That’s Kristi Luger. Kristi is the new City Manager for the City of Excelsior. She started there on Monday, April 21. I went up to Excelsior today to take her out for lunch to welcome her to the Twin Cities.

Actually, it’s really more like welcoming her back to the Twin Cities. You see, Kristi is an Eden Prairie gal. She grew up here and graduated from Eden Prairie High School. She then went on to get her bachelors and masters degrees from Minnesota State-Mankato. And, just a few short years ago (four years ago, if my memory is correct), Kristi was an intern in my office.

Now I’d like to be able to report that being my intern was the most important experience Kristi had in her college years, but I can’t be sure of that. What I am sure of is that she knew what she wanted to be a City Manager someday and she was dedicated to achieve it.

Following the completion of her masters degree, Kristi served as the City Administrator for the City of Tyler, Minnesota, which is way out west. That was a great experience for her because it was live on-the-job experience. She made actual decisions that combined what she learned as my intern and what she learned in the classrooms in Mankato. She has now worked her way back to the Twin Cities and her new job in Excelsior.

I have several other interns who have moved on to success in their post-intern years, but Kristi is the first to become a full-fledged City Manager, and I am very proud of her.

The State Auditor conducts an annual review of the profitability of municipal liquor stores each year. They do this as part of their “watch-dog” role over local governments. They want citizens to know if their local municipal liquor stores are losing money or are creating a drain on local property taxes, instead of creating additional revenue for their owners.

I’ve copied in an article from today’s Star Tribune about that annual study. There are several municipal liquor stores that are losing money. In Eden Prairie, however, our municipal liquor store operation was rated #1 in the state in terms of net profit in 2006 - the latest year for which the state has complete data. Our Return on Investment (ROI) in 2006 was 10.47%. In 2005 it was 10.42%. In 2007 it was 10.5%. We’re looking forward to a healthy 2008.

Liquor profits in Eden Prairie go right back into the community via our Capital Improvements Program. The money goes for such things as parks, sidewalks, trails, streets and other public improvements that we would otherwise have to tax our citizens for, or just not do.

Here’s the article. Congratulations to our fine staff who run a first class operation!

Municipal liquor stores made $20 million in 2006

According to a state auditor’s report, 44 cities that operate municipal liquor operations across the state lost money in 2006, including four communities in the metro area - Robbinsdale, Mound, Shorewood and Farmington.

THE LATEST: Minnesota cities that operate municipal liquor stores collectively had record sales for the 11th consecutive year and turned a net profit of $20 million in 2006, according to a report recently released by the state auditor’s office.

There are several property tax bills being considered by the State Legislature that are of interest to citizens and city governments in Minnesota. I pleased to report that one of the bills that I talked about last week - a new economic development tool being considered to help subsidize a parking ramp for the new phase II development at the Mall of America - has been amended so that it is now revenue-neutral for Twin Cities commercial/industrial taxpayers. That’s good. In fact, the legislature is going to consider developing criteria and rules for the use of that particular tool in the future, which would also be good.

Another property tax development that is under consideration is the proposal outlined by the Star Tribune’s Lori Sturdevant in the story below that appeared in Saturday’s paper. Like many bills, it has its positive and negative sides. For places like Eden Prairie, I think it will impact our citizens greater than average because we have a higher proportion of our population with total family income of $200,000 or more.

One of its positive impacts is that it directs state property tax relief directly from the state to the individual. In the current property tax relief system, the state routes some (but not all) of its property tax relief through city governments. This is problematic for city governments because sometimes the state reimburses us for their property tax relief programs, and sometimes they don’t. I like the idea of getting city governments out of the middle of that transaction.

Read Ms. Sturdevant’s story:

As property taxes bear down, pair offers a leg up

By LORI STURDEVANT, Star Tribune

April 26, 2008

For the last few years, rising residential property taxes have been the weather issue at the Minnesota Legislature — the thing everybody talks about, but nobody does much about.

It’s not for lack of trying, or lack of ideas. But each party’s pet idea for controlling property taxes is anathema to the other, and this crowd tends to cling to its pets like toddlers to their favorite toys.

Against that backdrop last week came a new property tax relief idea from House DFL tax chair Ann Lenczewski and property tax division chair Paul Marquart. It came with a label not often attached to DFL tax proposals: “revenue neutral.”

The idea featured a few other surprises: It did not involve a state tax increase. (That was tried and vetoed last year.) It did not involve a huge increase in aid to local governments (never popular with Republicans, who tend to favor local control more in principle than in practice). It did not rely on unsustainable one-time money gimmicks (which are in vogue in both parties this year but are detested by fiscal prudes, including editorial writers).

Lenczewski and Marquart proposed to ease the property tax burden on homeowners least able to bear it, by putting the state’s property tax refund program, or “circuit breaker,” on steroids. It would bulk up state refunds to homeowners whose property tax burdens are disproportionately high relative to their incomes, making it big enough to block next year’s expected property tax increases for a majority of Minnesotans.

The circuit breaker’s growth would be funded by scaling down or eliminating the itemized state income tax deduction for property taxes and the market value homestead credit, which is unrelated to the size of either a homeowner’s tax bill or income.

That would mean higher taxes for homeowners with high incomes and comparatively low property taxes — particularly those with household incomes after deductions of more than $200,000. They’re only about 5 percent of Minnesotans. But their ranks may include more potential campaign donors than legislators and Gov. Tim Pawlenty are willing to afflict in an election year.

Yet the high-end earners who would lose a prized tax deduction under this plan should be advised that the existing state-plus-local tax structure in Minnesota grants them most-favored-taxpayer status. The tax cuts of 1999-2001 produced a fairness gap that favors the rich, and it’s growing. The latest calculations say top earners pay about 9 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes, compared with 12.5 percent for middle earners.

Lenczewski is a zealot about arresting that regressive trend. In that sense, her proposal is true to eight decades of emphasis by the DFL or its Farmer-Labor antecedent on basing taxation on ability to pay.

But in another sense, Lenczewski and Marquart are breaking with DFL orthodoxy. They favor direct aid to taxpayers over local governments. That’s an implicit acceptance of Republican arguments about the virtue of putting money into individual pockets and of exposing more taxpayers to the full impact of local government decisions.

That bow in the GOP direction ought to give their idea at least a remote chance to get through Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s “no new taxes” filter and become law. It should, that is, if easing property tax pain for those who are really hurting outweighs the election-year thrill of stomping on any idea that originates with the opposite team.

What ought to be clear to legislators is that the economic hurt in Minnesota is growing, and their election certificates oblige them to do something about it, no matter whether they sit in the majority or the minority caucus.

People whose incomes are falling are particularly burdened by the 82 percent average increase in homeowners’ property taxes that’s come on Pawlenty’s watch. They can’t afford the 7.7 percent increase that’s forecast for next year. Helping people in tough circumstances stay in their homes is what Minnesotans looked to a Farmer-Labor governor and a Conservative Legislature to do 75 years ago, and they delivered. Today’s divided government owes its constituents no less.

Lori Sturdevant is a Star Tribune editorial writer and columnist. She is at lsturdevant@startribune.com.

Money Back for Minnesotans

How the House DFL plan might affect you, if you live in rural Minnesota (top set of numbers) or in the metro area (the bottom set of numbers):

If your household … and your home’s … your savings next year would be:

income after market value is …

deductions is …

$40,000 $106,900 $35

$60,000 $160,300 $101

$100,000 $213,700 $70

_________________________________________________

$60,000 $187,500 $110

$80,000 $281,100 $227

$110,000 $374,700 $365

$150,000 $374,700 $63

All savings are net of the project impact on all taxes, federal, state and local.

Source: House Research.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

According to Ms. Nina Manzi, an analyst with State House Research, the following groups/people will benefit most from this proposal:

1. High-income taxpayers (over $200K income/year) who itemize their federal deductions regardless of where they live.

2. Taxpayers who itemize their federal deductions with incomes over $100K who live in low-value homes (>$200K).

3. Taxpayers who itemize their federal deductions with incomes over $100K who live in average value homes, but have low taxes ($280,000 home, taxes of $2,300).

4. Taxpayers who itemize their federal deductions with incomes over $150K who live in average value homes ($200K) with average or high taxes ($3K and up)

5. Taxpayers who itemize their federal deductions with incomes over $100K and have average taxes (or higher). For example, an income of $100K in a home valued at $160K or more, with taxes of $1,500 or more.

Linking property tax relief to income is a new concept in Minnesota. I doubt this proposal will become law, but you never know.

At their meeting this week the City Council accepted a gift of a building from the Sampson family that will serve as the City’s future Art Center. The Council’s action means that City staff and the City’s Arts & Culture Commission can now move forward in the planning effort to get the Art Center ready to go. We presented the Council with a tentative plan of necessary building improvements and a program of use for the building at the Council meeting. That was good enough to win the support of the Council, so now it’s time to make it real.

The Council Members expressed their appreciation and gratitude to the Sampson family for their gift to the City. It’s thought to be the largest single gift (in terms of monetary value) ever given to the City - a 5,400 sq ft building worth over $1,000,000.

There’s a lot of work to do, but now we’re cleared to do it. Thank you City Council, and thank you Sampson family. We will do this right. You will be proud of this gift to Eden Prairie.

I attended a big meeting yesterday at the headquarters of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) in St. Paul. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the prospects for the future improvement of the I-494 - T.H.169 interchange given the State’s new transportation bill generated new funds for MnDOT. We wanted to see if the new money meant that the project might be accelerated, or if the new money might vault other area projects ahead of this one.

The meeting included the Mayors, City Managers and Public Works Directors of Eden Prairie, Edina and Bloomington. There were also City Council Members and other city staff from the respective cities. There were also a couple of representatives from Eden Prairie’s business community: Liberty Property Trust and SUPERVALU. Finally, there were also three State Representatives there: Rep. Maria Ruud from Eden Prairie; Rep. Ron Erhardt from Edina and Rep. Neil Peterson from Bloomington. MnDOT was represented by the Acting Director Bob McFarlin, Metro District Engineer Tom O’Keefe and several other high ranking MnDOT staff members. It was a large group of people with busy schedules who got together to talk about a very important project.

It was a productive meeting. MnDOT shared with us what they expect to receive in new revenue as a result of the new transportation bill. They will see new money, but a significant share of it will go toward the repair and replacement of bridges. That was a legislative mandate by the State Legislature. The second priority of the new money will be pavement preservation. Expansion projects, which is what they say the 494-169 project represents, are, at best, a third priority for MnDOT.

Nonetheless, Mr. McFarlin told us that the 494-169 project is a priority project for him. He has a long history with the project during his career at MnDOT. He told us that he would work with his staff and with the three cities to figure out a solution to get the project moving. He asked us to consider potential decreases to the scope of the previously approved improvement plan for the interchange. The message was that if we could decrease the cost of the project, which is estimated to be over $120,000,000, by decreasing the scope of the project, the project could be completed sooner rather than later. No surprise there. The cities said they would look at variations of the project scope proposed by MnDOT and get responses back to MnDOT this summer.

Meetings like this a necessary in order to set a path for creating a solution to a problem. We want the project to happen tomorrow. They don’t have enough money to do the project tomorrow. So what do we do? We talk. We compromise. We move the project forward by reassessing what’s important and what’s not. We’re going to get right to work on this. This project is too important to the traveling public and to the economic development prospects in Eden Prairie to wait another ten years. We need it sooner rather than later.

Congratulations to the Eden Prairie Veterans Memorial Committee. The Committee, along with our locally elected state officials - Senator David Hann, Representative Erik Paulsen and Representative Maria Ruud - were successful in garnering a $100,000 appropriation in the State’s 2008 Bonding Bill. The appropriation will be used to continue the progress of building a Veterans Memorial in Purgatory Creek Park.

The bonding bill was signed into law by Governor Pawlenty earlier this week. I don’t yet know the details of how the money will be disbursed for the project, but I’m sure we’ll work that out later. If you want to see the actual line item appropriation for yourself in the bill, click this link and page down to page page 6 of 9, line 365: 2008 Bonding Bill Link.

The City was also seeking a sizable bonding bill appropriation for the Camp Eden Wood Project, but that did not come through this year. That’s OK. We’ll try that one again next time. But I couldn’t be more happy for the Memorial Committee. They have worked so hard to realize this dream, and now it is really within their sights.

Council Member Brad Aho, Fire Chief George Esbensen and I walked walked and walked the sidewalks around the office buildings surrounding Capitol Hill as we went from legislative office to legislative office to talk about Eden Prairie’s federal legislative agenda. It was a lot of walking. My feet were dead after two days of it. I think I’ll wear a better pair of shoes next year.

We got good responses from the offices we met with. We are concentrating on Representative Kline’s office for assistance with the WAFTA site clean-up. Our tone was a bit stronger on that issue this year compared to previous years. It needed to be. We all know the site is contaminated. That is well documented. It is also well documented that we all know about it and haven’t been all that active in getting it cleaned up. This is the year that we need to make some progress on that issue. WAFTA is in the 2nd Congressional District so it is appropriate for Rep. Kline to take the lead on the issue. But it’s problematic for us to have Rep. Kline take the lead in some respects because he has a personal policy against congressional earmarks, which is what we probably need in this case. Rep. Ramstad said he would try to help us with that.

We had an excellent meeting with Representative Jim Oberstar’s chief of staff Bill Richard. Rep. Oberstar is a powerful congressman when it comes to transportation funding. We made our case to Mr. Richard about the importance of getting additional federal funding for the 169-494 interchange and for future funding for the SWLRT project.

Senator Coleman hosted an open house event on Tuesday so that he could meet with all the Minnesota city officials in DC for the National League of Cities conference. About a 12-15 showed up. Those who missed it, missed a good opportunity. He gave us a lot of his time and attention. We also met with his staff on Monday, so we had a pretty good opportunity to make our points on individual Eden Prairie issues too, such as the Southwest LRT project and the 169-494 intersection project.

We had two meetings with Senator Klobuchar’s staff. We concentrated on an ongoing issue we have with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service concerning public access to the Minnesota River Valley at one and one transportation and homeland security at the other. We also threw in the WAFTA issue at both meetings, just for good measure.

I bumped into Representative Keith Ellison at a legislative reception sponsored by the City of Minneapolis. I talked to him about the fact that the proposed light rail line from Minneapolis to Eden Prairie is equally important for both cities. He agreed and told me that he’d do everything he could to support the project when it came time to provide it federal funds.

Our final meeting of the week was our final meeting with Representative Ramstad. He will be retiring from Congress this year. I am going to miss him. He is a good legislator, and an even better guy. He is honest and frank about issues. He tells you when he can help and tells you when he can’t. He has been an effective representative for Hennepin County in Congress. He will be missed.

We’re back home now and busy getting follow-up communications sent back to remind the people we met with what they said they would do for us. It’s also a good way to remind ourselves what we said we’d do for them.

Good trip, but it’s good to be back to work in Eden Prairie.

City Council Member Brad Aho, Fire Chief George Esbensen and I are heading off to Washington DC this weekend for the 2008 National League of Cities Congressional Cities Conference. The conference is important, but we have also scheduled meetings with a number of Minnesota’s federal elected officials to discuss policy issues that are of particular importance to Eden Prairie. On Monday and Tuesday we will be meeting with representatives from the following offices: Senator Klobuchar, Senator Coleman, Representative Oberstar, Representative Kline, Representative Ellison and Representative Ramstad to discuss the following issues:

1. Clean up of the environment contamination at the WAFTA site.

2. Gaining better access to the Minnesota River Valley from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

3. Full funding of the Community Development Block Grant program.

4. Increased transportation funding for roads and LRT.

5. Cooperation and financial support of our local homeland security efforts.

I’m bringing my computer and camera along, so I’ll update my blog from there are share our progress from day to day.

My heart goes out today to my colleagues at the City of Kirkwood, Missouri where a resident killed six people at their City Council meeting last night. It’s a terrible, terrible tragedy. You can read more about the event at this link from CNN: “Six Dead as gunman goes to war with Missouri city“.

As soon as I heard the news this morning it took me immediately back to Mt. Pleasant, Iowa where I was the City Administrator from 1990-1996. In 1987 a resident named Ralph W. Davis walked into a Mt. Pleasant City Council meeting and shot Mayor Edd King three times and the Council Member on either side of the Mayor once each. Mayor King died at the scene. The two Council Members suffered serious injuries, but later recovered. Davis was later convicted of murder and died in an Iowa prison. The motive for his crime: he thought the City was intentionally filling up his basement with flood water.

As I said, I was not in Mt. Pleasant at the time of this event, but the mental, emotional and community trauma was still churning when I arrived in February 1990. There were lawsuits. There were workers’ compensation issues. The City had a tough time getting citizens to volunteer to serve in any capacity for the City. The City of Kirkwood will go through these issues too. It’s very difficult. In some ways, their city will never recover from this tragedy.

So I will say a prayer tonight for the citizens, City staff and elected officials of Kirkwood, Missouri tonight. They will need all the support they can get.

Department Directors and I (and my trusty assistant Lorene) met with City Council on Saturday morning, January 19, for our annual Council Planning Session. The purpose of the planning session was to have some conversation on some City foundational issues, such as our vision, mission, key objectives and core beliefs. We also planned to talk about the future of the new Budget Advisory Commission and to review the policy direction of the City’s new Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan.

As we reviewed the City’s existing vision, mission, key objectives and core beliefs, I asked the Council to affirm the existing statements, or to suggest amending them. We had good a good discussion and affirmed the existing vision, mission and key objectives. As for our core beliefs, we added a new one that says we will “honor our natural and cultural heritage.” We have a reference to fostering respect for the past in our mission statement, but had no connection to that statement in our statement of core beliefs. We also amended another one that originally said that we believe in “the value of public service, both paid and voluntary.” The new version says we believe in “the value of public and community service, both paid and voluntary.” The addition of the word “community” is meant to emphasize the City Council’s appreciation and value of people who do community service in Eden Prairie in non-profits, youth athletic associations, churches, etc. The value of community service is very important to city government. If we did not have people in the community willing to serve their fellow citizens in these important roles and functions, city government would probably need to be bigger and broader than it is today.

We also had a good discussion about the City’s newest citizen advisory commission: the Budget Advisory Commission (BAC). The Council reached consensus on a couple of issues related to the BAC. I am drafting a statement to share with BAC members about the direction of their commission, but I need to review it with Council Members first before I share it with everyone reading this blog. No sneak peak on this one.

The final thing we accomplished on Saturday was to review some of the fundamental changes that we are going to see in our upcoming comprehensive guide plan. The guide plan is getting an update this year. That happens every ten years. The new guide plan contains new direction for the City in several key areas. We’ve been talking with the Council and the Planning Commission about these new directions for the past couple of years, but we wanted to make double and triple sure that the new guide plan reflects the Council’s wishes because we are getting awfully close to asking them to approve the final document. The Council affirmed for us that the guide plan is heading in the right direction. It gets its final review by the Planning Commission on January 28 and its first review by the Council at the February 12 Council meeting.

All in all, a pretty good planning session.

It’s time once again for the annual State of the City address. Last year the City joined the School District and the Chamber of Commerce for a joint State of the City event. It was very well received, so we’re going to do that again this year. The event is scheduled for Thursday (tomorrow), January 17 in the Garden Room in Eden Prairie City Center. The event starts at 4pm with a social hour followed by the start of the presentations at 5pm. We expect the event to wrap up by 6pm. The City is videotaping the event and will broadcast the tape on EPTV-16 starting next week. You can find the EPTV-16 program schedule by clicking on this link: EPTV-16 Program Schedule

Eden Prairie had a pretty good year last year. The State of the City is good. So if you can’t join us in person for the big event, you’re always welcome to watch us on EPTV-16. I think you’ll enjoy it.

Mayor Young, Council Member Aho and I joined a group of 20+ other members of the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce Business Leaders Roundtable on Friday at the Hilton Garden Inn for a meeting with 3rd District Congressman Jim Ramstad. We had a good meeting with the Congressman. He covered five topics in detail that he felt were going to consume most of Congress’s available time and attention in 2008: economy, health care costs. transportation, education and the war in Iraq.

Congressman Ramstad talked about the success of the Bush tax cuts that he credits with 52 consecutive months of job growth in the United States - the longest streak of of consistent job growth in American history. But he wondered in the job growth numbers from the 4th quarter of 2007 is a sign that the streak may be coming to an end. He voted in favor of another one year fix of the AMT, but believes a permanent fix for the AMT is necessary. He also talked about the proposal to make the Bush tax cuts permanent (they expire in 2010), but understands that will mean a potential $2.5 trillion hit to the U.S. Treasury and wondered how the federal government would deal with that.

When discussing health care, Congressman Ramstad said that he favored the S-CHIP bills that came out of Congress this fall and credited Governor Pawlenty as one of the most innovative governors in America when it came to expanding and managing S-CHIP funded programs in Minnesota. He also shared his five suggestions for improving health care in the U.S.: cover the uninsured through refundable tax credits and vouchers; allow association health plans; implement medical liability reform; expand health savings accounts; and allow for the re-importation of pharmaceutical drugs from Canada.

The congressman said he would fight for earmarks for such transportation projects as highway 610, 494-169 interchange, Southwest LRT, and highway 212 because money is needed for those projects and because the projects have merit.

Congressman Ramstad said that the President and Congress should not become a national School Board and substitute its collective judgment for the judgment of locally elected school boards. He said the federal government should fully fund its 1976 commitment to pay for 40% of local special education costs. The federal government current funds about 18% of special ed costs.

Finally, Congressman Ramstad described the war in Iraq as the “800 pound gorilla in the room”. He was one of only 17 Republicans in the House to vote against the President’s “surge” plan. He acknowledged the reported success of the surge in reducing the overall level of violence in Baghdad, but wondered if the surge had just disbursed the bad guys into the hinterlands to lay low until the U.S. departed. He also offered some criticism of the Iraqi government for not making much political progress on the 18 benchmarks adopted by the U.S. Congress. So far, the Iraqi central government has only made substantial progress of 8 of the 18 benchmarks.

Congressman Ramstad is a great guy to have breakfast with. He is informative, but listens well too. He will be tough to replace.

The City of Shorewood is out of the municipal liquor business. In 2007 three of the five members of the Shorewood City Council examined the future of the City’s municipal liquor operations and decided it was not a lucrative enough venture for the City to continue to be involved in. Laurie Blake has a story in today’s Star Tribune. You can see the story by clicking on this link: “Municipal liquor sales: No business for a city?”

The decision about staying in (or getting out of) a municipal liquor operation can be a difficult one. Or, for some, it can be an easy one. Some people believe a City should control the distribution of liquor in a community because they believe it will be more controlled under the non-profit management of a city government than under the for-profit management of a private business owner. Others believe a city should not be engaged in any sort of retails sales operation, liquor included. The middle ground is typically occupied by people who feel it is a bit off target for a city to be in the liquor business, but they like the idea that liquor profits are used, primarily, to fund improvements to public streets, trails, parks, police cars, fire trucks, etc. that would ordinarily be funded by property taxes.

The numbers included in Blake’s story are interesting. The first number is total sales from 2005 and the second is the 2005 net profit from liquor sales in 2005. The source of the data is the State Auditor’s Office:

Metro Area City Sales Net profits

Anoka $3,189,297 $182,058

Apple Valley $6,405,618 $555,748

Brooklyn Center $4,610,091 $182,910

Columbia Heights $6,713,932 $228,532

Eden Prairie $10,023,770 $1,096,673

Edina $10,752,724 $1,003,411

Farmington $3,441,312 $267,924

Fridley $5,283,229 $375,866

Lakeville $11,481,091 $1,149,155

Lexington $2,598,458 $171,981

Mound $2,134,980 $-118,780

Richfield $10,016,562 $619,639

Robbinsdale $2,011,139 $13,652

Rogers $2,851,190 $137,880

Savage $5,749,755 $438,991

Shorewood $2,035,480 $46,792

Spring Lake Park $2,527,828 $25,129

St. Anthony $5,298,404 $269,061

St. Francis $1,717,092 $156,434

Watertown $22,195 -$69,215

Wayzata $3,101,217 $218,624

In 2005, Shorewood sold $2,035,480 in beer, wine and liquor in order to generate $46,792 for the City’s General Fund. That’s a 2.3% profit margin. Eden Prairie, by contrast, had 2005 sales of $10,023,770 and generated $1,096,673 - a profit margin of 11%, one of the highest municipal liquor profit margins in the metro area. Eden Prairie plugs its annual liquor profits right into our Capital Improvement Fund. From there it is distributed by the City Council to pay for many different kinds of public projects, such as road improvements, park improvements, new trail construction and improvements to public buildings and facilities. If the City did not have the annual municipal liquor profits, we would need to tax our property taxpayers for a like amount of revenue; or, reduce the number of road improvements, park improvements, etc. that we try to accomplish on an annual basis. It’s a tough choice.

The tough choice for municipal liquor belongs to the City Council. It takes a simple majority vote of a City Council to give up a City’s municipal liquor operations. And once you’re out, you’re out. Can’t go back again. Because it is a public-driven choice by a community’s elected officials, the City asked Eden Prairie residents in the City’s 2006 Quality of Life Survey what they thought about the City’s municipal liquor operations. Here’s what we asked them:

Do you favor of oppose the City continuing to operate its municipal liquor stores?

84% said they “favor”

9% said they “oppose”

7% said they were “Don’t know/Refused to answer”

The 9% who said they opposed the City’s continued operation of its municipal liquor stores were asked an additional follow-up question that went like this:

Do you still oppose the continued operation of the municipal liquor stores if closing the liquor stores would result in a $1,000,000 loss of revenue for the city?

50% responded they would still oppose the City’s operation of municipal liquor stores, even if it meant a financial loss for the City.

47% changed their minds after hearing the additional information about the loss of revenue if the City got out of its municipal liquor operations.

3% did not answer or did not have an opinion.

Staying in the municipal liquor business is a tough choice, even if the profits are good, and even if those profits go to a benevolent end. It’s one of the areas of city government where elected officials face the dilemma that something that is beneficial for the community may be in conflict with their personal philosophy of life, business or politics. Think being a member of a City Council is easy? Think about the arguments for and against the municipal liquor issue. It can be a tough choice.

Here’s my Friday Report to the City Council for Friday, December 14, 2007:

Friday Report

1. MLC Legislative Program is Approved - The Municipal Legislative Commission Board of Directors unanimously approved the draft 2008 legislative program at the board meeting in Shoreview yesterday.

2. Joint Meeting with Planning Commission - Our Workshop for Tuesday, Dec. 18 is a joint meeting with the Planning Commission. The purpose of the joint meeting is to discuss the future of the Major Center Area. Staff and Planning Commission are hoping to receive affirmation that our current policy direction on the MCA, and specifically the Town Center, still has the general support of the City Council.

3. Joint Meeting with Legislative Delegation - I have invited Representatives Paulsen and Ruud and Senator Hann to join the City Council for a pre-session joint meeting during the City Council’s Jan. 22, 2008, workshop.

4. Transitional Housing Proposal - Housing and Community Services staff are working with Pax Christi Church on a proposal to establish a “transitional home”. In this proposal, the City would purchase a home with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The Church would manage the transition home functions. The City Attorney’s office has researched the use of CDBG funds for this type of function and determined that it is an eligible use. Further, this meets HUD’s objective to work with faith-based initiatives. A transitional home is one in which a family is provided a place to live for a period of time, while receiving supportive efforts to achieve education and employment goals in order to thrive in the community. This project will be formally presented to the City Council early in 2008.

5. MLC Legislative Breakfast Meetings - The annual MLC Regional Legislative Breakfast Reception for the west metro MLC cities and legislators has been scheduled for Friday, Feb. 15, 2008, from 7:30 - 9 a.m. at the Radisson Hotel and Conference Center in Plymouth.

6. Proposed City Council Meeting Schedule for 2008 - The Council normally approves its schedule of official meetings for the year at its first official meeting of the year. Because the first Tuesday of the year is Jan. 1, 2008, the Council’s first official meeting of the year is scheduled for the second Tuesday of Jan. 8, 2008. There are also several anomalies in the 2008 calendar which make the standard 1st and 3rd Tuesday meeting schedule difficult to attain. I am proposing a modified Council meeting schedule for 2008, which adjusts the standard schedule during several months. I also intend to raise the issue with the Council at the Dec. 18 Council meeting.

7. Annual Holiday Meal - Council Members are welcome and invited to join staff for our annual holiday meal on Thursday, Dec. 20. The meal is served in the Garden Room. It runs from 11:30 a.m. - 1 p.m. In addition, we do a slightly scaled down version of the meal for night shift employees from 8 - 9 p.m., also in the Garden Room.

8. Customer Thank You Cards - Liquor Store staff are distributing customer thank you cards again this year.

9. Flag Lights - Appropriate lighting has been installed to light the flags at the Veterans Memorial in Purgatory Creek Park.

10. Town Hall Meeting Follow-up - I have sent a follow-up letter to every speaker from the Nov. 27 Town Hall Meeting.

11. City Center Holiday Schedule - City Center will be closed on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day and also on New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day. We have posted the holiday hours for other City facilities on our Web site.

12. 2008 Council Planning Session - At the Dec. 3 Council meeting, the Council set Saturday, Jan. 19, 2008, as the date of the annual Council planning session. We have reserved a meeting room at Olympic Hills Golf Club for the day.

I get many questions about my blog. Besides the standard “Why do you do it?” and “How do you have time to do it?”, the most common question I receive is very much in line with the following question that I got last week:

Mr. Neal,

We recently implemented a “President’s Page” on our Village Website. This

allows our Village President the opportunity to regularly comment on a topic

that our Village Board is taking action on or considering. The Village

President wanted this to be set up in a blog format so that our community

members could contribute their opinions on the topic back. I was looking at

your blog and see that a person could read each of your blog topics but I

also see that the comments on the archived articles are turned off. Do you

accept the blog feedback personally to your email or do you actually have

the blogs posted for the general public to read, so they can review each

others opinions? From the note above this form, I believe you are receiving

these personally and they are not publicly posted. Did your municipality

implement any policies regarding the website or the blog format? If so

could I receive a copy? I’m hoping to gather information from other

communities that offer blogs regarding their policies and set to that we can

provide our community with the best forum possible. By default I have

somewhat become our IT person, website co-developer and find that blogging

formats are a new topic. I appreciate your time and patience of reading

this. I would appreciate a response though I understand that your schedule

may not allow that. I am willing to wait. Sincerely with

gratitude….

I do accept questions and comments about my blog. I answer all of them Well, all of them except for the very strange or obscene. Fortunately, I don’t get many of those.

I do not have the blog set up to have the questions and comments posted for all to see. There are a couple of reasons for this. One, I read a few blogs that operate like this. I know how long it takes to do my blog. I can’t imagine how much time it would consume from my life to run a blog where I am responding to a comment based on someone’s comment who was responding to my public reply to someone’s question. Get the picture? I enjoy doing the blog, but I don’t have time in my life to manage what would amount to a public message board/discussion arena on municipal government. Don’t get me wrong, that would be fun, but I’d never get my day job done.

Another reason I do not allow openly posted comments on my blog is that I view my blog as a means to communicate to people, not necessarily with people. There are lots of other communications tools, formats and venues in which I communicate with people. The blog is a great a forum for me to come up with a message and communicate that message the way I want to at the time I want to. In my opinion, there isn’t much effective dialog going on in the electronic world - yet. Blogs and email are not great environments for effective dialog. For me, effective dialog occurs in person….at least for the foreseeable future.