gain the experience to compete effectively.
Ed Knoyle, a software engineer from Bozeman, Mont., began telecommuting as a consultant for the agency in 1975. His contracts since 1996 have totaled $517,755. Some were awarded without competition.
When MnDOT wanted approvals for no-bid contracts with Knoyle, it typically said he had so much institutional knowledge and technical expertise that he had no peer.
MnDOT also sometimes awarded contracts for amounts just under the threshold that would have required competitive bids. It later amended the contracts, pushing total costs far above the threshold.
Joyce suggested that MnDOT may have been dodging the law in one such case involving Knoyle. In a February 1999 memo, he wrote that a Knoyle contract had started at $24,000, "conveniently below" the $25,000 bidding threshold, but that through amendments, it had nearly tripled in cost and had exceeded the original scope.
He approved the amendment that sparked his comments but said he wanted assurance, for his file, "that the original intent of this contract was never to be this large and all-encompassing. It appears that there may be even more amendments anticipated; if that's the case, I would recommend a new contract or some explanation of why no MnDOT employees can now perform these services."
Later that year, Pickett raised more questions about MnDOT's use of Knoyle. Citing a contract that had grown from $60,000 to $95,000, she said, "This is not an appropriate amendment. The new work is unrelated to the original contract and should have been a separate contract."
In summer 2001, MnDOT found a detour around some of the regulators' challenges. According to an internal memo, managers reviewed contracting rules and found that if they used a special type of contract and kept the amount under $20,000, the agency could hire Knoyle directly without competition. MnDOT officials approved a $10,000 contract for Knoyle to work on a mainframe computer and a separate $15,000 contract for him to work on a database.
Determining when a contract amendment is truly required can be difficult, said Gabriel Bodoczy, a former MnDOT official who oversaw consulting contracts for a decade before retiring in 1999. But he said that too many amendments are driven by consultants and not by the agency's needs.
Knoyle suggested that MnDOT extend one of his contracts a year ago, saying he had run out of work with two-thirds of the money remaining. An agency representative wrote back, asking whether he was looking for something to do.
Knoyle responded: "My time is less committed now. . . . Everybody just looks at each other and wonders who is supposed to be doing what. . . . What this means is that I will have more time available than I have recently, so yes, I am looking for projects if you have some in mind."
MnDOT extended the contract through June of this year.
Knoyle said his string of contracts stems from his ability to find a niche within MnDOT. He said that he follows the money, shifting to new projects as priorities change, but that MnDOT's employee turnover helps, too.
"A lot of times, I'm coming in and educating MnDOT employees how we got to where we are today, because I've been here 20 years and they've been here, you know, six months," he said. "I don't think we intended it to work out that way. It's just kind of how it turned out."
Why break the law? Speed plays a role
In its efforts to accelerate projects, MnDOT insists that it must sometimes violate statutes that prohibit contractors from starting work before money is set aside or before a contract is signed.
"It takes too damned long to get a project developed and on the ground," Tinklenberg said in an interview last spring.
The Star Tribune found dozens of examples in which the agency acknowledged breaking the law by starting work before contracts were signed or money was set aside.
In addition, Pickett complained in an internal document that MnDOT often steps around the rules when it decides it wants a particular consultant. The agency frequently asks for approval of no-bid contracts long after the work has begun, she said, even though "working without the benefit of a contract creates liability for the state."
In 1999, the agency wanted to hire Barr Engineering of Edina to draft a cleanup plan for part of the light-rail corridor. One reason it gave was that the company could produce a "scientifically and politically acceptable product the first time."
The Administration Department initially rejected MnDOT's request for a $125,000 contract, saying the agency had failed to meet criteria for avoiding competitive bidding. MnDOT eventually got permission to negotiate a contract with Barr after explaining that cleanup funds from a settlement with a previous owner were about to expire. The agency then put Barr to work without a binding contract and without dedicated money. MnDOT later acknowledged that it broke the law in doing so.
Barr did not finish the job in time to capture the cleanup funds. A MnDOT official later downplayed the failure, explaining to Administration regulators that the most important reason for moving so quickly was to avoid delays in light-rail construction.
Pickett ultimately signed the contract after much of the work was completed.
In a recent interview she said she was under intense pressure from MnDOT and was mindful that light rail was a priority for David Fisher, the administration commissioner at that time. "He directly said he was in favor of light rail and he wants to help wherever he can to get this thing on the tracks," she said. ". . . You can't fight every battle. You can only push so hard."
MnDOT says it takes risks that are legitimate
Starting work without final approvals can create liability for the state, say auditors and the state attorney general's office. Tinklenberg has said the agency weighs that against the threat of incurring financial penalties for delays or compromising public safety.
In an internal memo that itemized its quarrels with Administration watchdogs, MnDOT said it does not make it common practice to violate contracting laws. "However we realize that there are high priority projects for which we must take the risk and start work to meet delivery deadlines. . . . When long established supplier relationships are in place, we trust consultants to start projects for us."
Ron Gipp, MnDOT's chief auditor, called that "extraordinarily risky" for the state in a review of MnDOT's building contracts that was conducted jointly with Administration. Without a contract between the state and its consultant, the audit says, "neither party is bound to fulfilling any contractual obligation." And if disputes surface, "an increased risk of litigation may result."
MnDOT considered the risk low. It said in one internal document that if the number of violations is rising, "it may indicate that laws and policies need to change", not contracting practices.
Not everyone at MnDOT thinks it has come to that.
Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations, said the agency hasn't tried hard enough to live within the law. "We just blow it off, and that's not my style," he said. "We need to put emphasis on dotting our I's, crossing our T's, in a timely fashion."
He added that if the regular contracting process jeopardizes the department's basic mission, then changes in the law should be considered. "But you've got to give it your best effort, and we haven't done that," he said.
Pawlenty said his administration will review the contracting rules and procedures to see whether they make sense, "because one of the things we're going to do at MnDOT is . . . ask them to try to deliver projects more effectively, more efficiently and quicker. . . . Once we're convinced that the rules are appropriate, we've got to follow them."
An aborted project in Arden Hills illustrates the risk of taking shortcuts. MnDOT was planning to help redevelop the abandoned Army Ammunition Plant there, working with the city, the National Guard and Ramsey County.
Two years ago, a MnDOT project manager broke the law by telling Short Elliott Hendrickson to start design work on the project even though the $60,000 contract wasn't signed. The firm finished the job, but the city pulled out of the arrangement.
Here's how MnDOT explained the situation in a memo to Administration:
"In a nut shell, Mn/DOT was going to participate in this project, the vendor started work and as the contract progressed, partners changed their minds on participation. Mn/DOT backed out of the project and now we have this contract to cover the work that was done that we agreed to fund, prior to our backing out. Messy."
E-mail:
"MnDOT chooses to portray its 'business decisions' as reasons for doing things differently than the law requires, and claims sole authority for making those business decisions. Unfortunately, that is not how the law is written. We do not serve the public good by acting as MnDOT's shill in a game to play quick and loose with the law so that MnDOT can have its way. I missed somewhere the constitutional or statutory connection between 'what MnDOT wants' and the public good."
Paul Stembler, a contract watchdog for the Minnesota Department of Administration, to his colleagues in 1999.
Memo:
"It appears that Mn/DOT is giving a great deal of this type of work just to Ms. Bacon, especially when there are other people, as well as state employees, who could perform this work."
Heather Pickett, a contract watchdog for the state Department of Administration, to MnDOT in 2001.
E-mail:
"My time is less committed now. ... What this means
is that I will have more time available than I have recently, so yes, I am looking for projects if you have some in mind."
Ed Knoyle, a longtime consultant, writing to MnDOT in 2002.
A former MnDOT official said that consultants, not agency staff members, too often drive the contract process.
.
ABOUT MnDOT
Established: In its current form, 1976. Versions of the department date to 1905.
Purpose: "To develop and implement policies, plans and programs for highways, railroads, commercial waterways, aeronautics, public transit and motor carriers."
Scope: In terms of miles, Minnesota's state highway system is the 19th-largest in the United States.
Budget: $4.6 billion for 2002 and 2003. The gas tax, motor-vehicle registration fees and federal aid provide most of its revenue. The construction and maintenance of roads and bridges account for most of its spending.
Employees: About 5,300.
Leadership: Gov. Pawlenty has selected Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as as transportation commissioner.
MnDOT is state' leading user of consultants
Consultants who provide what the government calls professional and technical services are a growing force. According to the Minnesota Department of Finance, they have received $2.2 billion in state money since 1996, an average of $303 million a year. Among state agencies, the Minnesota Department of Transportation spends the most on such consultants. The top 10:
.
Average annual spending on
consultants in millions, Percent
Agency 1996-2002 of total
Transportation $49.6 26.4%
Investment Board 38.1 12.6
State colleges/
universities 34.3 11.3
Human services 33.7 11.1
Corrections 19.9 6.6
Administration 13.3 4.4
Pollution Control 12.3 4.1
Children, Families
and Learning 8.7 2.9
Health 7.9 2.6
Revenue 7.6 2.5
Dollar amounts not
adjusted for inflation
Agency's use of consultants has doubled
All state agencies
In millions of dollars
(See microfilm for chart.)
MnDOT
In millions of dollars
(See microfilm for chart.)
Source: Department of Finance
.
Playing favorites
After Allen Paulson retired from MnDOT in 1994, he won a string of consulting contracts.
A MnDOT official wanted to extend one of them in 1997 but was told it would require a competitive process. He responded, "I only want to hire Al Paulson," and told a subordinate to make sure the office that solicited proposals understood that.
One agency employee took offense. "Is this incriminating or what?" she wrote in a note on the file.
Paulson won the competition. He said in an interview that he was unaware of the memos.
"I suppose it looks a little bit like a smoking gun," he said. "But I suppose you could also say, well, that's good management to hire the most qualified person . . . and let's not play games and invite a lot of unqualified people to submit applications."
He said his MnDOT experience gives him an edge. "I'd like to think that I'm more efficient than anybody they could get, and perhaps they think that, too," he said.
Legal issues at core of conflicts
The Minnesota Department of Transportation has fought frequently with contract regulators over these three aspects of state law.
No-bid contracts: Except in emergencies, agencies must seek competition for most contracts unless "there is clearly and legitimately only a single source for the goods and services and the commissioner determines that the price has been fairly and reasonably established." (Minnesota statute 16C.10)
Jumping the gun: No payments may lawfully be made to a contractor unless the money has been "encumbered," or reserved. Minnesota law says, "An employee authorizing or making the payment, or taking part in it, and a person receiving any part of the payment, are jointly and severally liable to the state for the amount paid or received." An employee who knowingly violates this law may be fired. (16A.15)
Working without a contract: A contract is not valid and the state is not bound by it unless it has been signed by the company, the department entering the contract, the Department of Administration and the attorney general's office. (16C.05)
E-mail:
"Mn/DOT chose to put me in a situation where I can choose to violate the law, or stop work that has already begun. This is not a choice I can make for you."
_ Paul Stembler, a contract regulator, to his boss in 2001. He was being asked to sign a contract for work that began without approval.
.
INSIDE MnDOT
THE AUDIT TRAIL
Over the years, reviews of the contracting practices of the Minnesota Department of Transportation have identified consistent themes: ethical issues and a lack of competition and oversight.
.
1994
A joint review by MnDOT and the Federal Highway Administration found that:
- Some employees involved in selecting consultants and administering contracts sought or gained work with consultants for themselves, relatives and friends. Other employees believed that former colleagues who went to work for consultants used their connections to MnDOT to gain access and lobby for their firms.
- Consultants were used instead of staff members without a clear explanation for the decisions.
- Contract modifications were seldom rejected and were authorized without documentation of whether they were "clearly cost beneficial _ not payment for inefficiencies, overruns or unnecessary work." This was particularly true for modifications "responding to political or public requests."
1998
A MnDOT and Administration Department audit of the MnDOT's building construction program found that:
- Some contractors were given permission to proceed with work beyond the scope of their original contracts before agreements on the new work were formalized.
- More than half of the contracts reviewed lacked sufficient insurance coverage to protect the state in the event of a loss.
2000
An audit prompted by the Hiawatha light-rail project and commissioned by the Federal Transit Administration found that:
- Work went beyond the terms of existing contracts and was authorized before contracts were finalized, and there were ongoing problems with contractors who were failing to comply with federal prevailing wage requirements.
2001
A review commissioned by the Department of Administration and MnDOT following federal criticism of the light-rail management contract found that:
- Several MnDOT employees said it was "not uncommon" for work on consulting and construction projects to begin before they were fully approved, and that in some cases "backsheet adjustments" were made to contractors for their early work. "The issue has been a recurring one," the report noted.
- At least four consultants "appeared to benefit regularly from sole-source consideration."
2002
An internal MnDOT audit on the use of federal money found that:
- On two projects the agency used "backsheet adjustments" to pay for supplemental work that had been started before contracts were in place. The audit noted that audits for fiscal years 1998 through 2000 had found the same.
On a radio program last summer, Elwyn Tinklenberg, then MnDOT's leader, criticized the Star Tribune's investigation of the agency, saying that "it's all about issues that have already been covered in previous audits. And the audit reports continue to come back: MnDOT had not done anything wrong in its contracting. And as a matter of fact, its contracting procedures are reasonable and appropriate."
PUT THAT PERSON ON THE PAYROLL
Some consultants have become so familiar with MnDOT that concerns were raised about whether they might be construed as agency personnel.
One is Darlene Gorrill. MnDOT records show that since 1997 she has patched together mostly small technical writing contracts worth at least $219,000. That prompted the state Administration Department to warn that if the Internal Revenue Service looked into the matter, it might conclude she was an employee.
Other consultants were employees, which is against the law. For six years in the 1990s, the agency contracted with five of its employees to kill beavers in northwestern Minnesota. A MnDOT accounting technician wanted a reason to end the arrangement. Replied an Administration Department regulator: "Violation of state law and conflict of interest are as good [of] places to start as any."
MnDOT then stopped the practice.
HIRE HIM, OR HIRE NO ONE
In 1998, outgoing MnDOT Commissioner James Denn decided he needed former Democratic U.S. Rep. Tim Penny to coordinate a group of freight shippers advising the agency on policy and investment decisions. Penny was affiliated with the public-relations firm Himle Horner Inc., which got the no-bid, two-year, $32,000 contract. It called for Penny to organize eight meetings.
Apparently, Penny was more important than the job itself. MnDOT wrote in the contract that if it couldn't get him, the contract would be terminated. MnDOT later renewed the contract, saying it wanted Penny in part because he was a "political insider."
NO APPROVAL? START ANYWAY
Audits and contract watchdogs have faulted MnDOT for telling consultants to begin work before all the pieces were in place.
For example, in July 2001, former MnDOT employee Billie Branden got a $53,500 deal to administer drug tests. The agency told her to start before the contract was approved and without setting aside money to cover it.
Its reason? "Funds were not available because of [the] legislature's indecision."
ABOUT THIS SERIES
Star Tribune reporters reviewed hundreds of individual contracts and thousands of government documents, including e-mails, memos and other correspondence, provided under the Minnesota Data Practices Act. They also analyzed two Department of Transportation databases documenting more than 2,000 consulting contracts and interviewed dozens of officials from various state offices and the Legislature, as well as private contractors, lobbyists and others.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Top 7 in 2007: Bloggers
Since my top 10 lists were so popular last year, I will have a few "Top 7 in 2007" pieces to finish 2007 strong.
While I have had a great deal of fun writing the past year, I have been blessed to have worked with numerous bloggers across the state.
Keeping with the holiday season, the following bloggers/blogs are in the "Land of the misfit bloggers". These are bloggers who publish excellent content but in many cases, are under exposed in the Minnesota blogosphere.
7. Residual Forces: What? Blueman has a righty blog in his top 7? What the...
Andy tends to tick off both righties and lefties with his work. I don't necessarily agree with most of his work, but I like how he goes about his work on the blog.
6. Developers are Crabgrass: Eric Z's work on exposing the incestial nature of the local government relationships in the Northern suburbs is top notch! His work on Elwyn Tinklenberg's lobbying ties is equally as excellent!
5. Dump Mark Olson: Avidor's work this past year on the Mark Olson domestic violence case and his PRT boondoggle have been excellent and consistent. No one is better with photoshop either! I'm looking forward to Avidor covering the Olson House race in 08.
4. Beyond Headlines and Sound Bites: Tom and the crew at BHSB compliment Avidor's work on Mark Olson and issues within Sherburne County and bring a much needed voice to the race in the 6th.
3. Liberal in the Land of Conservative: Political Muse is the newest edition to the Minnesota Liberal Blogophere and his work has been awesome. Whether it's dissecting another vote by Congresswoman Bachmann, opining on the CD 6 race, or his You Tube work, Political Muse is a welcome edition to the blogging scene and his work is excellent. Plus, he's pimping Joe Biden, which instantly gains my respect for not riding the coat tails of the "Top 3".
The voting for all of the Top 7 was hotly contested. Following the precedence of the 2000 elections, I have not counted the hanging chads. So...
2. I Don't Hate America: A blogging team from Southeastern MN (Winona State University) stepped up the to plate in 2007 and knocked it out of the part. DJ, Jason, Ian and Jared wrote about student issues, local politics, CD 1 and Tim Walz, Al Franken, and a ton of other important issues. I am looking forward to the great stuff IDHA will publish in 2008.
1. Bluestem Prairie: Ollie probably gets the most traffic of our Top 7. Her stuff is just really good. While exclusively covering the happenings in the "Fighting 1st", Ollie offers thought provoking advice to novice bloggers like myself while setting high journalist standards for the Minnesota Blogosphere. Her work in the "Fighting 1st" will pay big dividends for the 08 elections. More important though is her role as a mainstream media watchdog.
So Congrats to those in the "Land of Misfit Bloggers". While your work may go unnoticed (or at least un-cited) by others in the blogosphere, many of us recognize your important work and I just want to say thanks!
2008 is going to be a fun year...
While I have had a great deal of fun writing the past year, I have been blessed to have worked with numerous bloggers across the state.
Keeping with the holiday season, the following bloggers/blogs are in the "Land of the misfit bloggers". These are bloggers who publish excellent content but in many cases, are under exposed in the Minnesota blogosphere.
7. Residual Forces: What? Blueman has a righty blog in his top 7? What the...
Andy tends to tick off both righties and lefties with his work. I don't necessarily agree with most of his work, but I like how he goes about his work on the blog.
6. Developers are Crabgrass: Eric Z's work on exposing the incestial nature of the local government relationships in the Northern suburbs is top notch! His work on Elwyn Tinklenberg's lobbying ties is equally as excellent!
5. Dump Mark Olson: Avidor's work this past year on the Mark Olson domestic violence case and his PRT boondoggle have been excellent and consistent. No one is better with photoshop either! I'm looking forward to Avidor covering the Olson House race in 08.
4. Beyond Headlines and Sound Bites: Tom and the crew at BHSB compliment Avidor's work on Mark Olson and issues within Sherburne County and bring a much needed voice to the race in the 6th.
3. Liberal in the Land of Conservative: Political Muse is the newest edition to the Minnesota Liberal Blogophere and his work has been awesome. Whether it's dissecting another vote by Congresswoman Bachmann, opining on the CD 6 race, or his You Tube work, Political Muse is a welcome edition to the blogging scene and his work is excellent. Plus, he's pimping Joe Biden, which instantly gains my respect for not riding the coat tails of the "Top 3".
The voting for all of the Top 7 was hotly contested. Following the precedence of the 2000 elections, I have not counted the hanging chads. So...
2. I Don't Hate America: A blogging team from Southeastern MN (Winona State University) stepped up the to plate in 2007 and knocked it out of the part. DJ, Jason, Ian and Jared wrote about student issues, local politics, CD 1 and Tim Walz, Al Franken, and a ton of other important issues. I am looking forward to the great stuff IDHA will publish in 2008.
1. Bluestem Prairie: Ollie probably gets the most traffic of our Top 7. Her stuff is just really good. While exclusively covering the happenings in the "Fighting 1st", Ollie offers thought provoking advice to novice bloggers like myself while setting high journalist standards for the Minnesota Blogosphere. Her work in the "Fighting 1st" will pay big dividends for the 08 elections. More important though is her role as a mainstream media watchdog.
So Congrats to those in the "Land of Misfit Bloggers". While your work may go unnoticed (or at least un-cited) by others in the blogosphere, many of us recognize your important work and I just want to say thanks!
2008 is going to be a fun year...
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Strib covers the "freshmen": In their own biased ways
I just read yet another Startribune fluff piece on Congresswoman Bachmann. I find it rather interesting the Startribune's selection of which Bachmann opponent to bring up as well as the insistence that Bachmann's Predidential fondle was a "casual hug". Check out Dump Bachmann, there was nothing casual about Bachmann's hug, it was definitely not an "awkward A" hug!
The Strib described two key Bachmann votes in Congress, the energy bill and a transportation spending bill.
Note the Strib completely ignoring the fact that Bob Olson is a subject matter expert on Sustainable Energy sources.
Yet, when discussing the transportation vote, the Kevin Diaz deliberately discussed Elwyn Tinklenberg.
Juxtapose this with the piece on Congressman Walz. Diaz takes the time to use NRCC stats describing the Congressman's voting record, and as Ollie points out, fails to cite it!
Day gets his anti-immigration talking points from moderate political figures such as the "Minutemen". How moderate is that?
They even allowed Dick Day to take a pot shot at the Congressman. Dick Day? Really? Even after the Strib and Mark Brunswick were caught red handed pimping Dick Day press releases, the Strib lets this guy get in a low blow on Congressman Walz?
And some out there chide bloggers for being careless and free with the facts.
Diaz did catch one key difference between Bachmann and Walz.
But it does beg the question, why no comparison of Bachmann voting along side Kline on bill upon bill, voting against the interests of Minnesota, time and time again.
A comment at Bluestem Prairie summarizes it better than I can...
The Strib described two key Bachmann votes in Congress, the energy bill and a transportation spending bill.
In the waning days of the 2007 Congress, Bachmann also voted against a key piece of Democratic energy legislation that Bush signed, boosting automotive fuel efficiency standards and ethanol production.
To Bachmann, the bill failed to provide much in the way of "new energy," despite its sixfold increase in ethanol use by 2022, a boon for Minnesota farmers.
"Ethanol is something that has had mixed reviews," she said.
Note the Strib completely ignoring the fact that Bob Olson is a subject matter expert on Sustainable Energy sources.
Yet, when discussing the transportation vote, the Kevin Diaz deliberately discussed Elwyn Tinklenberg.
Nowhere, they say, was that more evident than in her vote against a major transportation spending bill this fall that included money for the collapsed Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis and the Northstar commuter rail line, which would run from Minneapolis to Big Lake, near St. Cloud, in the heart of her suburban district.Diaz should read the same archives Blueman reads. If he did, he'd find that Tinklenberg's transportation past is not as rosy as the newer scribes at the Strib and some of Tinklenberg's supporters think.
Bachmann cited an excess of spending, particularly for earmarks that fund pet congressional projects across the nation.
She noted that she authored a "clean" 35W bridge funding bill that was derided and ignored by the new Democratic majority in Congress.
"I'm willing to spend money when it's for infrastructure that's a legitimate duty of government," she said.
The 35W bridge is likely to loom large for Bachmann. The political fallout from the bridge collapse has already drawn in one high-profile opponent, former Minnesota Transportation Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg. He and other DFL critics see Bachmann's position on the bridge as a favor to Bush, who supported the bridge money but wielded a veto threat against the larger transportation bill.
Juxtapose this with the piece on Congressman Walz. Diaz takes the time to use NRCC stats describing the Congressman's voting record, and as Ollie points out, fails to cite it!
The best-known challenger, state Sen. Dick Day of Owatonna, emphasizes taxes and
immigration to make the case that Walz is not the moderate he claimed to be in
his come-out-of-nowhere campaign in 2006.
Day gets his anti-immigration talking points from moderate political figures such as the "Minutemen". How moderate is that?
They even allowed Dick Day to take a pot shot at the Congressman. Dick Day? Really? Even after the Strib and Mark Brunswick were caught red handed pimping Dick Day press releases, the Strib lets this guy get in a low blow on Congressman Walz?
And some out there chide bloggers for being careless and free with the facts.
Diaz did catch one key difference between Bachmann and Walz.
"It forces me to be responsive to my constituents," Walz said. "Not just politically, but to be aware of the reality of where they're at."With Bachmann's lack of constituent outreach, it's tough for her to be as responsive to her constituents, to understand the reality faced daily by residents in the 6th.
But it does beg the question, why no comparison of Bachmann voting along side Kline on bill upon bill, voting against the interests of Minnesota, time and time again.
A comment at Bluestem Prairie summarizes it better than I can...
Well said! So while Congresswoman Bachmann continues with her free pass from the Strib scribes, Congressman Walz keeps working! I'll take work over fluff everyday!Walz has voted on a number of key votes against the Democratic majority … which in my mind says that he is an “independent leader for Southern Minnesota”.
And in reality with 1186 roll call votes to date, how many are truly important? Diaz should have pointed to just the most significant votes. Why didn’t he compare how Bachmann/Ellison/Walz approached funding and response for disasters in the state … we’ve had a few … it should have been easy but not as easy as interviewing a few critics who can supply all the ammo needed.
As a point of comparison, Diaz should look at Bachmann. There are many examples where she (and John Kline) voted in opposition to a majority of Republicans … so Walz is outside Minnesota values but Bachmann doesn’t even get a mention even though she is so far outside that she even Republicans don’t agree with her on the issues.
Lastly, this comment by Dick Day "Out of all the people who have represented the district in recent decades, Walz is by far the most liberal," Yeah, Walz is so “liberal” that he voted FOR FISCAL DISCIPLINE after six years of Gil Gutknecht voting for one-year ATM patches that has helped explode the National Debt. Responsible fiscal management says that you have to balance tax cuts with revenues (or spending cuts) … Gutknecht did neither.
Tinklenberg makes National Blog...
and it's not a good thing! H/T to Tom!
From The Rothenberg Political Report
Greatest Indecision by a Candidate/Non-Candidate Nominees:
I'd love to read what they'd have to say about Tinklenberg's inconsistency on the endorsement!
From The Rothenberg Political Report
Greatest Indecision by a Candidate/Non-Candidate Nominees:
• Rep. Tom Udall (D-N.M.)
• Elwyn Tinklenberg (D-Minn.)
• Steve Stivers (R-Ohio)
• Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.)
• Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.)
The winner: Almost an impossible choice here. Some couldn't make a decision at all. Some kept changing their minds. How do these folks ever buy furniture? But the award has to go to Tinklenberg, who for the second cycle in a row reversed himself. This time, he has reversed himself twice, and the year isn’t over yet.
I'd love to read what they'd have to say about Tinklenberg's inconsistency on the endorsement!
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
Eric Z on Tinklenberg's lobbying ways
Eric Z has a strongly worded post on Elwyn Tinklenberg's lobbying ways, from Albertville City Council minutes.
One thing stood out to me, on the heels of Elwyn Tinklenberg saying he does not lobby on a Federal Level at the December SD 19 meeting.
It's interesting to note that Tinklenberg is working in conjunction with SEH Engineering. Recall who SEH is, they got some non-competitive bid contracts during Elwyn's tenure as MnDOT commissioner.
And also recall that SEH executives contributed over $3000 to Elwyn's campaign in 06. I sure can't wait until Tinklenberg's first 08 FEC report comes out!
The minutes from the Albertville City Council meeting are interesting.
Do you have to register as a lobbyist if you can just walk in the front door of your Congressional buddies? Just curious. I think this answers the question that Elwyn lied to the SD 19 folks about.
I agree with Eric's sentiment on why this is important to get out in the open now.
With all of this out there on Tinklenberg, if he were to win the endorsement or simply not abide by it (my guess is 75-25 Tinklenberg is set for a primary), he's Mark Kennedy irrelevant by mid August.
One thing stood out to me, on the heels of Elwyn Tinklenberg saying he does not lobby on a Federal Level at the December SD 19 meeting.
City Administrator Kruse presented opening comments stating that the purpose of the workshop was: to seek Council direction for an I-94 layout, which staff will take to the I-94 Implementation Task Force; to ask the Council to endorse this layout; and to seek Federal Funding. The Tinklenberg Group will update the Council on their efforts obtaining Federal Funding, and discuss their strategy for the 2007 funding cycle. SEH will review several layouts and seek concurrence on a preferred layout. SEH will discuss associated cost to complete a preliminary design or staff approved layout. (Emphasis added)
It's interesting to note that Tinklenberg is working in conjunction with SEH Engineering. Recall who SEH is, they got some non-competitive bid contracts during Elwyn's tenure as MnDOT commissioner.
One example involves Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) of St. Paul. In 1998, the department signed a three-year, $750,000 contract with SEH for road-design services. Two years into the contract, it tagged on an amendment for $750,000, citing the heavy workload. It was among eight SEH contracts with supplements exceeding 60 percent of their original value.
Taken together, the original contracts were worth $3.6 million, and the supplements added $3.3 million. Two years ago, a MnDOT project manager broke the law by telling Short Elliott Hendrickson to start design work on the project even though the $60,000 contract wasn't signed. The firm finished the job, but the city pulled out of the arrangement.
And also recall that SEH executives contributed over $3000 to Elwyn's campaign in 06. I sure can't wait until Tinklenberg's first 08 FEC report comes out!
The minutes from the Albertville City Council meeting are interesting.
The Tinklenberg Group will proceed to seek Federal Funding for the I-94 Project at an estimated cost of $3,000 per month.
S.E.H. and the Tinklenberg Group will collaborate and put together a Public Involvement Plan whereby a newsletter or brochure will be sent to Albertville residents and specific business owners that would be assessed and affected by the proposed I-94 Project.
Do you have to register as a lobbyist if you can just walk in the front door of your Congressional buddies? Just curious. I think this answers the question that Elwyn lied to the SD 19 folks about.
I agree with Eric's sentiment on why this is important to get out in the open now.
Can you imagine the NRCC hate mailings about the man's baggage, and how Brodkorb will be blogging? It will be a slaughter - and perhaps one of the nastiest elections in State history. Do you suppose there's any truth to the stories that he is Jim Oberstar's protege? With influence that way, on the House Transportation Committee? Again, what is the man selling, to get all those consulting contracts? Do you think the GOP will not be asking such questions on the ramp-up to November 2008?
With all of this out there on Tinklenberg, if he were to win the endorsement or simply not abide by it (my guess is 75-25 Tinklenberg is set for a primary), he's Mark Kennedy irrelevant by mid August.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Bob Olson Challenger Elwyn Tinklenberg Prominent Player in Strib Series
Dump Bachmann covered a story about Tinklenberg standing up for the safety zone around the Minneapolis St Paul International Airport.
From the Stib story:
Actually, the fact checkers at the Strib missed the fact that Tinklenberg actually resigned his position in October 2002.
Amidst the turmoil at MnDOT, it leaves me wondering if his resignation had anything to do with the problems with non-competitive bid contracts, exorbitant spending, and other problems that plagued the powerful state agency.
As you know by now, the Startribune had a 3 day series that featured 5 stories on the problems at MnDOT. Elwyn Tinklenberg is a prominent player in each of these stories.
Previous Blueman MnDOT stories are up now.
The final story in MnDOT saga appeared on Janary 21, 2003 and was titled, "INSIDE MnDOT; Motivation can be costly at MnDOT; Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up." The story describes questionable spending practices at MnDOT
Recall Tinklenberg's no bid contracts at MnDOT. And he thinks he can hold Congresswoman Bachmann accountable?
While communication between the sexes is important in workplaces, it would appear to at least me that the spending was a bit exorbitant. $14,000 an hour? Really?
They lost $664,231 on these conferences? Providing a "free ride" for your favorite consultants and other vendors is problematic. $5,000 for someone to tell dry jokes?
And then the Alaska trek...
A then recently elected Governor Pawlenty called out MnDOT on these spending practices. He chided MnDOT leadership for the size of the Alaska delegation as well as their own conference. We now know that years later, MnDOT still has significant problems. It will be interesting to find out if MnDOT has fixed it's non-competitive bid contract situation.
MnDOT hired comedians to come to their meetings!
The $200 is not the big issue here. Billing a comedian as a motivational speaker and the comedian coming back and saying that MnDOT did it "for the billing" raises numerous questions for me.
Spending $2900 in employee time and expenses for a 9 1/2 minute videotape called "Tinklenberg Zone" is not that big of an issue either, when viewed as a single case of wasteful spending. However, when viewed as a whole, its clear that MnDOT under Elwyn Tinklenberg wasted a lot of taxpayer dollars.
The series of Startribune stories from January 2003 is damaging. Especially for someone running on holding Congresswoman Bachmann accountable. It's also damaging because it paints Tinklenberg as a prominent member of the "good ole boys club" of Minnesota politics. It will not play well in the 6th.
Bob Olson is not a member of the "good ole boys club". He's the only candidate running in the 6th that has actually helped our youth go to college and assisted people in buying homes.
He actually knows something about Sustainable and Renewable energy sources.
He will be able to go toe to toe with Congresswoman Bachmann on taxation issues, as he has served as a tax attorney for about 30 years.
Most importantly though, you know where Bob stands on the issues. He does not constantly tweak his position (DFL endorsement, war in Iraq, choice, gay marriage issues) to obtain one more vote. He's honest and genuine and not a flip flopper!
Soon, I will post the entire MnDOT series. I encourage each of you to spend some time and read the MnDOT series, it's the other Startribune story/stories that Elwyn Tinklenberg is a "prominent player" in, and a series some will not want you to read.
From the Stib story:
But Tinklenberg's tenure ended when Pawlenty was inaugurated in January 2003.
Molnau replaced him.
Actually, the fact checkers at the Strib missed the fact that Tinklenberg actually resigned his position in October 2002.
Amidst the turmoil at MnDOT, it leaves me wondering if his resignation had anything to do with the problems with non-competitive bid contracts, exorbitant spending, and other problems that plagued the powerful state agency.
As you know by now, the Startribune had a 3 day series that featured 5 stories on the problems at MnDOT. Elwyn Tinklenberg is a prominent player in each of these stories.
Previous Blueman MnDOT stories are up now.
The final story in MnDOT saga appeared on Janary 21, 2003 and was titled, "INSIDE MnDOT; Motivation can be costly at MnDOT; Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up." The story describes questionable spending practices at MnDOT
Recall Tinklenberg's no bid contracts at MnDOT. And he thinks he can hold Congresswoman Bachmann accountable?
Last year (note the article is from 2003), for instance, the 1,200 or so who attended the conference at the Radisson South Hotel were treated to an hourlong speech titled "The Rise, Fall and Rise of Harley-Davidson." The speaker, a marketing consultant, was paid $10,750.
A speech the next day was titled "Build a Bridge . . ." But it had nothing to do with concrete and steel. Rather, taxpayers spent $14,045 for engineers to spend an hour with a motivational speaker who writes about communication between the sexes.
While communication between the sexes is important in workplaces, it would appear to at least me that the spending was a bit exorbitant. $14,000 an hour? Really?
MnDOT has increased its spending on the event by about 61 percent, from $136,173 in 1999 to $219,300 last year, according to records obtained by the Star Tribune under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.During the past four conventions, MnDOT spent a total of $664,231 more than it recovered from vendors' fees and other income, records show.
Keynote speaker contracts for the four years totaled $114,430. Some examples from the 2001 conference:
- $11,650 for a former ski champion's motivational speech.
- $12,950 for a team-building consultant who talked about ways managers can use fun to revitalize workers.
- $5,000 for a speech on "Intelligent Risk Taking."
MnDOT has canceled its 2003 conference, citing budget constraints.
They lost $664,231 on these conferences? Providing a "free ride" for your favorite consultants and other vendors is problematic. $5,000 for someone to tell dry jokes?
And then the Alaska trek...
In addition to its own conferences, MnDOT participates in the annual conference of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).The 2002 conference was held in Alaska in October. The agency initially sought permission from the Department of Employee Relations to send 25 people, noting that Minnesota would be host of the conference this year.
Bill Eisele, a division manager in the Employee Relations Department, cautioned MnDOT about sending so many. "I realize the necessity of your [conference] committee chairs going since you will be hosting the conference next year. However, have you considered the negative press if this ever got out?" he wrote in a July e-mail to Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations.
Eisele said MnDOT's travel request was the largest that he had encountered. MnDOT officials eventually persuaded the Employee Relations Department to authorize travel for as many as three dozen employees, he said.MnDOT sent 34 people at a cost of about $100,000, records show.
A then recently elected Governor Pawlenty called out MnDOT on these spending practices. He chided MnDOT leadership for the size of the Alaska delegation as well as their own conference. We now know that years later, MnDOT still has significant problems. It will be interesting to find out if MnDOT has fixed it's non-competitive bid contract situation.
MnDOT hired comedians to come to their meetings!
For instance, MnDOT paid $200 to Jerome Mayne for a 20-minute comedy routine during an employee meeting in December 2001.
"It was so dry. I mean, light rail, budget and all this," Mayne said about the meeting. "And then here's Jerome coming in, in the middle of the morning, trying to make 'em laugh. It was one of the hardest gigs I've ever done."
Although his contract says he was hired as a motivational speaker, Mayne said his appearance was strictly a stand-up gig. "I think they did that for billing," he said.
The $200 is not the big issue here. Billing a comedian as a motivational speaker and the comedian coming back and saying that MnDOT did it "for the billing" raises numerous questions for me.
Spending $2900 in employee time and expenses for a 9 1/2 minute videotape called "Tinklenberg Zone" is not that big of an issue either, when viewed as a single case of wasteful spending. However, when viewed as a whole, its clear that MnDOT under Elwyn Tinklenberg wasted a lot of taxpayer dollars.
The series of Startribune stories from January 2003 is damaging. Especially for someone running on holding Congresswoman Bachmann accountable. It's also damaging because it paints Tinklenberg as a prominent member of the "good ole boys club" of Minnesota politics. It will not play well in the 6th.
Bob Olson is not a member of the "good ole boys club". He's the only candidate running in the 6th that has actually helped our youth go to college and assisted people in buying homes.
He actually knows something about Sustainable and Renewable energy sources.
He will be able to go toe to toe with Congresswoman Bachmann on taxation issues, as he has served as a tax attorney for about 30 years.
Most importantly though, you know where Bob stands on the issues. He does not constantly tweak his position (DFL endorsement, war in Iraq, choice, gay marriage issues) to obtain one more vote. He's honest and genuine and not a flip flopper!
Soon, I will post the entire MnDOT series. I encourage each of you to spend some time and read the MnDOT series, it's the other Startribune story/stories that Elwyn Tinklenberg is a "prominent player" in, and a series some will not want you to read.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Bob Olson in the news!
So while the Startribune and other mainstream media outlets continue to ignore the 6th CD and Bob Olson's run for Congress, smaller media organizations are taking notice!
Bob Olson featured in St. Croix Valley Press
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
Olson hopes to take on Bachmann for Sixth District congressional seat
Link to full article
Olson can talk knowledgeably about many political issues, but, as the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Foundation, his eyes really light up when he talks about energy.
"I believe the most critical thing is to break our dependence on foreign oil," he says. "We're sending $1.3 billion a day out of this country on oil alone.
"Things like children's health care — we can afford that," he says. "We'll be able to afford a lot of things when we do things to implement sustainable energy."
Olson would like to see Congress invest $30 billion a year in sustainable energy over the next 10 years for two causes: to offer loan guarantees to a broad spectrum of borrowers to develop such things as wind turbines, and for tax incentives for switchgrass — for those developing new equipment that's affordable to farmers. "Switchgrass can be grown on substandard land, so it doesn't drive up food costs," says Olson.
He also sees hope for energy from wind and hydrogen. "We can move as quickly from oil, gas and coal as we did a century ago from horse and buggy," he says.
"We don't need to be dependent on Mideast oil," he says. "We could have jobs created in the U.S." One of his goals would be to have two wind turbine plants in the 6th District. He'd also like to see three hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the Nicollet Mall and at the U of M.
In his tax attorney hat, he also can speak to taxes, and he doesn't understand how the middle class can vote for Republicans "while they're picking their pockets."
Olson says the '81 tax cuts were the greatest shift of wealth away from the middle class, the '86 tax cuts made it worse, and the Bush tax cuts "pulled out all the stops."
"People making $30,000 in taxable earned income pay 66 percent more (in taxes) on the next dollar than someone making more than $300,000, and living off capital gains and dividends," says Olson.
"The only way to afford to vote Republican," he says, "is if you make over $300,000, live off capital gains or are about to inherit $4 million from mom and dad.
"We need to change things so the middle class benefits, like health care for everyone, and we can afford it," he says.
He knows he has strong views that are in opposition to those of Congresswoman Bachmann.
"There's a definite difference on SCHIP," he says. "We have 47 million without health insurance — 85,000 kids in Minnesota alone.
"And Mrs. Bachmann has been an advocate for Bush's war in Iraq. That (attack) made as much sense as it would have to attack India or China after Pearl Harbor," says Olson. "We attacked our enemy's enemy."
He would also like to see the government fund its educational mandates. "The current 'incentives' are punishment," he says. In football, he says, if a guy got hurt, you didn't have him do wind sprints.
"Good quality, well-funded education is a strength," he says. "It's hard to invest too much in education."
Unlike Bachmann, Olson supports the North Star Line, and he's a strong environmentalist.
"There's enough wind energy 35 miles on each side of I-90 from Sioux Falls past Rochester that it could be the new Saudi Arabia of sustainable energy," he says, "And the Sixth District could be the new Silicon Valley."
"My knowledge as a tax lawyer will serve me well," says Olson. "I don't see Ms. Bachmann caring about the middle class. She tows the line for the wealthy, and I'm not sure she knows the difference."
Bob Olson featured in St. Croix Valley Press
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
Olson hopes to take on Bachmann for Sixth District congressional seat
Link to full article
Olson can talk knowledgeably about many political issues, but, as the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Foundation, his eyes really light up when he talks about energy.
"I believe the most critical thing is to break our dependence on foreign oil," he says. "We're sending $1.3 billion a day out of this country on oil alone.
"Things like children's health care — we can afford that," he says. "We'll be able to afford a lot of things when we do things to implement sustainable energy."
Olson would like to see Congress invest $30 billion a year in sustainable energy over the next 10 years for two causes: to offer loan guarantees to a broad spectrum of borrowers to develop such things as wind turbines, and for tax incentives for switchgrass — for those developing new equipment that's affordable to farmers. "Switchgrass can be grown on substandard land, so it doesn't drive up food costs," says Olson.
He also sees hope for energy from wind and hydrogen. "We can move as quickly from oil, gas and coal as we did a century ago from horse and buggy," he says.
"We don't need to be dependent on Mideast oil," he says. "We could have jobs created in the U.S." One of his goals would be to have two wind turbine plants in the 6th District. He'd also like to see three hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the Nicollet Mall and at the U of M.
In his tax attorney hat, he also can speak to taxes, and he doesn't understand how the middle class can vote for Republicans "while they're picking their pockets."
Olson says the '81 tax cuts were the greatest shift of wealth away from the middle class, the '86 tax cuts made it worse, and the Bush tax cuts "pulled out all the stops."
"People making $30,000 in taxable earned income pay 66 percent more (in taxes) on the next dollar than someone making more than $300,000, and living off capital gains and dividends," says Olson.
"The only way to afford to vote Republican," he says, "is if you make over $300,000, live off capital gains or are about to inherit $4 million from mom and dad.
"We need to change things so the middle class benefits, like health care for everyone, and we can afford it," he says.
He knows he has strong views that are in opposition to those of Congresswoman Bachmann.
"There's a definite difference on SCHIP," he says. "We have 47 million without health insurance — 85,000 kids in Minnesota alone.
"And Mrs. Bachmann has been an advocate for Bush's war in Iraq. That (attack) made as much sense as it would have to attack India or China after Pearl Harbor," says Olson. "We attacked our enemy's enemy."
He would also like to see the government fund its educational mandates. "The current 'incentives' are punishment," he says. In football, he says, if a guy got hurt, you didn't have him do wind sprints.
"Good quality, well-funded education is a strength," he says. "It's hard to invest too much in education."
Unlike Bachmann, Olson supports the North Star Line, and he's a strong environmentalist.
"There's enough wind energy 35 miles on each side of I-90 from Sioux Falls past Rochester that it could be the new Saudi Arabia of sustainable energy," he says, "And the Sixth District could be the new Silicon Valley."
"My knowledge as a tax lawyer will serve me well," says Olson. "I don't see Ms. Bachmann caring about the middle class. She tows the line for the wealthy, and I'm not sure she knows the difference."
Blueman Live...KRWC 1360 in Buffalo
I'll make my first radio appearance, post election cycle today from 11:08 to about 11:30 on KRWC, AM 1360 in Buffalo.
I'll talk a little bit about blogging, the Wright County DFL, and Precinct Caucuses.
Enjoy!
I'll talk a little bit about blogging, the Wright County DFL, and Precinct Caucuses.
Enjoy!
Part III: Another interesting Startribune article
Check out Part I and Part II of the series in previous posts, as well as a post supporting Part II.
The past few days, I have been posting from the archives of the Startribune, in a direct response to some who have questioned the role of bloggers while using a recent Startribune story to make their candidate look good.
The bloggers I work with, Bluestem Prairie, I Don't Hate America, Dump Bachmann, Liberal in the Land of Conservative, MnBlue, Beyond Sound bites and Head lines and others, put a great deal of effort into their work. The amount of diligence that my colleagues place on getting a story right and providing perspectives that miss the mainstream media outlets is invaluable.
Anyway, thanks everyone...and now back to the story.
The January 21, 2003 Startibune published a story titled "INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT has worked hard to spin its image; It kept a tight grip on public information and a close eye on its adversaries. One top official suggested deleting records."
What's the saying about the worst part of a scandal? Something about the cover-up right? Recall yesterday's account of the $32 million LRT contract, for a $20 million job, that eventually was accomplished through a $15.4 million bid.
Destroying public documents? I thought it was bad enough that government paper shredding has increased 600 fold since the Bush Administration took office. Needless to say, these actions are not consistent with strong moral leaders.
So while a Federal Judge handed down a decision to ensure a competitive bid process, MnDOT leaders worked feverishly behind the scenes to get a specific firm, the contract they wanted.
So...either Mr Tinklenberg (who also resigned in October 2002) was completely oblivious to the fraudulent activities within his office or he allowed this to happen. Either way, the amount of waste, fraud and abuse at the upper echelons of MnDOT is disturbing.
MnDOT leaders supported plans to suppress protesters upset about the LRT and Highway 55, specifically how it could disturb American Indian places of honor.
MnDOT leaders also tried to slow information flow from the agency by coming up with a "Speaking with one voice" initiative. Leaders across the state balked at the idea, citing examples that they had communicated well with local leaders for decades.
The protest was merited. Sending someone from the Twin Cities to quell a transportation issue in Bovy, or other small Minnesota towns seems odd.
So Tinklenberg, in light of numerous problems at MnDOT, supported, in essence, a gag order.
Nice...
Would it surprise you that some of Tinklenberg's subordinates at MnDOT had concerns over some of his relationships?
While that may be true, why would the MnDOT spokeswoman halt someone (a Senior MnDOT engineer) from trying to say Tinklenberg had not given any special consideration?
The past few days, I have been posting from the archives of the Startribune, in a direct response to some who have questioned the role of bloggers while using a recent Startribune story to make their candidate look good.
The bloggers I work with, Bluestem Prairie, I Don't Hate America, Dump Bachmann, Liberal in the Land of Conservative, MnBlue, Beyond Sound bites and Head lines and others, put a great deal of effort into their work. The amount of diligence that my colleagues place on getting a story right and providing perspectives that miss the mainstream media outlets is invaluable.
Anyway, thanks everyone...and now back to the story.
The January 21, 2003 Startibune published a story titled "INSIDE MnDOT; MnDOT has worked hard to spin its image; It kept a tight grip on public information and a close eye on its adversaries. One top official suggested deleting records."
What's the saying about the worst part of a scandal? Something about the cover-up right? Recall yesterday's account of the $32 million LRT contract, for a $20 million job, that eventually was accomplished through a $15.4 million bid.
When ethical concerns threatened federal light-rail funding a few years ago, the Minnesota Department of Transportation swung into high gear.
Publicly, the department pledged to correct an apparent conflict of interest involving a $32 million contract.
Behind the scenes, a top MnDOT official contemplated another strategy: a campaign that included shifting blame, criticizing federal authorities and destroying public documents on the matter.
Destroying public documents? I thought it was bad enough that government paper shredding has increased 600 fold since the Bush Administration took office. Needless to say, these actions are not consistent with strong moral leaders.
So while a Federal Judge handed down a decision to ensure a competitive bid process, MnDOT leaders worked feverishly behind the scenes to get a specific firm, the contract they wanted.
In a summary of the discussion, David Warner, a Parsons Brinckerhoff executive, wrote that LaBau had wondered whether the company "could somehow cause" a locally prominent person to write a letter to the editor or an opinion article about the decision. The message would be, in effect, that "it's unfortunate that the judge felt compelled to make the decision he did due to the heavy-handed action of a large Federal bureau threatening a local agency with the withdrawal of funding."
Warner added that LaBau hoped Parsons Brinckerhoff would submit a new bid. (It didn't.)Warner sent LaBau a copy of his summary for her to review. She responded with an e-mail urging caution:
"Dave, Just a few thoughts, anything written down can be discoverable under data privacy act so you might want to delete the part about MnDOT hoping you will participate in a re-bid. Someone might interpret that as another bizarre basis for 'unfair advantage.' That might be better left for a phone call.
"I would also appreciate it if you would not put in writing about the Opinion Editorial Piece," she wrote, explaining that it could upset the Metropolitan Council, which influences transportation planning in the Twin Cities area. "I am a little out on the limb and MC likes to shake it whenever they are not getting their way."
She added: "I will be deleting your message and the response from my mailbox and my delete file. Nothing like operating with paranoia!"
LaBau's note to Warner was preserved in an agency computer backup.
LaBau, who resigned in October, declined repeated requests for interviews.
So...either Mr Tinklenberg (who also resigned in October 2002) was completely oblivious to the fraudulent activities within his office or he allowed this to happen. Either way, the amount of waste, fraud and abuse at the upper echelons of MnDOT is disturbing.
MnDOT leaders supported plans to suppress protesters upset about the LRT and Highway 55, specifically how it could disturb American Indian places of honor.
MnDOT leaders also tried to slow information flow from the agency by coming up with a "Speaking with one voice" initiative. Leaders across the state balked at the idea, citing examples that they had communicated well with local leaders for decades.
The protest was merited. Sending someone from the Twin Cities to quell a transportation issue in Bovy, or other small Minnesota towns seems odd.
John Bray, who was a public-affairs director for northeastern Minnesota, tried to explain that knowledgeable employees in his regional offices had been answering questions successfully for the agency for years.
"In other words, we do not have, and would not want to have, a hard and fast rule or bureaucratic maze regarding 'who can talk to the media' and this open forum relationship has well served us for nearly twenty years," he wrote in a memo.
Beaudin Klein responded, calling Bray's comments "unacceptable" and stressing that the new policy was not open to debate.
"This decision was made at the executive level and has the full support of the commissioner," she wrote. "I am seriously disappointed that a communications person is objecting to having a policy in place that will help the agency communicate with one voice."
So Tinklenberg, in light of numerous problems at MnDOT, supported, in essence, a gag order.
Nice...
Would it surprise you that some of Tinklenberg's subordinates at MnDOT had concerns over some of his relationships?
More recently, a top public-relations official tried to stop a senior MnDOT engineer, Richard Stehr, from talking publicly about an e-mail he wrote to a subordinate, Tim Henkel.
Henkel had written to Stehr in fall 2001 about concerns that he and his colleagues had regarding Philip Cohen, a lobbyist and former business associate of Tinklenberg's. He noted that Cohen was meeting with the commissioner and feared that he was using his influence to get around the agency's normal procedures and advance improvements to Hwy. 10 in the northwest Twin Cities suburbs.
In an e-mail, Stehr replied that Cohen would "take advantage of his friendship with the Commissioner to secure meetings with the Commissioner to discuss Phil's agenda. We are not going to stop that." He told Henkel "to expect that politics will influence the outcome."
MnDOT declined to make the authors of the e-mail exchange available individually to elaborate on their correspondence. Instead, the agency offered a group interview with a public-relations officer present.
MnDOT spokeswoman Lucy Kender interrupted when a Star Tribune reporter asked Stehr in an interview on another subject whether he cared to comment about the e-mails.
"No, he doesn't," Kender said.
Stehr seemed surprised by the interruption. Kender continued: "Because, Dick, you don't."
Stehr started to respond anyway, and Kender cut him off: "No! Dick, I advise you not to answer that because we've gone around on this several times." She said the agency would reply in writing. Stehr said he didn't mind answering, and Kender finally relented. "I'm the adviser. I can only go that far," she said.
Stehr said that Tinklenberg never asked him to give special consideration to Cohen or anyone else.
In a separate interview, Tinklenberg said: "The proof was in the pudding. . . . [The project] was not changed."
While that may be true, why would the MnDOT spokeswoman halt someone (a Senior MnDOT engineer) from trying to say Tinklenberg had not given any special consideration?
Comment on "another interesting Startribune article"
Eric Z posted an interesting comment, interesting enough to merit front page exposure.
Enjoy!
Blue Man, I find that repugnant. First, which MN 6 airport is he hyping, the one in Blaine? Where Wellstone took that flight? That is not a good place. It led to sorrow.
Beyond that, Tink brings home the Bacon, how's that for a campaign slogan. You are DFL, so you are going easy. Can you imagine Brodkorb and the mailings RNCC will be flooding the district with?Bacon/Pork/ graphics to go with it.And that contracting revolving door, you do know what Tink is doing now, don't you? Yup. Consulting for cash.
Jodie Ruehle - did you see that name show up in any stuff?Jodie is a Tinklenberg Groupie, a worker bee perhaps, perhaps bigger in the hive. But Tink contracts the cash, Jodie gets the appraisals, as in, J. Scott Renne, late appraiser for Community National Bank, for Ramsey Town Center work; and Jodie gets the Lake State Realty Services, Inc., to appraise buildings/land along US Highway 10. And Bruce Nedegaard is involved in that, and Jim Deal, and Brodkorb had his shot at Deal last election cycle. The failed Ramsey Town Center situation involved an RTC LLC, where the accountant/treasurer has already pled to a felony, and there's a lawsuit where defendants want to delay things because they have letters indicating they are potential targets of the feds.Nedegaard, dead, Renne, dead, Ramsey Town Center Dead. No wonder they're putting the county morgue there, all the death and stench.
So, you or any readers have any information about Jodie Ruehle? Jodie was involved in the pricing and sales for RALF money, of Highway 10 properties. One of the former Community National Bank people was reported as going to work for Jim Deal, and now may be a federal grand jury target; something like that, Dave Orrick is the Pioneer Press person who's reported a lot about the Ramsey Town Center. Lora Pabst now for Strib. Pat Tepoorten, for the ESM north end paper in North Branch.
What's to come of it? I do not know. A tempest in a teapot, or a big awful splat to come after the unions ramrod the Tink as DFL standard bearer? Tink should know. If it's even a chance to go splat, he should fall on his sword for the party. Step aside and let Bob Olson, the clean energy advocate carry the banner.
We wait. We see. In any event, that post was a great piece of coverage, Blue Man. Did you have to use the WayBack Machine? Or is it all still online via regular access?
I tried a Google of "Jodie Ruehle" and drew a blank. East Bethel City Council Minutes, Feb. 15, 2006. There have to be bigger footprints than that.
Enjoy!
Blue Man, I find that repugnant. First, which MN 6 airport is he hyping, the one in Blaine? Where Wellstone took that flight? That is not a good place. It led to sorrow.
Beyond that, Tink brings home the Bacon, how's that for a campaign slogan. You are DFL, so you are going easy. Can you imagine Brodkorb and the mailings RNCC will be flooding the district with?Bacon/Pork/ graphics to go with it.And that contracting revolving door, you do know what Tink is doing now, don't you? Yup. Consulting for cash.
Jodie Ruehle - did you see that name show up in any stuff?Jodie is a Tinklenberg Groupie, a worker bee perhaps, perhaps bigger in the hive. But Tink contracts the cash, Jodie gets the appraisals, as in, J. Scott Renne, late appraiser for Community National Bank, for Ramsey Town Center work; and Jodie gets the Lake State Realty Services, Inc., to appraise buildings/land along US Highway 10. And Bruce Nedegaard is involved in that, and Jim Deal, and Brodkorb had his shot at Deal last election cycle. The failed Ramsey Town Center situation involved an RTC LLC, where the accountant/treasurer has already pled to a felony, and there's a lawsuit where defendants want to delay things because they have letters indicating they are potential targets of the feds.Nedegaard, dead, Renne, dead, Ramsey Town Center Dead. No wonder they're putting the county morgue there, all the death and stench.
So, you or any readers have any information about Jodie Ruehle? Jodie was involved in the pricing and sales for RALF money, of Highway 10 properties. One of the former Community National Bank people was reported as going to work for Jim Deal, and now may be a federal grand jury target; something like that, Dave Orrick is the Pioneer Press person who's reported a lot about the Ramsey Town Center. Lora Pabst now for Strib. Pat Tepoorten, for the ESM north end paper in North Branch.
What's to come of it? I do not know. A tempest in a teapot, or a big awful splat to come after the unions ramrod the Tink as DFL standard bearer? Tink should know. If it's even a chance to go splat, he should fall on his sword for the party. Step aside and let Bob Olson, the clean energy advocate carry the banner.
We wait. We see. In any event, that post was a great piece of coverage, Blue Man. Did you have to use the WayBack Machine? Or is it all still online via regular access?
I tried a Google of "Jodie Ruehle" and drew a blank. East Bethel City Council Minutes, Feb. 15, 2006. There have to be bigger footprints than that.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Re-think the Tink:Backroom deal 101?
H/T to Eric Z for coming up with the "Re-think the Tink" line!
From the January 20, 2003 Startribune article "INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts."
What happens to the state's watchdog's?
Allin was fired by Fisher in March 2002 after after the Star Tribune reported that Allin and his staff had written memos strongly critical of MnDOT contracting practices. He was reinstated after he got a lawyer, although he failed to retain his title as Assistant Commissioner.
The story indicates that Tinklenberg resigned in October (2002) and did not provide funds to Fisher's fund.
Regardless, the pattern of no bid contacts and back room deals makes Tinklenberg vulnerable in a General Election.
If one thinks Congresswoman Bachmann and her cronies can't find this stuff, we're kidding ourselves.
Why bring this stuff out now?
Tinklenberg's campaign chose to use the Startribune as a source of reputable information, after their supporters chose to attack bloggers who are working to vet candidates. Citing Startribune stories from the past provides a greater perspective.
The Karl Rove modus operandi is to utilize one's perceived strength and expose it as their most glaring weakness. Regardless of what AM 950 Air America or the other apologists suggest, Tinklenberg's transportation past leaves him vulnerable.
Secondly, my intent is to ensure that the strongest DFLers are endorsed in 2008. I fear that the Elwyn's past will haunt him in the General Election. Bachmann exposes this info in May 08, attacks, attacks, attacks, making Elwyn Tinklenberg "Mark Kennedy relevant" by mid-August.
Bachmann would not need as much money to retain the 6th and the money gets "filtered" to GOP candidates running against Walz, Sarvi, and Madia, hurting the overall DFL cause.
The bottom line is, I want to win! Don't you?
From the January 20, 2003 Startribune article "INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts."
On Feb. 15, 2001, Fisher visited Tinklenberg in his office to discuss contracting issues. It was just the two of them, Fisher later told his staff in an e-mail. Fisher said Tinklenberg asked whether certain MnDOT officials could sign consulting contracts without going through Administration, "to move some things that are 'hot' currently."
At about the same time, Fisher, a technology buff who had been vice president of and general counsel to a telecommunications firm, was pushing a bill to establish a fund that would pay for statewide computer integration and related activities. He wanted MnDOT to contribute a fifth of the revenue it receives from leasing unused space on radio towers along highways.
Fisher sent Allin a handwritten note saying Administration should consider advancing MnDOT's contracts when "both the Governor and Legislature are pressing hard for MnDOT to move speedily with road/bridge work. This pertains specifically and solely to the $500 million appropriated in the 2000-2001 session."
Allin said he interpreted that as a directive "to go easier on MnDOT."
Fisher said he wasn't suggesting a free ride. "I wanted to make sure we removed doubt about Admin being a roadblock," he said. "It did not say treat them differently in terms of compromising principles."
In April, records show, Fisher agreed to fast-track MnDOT's consulting contracts and to give two MnDOT employees authority to sign most of them on his behalf.
Tinklenberg agreed to give 20 percent of the tower lease money to Fisher's fledgling technology fund and to help him with other technology projects when possible, the records show.
Finally, the two commissioners agreed to "assure that no agency representative criticizes the other agency to any non-agency party."
In an interview, Fisher said the fact that the issues were listed in the same document does not mean one was traded for the other.
"I can tell you . . . there is no context or connection," he said. "They are just a collection of issues."
What happens to the state's watchdog's?
Allin was fired by Fisher in March 2002 after after the Star Tribune reported that Allin and his staff had written memos strongly critical of MnDOT contracting practices. He was reinstated after he got a lawyer, although he failed to retain his title as Assistant Commissioner.
The story indicates that Tinklenberg resigned in October (2002) and did not provide funds to Fisher's fund.
Regardless, the pattern of no bid contacts and back room deals makes Tinklenberg vulnerable in a General Election.
If one thinks Congresswoman Bachmann and her cronies can't find this stuff, we're kidding ourselves.
Why bring this stuff out now?
Tinklenberg's campaign chose to use the Startribune as a source of reputable information, after their supporters chose to attack bloggers who are working to vet candidates. Citing Startribune stories from the past provides a greater perspective.
The Karl Rove modus operandi is to utilize one's perceived strength and expose it as their most glaring weakness. Regardless of what AM 950 Air America or the other apologists suggest, Tinklenberg's transportation past leaves him vulnerable.
Secondly, my intent is to ensure that the strongest DFLers are endorsed in 2008. I fear that the Elwyn's past will haunt him in the General Election. Bachmann exposes this info in May 08, attacks, attacks, attacks, making Elwyn Tinklenberg "Mark Kennedy relevant" by mid-August.
Bachmann would not need as much money to retain the 6th and the money gets "filtered" to GOP candidates running against Walz, Sarvi, and Madia, hurting the overall DFL cause.
The bottom line is, I want to win! Don't you?
Part II: Another interesting Startribune article
This is the second in a three part series on the mainstream media's previous coverage of the problems at MnDOT.
Recall yesterday's work on then Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg's struggles to adhere to a competitive bid process and Governor Pawlenty and Carol Molnau's collective failure to adhere to their campaign promises of straightening out MnDOT.
In January 2003, the Startribune had a three day series on the problems at MnDOT, with 5 stories covering the problems within the powerful state agency.
To be completely clear, these stories are not an indictment of the rank and file MnDOT worker, those that work through the sweltering summers and the bitter cold winters ensuring that Minnesota's roads are maintained.
These stories show the corruption and backroom deals that MnDOT leadership made status quo for the organization.
The January 20, 2003 Startribune had two articles highlighting problems at MnDOT.
"INSIDE MnDOT; Allegations about MnDOT were kept quiet; Lawyer had drawn up document on contracting practices."
In essence, it paints a picture of corruption within MnDOT. Not only did they pursue the use of non competitive contracts, but they sought to keep the public from knowing about the contracts.
Call me naive, but that sure feels corrupt to me. After all, if everything is and "open and honest" process, why the need to keep it from the public?
The Strib story indicates that the report did not find a conflict of interest or a kickback, but did state that the agency failed to follow state laws in the contracting process.
Also keep in mind that the stories were completed in 2003. Since then, Tinklenberg has ran two Congressional races. In 06, he received campaign money from several individuals of a company that was quoted in the 03 Strib series as receiving a non-competitive bid contract.
The second Startribune story of January 20, 2003 highlighted the battles between MnDOT and the Department of Administration.
"INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts."
Quid pro quo at it's best!
Leaders at the top of organizations set the standards for how these groups act. Strong moral leaders set standards that bind the actions of the leaders with the work of the "rank and file" worker, creating organizations with great synergy.
Organizations that lack strong moral leaders are often writ with waste, fraud and abuse issues and people who, behind the scenes, chronically complain. It's clear from the Startribune stories that MnDOT lacked strong moral leadership.
Working to ensure that our states roads are maintained is a daunting task. Being a steward of taxpayer money cannot be sacrificed while doing this. Checks and balances are in place for a reason!
So while the Administration Department had the final responsibility to approve state contracts, MnDOT labeled the Admin folks as "rule bound nitpickers who don't understand the real-world measures needed to get roads, bridges and rail lines built."
Checks and balances folks, checks and balances...
So why are these public watchdogs important?
In 1999, they stopped the department from sidestepping a pending competitive bidding process to give a $32 million light-rail management contract directly to Parsons Brinckerhoff.
MnDOT advertised for proposals, but before the responses were due, MnDOT officials privately had asked Parsons Brinckerhoff to submit a proposal for what what was initially estimated to be a $20 million job.
$32 million, for an estimated $20 million job, that actually was bid at $15.4 million? Does anyone else see that as problematic?
Recall yesterday's work on then Commissioner Elwyn Tinklenberg's struggles to adhere to a competitive bid process and Governor Pawlenty and Carol Molnau's collective failure to adhere to their campaign promises of straightening out MnDOT.
In January 2003, the Startribune had a three day series on the problems at MnDOT, with 5 stories covering the problems within the powerful state agency.
To be completely clear, these stories are not an indictment of the rank and file MnDOT worker, those that work through the sweltering summers and the bitter cold winters ensuring that Minnesota's roads are maintained.
These stories show the corruption and backroom deals that MnDOT leadership made status quo for the organization.
The January 20, 2003 Startribune had two articles highlighting problems at MnDOT.
"INSIDE MnDOT; Allegations about MnDOT were kept quiet; Lawyer had drawn up document on contracting practices."
Top officials responsible for overseeing state contracts and access to public records tried to keep some allegations against the Minnesota Department of Transportation from public view.
After the federal government criticized a light-rail contract in early 2000, the state Department of Administration commissioned a review of MnDOT's consulting contracts. Don Lewis, a lawyer in the Minneapolis firm of Halleland Lewis Nilan Sipkins & Johnson, produced a summary report and a list of 45 allegations from MnDOT and Administration employees.
They included:
- Poor contract management that led to statute violations.
- Excessive use of contracts issued without competition or justification.
- Allowing contracts to grow beyond their original scope.
- Improper influence by contractors.
- Contractor overcharges.
- Failure to meet hiring goals for firms owned by women and minority members.
In essence, it paints a picture of corruption within MnDOT. Not only did they pursue the use of non competitive contracts, but they sought to keep the public from knowing about the contracts.
Call me naive, but that sure feels corrupt to me. After all, if everything is and "open and honest" process, why the need to keep it from the public?
The Strib story indicates that the report did not find a conflict of interest or a kickback, but did state that the agency failed to follow state laws in the contracting process.
Also keep in mind that the stories were completed in 2003. Since then, Tinklenberg has ran two Congressional races. In 06, he received campaign money from several individuals of a company that was quoted in the 03 Strib series as receiving a non-competitive bid contract.
The second Startribune story of January 20, 2003 highlighted the battles between MnDOT and the Department of Administration.
"INSIDE MnDOT; Watchdogs or nitpickers? Two agencies fight it out; The Transportation and Administration departments have a history of feuding over the final say on outside contracts."
By 2001, the strain of a $675 million light-rail project and a special $459 million road and bridge program pushed the departments to the breaking point. So David Fisher, then administration commissioner, and Elwyn Tinklenberg, then transportation commissioner, worked out their own solution to expedite contracts, which Fisher referred to in a document as the Big Fix.
Among other things, two MnDOT employees were given authority to bypass Administration regulators on most contracts, and a fast-track review process was begun.
At about the same time as those issues were being worked out, Tinklenberg agreed to contribute part of the money MnDOT collects from leasing space on radio towers along state highways to a new technology enterprise fund administered by Fisher.
Quid pro quo at it's best!
Leaders at the top of organizations set the standards for how these groups act. Strong moral leaders set standards that bind the actions of the leaders with the work of the "rank and file" worker, creating organizations with great synergy.
Organizations that lack strong moral leaders are often writ with waste, fraud and abuse issues and people who, behind the scenes, chronically complain. It's clear from the Startribune stories that MnDOT lacked strong moral leadership.
Working to ensure that our states roads are maintained is a daunting task. Being a steward of taxpayer money cannot be sacrificed while doing this. Checks and balances are in place for a reason!
So while the Administration Department had the final responsibility to approve state contracts, MnDOT labeled the Admin folks as "rule bound nitpickers who don't understand the real-world measures needed to get roads, bridges and rail lines built."
Checks and balances folks, checks and balances...
Seems both Tinklenberg and Allin are culpable in the contract misdeeds of MnDOT.Nonetheless, Kent Allin, an assistant administration commissioner who oversaw the department's contract regulators, warned Fisher of possible trouble on the $3.2 million contract for preliminary design work on light rail. The Minneapolis engineering firm BRW Inc. (now owned by URS Corp. of San Francisco) had the contract; the New York firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas was a subcontractor.
MnDOT wanted Administration to approve two large amendments that would change the nature of the original contract with BRW and increase its cost ceiling by nearly 75 percent. Such dramatic changes generally require competitive proposals to ensure that taxpayers get the best deal.
But Fisher told his staff that he wanted to get the contract "on the ground ASAP." Noting that Tinklenberg had personally asked him to approve the amendments, he ordered it done.
In an e-mail to his staff, Allin described the situation as a mess: "Supplement #1 is for $900K. The work has been largely completed without the amendment ever being executed. That's a clear violation of state law and something we try hard to avoid."
Allin told his staff that "given the massive water already over the dam," they would need to document the facts leading up to the situation so the department could justify signing the amendment.
Administration also agreed to expedite the second amendment, worth $1.5 million, though it considered the work beyond the scope of the original contract.
So why are these public watchdogs important?
In 1999, they stopped the department from sidestepping a pending competitive bidding process to give a $32 million light-rail management contract directly to Parsons Brinckerhoff.
MnDOT advertised for proposals, but before the responses were due, MnDOT officials privately had asked Parsons Brinckerhoff to submit a proposal for what what was initially estimated to be a $20 million job.
Parsons Brinckerhoff bid on the project and won, sparking allegations of a conflict of interest. Federal authorities said the process appeared tainted, and they ordered the state to redo it.
MnDOT scaled back the job, which was won by O'Brien Kreitzberg (now owned by URS) with a bid of $15.4 million. Parsons Brinckerhoff didn't submit a new bid.
$32 million, for an estimated $20 million job, that actually was bid at $15.4 million? Does anyone else see that as problematic?
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Bachmann continues to vote against Minnesota's interests
I like the press release, especially on the heels of the SC Times LTE that credited Elwyn Tinklenberg for his strong stances on sustainable energy. Note that a week after the campaign told the SD 19 crowd that the "website is under significant revision but will be revised tomorrow", still no discussion of issues...
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, released the following statement regarding Michele Bachmann's vote against the Energy Independence and Security Act:
"This bill is far from perfect in my eyes, but it does begin to move us in the right direction by raising fuel efficiency standards and increasing production of ethanol and biofuels. Certainly anyone who has recently pumped gas at nearly $3 a gallon can get behind that.
"Michele Bachmann, however, made it clear that she's opposed to any reform. Rather than less pain at the pump and more investment in renewable energy we can produce right here in Minnesota, Mrs. Bachmann's answer is stay the course—more entanglements in the Middle East, more pollution, more of the same.
"While her supporters over at the Exxon Mobil PAC might be happy, Mrs. Bachmann's vote flies in the face of Minnesota values and is against the best interests of residents throughout the 6 th District."
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, released the following statement regarding Michele Bachmann's vote against the Energy Independence and Security Act:
"This bill is far from perfect in my eyes, but it does begin to move us in the right direction by raising fuel efficiency standards and increasing production of ethanol and biofuels. Certainly anyone who has recently pumped gas at nearly $3 a gallon can get behind that.
"Michele Bachmann, however, made it clear that she's opposed to any reform. Rather than less pain at the pump and more investment in renewable energy we can produce right here in Minnesota, Mrs. Bachmann's answer is stay the course—more entanglements in the Middle East, more pollution, more of the same.
"While her supporters over at the Exxon Mobil PAC might be happy, Mrs. Bachmann's vote flies in the face of Minnesota values and is against the best interests of residents throughout the 6 th District."
Another interesting Startribune article...
Apparently, since bloggers are "persona non grata" to some across the 6th, we must rely upon "mainstream sources" for our information.
Keep in mind, bloggers in Minnesota have broken a countless number of stories that the mainstream media has buried or ignored.
Remember Bachmann and Iran anyone?
I digress...
I received an email a few days ago from a Tinklenberg staffer pimping the Startribune story titled "Money vs. safety at MnDOT: Flying into Danger Zone".
I agree, this is a very serious issue and Tinklenberg did the right thing by advocating for the safety of the public.
After the Tinklenberg campaign used this as campaign fodder, Air America radio bit as well. Mark Heaney had Tinklenberg on and proceeded to praise him for his work at MnDOT, citing the Startibune story.
One local blog (gasp, not ANOTHER blog), picked up on this as well.
In 2003, the same Startribune ran a series on the Minnesota Department of Transportation titled "Inside MnDOT".
The first story ran on January 19, 2003 and was titled "MnDOT swerves around the law; Agency flouted rules on consultants."
Gotta love no-bid contracts!
Where was the accountability? The Startibune articles paint a picture that is in complete contrast with what the Tinklenberg campaign put on this past week, and what AM 950 Air America radio aired on Monday.
Governor Pawlenty appointed former State Senator Carol Molnau as the MnDOT commissioner, promising to reform the powerful state agency.
Pawlenty named Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as the agency's new commissioner. As a legislator, Molnau accused MnDOT of misrepresenting costs for the Hiawatha Avenue light-rail line and resisting scrutiny. During last year's campaign, she promised "major reforms."
Pawlenty failed on his campaign promise to bring forth major reforms to MnDOT.
Molnau has failed as well, as evidenced by the Sonia Pitt saga.
Anyone remember Carolyn Bacon?
The story indicates that the problems in MnDOT were evident before Tinklenberg became MnDOT Commissioner. However, the story also indicates that Tinklenberg simply played along with the "good ole boys network". Running on holding someone else accountable is pretty easy, especially after you yourself have not been held accountable.
And about those "no bid contracts".
41% of the consulting contracts in 2000 were "handpicked"?
The Startribune cites one example, one of many that they could have cited.
The story also points out that the total for the 2,100 contracts that were amended was $731 million with the actual amendments totalling $422 million. Amendments to the original contracts more than doubled the compensation.
Something seems wrong with that to me, and surely the taxpayers of Minnesota would feel this way as well.
The series, which I will post the remainder in future posts, paints a much less rosy picture of MnDOT under Tinklenberg than the recent Strib story that the Tinklenberg campaign and AM 950 Air America report.
While Molnau and Pawlenty have failed on campaign promises to "fix MnDOT", the Strib stories indicate that Tinklenberg simply "went along to get along".
Keep in mind, bloggers in Minnesota have broken a countless number of stories that the mainstream media has buried or ignored.
Remember Bachmann and Iran anyone?
I digress...
I received an email a few days ago from a Tinklenberg staffer pimping the Startribune story titled "Money vs. safety at MnDOT: Flying into Danger Zone".
In April 2004, MnDOT Commissioner Carol Molnau decided to open up the airport's safety zones, overruling the recommendations of the agency's own experts, who had warned that such a change would be dangerous. Molnau's decision, which reversed the stance of her predecessor at MnDOT, cleared the way for more than $1 billion worth of new commercial real-estate development south of the airport.
I agree, this is a very serious issue and Tinklenberg did the right thing by advocating for the safety of the public.
After the Tinklenberg campaign used this as campaign fodder, Air America radio bit as well. Mark Heaney had Tinklenberg on and proceeded to praise him for his work at MnDOT, citing the Startibune story.
One local blog (gasp, not ANOTHER blog), picked up on this as well.
In 2003, the same Startribune ran a series on the Minnesota Department of Transportation titled "Inside MnDOT".
The first story ran on January 19, 2003 and was titled "MnDOT swerves around the law; Agency flouted rules on consultants."
When the Minnesota Department of Transportation lost a $17-an-hour employee, it quickly hired her as a $100-an-hour consultant and gave her a string of contracts, despite repeated warnings from regulators that others should have been considered for the work.
When MnDOT was in a hurry to clean up a site that was to become a maintenance yard for the state's first light-rail line, it put an engineering firm to work without having a binding contract or money in place, admittedly violating state law.
Gotta love no-bid contracts!
A review of tens of thousands of government e-mails, memos and other documents shows that MnDOT often has avoided competition when awarding consulting contracts, has doubled or even tripled payments without bids and has broken laws by putting consultants to work before deals were approved or even funded.
Behind the scenes, state regulators have criticized such practices for years, describing the agency as a bully running roughshod over efforts to ensure fair contracting. Auditors, too, have criticized the way MnDOT handles consultants.
Where was the accountability? The Startibune articles paint a picture that is in complete contrast with what the Tinklenberg campaign put on this past week, and what AM 950 Air America radio aired on Monday.
Governor Pawlenty appointed former State Senator Carol Molnau as the MnDOT commissioner, promising to reform the powerful state agency.
Pawlenty named Lt. Gov. Carol Molnau to double as the agency's new commissioner. As a legislator, Molnau accused MnDOT of misrepresenting costs for the Hiawatha Avenue light-rail line and resisting scrutiny. During last year's campaign, she promised "major reforms."
Pawlenty failed on his campaign promise to bring forth major reforms to MnDOT.
Molnau has failed as well, as evidenced by the Sonia Pitt saga.
Anyone remember Carolyn Bacon?
MnDOT managers liked Bacon, who worked for them as an employee-development
specialist in the early 1990s. About five months after leaving that $17.25-an-hour job in 1993, she returned part time as a $100-an-hour consultant, running meetings, planning retreats and reorganizing staff. She has received contracts worth $266,270, MnDOT records show.
Minnesota law forbids the hiring of consultants for jobs exceeding $5,000 if state employees are available. In addition, even small contracts are supposed to go through an informal bidding process. Heather Pickett, a contract watchdog for the Minnesota Department of Administration, questioned Bacon's contracts in 2000.
"It appears that Mn/DOT is giving a great deal of this type of work just to Ms. Bacon, especially when there are other people, as well as state employees, who could perform this work. Fair and open competition is the goal when selecting contractors," she wrote in a memo to the agency.Pickett, a lawyer and former MnDOT employee herself, wrote that in the future, MnDOT would need to explain why it chose Bacon and whether competitors were sought.
Soon after, a $66,100 contract of Bacon's was due to expire. The agency wanted her to continue working so she could help in a staff reorganization. Pickett said she told the department to seek proposals from competitors.
MnDOT did. But meanwhile, it hired Bacon on a separate, no-bid, $5,000 contract to lead a retreat for managers who were planning the reorganization. Four days after the retreat ended, the department chose Bacon for a new contract worth $67,000.
The Administration Department, acting on a tip from a MnDOT source, looked into the contract. It found that:
Weeks before the proposal was put out for bids, a MnDOT employee already had described the project in her notes as "Carolyn's Contract."
The story indicates that the problems in MnDOT were evident before Tinklenberg became MnDOT Commissioner. However, the story also indicates that Tinklenberg simply played along with the "good ole boys network". Running on holding someone else accountable is pretty easy, especially after you yourself have not been held accountable.
And about those "no bid contracts".
One type of arrangement criticized by both regulators and auditors is the single-source contract in which an agency seeks to hire a contractor without competitive bids.
The law allows no-bid contracts if state employees cannot do the jobs and the selected firms are the only ones reasonably available for the work.
But Administration regulators have complained that MnDOT frequently has sought permission to handpick its consultants as much as 41 percent of the time in 2000 often with insufficient reasons.
41% of the consulting contracts in 2000 were "handpicked"?
The Startribune cites one example, one of many that they could have cited.
The Star Tribune analyzed two MnDOT databases with nearly 2,100 consulting contracts. The analysis found 150 cases in which the value of amendments equaled or exceeded the amounts of the original contracts. Some involved relatively small deals, such as a $2,590 engineering contract that increased by $11,410. Others were much larger, such as a $750,000 materials testing contract that increased by $2.1 million.
One example involves Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) of St. Paul. In 1998, the department signed a three-year, $750,000 contract with SEH for road-design services. Two years into the contract, it tagged on an amendment for $750,000, citing the heavy workload.
It was among eight SEH contracts with supplements exceeding 60 percent of their original value. Taken together, the original contracts were worth $3.6 million, and the supplements added $3.3 million.Generally speaking, state law allows agencies to amend contracts to order unexpected, related work or to deal with emergencies that involve public health and safety. MnDOT officials say they expand contracts out of necessity, generally to deal with unexpected problems or to avoid costly construction delays.
But regulators and auditors have noted that the practice can be used to skirt competitive-bidding requirements. They also say that supplements can be a sign that firms are allowed to bid low to win contracts and compensate with no-bid amendments.
The story also points out that the total for the 2,100 contracts that were amended was $731 million with the actual amendments totalling $422 million. Amendments to the original contracts more than doubled the compensation.
Something seems wrong with that to me, and surely the taxpayers of Minnesota would feel this way as well.
The series, which I will post the remainder in future posts, paints a much less rosy picture of MnDOT under Tinklenberg than the recent Strib story that the Tinklenberg campaign and AM 950 Air America report.
While Molnau and Pawlenty have failed on campaign promises to "fix MnDOT", the Strib stories indicate that Tinklenberg simply "went along to get along".
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
CD 6 Davis Bacon Act trivia
Our Final Jeopardy question of the night...
Which CD 6 candidate, while MnDOT Transportation Commissioner, had his department cited by the Legislative Auditor's Office for failing to fully comply with the Davis Bacon Act?
Cue the Jeopardy music Bluewoman...
Michele from Stillwater bet everything, wagering her $100 on the question and answered, "Who is Julie Quist?" Sorry Michele, you leave empty handed, and someday we'll answer your question.
Elwyn from Blaine bet everything as well, let's see your answer. Looks like time ran out on Elwyn and he did not answer the question. You also leave empty handed.
Bob from St Cloud, as long as you wagered less than $115,000 (what the Tinklenberg group was paid to support Phase I of the "Cambridge Corridor"), you will retain your title as Jeopardy Champion. Let's see your answer.
"Who is Elwyn Tinklenberg?"
Why correct Bob, and a bonus point to you for asking the question deep in the minds of voters across the 6th Congressional District.
The Legislative Auditor released a report in March 2001 highlighting an audit of MnDOT for the fiscal year ended June 30,2000.
One notation by the Legislative Auditor stood out to me (and Alex Trebek), on the heels of the labor endorsements in the 6th.
Commissioner Tinklenberg had problems ensuring Davis Bacon Act minimum wage law requirements were met?
What would the rank and file labor members think of this little tid bit?
Once again folks, this comes down to the vetting of candidates. We can vet our candidates and find out all sorts of interesting things, most of which will be used by Congresswoman Bachmann and her cronies in the General Election.
or
We can close our eyes, cover our ears and pay no attention to the past and reality for that matter.
I learned a phrase in the Army that suits this situation.
"Stay alert, stay alive."
We'll remain vigilant...
Curious as to what else the Legislative Auditor found?
Stay tuned for another fun filled episode of CD 6 Jeopardy soon...
Which CD 6 candidate, while MnDOT Transportation Commissioner, had his department cited by the Legislative Auditor's Office for failing to fully comply with the Davis Bacon Act?
Cue the Jeopardy music Bluewoman...
Michele from Stillwater bet everything, wagering her $100 on the question and answered, "Who is Julie Quist?" Sorry Michele, you leave empty handed, and someday we'll answer your question.
Elwyn from Blaine bet everything as well, let's see your answer. Looks like time ran out on Elwyn and he did not answer the question. You also leave empty handed.
Bob from St Cloud, as long as you wagered less than $115,000 (what the Tinklenberg group was paid to support Phase I of the "Cambridge Corridor"), you will retain your title as Jeopardy Champion. Let's see your answer.
"Who is Elwyn Tinklenberg?"
Why correct Bob, and a bonus point to you for asking the question deep in the minds of voters across the 6th Congressional District.
The Legislative Auditor released a report in March 2001 highlighting an audit of MnDOT for the fiscal year ended June 30,2000.
One notation by the Legislative Auditor stood out to me (and Alex Trebek), on the heels of the labor endorsements in the 6th.
The department should verify that the federal Davis Bacon Act minimum wage
requirements are met. The report cited three state projects where payroll records were missing for some of the subcontractors. The audit report recommended that MnDOT obtain the missing payroll records and review the records for compliance with the minimum wage requirements.
Commissioner Tinklenberg had problems ensuring Davis Bacon Act minimum wage law requirements were met?
What would the rank and file labor members think of this little tid bit?
Once again folks, this comes down to the vetting of candidates. We can vet our candidates and find out all sorts of interesting things, most of which will be used by Congresswoman Bachmann and her cronies in the General Election.
or
We can close our eyes, cover our ears and pay no attention to the past and reality for that matter.
I learned a phrase in the Army that suits this situation.
"Stay alert, stay alive."
We'll remain vigilant...
Curious as to what else the Legislative Auditor found?
The department should improve controls over bridge paint blasting residue shipment.The internal auditors found that, for a state project with several bridges, MnDOT did not follow Minn. Rule Chapter 7045 when handling bridge paint blasting residue shipment.This finding was also reported in the last three MnDOT audit reports.
The department should improve controls to ensure compliance with certain environmental regulations found in Minn. Rule 7001.0150 and the federal Clean Water Act. The report cited improper disposal of materials on one state project. The internal auditors recommended that the department ensure that appropriate inspections are made and appropriate documentation is kept on the disposal of materials.
The department should revise its policies to ensure compliance with Minn. Stat. Section16C.05 regarding contractual payments. The report cited payments that were made on two state projects prior to the execution of supplemental agreements. This finding was also reported in the two previous audit reports.
The department should review its policies to ensure compliance with Minn. Stat. Section16A.124 regarding prompt payment. The report cited two state projects where incentive payments were not made within 30 days. This finding was also reported in the two previous audit reports.
The department should improve controls over concrete production reports and clarify concrete aggregate quality assurance testing requirements. The audit report cited three state projects with missing or incomplete weekly concrete reports.
The department should provide additional controls over bituminous production testing for state aid projects. The audit report cited one city project where testing was not done and recommended the department provide more supervision.
Stay tuned for another fun filled episode of CD 6 Jeopardy soon...
Ron Shimanski sends heartfelt constituent email...over his listserv
Wow.
I cannot believe what I just read.
State Rep Ron Shimanski, R-Silver Lake has a email update he sends out to constituents. Typically I do not read them, as Rep Shimanski tends to do the whole "blame the Democrats" and "tax and spend" dance in virtually every edition.
This one came with a different look, so I checked it out.
I was astonished at what I read. A constituent wrote Rep Shimanski about some issues within the district. I will not divulge the contents of the letter, other than to say that I am deeply disturbed that a State Representative could make a mistake in releasing private information of this proportion.
Sick...just sick.
I cannot believe what I just read.
State Rep Ron Shimanski, R-Silver Lake has a email update he sends out to constituents. Typically I do not read them, as Rep Shimanski tends to do the whole "blame the Democrats" and "tax and spend" dance in virtually every edition.
This one came with a different look, so I checked it out.
I was astonished at what I read. A constituent wrote Rep Shimanski about some issues within the district. I will not divulge the contents of the letter, other than to say that I am deeply disturbed that a State Representative could make a mistake in releasing private information of this proportion.
Sick...just sick.
Monday, December 17, 2007
More on CD 6 labor endorsements
Political Muse, over at Liberal in the Land of Conservative, has an interesting post on the answers to the AFSCME screener by both Elwyn Tinklenberg and by Bob Olson.
While the short nature of Elwyn's answers may surprise you, the response from his defenders could be seen coming for miles.
They set out to discredit the bloggers, questioning our role in political discourse. Keep in mind though, these are also the first people that come up to you at a Wellstone Dinner or other DFL event and tell you "I love your stuff on Dean Urdahl" or any other Republican that falls within our cross hairs.
The same due diligence has been performed on "one of our own" and NOW our role is questioned?
How convenient! Other than Larry Schumacher at the SC Times, the mainstream media is failing us. Bluestem Prarie (gasp...a blog) has some info up on this as well.
As you recall, I posted about Elwyn's inconsistent statements on the DFL endorsement.
He now states, "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."
I've spent quite some time recently getting info on the other labor endorsements in the 6th.
An interesting pattern is emerging.
UniteHERE, United Laborers, United Auto Workers, and the Pipe Fitters all endorsed Tinklenberg without a screening.
IBEW endorsed Elwyn around 9/25/07. He didn't announce until October 1st...
Despite all of this, being anointed by labor in the 6th, Tinklenberg has the audacity to question the process by which DFLers across the 6th will endorse a candidate to challenge Congresswoman Bachmann?
This is why I have thought for quite some time now that the fix is in in the 6th.
He wants an "honorable and straight forward process" for the DFL endorsement but will compromise that for the labor side of the equation?
Seems like "someone" wants to have their cake and eat it too...
Obviously, this is mere conjecture, but all this evidence points to an organization already having made up its mind and simply going through the motion in the hopes of looking fair to both candidates. If this were my union, I would be absolutely outraged that they did not do a thorough examination of the candidates but simply chose one who apparently thinks so little of the union that he is unwilling to completely answer eleven questions.That's pretty much what I thought when I saw Tinklenberg's "answers" to many of the questions posed by AFSCME.
While the short nature of Elwyn's answers may surprise you, the response from his defenders could be seen coming for miles.
They set out to discredit the bloggers, questioning our role in political discourse. Keep in mind though, these are also the first people that come up to you at a Wellstone Dinner or other DFL event and tell you "I love your stuff on Dean Urdahl" or any other Republican that falls within our cross hairs.
The same due diligence has been performed on "one of our own" and NOW our role is questioned?
How convenient! Other than Larry Schumacher at the SC Times, the mainstream media is failing us. Bluestem Prarie (gasp...a blog) has some info up on this as well.
Updated: if we are lucky, the Free Press's editorial will help the Strib's stenographers go beyond repeating Republican catch phrases in their reporting. We're beginning to wonder what's up with the Strib's coverage of the U.S. House in general: it looks as if it's all GOP news, all the time. From the screen shot from today's "House" section of Politically connected, you'd never guess that there was a DFL candidate forum this week for the open seat in CD 3 during which one non-anointed contender dominated the field or an endorsement battle in the Sixth.Catch the rest at Bluestem Prairie.
As you recall, I posted about Elwyn's inconsistent statements on the DFL endorsement.
He now states, "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."
I've spent quite some time recently getting info on the other labor endorsements in the 6th.
An interesting pattern is emerging.
UniteHERE, United Laborers, United Auto Workers, and the Pipe Fitters all endorsed Tinklenberg without a screening.
IBEW endorsed Elwyn around 9/25/07. He didn't announce until October 1st...
Despite all of this, being anointed by labor in the 6th, Tinklenberg has the audacity to question the process by which DFLers across the 6th will endorse a candidate to challenge Congresswoman Bachmann?
This is why I have thought for quite some time now that the fix is in in the 6th.
He wants an "honorable and straight forward process" for the DFL endorsement but will compromise that for the labor side of the equation?
Seems like "someone" wants to have their cake and eat it too...
Political Muse takes off the gloves...
...and dishes out a verbal butt whoopin
Correct, bloggers will not "elect" these candidates. However, we will vet them as it appears to many of us that some candidates are simply being anointed by others.
Considering the antipathy with which this member treated myself and the blogging world at the St. Cloud State DFL debate, it comes as little surprise to me that he would make such statements. When I approached him at the debate to inquire about future events, his message to me was clear when he told me that bloggers would NOT be electing these candidates. This comment was allowed to pass and I moved along to the more important task of covering the debate.
Correct, bloggers will not "elect" these candidates. However, we will vet them as it appears to many of us that some candidates are simply being anointed by others.
It's quite obvious that the DFLer that attacked LLC wants "the other side" suppressed. He or she does not want you to know that Tinklenberg has "nuanced" his position, once again, on abiding by the endorsement.
Great work Political Muse! Don't let them get to you!
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Elwyn Tinklenberg and his conflicting statements
This is what riles me up about politicians. People we are supposed to represent us in Congress and other legislative bodies but are inconsistent with what they say.
Elwyn Tinklenberg has had a few You Tube moments recently.
At the November 15th forum at St Cloud State University, Tinklenberg stated his intentions on the endorsement.
From the SC Times.
Yet, on December 13th at the SD 19 DFL meeting in Buffalo, Elwyn had this to say about the endorsement.
Did he say that because the room in Buffalo contained fewer Democrats than St Cloud?
Did he say that because no local press attended?
Why the change of heart?
Why the ambiguity in his previous statements?
It's quite clear to me that Tinklenberg has no intention of abiding by the DFL endorsement, if earned by Bob Olson.
Another interesting moment occurred in Buffalo at that meeting. A concerned activist wanted to know about Congress and lobby reform. Olson gave a one sentence answer and then, in rather witty fashion, said, "I'll direct the question to the only lobbyist in the room".
Elwyn turned a nice shade of red.
His answer struck me hard. He quickly retorted that "we do not lobby at the Federal Level". He went on to discuss working to get "the money out of politics". Advocating strongly for public financing of campaigns.
I think most of us agree on that.
But it left me wondering, does the Tinklenberg Group and/or Elwyn lobby at the Federal level?
My gut told me yes...after all, how do you get lobbyist fundraisers in Washington without being connected to lobbyists.
But I digress.
I obtained a copy of Elwyn Tinklenberg's AFSCME screener, from an anonymous source.
It answers my question fully...while once again providing a completely different answer in public.
From the screener:
And this is what people despise about politicians. Answers to straight forward questions that distort the truth, telling people what they want to hear as opposed to reality.
I'll reiterate this again, this is why I so strongly support Bob Olson. I have not seen nor heard him waver on the issues, he is not a political jellyfish.
Elwyn Tinklenberg has had a few You Tube moments recently.
At the November 15th forum at St Cloud State University, Tinklenberg stated his intentions on the endorsement.
From the SC Times.
The DFL race would appear to be up to party delegates to decide, as Tinklenberg, who had avoided saying he would abide by the party's endorsement process earlier, appeared to commit Thursday.
"I supported the party's endorsed candidate before," he said of his 2006 endorsement loss to Patty Wetterling. "I will certainly do that again."
Olson reiterated his previous commitment to abide by the endorsement process.
Yet, on December 13th at the SD 19 DFL meeting in Buffalo, Elwyn had this to say about the endorsement.
"We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."Did he change his mind?
Which left many potential delegates asking the question, "What, what does that mean?"
Elwyn came back with "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and fair process."
Did he say that because the room in Buffalo contained fewer Democrats than St Cloud?
Did he say that because no local press attended?
Why the change of heart?
Why the ambiguity in his previous statements?
It's quite clear to me that Tinklenberg has no intention of abiding by the DFL endorsement, if earned by Bob Olson.
Another interesting moment occurred in Buffalo at that meeting. A concerned activist wanted to know about Congress and lobby reform. Olson gave a one sentence answer and then, in rather witty fashion, said, "I'll direct the question to the only lobbyist in the room".
Elwyn turned a nice shade of red.
His answer struck me hard. He quickly retorted that "we do not lobby at the Federal Level". He went on to discuss working to get "the money out of politics". Advocating strongly for public financing of campaigns.
I think most of us agree on that.
But it left me wondering, does the Tinklenberg Group and/or Elwyn lobby at the Federal level?
My gut told me yes...after all, how do you get lobbyist fundraisers in Washington without being connected to lobbyists.
But I digress.
I obtained a copy of Elwyn Tinklenberg's AFSCME screener, from an anonymous source.
It answers my question fully...while once again providing a completely different answer in public.
From the screener:
"I am currenly president of The Tinklenberg Group, a consultancy which specializes in transportation, marketing and public relations. Among my clients was the United States Department of Transportation where I worked with the Office of the Secretary and the surface modal administrations on a review of the organization and focus of the Intelligent Transportation Systems programs of the Joint Programs Office."Wow, sounds like he lobbies or lobbied at the Federal level to me.
And this is what people despise about politicians. Answers to straight forward questions that distort the truth, telling people what they want to hear as opposed to reality.
I'll reiterate this again, this is why I so strongly support Bob Olson. I have not seen nor heard him waver on the issues, he is not a political jellyfish.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Tinklenberg on the DFL endorsement
From the SD 19 meeting tonight in Buffalo. Man I wish I could have live blogged that thing!
On the DFL endorsement.
Bob Olson pledged to unify the party and abide by the endorsement.
Elwyn Tinklenberg stated "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."
Which left many potential delegates asking the question, "What, what does that mean?"
Elwyn came back with "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and fair process."
So, more to follow on this in the morning, but I am left with a few questions.
1. Was the process not honorable and straight forward in previous 6th CD conventions? Apparently so if this is an "issue".
2. Doesn't this go against all the "party building" rhetoric Tinklenberg opened the night with?
3. According to Tinklenberg's website, "I’m running for Congress because I am deeply concerned that polarizing and divisive politics is undermining our ability to deal with the serious problems we face and is threatening our fundamental commitment to a “common good”.
Calling into question the integrity of the 6th CD DFL endorsement process is not polarizing or divisive?
Well...Elwyn was pretty RED in the face when he got hit with this question.
Will he change his stance and abide by the endorsement or will he leave the delegates hanging on this one?
More to follow tomorrow...
On the DFL endorsement.
Bob Olson pledged to unify the party and abide by the endorsement.
Elwyn Tinklenberg stated "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and straight forward process."
Which left many potential delegates asking the question, "What, what does that mean?"
Elwyn came back with "We will honor the endorsement if it is an honorable and fair process."
So, more to follow on this in the morning, but I am left with a few questions.
1. Was the process not honorable and straight forward in previous 6th CD conventions? Apparently so if this is an "issue".
2. Doesn't this go against all the "party building" rhetoric Tinklenberg opened the night with?
3. According to Tinklenberg's website, "I’m running for Congress because I am deeply concerned that polarizing and divisive politics is undermining our ability to deal with the serious problems we face and is threatening our fundamental commitment to a “common good”.
Calling into question the integrity of the 6th CD DFL endorsement process is not polarizing or divisive?
Well...Elwyn was pretty RED in the face when he got hit with this question.
Will he change his stance and abide by the endorsement or will he leave the delegates hanging on this one?
More to follow tomorrow...
Bachmann energy LTE in SC Times
Well...not quite sure what to think about this one.
Tinkleberg a subject matter expert on renewable and sustainable energy, creating energy independence and reducing greenhouse gases? Hmmm, interesting.
Using my blogging due diligence, I checked out Tinkleberg's campaign website, hoping I would find the golden nugget to energy independence and to reducing greenhouse gases.
Wow, that wreaked...and not of greenhouse gases!
Actually, his website says nothing of the such.
Nothing on global warming.
Nothing on sustainable energy.
Nothing on taxes.
Noting on the war in Iraq.
It almost literally says nothing.
Bob Olson's site on the other hand...that's a different story!
Olson actually talks about sustainable energy in his opening remarks on the site!
Heck, he even has a link so that you can read what Bob thinks about it!
Bob even founded the American Sustainable Energy Council, a nonprofit that focuses on renewable energy policy and projects.
Which leaves me completely perplexed right now.
Did Mr Schultz simply confuse these candidates? Clearly Tinklenberg's knowledge on sustainable energy pales in comparison to someone who founded a non-profit that focuses on renewable energy. While Elywn may have better hair than Bob, he does not have a better focus on energy policy.
Clearly, Bob Olson is a leader in sustainable energy and is working hard to lead America toward energy independence!
Whatever may be her motive, she’s just given her constituents of the 6th District another great reason to support El Tinklenberg against her in the upcoming elections.
Tinklenberg, for one, knows that energy conservation is the first and most important step America needs to take on the path to energy independence and reductions in greenhouse gases.
Tinkleberg a subject matter expert on renewable and sustainable energy, creating energy independence and reducing greenhouse gases? Hmmm, interesting.
Using my blogging due diligence, I checked out Tinkleberg's campaign website, hoping I would find the golden nugget to energy independence and to reducing greenhouse gases.
Wow, that wreaked...and not of greenhouse gases!
Actually, his website says nothing of the such.
Nothing on global warming.
Nothing on sustainable energy.
Nothing on taxes.
Noting on the war in Iraq.
It almost literally says nothing.
Bob Olson's site on the other hand...that's a different story!
Olson actually talks about sustainable energy in his opening remarks on the site!
Heck, he even has a link so that you can read what Bob thinks about it!
Bob even founded the American Sustainable Energy Council, a nonprofit that focuses on renewable energy policy and projects.
Which leaves me completely perplexed right now.
Did Mr Schultz simply confuse these candidates? Clearly Tinklenberg's knowledge on sustainable energy pales in comparison to someone who founded a non-profit that focuses on renewable energy. While Elywn may have better hair than Bob, he does not have a better focus on energy policy.
Clearly, Bob Olson is a leader in sustainable energy and is working hard to lead America toward energy independence!
Kucinich excluded from Des Moines Register debate!
What a bunch of BS! Exclude the most progressive candidate for President and one who is polling 4th nationally? WTF!
Make some calls and send some emails!
Here's the contact info for the Des Moines Register
Editor Carolyn Washburn (515) 284-8502
Laura Hollingsworth President and Publisher (515) 284-8041
Randy Brubaker Managing Editor (515) 284-8590
Randy Evans Assistant Managing Editor (515) 284-8118
Letters to the editor e-mail: letters@dmreg.com
Make some calls and send some emails!
Here's the contact info for the Des Moines Register
Editor Carolyn Washburn (515) 284-8502
Laura Hollingsworth President and Publisher (515) 284-8041
Randy Brubaker Managing Editor (515) 284-8590
Randy Evans Assistant Managing Editor (515) 284-8118
Letters to the editor e-mail: letters@dmreg.com
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Blueman's mom gets a Bachmann call!
My mom just called me a bit ago to tell me that Congresswoman Bachmann was getting ready to hold one of her epic telephone townhall meetings tonight. My mom did not have time for these shenanigans and hung up.
Son of a...oh I wish I had been at my parents house when this call came through. It would have been fun to live blog it!
I'm certain it was a lot like the last one though...
Son of a...oh I wish I had been at my parents house when this call came through. It would have been fun to live blog it!
I'm certain it was a lot like the last one though...
Beyond Sound Bites and Headlines Takes Mark Olson Deep!
Damn, this is some good stuff...
Bluewoman is equally as impressed!
The Republican "Big tent" just got a little smaller.
The State Republican House Caucus voted to permanently remove Rep. Mark Olson from its membership this week.
This marks a stunning change of policy for Republicans who normally only expel homosexuals.
One Big Lake resident I talked to had this to say; “They kicked Mark Olson out? I didn’t know he was gay.”
Mark Olson has been elected 8 times. During his 1st run for office his campaign slogan was the need for term limits.
Mark Olson’s 16 years of service is note worthy for its lack of accomplishments. He is the co-author of the Heritage preservation act which encourages history teachers to teach about the Mayflower pac. I’ve yet to meet a teacher who’s heard of this legislation.
Mark Olson also championed a bill which exempts wedding rings worth less than a few hundred dollars from divorce settlements. He may regret that bill now that he finds himself in a divorce case.
Olson is a strong opponent of the Northstar commuter train which ends in his town. “The train runs both ways” is a favorite saying of Marks, meaning that the train is likely to bring gangs and minorities flooding into the Big Lake area. Currently gangs and minorities have no way of getting to Big Lake as they have to run the gauntlet of police cruisers looking to pull over any minorities north of Brooklyn Park. Sherburne County is one of the whitest Counties in America.
Olson has endeared himself to his fellow House members by using humor in his floor speeches. “The guys really funny” one member said. “He’s not trying to be, but the stuff he says is just so far out there”.
Last year alone Mark has claimed (and I’m not making this up) that tobacco does not cause cancer, pure water is the cure for mental illness, When the polar ice caps melt the sea level will go down, Global warming is a myth put upon us by the weather channel and my favorite: There is a cure for diabetes but the doctors who know of the cure are afraid to revile it because of the thugs at the Diabetes Foundation.
Olson may now find himself in a three way race for his seat. But Olson is confident about his chances. He has secured the pro wife beating vote which is a large constituency in Sherburne County with well over 1500 reported abuse cases per year.
Should Olson not be reelected the burden of being the kookiest house member will be up for grabs. It’s tough to call right now but Rep. Tom Emmer (Buffalo) is fighting hard to take Olson’s place.
Bluewoman is equally as impressed!
The Republican "Big tent" just got a little smaller.
The State Republican House Caucus voted to permanently remove Rep. Mark Olson from its membership this week.
This marks a stunning change of policy for Republicans who normally only expel homosexuals.
One Big Lake resident I talked to had this to say; “They kicked Mark Olson out? I didn’t know he was gay.”
Mark Olson has been elected 8 times. During his 1st run for office his campaign slogan was the need for term limits.
Mark Olson’s 16 years of service is note worthy for its lack of accomplishments. He is the co-author of the Heritage preservation act which encourages history teachers to teach about the Mayflower pac. I’ve yet to meet a teacher who’s heard of this legislation.
Mark Olson also championed a bill which exempts wedding rings worth less than a few hundred dollars from divorce settlements. He may regret that bill now that he finds himself in a divorce case.
Olson is a strong opponent of the Northstar commuter train which ends in his town. “The train runs both ways” is a favorite saying of Marks, meaning that the train is likely to bring gangs and minorities flooding into the Big Lake area. Currently gangs and minorities have no way of getting to Big Lake as they have to run the gauntlet of police cruisers looking to pull over any minorities north of Brooklyn Park. Sherburne County is one of the whitest Counties in America.
Olson has endeared himself to his fellow House members by using humor in his floor speeches. “The guys really funny” one member said. “He’s not trying to be, but the stuff he says is just so far out there”.
Last year alone Mark has claimed (and I’m not making this up) that tobacco does not cause cancer, pure water is the cure for mental illness, When the polar ice caps melt the sea level will go down, Global warming is a myth put upon us by the weather channel and my favorite: There is a cure for diabetes but the doctors who know of the cure are afraid to revile it because of the thugs at the Diabetes Foundation.
Olson may now find himself in a three way race for his seat. But Olson is confident about his chances. He has secured the pro wife beating vote which is a large constituency in Sherburne County with well over 1500 reported abuse cases per year.
Should Olson not be reelected the burden of being the kookiest house member will be up for grabs. It’s tough to call right now but Rep. Tom Emmer (Buffalo) is fighting hard to take Olson’s place.
MinnMon takes notice of Bob Olson
On the heels of Bob Olson's strong statement on hate crimes legislation, Minnesota Monitor took notice!
Barack Obama issued an equally strong statement.
Thank you!
Olson's strong statement displays a key difference between himself and Elwyn Tinklenberg. Bob Olson will not "go along to get along" in Congress. He will not compromise his principles over a tough vote, he won't waver.
Bob Olson continues to be a strong moral leader in the 6th CD.
Meanwhile, Tinklenberg seems comfortable asserting his rights under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution...his right to remain silent.
Olson continued: "Politics as usual has failed the American people for too long.
I hope leadership finally learns that lesson."
Barack Obama issued an equally strong statement.
Presidential candidate Barack Obama scolded fellow Democrats for not trying harder. "While it is imperative that the Congress move this Defense Authorization bill, I am extremely disappointed that House and Senate negotiators failed to include this important provision in the bill being sent to the President ... All Americans deserve to live their lives without fear of hate driven attacks," the Illinois senator said in a press statement. "Almost 40 years after Congress first enacted a federal hate crimes law, it is our moral obligation to continue striving for equality, and ensure that the federal government, along with state and local jurisdictions, have the tools necessary to effectively prosecute these crimes. Given the rise in hate crimes nationally, failure to pass this vital legislation is truly unacceptable."
Thank you!
Olson's strong statement displays a key difference between himself and Elwyn Tinklenberg. Bob Olson will not "go along to get along" in Congress. He will not compromise his principles over a tough vote, he won't waver.
Bob Olson continues to be a strong moral leader in the 6th CD.
Meanwhile, Tinklenberg seems comfortable asserting his rights under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution...his right to remain silent.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Bob Olson is the Progressive Choice in the 6th
From Dave Mindemann at mnpACT!
I could not agree more, a progressive who can sway fiscal conservatives creates a win-win situation for the 6th.
And another key point that will hinder Elwyn Tinklenberg's chances in a 2008 General Election.
Indeed, there is a lot of dirt out there on Mr. Tinklenberg and Congresswoman Bachmann and the Rovian tactics she utilizes will use Tinklenberg's perceived strength in Transportation against him.
Indeed, the anointing process has began...and there has been nothing progressive about it.
I could not agree more, a progressive who can sway fiscal conservatives creates a win-win situation for the 6th.
Democrats have the majority and obviously are still learning how to use it. Sending more "fuzziness" to Capitol Hill is not going to help the progressive cause. That's why in District 6, progressives should understand the clear choice they have..... it is Bob Olson. This is not an endorsement, exactly, it is just an examination of the progressive facts.
The National and State party, as well as labor unions, are probably going to back Elwyn Tinklenburg. The popular line will be that he "fits the district". Maybe he does if you think more "fuzziness" is a requirement..... but fitting a district is not a qualification for office....and it certainly doesn't translate into adherence to principle.
And another key point that will hinder Elwyn Tinklenberg's chances in a 2008 General Election.
Elwyn Tinklenburg has a past that can be manipulated.
Indeed, there is a lot of dirt out there on Mr. Tinklenberg and Congresswoman Bachmann and the Rovian tactics she utilizes will use Tinklenberg's perceived strength in Transportation against him.
Elwyn Tinklenburg hasn't even engaged Bachmann yet. He seems to be waiting for the Democrats to "coronate" him.
Indeed, the anointing process has began...and there has been nothing progressive about it.
Press Release: Progressive Blogs Take Notice at Olson Continues to Lead
Good stuff over at mnpACT! Larry Schumacher noticed as well!
Progressive Blogs Take Notice As Olson Continues to Lead
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
612.423.2582
chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Popular progressive blogs are praising Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, after he criticized Michele Bachmann's vote against sustainable energy and called on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to schedule a direct up-or-down vote on hate crimes legislation.
From mnpACT!
http://www.mnpact.org/sblog/blog.php?id=928
Bob Olson's record centers on environmental concerns and opposition to the war. His progressive credentials are sound. Of course, Bachmann will attempt to define him in her own way if he is the nominee, but if Olson can turn the tables and make her the real issue.... he has plenty of ammunition. It would be hard to find the negatives in Olson, who thoroughly believes in reducing our dependence on fossil fuels as a matter of national security. Recently, Bob Olson sent a letter to Bachmann. In it, he states: Currently, we export a billion dollars a day out of our country to keep America moving. Our addiction to foreign oil has us mired in no-win alliances in the Middle East, it's poisoning our environment and it's crippling our economy. That is a difference that any voter can understand. And that is a hard argument for Bachmann to dismiss. Especially with the voting record she has already accumulated.
And Blue Man in a Red District weighs in, too:
http://buildourparty.blogspot.com/2007/12/bob-olson-on-hate-crimes-legislation.html
This is exactly why I support Bob Olson, he is a political figure of a different mold, not of the status quo. He won't waver on the important issues to save his political soul. He'll stand up and do what is right!
-----
Bob Olson is seeking the DFL endorsement for the 6th Congressional District seat currently help by Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Olson, a St. Cloud resident, is the owner of St. Stephen State Bank, the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Council and he also practices tax law.
He entered the race in July after being recruited by DFL leaders throughout the 6th District.
More information is available at www.bobolson.org.
Progressive Blogs Take Notice As Olson Continues to Lead
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
612.423.2582
chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Popular progressive blogs are praising Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, after he criticized Michele Bachmann's vote against sustainable energy and called on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to schedule a direct up-or-down vote on hate crimes legislation.
From mnpACT!
http://www.mnpact.org/sblog/blog.php?id=928
Bob Olson's record centers on environmental concerns and opposition to the war. His progressive credentials are sound. Of course, Bachmann will attempt to define him in her own way if he is the nominee, but if Olson can turn the tables and make her the real issue.... he has plenty of ammunition. It would be hard to find the negatives in Olson, who thoroughly believes in reducing our dependence on fossil fuels as a matter of national security. Recently, Bob Olson sent a letter to Bachmann. In it, he states: Currently, we export a billion dollars a day out of our country to keep America moving. Our addiction to foreign oil has us mired in no-win alliances in the Middle East, it's poisoning our environment and it's crippling our economy. That is a difference that any voter can understand. And that is a hard argument for Bachmann to dismiss. Especially with the voting record she has already accumulated.
And Blue Man in a Red District weighs in, too:
http://buildourparty.blogspot.com/2007/12/bob-olson-on-hate-crimes-legislation.html
This is exactly why I support Bob Olson, he is a political figure of a different mold, not of the status quo. He won't waver on the important issues to save his political soul. He'll stand up and do what is right!
-----
Bob Olson is seeking the DFL endorsement for the 6th Congressional District seat currently help by Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Olson, a St. Cloud resident, is the owner of St. Stephen State Bank, the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Council and he also practices tax law.
He entered the race in July after being recruited by DFL leaders throughout the 6th District.
More information is available at www.bobolson.org.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Is Bruce Anderson really concerned about our tax dollars?
Larry Schumacher at the St Cloud Times has a pretty interesting blog post up about Rep Bruce Anderson not "hearting" committee spending.
In addition...
Really? Rep Anderson took per diem on 136 of 139 session days, 75 of which they were considered legislative days, hauling in a total of $20,402.73 in "alternate compensation".
Can Rep Anderson produce any evidence of a "reasonable return on the investment"?
It troubles him as a legislator and a taxpayer, yet cannot refrain from filling his face at the trough?
Blueman does not heart politicians who are hypocritical...
Anderson takes House DFLers to task for increasing the per diem from $66 to $77 a day, doubling committee budgets from $324,000 to $646,000 per session, and having more meetings during the off-season in his latest news column.
In addition...
As a fiscal conservative I am strongly opposed to any and all expenditures which do not show a reasonable return on the investment. Each month I receive a statement in the mail from my financial advisor telling me how my investments did for the month and what the returns were. When I look at what is happening in the legislature I see the “investments” are steadily increasing, but I can’t see any notable “return” from these expenditures and that greatly troubles me as a legislator and a taxpayer.
Really? Rep Anderson took per diem on 136 of 139 session days, 75 of which they were considered legislative days, hauling in a total of $20,402.73 in "alternate compensation".
Can Rep Anderson produce any evidence of a "reasonable return on the investment"?
It troubles him as a legislator and a taxpayer, yet cannot refrain from filling his face at the trough?
Blueman does not heart politicians who are hypocritical...
Bob Olson on hate crimes legislation
This is exactly why I support Bob Olson, he is a political figure of a different mold, not of the status quo. He won't waver on the important issues to save his political soul. He'll stand up and do what is right!
Bob Olson Blasts Democrats' Handling of Hate Crimes Legislation
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
612.423.2582
http://us.f563.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, released the following statement regarding hate crimes legislation that stalled in the House of Representatives last week:
"Hate crimes legislation deserved an up-or-down vote on its merits last week. By attaching this important bill to a defense policy bill, House leadership is guilty of playing the same type of political games Republicans used for so long.
"I favor the legislation, which would extend hate crimes protection to people attacked because of their sexual orientation, and I'm simply appalled that Speaker Pelosi and her lieutenants have handled this matter so poorly.
"Others may oppose this legislation, but I think most people will agree that big issues should be debated and voted on—yes or no—in a forthright manner. Politics as usual has failed the American people for too long. I hope leadership finally learns that lesson."
-----
Bob Olson is seeking the DFL endorsement for the 6th Congressional District seat currently help by Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Olson, a St. Cloud resident, is the owner of St. Stephen State Bank, the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Council and he also practices tax law.
He entered the race in July after being recruited by DFL leaders throughout the 6th District.
More information is available at http://www.bobolson.org/.
Bob Olson Blasts Democrats' Handling of Hate Crimes Legislation
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
612.423.2582
http://us.f563.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=chris@bobolson.org
ANOKA—Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, released the following statement regarding hate crimes legislation that stalled in the House of Representatives last week:
"Hate crimes legislation deserved an up-or-down vote on its merits last week. By attaching this important bill to a defense policy bill, House leadership is guilty of playing the same type of political games Republicans used for so long.
"I favor the legislation, which would extend hate crimes protection to people attacked because of their sexual orientation, and I'm simply appalled that Speaker Pelosi and her lieutenants have handled this matter so poorly.
"Others may oppose this legislation, but I think most people will agree that big issues should be debated and voted on—yes or no—in a forthright manner. Politics as usual has failed the American people for too long. I hope leadership finally learns that lesson."
-----
Bob Olson is seeking the DFL endorsement for the 6th Congressional District seat currently help by Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Olson, a St. Cloud resident, is the owner of St. Stephen State Bank, the founder of the American Sustainable Energy Council and he also practices tax law.
He entered the race in July after being recruited by DFL leaders throughout the 6th District.
More information is available at http://www.bobolson.org/.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Olson writes Bachmann...
And she'll probably ignore him like she has ignored a good of her constituents...maybe we'll all get on one of those teleconferences!
Olson Writes to Bachmann Regarding Sustainable Energy
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
612.423.2582
ANOKA – Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, sent the following letter to Michele Bachmann regarding her vote against legislation to help America end its dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
* * * * *
The Honorable Michele Bachmann
412 Cannon Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Monday, Dec. 10, 2007
Dear Congresswoman Bachmann:
I am writing regarding your vote last week against a critical piece of legislation that will help move our country beyond its lethal addiction to foreign oil.
This important bill will raise fuel efficiency standards on automobiles for the first time in a generation and eliminate tax breaks for the biggest oil companies in the country so we can invest in American-made renewable energy.
In discussing the bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "We will send our energy dollars to the Midwest, not the Middle East."
She's absolutely right.
Currently, we export a billion dollars a day out of our country to keep America moving. Our addiction to foreign oil has us mired in no-win alliances in the Middle East, it's poisoning our environment and it's crippling our economy.
Minnesota can play a leading role in breaking this dangerous cycle. We can create thousands of new, good jobs, which is nothing to scoff at given the economic difficulties facing our great state.
I am advocating additional strong investment in loan guarantee funds and tax incentives so Minnesota entrepreneurs can take the impressive work they have done here to the national level. This policy is a victory for Minnesota and America as a whole.
I know you have talked about your interest in improving our economy and strengthening America's national security. Energy independence moves us in that direction.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to you demonstrating positive leadership on this in the future.
Sincerely,
Bob Olson
Olson Writes to Bachmann Regarding Sustainable Energy
For Immediate Release
Contact: Christopher Truscott
chris@bobolson.org
612.423.2582
ANOKA – Bob Olson, a DFL candidate in the 6th Congressional District, sent the following letter to Michele Bachmann regarding her vote against legislation to help America end its dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
* * * * *
The Honorable Michele Bachmann
412 Cannon Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Monday, Dec. 10, 2007
Dear Congresswoman Bachmann:
I am writing regarding your vote last week against a critical piece of legislation that will help move our country beyond its lethal addiction to foreign oil.
This important bill will raise fuel efficiency standards on automobiles for the first time in a generation and eliminate tax breaks for the biggest oil companies in the country so we can invest in American-made renewable energy.
In discussing the bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "We will send our energy dollars to the Midwest, not the Middle East."
She's absolutely right.
Currently, we export a billion dollars a day out of our country to keep America moving. Our addiction to foreign oil has us mired in no-win alliances in the Middle East, it's poisoning our environment and it's crippling our economy.
Minnesota can play a leading role in breaking this dangerous cycle. We can create thousands of new, good jobs, which is nothing to scoff at given the economic difficulties facing our great state.
I am advocating additional strong investment in loan guarantee funds and tax incentives so Minnesota entrepreneurs can take the impressive work they have done here to the national level. This policy is a victory for Minnesota and America as a whole.
I know you have talked about your interest in improving our economy and strengthening America's national security. Energy independence moves us in that direction.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. I look forward to you demonstrating positive leadership on this in the future.
Sincerely,
Bob Olson
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Tinklenberg's MnDOT more corrupt than Molnau's?
Some will say that those who spend a great deal of time in public service, always have baggage. While that may be true to some extent, said baggage can usually fit nicely under the seat in front of you or in the overhead compartment.
Former Transportation Commissioner and 6th CD DFL candidate Elwyn Tinklenberg's baggage will barely fit in the hull of the DC 9 he will fly on to Washington DC for a December 29th fundraiser with the Transportation lobby.
It appears as though I have began to agitate some. Some believe that it's the job of MDE, Residual Forces and other right wing blogs to expose the shortcomings of a DFL candidate.
It comes back to a post I read about a week ago about the fall of Michael Barrett. Right wing bloggers exposed him because they felt it was better to expose faults on their own terms, institute corrective action before the lefty bloggers could take him to task.
Hence, my posts on Mr Tinklenberg. The most important race for me in 2008 is the Congressional race. I think Congresswoman Bachmann is vulnerable and that the right candidate will be able to fulfill a storied Minnesota blogs goal of Dumping Michele Bachmann.
The past will haunt Tinklenberg. There was a fraction of dirt out there on Patty Wetterling and Bachmann and her henchmen (Hellier and his crew), made Patty look pretty bad. The dirt out there on Tinklenberg will make Patty's attack seem insignificant.
Recall Tinklenberg's no bid contracts at MnDOT. And he thinks he can hold Congresswoman Bachmann accountable?
Wasteful spending was also a significant problem during Tinklenberg's reign. As noted in the January 21, 2003 edition of the Startribune, a story titled "INSIDE MnDOT;Motivation can be costly at MnDOT;Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up," describes some of the waste.
While communication between the sexes is important in workplaces, it would appear to at least me that the spending was a bit exorbitant. It gets better...
$664,000 is a pretty healthy deficit. It's a nice free ride for a lot of folks! $5,000 for someone to tell dry jokes?
And then the Alaska trek...
Am I nitpicking? Perhaps. But a pattern has emerged.
Running on holding Congresswoman Bachmann accountable when one has lacked accountability is a recipe for disaster.
While former MnDOT’s director of homeland security and emergency management Sonia Morphew Pitt allegedly bilked taxpayers out of more than $26,000 in compensation under Carol Molnau's watch it's quite clear to me that Molnau's incompetent leadership of MnDOT rivals the corrupt nature of Tinklenberg's MnDOT tenure.
I'm not sure what I am more disappointed about. The anointing of a candidate with a severe baggage problem or the fact that no one seems to care about it...
Former Transportation Commissioner and 6th CD DFL candidate Elwyn Tinklenberg's baggage will barely fit in the hull of the DC 9 he will fly on to Washington DC for a December 29th fundraiser with the Transportation lobby.
It appears as though I have began to agitate some. Some believe that it's the job of MDE, Residual Forces and other right wing blogs to expose the shortcomings of a DFL candidate.
It comes back to a post I read about a week ago about the fall of Michael Barrett. Right wing bloggers exposed him because they felt it was better to expose faults on their own terms, institute corrective action before the lefty bloggers could take him to task.
Hence, my posts on Mr Tinklenberg. The most important race for me in 2008 is the Congressional race. I think Congresswoman Bachmann is vulnerable and that the right candidate will be able to fulfill a storied Minnesota blogs goal of Dumping Michele Bachmann.
The past will haunt Tinklenberg. There was a fraction of dirt out there on Patty Wetterling and Bachmann and her henchmen (Hellier and his crew), made Patty look pretty bad. The dirt out there on Tinklenberg will make Patty's attack seem insignificant.
Recall Tinklenberg's no bid contracts at MnDOT. And he thinks he can hold Congresswoman Bachmann accountable?
Wasteful spending was also a significant problem during Tinklenberg's reign. As noted in the January 21, 2003 edition of the Startribune, a story titled "INSIDE MnDOT;Motivation can be costly at MnDOT;Spending on conferences, travel and entertainment adds up," describes some of the waste.
Last year, for instance, the 1,200 or so who attended the conference at the Radisson South Hotel were treated to an hourlong speech titled "The Rise, Fall and Rise of Harley-Davidson." The speaker, a marketing consultant, was paid $10,750.
A speech the next day was titled "Build a Bridge . . ." But it had nothing to do with concrete and steel. Rather, taxpayers spent $14,045 for engineers to spend an hour with a motivational speaker who writes about communication between the sexes.
While communication between the sexes is important in workplaces, it would appear to at least me that the spending was a bit exorbitant. It gets better...
MnDOT has increased its spending on the event by about 61 percent, from $136,173 in 1999 to $219,300 last year, according to records obtained by the Star Tribune under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.
During the past four conventions, MnDOT spent a total of $664,231 more than it recovered from vendors' fees and other income, records show.
Keynote speaker contracts for the four years totaled $114,430.
Some examples from the 2001 conference:
- $11,650 for a former ski champion's motivational speech.
- $12,950 for a team-building consultant who talked about ways managers can use fun to revitalize workers.
- $5,000 for a speech on "Intelligent Risk Taking."
MnDOT has canceled its 2003 conference, citing budget constraints.
$664,000 is a pretty healthy deficit. It's a nice free ride for a lot of folks! $5,000 for someone to tell dry jokes?
And then the Alaska trek...
In addition to its own conferences, MnDOT participates in the annual conference of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
The 2002 conference was held in Alaska in October. The agency initially sought permission from the Department of Employee Relations to send 25 people, noting that Minnesota would be host of the conference this year.
Bill Eisele, a division manager in the Employee Relations Department, cautioned MnDOT about sending so many. "I realize the necessity of your [conference] committee chairs going since you will be hosting the conference next year. However, have you considered the negative press if this ever got out?" he wrote in a July e-mail to Bruce Biser, assistant director of management operations.
Eisele said MnDOT's travel request was the largest that he had encountered. MnDOT officials eventually persuaded the Employee Relations Department to authorize travel for as many as three dozen employees, he said.
MnDOT sent 34 people at a cost of about $100,000, records show.
Am I nitpicking? Perhaps. But a pattern has emerged.
Running on holding Congresswoman Bachmann accountable when one has lacked accountability is a recipe for disaster.
While former MnDOT’s director of homeland security and emergency management Sonia Morphew Pitt allegedly bilked taxpayers out of more than $26,000 in compensation under Carol Molnau's watch it's quite clear to me that Molnau's incompetent leadership of MnDOT rivals the corrupt nature of Tinklenberg's MnDOT tenure.
I'm not sure what I am more disappointed about. The anointing of a candidate with a severe baggage problem or the fact that no one seems to care about it...
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
A tale of two websites
In the age of cyber campaigns, websites say a lot about a candidate.
Inspired by a comment at MnBlue!
Elwyn Tinklenberg's site is, well...basic. Standard political spin on the home page, a nice bio, and his press release from his October 1st announcement.
Nothing since...
It begs the question, does he really care? I mean, really! How many labor endorsements has Tinklenberg snagged? Damn near everyone of them. However, since it appears that they are simply going through the motions, there is no mention of any endorsements on his page.
It speaks to the organization and priorities of the campaign as well.
Bob Olson's site is pretty nice. It's definitely not basic!
Olson's site is updated with press releases, has an event calendar, ways for people to volunteer and donate money, and it actually says something.
I think it speaks to the organization of the campaign as well their desire to provide people with as much info as possible.
When Olson snags one of these union endorsements, how long do you think it will take them to post it? Anyone wanna bet it'll be up within 24 hours?
Just some random thoughts on how the campaigns are progressing...that's all!
Inspired by a comment at MnBlue!
Elwyn Tinklenberg's site is, well...basic. Standard political spin on the home page, a nice bio, and his press release from his October 1st announcement.
Nothing since...
It begs the question, does he really care? I mean, really! How many labor endorsements has Tinklenberg snagged? Damn near everyone of them. However, since it appears that they are simply going through the motions, there is no mention of any endorsements on his page.
It speaks to the organization and priorities of the campaign as well.
Bob Olson's site is pretty nice. It's definitely not basic!
Olson's site is updated with press releases, has an event calendar, ways for people to volunteer and donate money, and it actually says something.
I think it speaks to the organization of the campaign as well their desire to provide people with as much info as possible.
When Olson snags one of these union endorsements, how long do you think it will take them to post it? Anyone wanna bet it'll be up within 24 hours?
Just some random thoughts on how the campaigns are progressing...that's all!
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
CD 6 Labor Endorsements: The fix is in?
Beyond Sound Bites and Headlines has an excellent post that discusses the issues.
I guess that's what I'm having difficulty grasping. If our ultimate goal in 2008 is to defeat Congresswoman Bachmann, why wouldn't those united in this task screen all candidates and select the a candidate who can actually win?
Simply put, Tinklenberg is being anointed by labor in the 6th, and while I support labor, I have a hard time supporting back room deals to anoint a lessor candidate.
Tinklenberg has a "past", and it's much deeper than this. While he is popular with many, his actions as the Transportation Commissioner and his quick tongue shortly after the August 1st 35W Bridge collapse will haunt him.
People are tired of status quo politicians who are "in it for a buck".
Has Tinklenberg answered the question about what will come of his Transportation Lobby firm if he is elected to Congress? Surely he will serve on a transportation committee.
How many of his cronies will profit from Tinklenberg being elected to Congress?
Never mind the fact that the last social conservative that ran as a DFLer only gained 35% in the 6th.
How will Elwyn reach out to "Klobuchar Republicans"?
Clearly the powers that be, The DCCC, Union bosses and Oberstar have decided that this process should be taken out of the hands of those of us who endorsed Patty last election. To endorse without a screening or even a meeting seems incredible to those of us who are naive enough to believe in our Democratic system.At least 3 unions endorsed without even screening candidates, the pipe fitters, hotel workers and the laborers each endorsed without even a screening.
I guess that's what I'm having difficulty grasping. If our ultimate goal in 2008 is to defeat Congresswoman Bachmann, why wouldn't those united in this task screen all candidates and select the a candidate who can actually win?
Simply put, Tinklenberg is being anointed by labor in the 6th, and while I support labor, I have a hard time supporting back room deals to anoint a lessor candidate.
Tinklenberg has a "past", and it's much deeper than this. While he is popular with many, his actions as the Transportation Commissioner and his quick tongue shortly after the August 1st 35W Bridge collapse will haunt him.
People are tired of status quo politicians who are "in it for a buck".
Has Tinklenberg answered the question about what will come of his Transportation Lobby firm if he is elected to Congress? Surely he will serve on a transportation committee.
How many of his cronies will profit from Tinklenberg being elected to Congress?
Never mind the fact that the last social conservative that ran as a DFLer only gained 35% in the 6th.
How will Elwyn reach out to "Klobuchar Republicans"?
On the 29th of this month Oberstar is hosting a fund raiser for Tinklenberg in Washington DC with all of his Transportation lobbyist supporters.Indeed, the fix appears to be in...
It must be noted that Bob Olson is trying to bring 3 new manufacturing plants to our area. Two wind turbine and one Hydrogen powered bus plants. Currently only one turbine plant exists in this country and it is represented by the Steel workers in Pennsylvania. The rest come from Europe.
You would think that Unions would want to expand the manufacturing base here in the 6th. You would think that the UAW would be worried about where its Ford workers are going to find jobs next year. It may have been nice if they had at least talked to Bob.
I guess it was too much to ask.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
A couple of my favorites
From Jared's myspace page...
On Guitar Hero
Guitar Anti-Hero
Current mood: aggravated
Lake City
And lastly, Jared's "On Notice" list
Brilliance...
On Guitar Hero
Guitar Anti-Hero
Current mood: aggravated
Quite possibly the dumbest game ever created by mankind would be Guitar Hero. Sorry to be the one to break the news to you but you can not apply the skills you "learn" in guitar hero to anything practical in the real world. Here's a novel idea, how about you learn to play a real guitar?! Because that would be too stimulating and challenging....
So you think you can impress the ladies with your mad guitar hero skills? No, its quite ridiculous sitting there thinking you're "in the band" trying to attempt Smoke on the Water for the 3rd time in the row because you can't press two buttons when the TV tells you too. Monkeys trained by the Soviets that were used in early space flights can most likely kick your ass in guitar hero, if not be able to play at the same level as anyone else.
So please spare us all the horrible rendition of Carry on My Wayward Son and just do something practical and less ridiculous looking.
Lake City
Lake City...more like Liar City
Current mood: annoyed
I think the time is right in my MySpace blogging rants to talk about one of the biggest things that bug me, and that is the City of Lake City, Minnesota.
From the very beginning of my college career Lake City and I didn't get along. It began on a Friday morning late in my senior year of high school when I was accompanying my friend Ashley down to Winona for a day of exploration and discovery during Tartan HS's senior skip day. On the way down to Winona Ashley was pulled over for "speeding" on Hwy. 61 in downtown Lake City. I knew from that moment on that the relationship between Lake City and I would be a rocky one.
During my freshman year at WSU several colleagues and I made a discovery about this "birthplace of water skiing." We've noticed that whenever you pass through Lake City you never see ANYONE water skiing on Lake Pepin (Lake City's "lake"). This is a problem being that Lake City prides itself on being the "birthplace of water skiing." At first I decided to try and help Lake City with this problem by writing them letters concerning a 24-hour water skiing proposal that would validate their claim. But this proposal was eventually ignored, and Lake City continues to lie to itself, it's citizens, and southeast Minnesota. The 24-hour water skiing proposal was actually a speech topic of mine for my intro to speech class. The speech can be viewed on my blog by click here: The Lake City Speech.
Next, is Lake Pepin an actual lake? To me it is a widening of the Mississippi River and therefore not a lake. So technically in it's very name Lake City is lying. I propose that this city now become Wide Part of the Mississippi City instead of Lake City.
Finally, in late September I had the pleasure of being stopped by a Wabasha County Sheriff Deputy for "speeding." According to the Deputy I was going 70 MPH in a 55 MPH zone, it is because of this I was issue a ticket. Where did this take place? Why just outside of Wide Part of the Mississippi City. Luckly the ticket is now non-existant due to the Wabasha County Safe Drivers Course that allows you to get rid of speeding tickets for first time offenders.
So let's recap:
1. "Lake" City pulled over my friend Ashley in spring 2004.
2. "Lake" City makes claims such as "the birthplace of water skiing" and does nothing to validate the claim, even though a concerned citizen of the region makes a proposal to fix their situation.
3. "Lake" Pepin is acutally a wide part of the Mississippi River
4. I was pulled over just outside of "Lake City." That's four strikes against them! They've struck out and then some!
So therefore, Wide Part of the Mississippi City is on my "on notice" list, along with other things mentioned on this MySpace blog.
And lastly, Jared's "On Notice" list
These are all the things that are "on notice" with me, which means they better change or get their act straight before something bad goes down, and we don't want that now.
On Notice: -
City of Lake City-
Rochester Post Bulletin Reader Comments (http://jarheadjps.blogspot.com/2006/12/post-bulletin-reader-comment.html)-
David Hasselhoff- People who drive motorized tricycles-
Woodbury mom's who let their four year old kids order their own food at Noodles and Company-
People who haven't seen the 1986 blockbuster hit Top Gun starring Tom Cruise, Anthony Edwards, Kelly McGillis, and Val Kilmer.-
Anti-Mocha people -
Ladies who run around 4th St. in front of Bub's in Winona and yell at their dog Rufus-
The popular 1990's boy band New Kids on the Block-
MySpace bulletin surveys -
Seagull in front of Kryzsko Commons, Winona State University -
The new Coke display fridge at Mugby Junction on Huff St.
Brilliance...
Random thoughts
Spent a lot of time on the phone yesterday, checking in with friends and seeing how everyone is doing.
Spent a lot of time reflecting on the time I was able to spend with Jared. Damn, we all had some good times with that guy.
MSUSA Conferences were always a riot! Moorhead conference in 2005, Jared talking about dressing up as Clifford the Big Red Dog...
The absolutely random pictures that he would draw...
Hotdish...
On my 35th Birthday, he was singing the Fergie song, "My Humps" at decibel levels that nearly brought out the Wright County Sheriff, as Nolan song and gyrated in Tootsies...
Speaking of Sheriffs, the story of Ryan, Jared and Nolan staying at Dori's place when the Meeker County Sheriff showed up, campaigning guys..."I swear officer, we're all over 21 and have permission to be here..."
Jared coming up to me at the Dassel Parade wearing his "smart ass" DFL shirt and saying, "you think this is alright to wear"...
And countless other memories...
We're all mourning now. It will take some time to pick the pieces back up and begin to move forward again, and that's fine.
Dori and I were in Marketplace getting some groceries before the "Storm of the Century" hits us. All the sudden, everything started to hit me.
I started to ponder what if this happened on our watch?
I'm in pain right now. I can't imagine being in a position of leadership in MSUSA and having one of my fellow leaders pass away. I can't fathom the feeling if one of the Board members during the Kimball/Reese days passed.
We had legal matters and executive director stuff to deal with, and at times, that was pretty frickin hard.
It pales in comparison.
They did the right thing in cancelling the conference in St Cloud this past weekend. As a matter of fact, it was the only thing they could do...
I know this loss is tough on the staff, officers and board members of MSUSA, it's like losing a family member, ripe with some interesting dysfunctions at times as well!
Kara, Brad and Jason will need a lot of support. It's times like these where our future leaders step forward and carry on the torch, where Team MSUSA grows in strength.
I sat in my chair in the living room for nearly 2 hours Thursday night, not moving, not saying a word. Dori came downstairs and told me, "You know, Jared probably just handed Paul Wellstone the most insane drawing he's ever seen..."
So true...
Spent a lot of time reflecting on the time I was able to spend with Jared. Damn, we all had some good times with that guy.
MSUSA Conferences were always a riot! Moorhead conference in 2005, Jared talking about dressing up as Clifford the Big Red Dog...
The absolutely random pictures that he would draw...
Hotdish...
On my 35th Birthday, he was singing the Fergie song, "My Humps" at decibel levels that nearly brought out the Wright County Sheriff, as Nolan song and gyrated in Tootsies...
Speaking of Sheriffs, the story of Ryan, Jared and Nolan staying at Dori's place when the Meeker County Sheriff showed up, campaigning guys..."I swear officer, we're all over 21 and have permission to be here..."
Jared coming up to me at the Dassel Parade wearing his "smart ass" DFL shirt and saying, "you think this is alright to wear"...
And countless other memories...
We're all mourning now. It will take some time to pick the pieces back up and begin to move forward again, and that's fine.
Dori and I were in Marketplace getting some groceries before the "Storm of the Century" hits us. All the sudden, everything started to hit me.
I started to ponder what if this happened on our watch?
I'm in pain right now. I can't imagine being in a position of leadership in MSUSA and having one of my fellow leaders pass away. I can't fathom the feeling if one of the Board members during the Kimball/Reese days passed.
We had legal matters and executive director stuff to deal with, and at times, that was pretty frickin hard.
It pales in comparison.
They did the right thing in cancelling the conference in St Cloud this past weekend. As a matter of fact, it was the only thing they could do...
I know this loss is tough on the staff, officers and board members of MSUSA, it's like losing a family member, ripe with some interesting dysfunctions at times as well!
Kara, Brad and Jason will need a lot of support. It's times like these where our future leaders step forward and carry on the torch, where Team MSUSA grows in strength.
I sat in my chair in the living room for nearly 2 hours Thursday night, not moving, not saying a word. Dori came downstairs and told me, "You know, Jared probably just handed Paul Wellstone the most insane drawing he's ever seen..."
So true...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
