Bluestem Prairie

Only 1 ICE detainee left in Sherburne County jail

I'm old enough to remember when the closed private prison in Appleton was posited as a place where Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainees could be incarcerated. 

Witnees Immigrants for Sale: Will Appleton’s shuttered private prison open in human trafficking scheme? (2011) and Opposition to CoreCivic bid to re-open Appleton Prison as ICE detention center meet to Tuesday (2019).

But such attempts failed, and other counties' public jails got the contracts. How's that working out?

Here's one story from the Minnesota Reformer:

There is only one ICE detainee left in Sherburne County jail
By Nafi Soumare

In a much publicized move a few years ago, Sherburne County offered up its jail to house federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees in an effort to make extra money. 

The county encompassing part of St. Cloud and that supported former President Donald Trump by 37 points in 2016, had hoped to rake in $100 dollars per detainee per day. 

The effort has fallen flat under the weight of widespread reports of mistreatment of vulnerable detainees and a slew of litigation that followed. 

One of the final two ICE detainees in Sherburne county jail was released recently. The final detainee was set to be released but had his bail revoked. 

ICE has contracts with three counties in Minnesota, including Sherburne, which is home to the state’s second-largest county jail. In 2017, Sherburne County signed a contract with ICE guaranteeing that the jail would make available 300 beds for ICE detainees per day, making it the largest holding facility for ICE detainees in the state. For each detainee the county held, Sherburne would receive about $100 per day. 

Though Sherburne has the most beds dedicated to ICE detainees, however, 36 ICE detainees were held in Freeborn County, 104 in Kandiyohi County, and only one in Sherburne, as of November 13. 

The decline comes after Sherburne County in 2019 attempted to increase their ICE beds from 300 to 500, but was denied.

A spokesperson for Sherburne County Sheriff Joel Brott told the Reformer that the contract they have with ICE no longer guarantees 300 beds a day. The spokesperson said the empty ICE beds come at no cost to the taxpayer and are filled with county inmates and overflow from other federal agencies. 

Increased public pressure and negative media coverage have coincided with the slow leak of ICE detainees from Sherburne County. Over 40 Elk River interfaith groups signed a petition in 2022 calling for the immediate release of all Sherburne County ICE detainees. Even then, the prison was housing less than 20 immigration inmates a day. 

Sherburne has also failed to meet ICE detention requirements for mental health care and general wellbeing of their detainees. 

A 2020 inspection by ICE into the Sherburne County facility showed that the facility failed to provide suicide prevention care for their inmates; and failed to conduct routine welfare checks or provide detainees on suicide watch with a daily check by a mental health worker, all of which are mandated by ICE detention standards.

ICE didn’t respond to a request for an on-the-record comment. 

Sahan Journal reported on a Sherburne County detainee who was put on suicide watch, detained in a cold, dark room for 23 hours a day and denied proper mental health support.

Robyn Meyer-Thompson, attorney at the Immigration Law Center of Minnesota, said Sherburne County has faced a slew of lawsuits.  

In 2020, a lawsuit was filed against Sherburne County for the wrongful imprisonment and attempted deportation of a U.S. citizen. 

Another lawsuit filed that year alleged Sherburne County correctional officers were complicit in the suicide of one of their inmates, ignoring warning signs and failing to perform routine wellness checks. 

“And so what we just generally noticed is that after that lawsuit was filed, ICE basically stopped transporting individuals to the immigration court in Fort Snelling who were detained. We noticed a trend of more individuals being transferred to Kandiyohi County jail,” Meyer-Thompson said. 

Sherburne County did not respond to questions about the litigation. 

The last remaining Sherburne County ICE detainee has been facing mental health issues and already had an inpatient bed set up and waiting for him at a facility in North Dakota. 

The Minnesota Freedom Fund, a nonprofit organization that gained national prominence and an influx of donations in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd, is putting some of their $42 million endowment to pay immigration bonds, paying special attention to Sherburne County and its final detainee. 

The detainee has struggled with paranoid schizophrenia, according to his lawyer John Bruning, who asked that his client’s name not be shared because he is gay and has a history of political activism that could threaten his safety in his home country if he is deported.  

The Freedom Fund had started the process of wiring the bail money and was given the green light to organize his release — he was dressed and ready to walk out the door — when the Board of Immigration Appeals granted a stay of his bond. 

ICE was aware that the detainee had severe mental health issues and that he had an inpatient bed waiting for him, which, Bruning says, may no longer be available given his continued detainment. Bruning believes the detainee is getting treatment for his mental health — he is medicated and being seen by a mental health professional — but he doesn’t see long-term mental health care as feasible in Sherburne. 

“I think detention is really the worst possible thing you can subject someone to who is going through a mental health crisis. It really exacerbates all these problems,” Bruning said. 

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Photo by Alex Potemkin/Getty Images.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Matt Grossell won't run for again for MNHouse in 2024; sold his house on September 5, 2023

On Friday morning, Annalise Braught reported for the Bemidji Pioneer in Rep. Matt Grossell announces he will not seek reelection in 2024:

CLEARBROOK — After four consecutive terms in the Minnesota House of Representatives Rep. Matt Grossell, R-Clearbrook, announced on Friday that he will not be seeking reelection in 2024.

Prior to joining the House of Representatives in 2017, Grossell served as a Clearwater County Sheriff’s Deputy. Currently, he represents District 2A which includes Lake of the Woods County as well as portions of Beltrami and Clearwater Counties.

In a release, Grossell noted his work on the Public Safety committees for all four terms as well as the Judiciary committees for the past three biennia where he has championed bringing attention to the scourge of child sexual abuse. His committee work also includes time on Capitol investment, education innovation policy, and veterans and military affairs.

In 2019, Grossell was arrested for misdemeanor trespassing after he refused to leave a hospital he was transported to after acting intoxicated and disorderly at the Best Western Plus Capitol Ridge in St. Paul. . . .

On July 11, 2023, Grossell was sentenced to 90 days in jail in Clearwater County for a DWI for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol after being cited on Feb. 11, 2023, for driving while intoxicated. . . .

“This has been such an honor to represent my community in St. Paul for these eight years. A sufficient amount of time for one person to hold office,” Grossell said of his time in the legislature. “I am looking forward to finishing strong in St. Paul, especially through pushing for tax cuts, which are critical for families and small businesses facing record inflation. Additionally, I believe it is important to provide our officers with the support they need to excel in our state.

“While I look forward to retirement in Alaska to be near family; as well as with better tax rates and better support for police, I will always call the Northwoods my home. God’s blessings to my constituents, colleagues and the state of Minnesota.” 

Bluestem find it interesting that the dateline for the press release is Clearbrook, since Grossell sold his house there, 227 Main St N. Clearbrook, MN 56634, on September 5, 2023.

Bluestem learned from sources in the district that the home was for sale and that Grossell had moved out of the residence, possibly  going up to a cabin in Itasca County owned by the nonprofit corporation Ditchbank Nimrod, but he didn't return phone calls from Bluestem about the Clearbrook property or his present location.

That's the address on his Campaign Finance Board candidate page Officers and Contact tab.

According to information at the Minnesota Department of Revenue (CRV database), Reid and Abigail Sloan purchased the home for $115,000.00.

Have they moved into their new home? Is Grossell already snuggling in up in Alaska? Has he moved to another address in the district or enjoying life at the Ditchbank Nimrod address? Bluestem's sources in the district weren't willing to keep the Clearwater house under surveillance. 

Does it matter where a candidate or elected member of the Minnesota Legislature lives once the election period is over? 

Bluestem received differing opinions on this, though none of those we contacted were willing to go on the record, regardless of their partisan affiliation. Some thought it didn't matter whether a candidate lived inhis and her district, while others thought constituents might petition the court to have the person declared ineligible for office. 

Unlike residence during an election period, the question isn't directly addressed by the state constitution or by statute.

There is one requirement about reporting change of address, however. The address on file at the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure candidate page must be updated within 20 days of moving (not the sale). according to the campaign finance board Executive Director Jeff Sigurdson.

If Grossell's moved from the home he sold, Bluestem sure hopes he lets the Campaign Finance Board know where he's at.

Moreover,  it doesn't seem to matter where he lives under the terms of his unsupervised probation for that dewey, Bluestem was told as I researched the question,

I sure wished he'd returned my calls.

Screen grab: An online listing for Representative Grossell's house.

Related posts

• MN state representative Matt Grossell enters guilty plea to February DWI charge
• Rep. Matt Grossell arraigned for DWI
• Matt Grossell DWI update: implied consent hearing petition filed & more from MCRO
• Matt Grossell cited for DWI. Apparently diversion program for 2019 disorderly night wore off
• State DFL responds to Matt Grossell Facebook post
• In early morning Facebook post, Matt Grossell frets about alter agenda coordinated attack
• Snipe hunt of war: Grossell spent night out with patriot buds waiting for phantom buses.
• Beltrami Co. Sheriff addresses rumors and misinformation; Grossell presence confirmed
• Was Minnesota state representative Matt Grossell out with vigilantes during Bemidji curfew?
• Minnesota state representative Matt Grossell may not want any more Muslim colleagues elected 
• In more sober moments than Saturday morning, lawmaker has more respect for hospital staff

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Two takes on Minnesota's budget forecast

Reading around the web today, I found two articles about Minnesota's state spending forecast most helpful for understanding what's up and what's coming.

At MinnPost, Peter Callaghan reports in The difference between ‘deficit’ and ‘structural imbalance’ in Minnesota’s budget picture and why it matters:

Sometimes it seems that Republicans and DFLers in the state are Minnesotans separated by a common language, with Wednesday’s release of projections of state spending and tax collections being the latest example.

Where one saw good news, another saw pending financial woes. And what one saw as a potential “structural imbalance,” another saw as future deficits.

That report, one of two annual updates by state economists and accountants that tell governors and legislators how much they can spend, said the current budget will end in the black. That is, by the time the current $71 billion two-year budget ends on June 30, 2025, the state will have $2.4 billion left over.

There was a time when a $2.4 billion surplus would have been celebrated; now it’s kind of meh. It’s real money, but compared to the $19 billion surplus that welcomed lawmakers to town last January, it seems like budget dust. It is low enough that Gov. Tim Walz and DFL legislative leaders are trying to chill spending demands from DFL constituencies. 

But it is the forecast for what happens in the next budget period, the one starting in July of 2025, where the different interpretations of the same numbers start to vary the most. A generous reading is that if the state just did what it is doing now — spent the same and taxed the same — the state’s balance sheet would show $82 million unspent at the end of the 2025-2027 budget period. That’s how DFLers spin the forecast.

But the reading favored by Republicans shows that to get to that positive number, the state would have to hope that none of that $2.4 billion surplus is spent over the next two sessions. Every dollar spent now makes the next biennial forecast one dollar closer to negative territory. . . .

Read the entire article at MinnPost.

Reporting for the Minnesota Reformer, Michele Griffith and Christopher Ingraham write inState projects $2.4 billion surplus, but potential budget deficit looms:

Minnesota’s budget agency on Wednesday predicted that the Legislature next session will sit on a $2.4 billion surplus, but if current trends continue, the state government will spend more than it takes in during the two-year period beginning July 1, 2025. 

The rapidly emptying punch bowl came as something of a shock to a political class that’s become accustomed to big surpluses and resulting relatively painless budget choices.  

Minnesota Management and Budget Commissioner Erin Campbell said the state’s latest budget forecast shows that the Legislature should be thoughtful about any new spending that could propel the state into a deficit.

“There’s positive news in this forecast. Revenues are expected to grow — but having said that — with increasing spending, it appears policymakers should exercise caution when making budget decisions,” Campbell said.

This means Minnesota interest groups will need to curtail their funding requests to DFL Gov. Tim Walz and the DFL-controlled Legislature, as MMB predicts there could be a $2.3 billion deficit in fiscal year 2026.

Fiscal year 2026 doesn’t begin until July 2025, however, and a lot of unknowns could affect the economy and the state’s budget in the coming years.

Here are some interesting nuggets from Wednesday’s budget forecast. 

What’s driving higher spending?

General fund spending is projected to jump dramatically from $27.2 billion in fiscal year 2023 to about $38 billion in fiscal year 2024. A year-over-year increase of that magnitude is unprecedented going back to 1990. While one-time expenses account for a considerable share of the increase, spending is projected to remain well above normal levels in subsequent years.

When the legislative session ended in May, the state estimated its total general fund spending would be $69.5 billion for fiscal years 2024-2025. That estimate was $998 million off.

The increase in spending comes primarily from two departments: education and health and human services. 

Student enrollment in E-12 education is about 5,000 students greater than expected. MMB said the increase is due to schools seeing more English Language Learner students due to increased migration in Minnesota. Those students require more help, which costs more money

MMB said the price of the newly enacted free breakfast and lunch program is costing the state about $81 million more than anticipated this biennium. Budget analysts previously forecasted the program would cost $380 million during the next two years, which means the program’s cost is up more than 20%. MMB says more students are taking advantage of the free meals program, and the cost of food and therefore school reimbursement rates are also higher than previously predicted. 

Caring for people with physical and developmental disabilities has also been costlier than expected. MMB said it’s seeing higher enrollment in disability programs, which will cost the state an additional $165 million during the current biennium.

Walz riffs

Gov. Tim Walz, speaking after the budget presentation, had some strong words about the recent news that the Internal Revenue Service would tax the state rebate checks sent out to Minnesotans earlier this year.

Minnesotans who made a gross income of up to $75,000 in 2021 were eligible for a $260 rebate check, and families who made up to $150,000 were able to receive a $520 check. The tax could eat up $26 of a $260 rebate. 

When asked about the IRS taxing the rebate checks, Walz — who is known to speak extemporaneously and occasionally over-caffeinated on Diet Mountain Dew — called it “bullshit.”

“I’m deeply disappointed and I think the idea, if they even think about downplaying the $26, I will have even harsher words than I started with because that’s simply — this is not right,” Walz said.

Reporters asked Walz how he thinks the $2.4 billion surplus should be spent, but he said the state should be careful to make sure the state doesn’t plunge into a deficit, which led to a revelation about his credit score. 

“Those who know me — I am not shy to show them my 850 personal credit score because I worked pretty hard on that. I’m pretty fiscally conservative about these things,” Walz said, adding that Minnesota will “live within our means.

He then told reporters that this session will look different from last year when the Legislature spent nearly all of its $17.5 billion surplus.

“I’m just telling them (lawmakers), ‘Stay the course,’ but recognize this is not going to be like last year. It’s not a budget year. It’s a supplemental budget year, and I think it’s going to be … very measured inside the parameters that are here,” Walz said.

Don’t say deficit

MMB is projecting a potential budget shortfall beginning in fiscal year 2026, but don’t call it a “deficit.”

“Let me clarify that we’re not projecting a deficit. We’re projecting a structural imbalance,” Campbell said.

Reporters were confused and asked Campbell to clarify. She said it’s not a deficit because the state currently has a surplus. 

Still, the state’s spending is projected to exceed revenue once the next biennium starts. 

“It is not fair to call it a deficit,” Campbell said. 

Republicans scoffed. 

“No matter the semantics that we’ve heard today, no matter how they spin this, this is a deficit,” said Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks.

Press release writers’ wasted labor

Many nonprofits and lobbying groups sent out press releases that seem to have been written before the actual MMB numbers came out projecting the “structural imbalance.” They urged lawmakers to give them a piece of the budgetary pie, even though the pie beginning in July 2025 may be a shrunken version of the 2023 session’s Paul Bunyon-sized pie. 

One group said the money should go toward mental health. Another said lawmakers should invest in hospitals. The state’s teachers’ union said the Legislature should ease the teacher shortage.

But the numbers should serve to temper expectations. That may be a gift to Walz and DFL legislative leaders, who need to persuade voters in next year’s election — 134 House seats are up, though the Senate is not — that they are careful stewards of the people’s money. 

Infrastructure projects built with borrowed money are another story, however. MMB says the state has the capacity to borrow $830 million for infrastructure projects. 

More consumer spending, corporate profits

It wasn’t all bad news: MMB says consumer spending and corporate profit growth are increasing the state’s revenues for this biennium compared to the last forecast in February.

Officials said this is because the U.S. economic outlook is improving. The state is seeing higher-than-expected consumer spending, business investment and employment.

But the revenue growth has been mostly offset by the increase in projected spending.

“Ultimately, forecasts are intended to help inform the decisions of policymakers. Resources available last legislative session allowed for major investments, many of which were one time in nature, in recognition that spending needed to be in line with resources,” Campbell said.

Go figure.

Also worth look at the Reformer? Eric Harris Bernstein's commentary Budget forecast: DFL lawmakers should feel good about investments in a better Minnesota.

The Minnesota Reformer article is reprinted online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Minnesota Management and Budget Commissioner Erin Campbell presented the November 2023 budget forecast at the Department of Revenue building on Wednesday, Dec. 6. Photo by Michelle Griffith.

Related post

• Governor Noem’s spending plan totals $7.28 billion, down slightly from current budget

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

ACLU, Planned Parenthood North Central States, SD Justice Empowerment Network don’t support ballot measure aiming to restore abortion access

When the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe, a "trigger law" banned abortion in South Dakota.

Now an effort to place abortion rights on the ballot faces opposition from abortion rights groups, according to an article published Wednesday by the South Dakota Searchlight.

Abortion rights groups don’t support ballot measure that aims to restore abortion access
By Joshua Haiar

Some South Dakota abortion rights groups do not support a potential ballot measure that aims to restore those rights.

The groups say they have concerns about the measure’s language and the way it was drafted.

“We are not telling people to donate, or volunteer,” said Samantha Chapman, advocacy manager for the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota. “We are staying out of it. We’re not telling people to vote no or yes.”

Kristin Hayward formerly worked for Planned Parenthood and is an abortion rights advocate.

“There is a reason why two giant pro-choice organizations are not out there supporting this bill,” Hayward said, referring to the ACLU and Planned Parenthood. If they supported the measure, Hayward added, “There would be billboards, commercials.” 

Hayward blames Dakotans for Health.

“We explained how there would need to be a lot of eyes on any ballot measure proposal, and they refused,” Hayward said. “We have all seen how state lawmakers mess with what the voters pass. We need to be careful.”

Hayward was referring to past examples of South Dakota legislators repealing or amending ballot measures passed by voters. In this case, the constitutional amendment would expressly allow legislators to enact limitations on abortion in the second trimester, and up to a ban in the third trimester with exceptions for the life and health of the mother.

Floren said she will vote for the abortion measure if it makes the ballot, but won’t campaign for it. Hayward did not answer similar questions in a follow-up message seeking clarification of her plans. 

Dakotans for Health responds

Weiland, chairman of Dakotans for Health, said waiting for polling to help inform the drafting of a ballot measure was unnecessary, because South Dakota voters rejected abortion bans in 2006 and 2008.

“I will tell you, the fact that they wouldn’t commit to doing anything here forced us to move ahead,” Weiland said of the ACLU and Planned Parenthood. “We’ve got 450,000 women out here that are living under a trigger law right now, that can’t wait until national organizations decide if it’s worth it or not. Where does that leave women in South Dakota?”

Weiland pointed to a 2022 poll of 500 registered South Dakota voters showing 65% of them supported having a statewide referendum to determine the state’s reproductive rights laws, and 76% supported allowing legal abortion in cases of rape and incest, which are exceptions not currently allowed under South Dakota’s law.

Cathy Piersol, a retired Sioux Falls lawyer who’s involved with Dakotans for Health, said abortion-rights advocates and abortion-rights groups were offered opportunities to get involved and provide input on the ballot measure language.  

“It’s simply not true that those groups did not have input,” Piersol said. 

She said the idea of pursuing a ballot measure with Dakotans for Health came from former South Dakota legislator Jan Nicolay, who helped lead efforts to defeat abortion bans in 2006 and 2008. The 2006 ballot measure would have banned abortions except to save the life of the mother, and the 2008 ballot measure would have banned abortions with exceptions for the life of the mother, rape and incest. 

Nicolay felt compelled to take action when the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision was leaked.

“We sat around and waited for someone to surface, to take the lead and go forward,” she said. 

Early meetings on the ballot measure, according to Nicolay, “included everybody.” 

“Planned Parenthood was there, ACLU was there,” she said. “And we were not there to take over. We were just trying to create some structure for leadership.”

Ultimately, Nicolay said, “None of them was willing to take on the ballot measure.” 

“That includes the ACLU and Planned Parenthood,” she said. “Rick Weiland stood up.” 

Weiland, a Democratic former congressional staffer and candidate, has been involved in numerous ballot question campaigns.

Piersol said “the obvious solution seemed to be to put Roe v. Wade into the state constitution,” referring to the 1973 Supreme Court case that established the right to an abortion. “And the language needed to get submitted before the election of Secretary of State Monae Johnson, because we didn’t know what she would try to do with it.”

Johnson, a Republican, was elected in November 2022 after touting an endorsement from the anti-abortion South Dakota Right to Life organization, and after repeatedly declining to affirm the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election.

ACLU’s Chapman alleges lack of consultation

Chapman, of the ACLU, said the ballot measure was initiated by “women who are not of reproductive age” and said “Dakotans for Health is ultimately run by three white men. None of these people are directly affected by this.”

Nicolay disagreed with that assessment. 

“No three men led this,” Nicolay said. “I’m sorry, but that’s very offensive to me and misleading.” 

Nicolay, who is 81, also said passing the measure “has nothing to do with whether or not I can get pregnant. It’s about the right to choose.”

The three men Chapman referred to are Weiland, his son Adam, and attorney Jim Leach. 

Chapman was formerly married to one of Weiland’s other children. She said that has not influenced her views, and the ACLU had analyzed and formed its stance on the potential ballot measure before she was hired in December 2022. 

“Were the pro-choice organizations with grassroots knowledge of the current landscape of this state consulted?” Chapman said. “No, they were not. The ACLU believes that in order to do this work effectively and meaningfully, the people most impacted should be directly involved in the decision-making process about the language and direction of the campaign.” 

Chapman said Michigan is an example of how the process should have worked. There, the ACLU of Michigan partnered with Planned Parenthood and Michigan Voices to form a coalition. That coalition, after getting feedback from relevant stakeholders, initiated a successful campaign to amend that state’s constitution, protecting reproductive rights.

Ballot measure’s future

Floren and Hayward said they don’t believe the measure goes far enough to protect abortion rights. And they worry that if it passes, it could become the final say on the matter. They also have problems with some of the measure’s language; for example, “the measure uses the terminology ‘women,’ which could give the Legislature the ability to exclude minors,” Floren said. 

Weiland said any abortion rights measure will be attacked by the Republican-dominated Legislature and anti-abortion leaders. The Republican state attorney general’s official explanation of the measure already includes the statement, “judicial clarification of the amendment may be necessary.”

“Anything could be litigated,” Weiland said. “That’s the way it works. No one can stop anybody from filing a lawsuit.”

Weiland said Dakotans for Health has already reached 50,000 signatures, well ahead of the 35,017 needed from registered voters to put the measure on the ballot. The committee is seeking a cushion of even more signatures.

“We’re trying to restore the rights that women have had for the last 50 years,” Weiland said. “And that’s why we have used the actual language of Roe v. Wade for the amendment. You know, whatever rights women had from Roe back in 1973, they will get when this thing passes and becomes part of our constitution.”

Meanwhile, the group hoping to stop the measure has a unified front, according to Dale Bartscher, the executive director of South Dakota Right to Life. He said “it does not surprise us at all” that the abortion rights groups are divided. 

“The pro-life coalition is solid, and totally together on this,” he said, pointing to groups including Right to Life, Family Voice, South Dakota Catholic Conference, Concerned Women for America and others.

“A real unified front,” he said.  

Nicolay said if abortion rights advocates don’t unify, “That’s what’s going to kill us at the ballot box. If you don’t have a unified voice, you’re going to fail.” 

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: People sign a petition to put a measure on the ballot in 2024 that would reinstate abortion rights in South Dakota. (Courtesy: Dakotans for Health/ South Dakota Searchlight).

Related posts

• In South Dakota, where abortion is now outlawed, college students ramp up activism
• At SD Democratic Party reproductive rights rally, Sioux Falls Rep. Duba shares her abortion story
• Abortion poll: Is South Dakota the next Kansas?

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Ethanol carbon pipeline update: Summit Carbon Solutions prevails over 2 Iowa county ordinances

While ethanol carbon news has cooled down somewhat with the withdrawal of the Navigator CO2 project, Summit Carbon Solutions continues to soldier on against local control.

From the iowa Capital Dispatch:

Pipeline company prevails over two county ordinances
By Jared Strong

A federal judge on Monday permanently barred two Iowa counties from enforcing their ordinances that restrict the placement of carbon dioxide pipelines.

Shelby and Story counties adopted restrictions after two companies proposed to build pipeline systems to transport captured carbon dioxide from ethanol plants and other facilities.

The ordinances set minimum distances to locate the pipelines away from cities, homes, schools and other sites. They also have some requirements that pertain to emergency response plans in case of a pipeline breach.

Summit Carbon Solutions, which hopes to build a five-state pipeline system to transport the greenhouse gas to North Dakota for underground sequestration, sued the counties and argued that they lack the authority to impose the restrictions.

The company said the federal government is charged with regulating the pipelines’ safety and that the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) has authority over their placement.

Chief Judge Stephanie Rose, of the federal Southern District of Iowa, agreed. Rose granted Summit summary judgments in both lawsuits on Monday and issued permanent injunctions to block the counties from enforcing the ordinances.

“The challenged restrictions impose severe limitations that will lead to a situation where the IUB may grant a permit to construct a pipeline and Summit is unable to do so,” Rose wrote in the Shelby County decision.

The Story County decision contained a similar rationale.

Rose ordered the counties to cease enforcement of their minimum-distance and safety requirements, give written notice to county employees of the injunctions and prove they have complied with the order within 10 days.

An attorney for the counties did not immediately respond to a request to comment for this article.

Summit declined to comment but sent an email to an unspecified number of county supervisors on Monday to inform them of the judge’s decisions.

“This final order is significant, underscoring the precedence of federal and state laws over local ordinances in regulating major infrastructure projects like ours,” wrote Kylie Lange, a senior project manager for the company. “It reinforces our position that local setbacks and safety standards cannot intrude upon the authority vested in federal and state agencies.”

Summit also has a pending lawsuit against Emmet County for a similar ordinance. Another carbon dioxide pipeline company, Navigator CO2, had sued Bremer, Emmet and Story counties but dismissed the litigation after it announced in October that it was canceling its project.

The threat of litigation has prevented other counties from adopting pipeline ordinances.

Jan Norris, a Montgomery County landowner whose property is near the path of Summit’s proposed pipeline, said she has been urging her county supervisors for more than a year to restrict how close it can be to houses and other places.

She said one of the homes in her area is within 300 feet of Summit’s proposal, and she believes the family that lives there would be swamped by carbon dioxide within minutes if the pipeline has a catastrophic failure.

“They have said, ‘We can’t pass an ordinance because Summit is going to sue us,’” Norris said of her five-person board of supervisors. “They are paralyzed with fear.”

Mike Olson, the chairperson of the Montgomery board, said he has long doubted that counties have the authority to regulate the pipelines, and “I did not want to drag our county into a lengthy legal battle.”

He is a farmer who thinks the pipelines will benefit the ethanol industry and, by extension, the amount of money farmers are paid for their corn. More than half of the state’s corn crop is used to produce ethanol.

Olson said the board considered an ordinance identical to Shelby County’s but decided to wait for the federal judge’s ruling before proceeding with any votes, on the advice of his county attorney.

Fears about pipeline breaks are frequently voiced by opponents of the projects. They stem, in part, from a carbon dioxide pipeline rupture in Mississippi in 2020, when a confluence of atmospheric conditions caused a plume of the leaked gas to travel toward a small town. About 45 people sought hospital treatment, and three nearly died.

Federal regulators have said the leaked gas typically dissipates rather than forming a dense plume. Summit has said its pipeline would be one of the safest ever built.

The U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is in the process of revising its safety regulations for the pipelines and plans to publish its proposed changes in June 2024.

Despite the threat of litigation, other Iowa counties are considering enacting ordinances. Last month, the Dickinson County Board of Supervisors directed its planning and zoning commission to draft one for its consideration.

“If this is adopted, we’re getting sued,” Dickinson County Attorney Steve Goodlow told the board, according to the Dickinson County News.

Goodlow told the Iowa Capital Dispatch on Tuesday that the judge’s rulings against the Shelby and Story county ordinances will not prevent his county from pursuing its own ordinance. He did not know when it might get final approval.

In South Dakota, counties have been successful enacting ordinances that govern where the pipelines can be located, and those ordinances were part of the reason utility regulators denied Summit’s pipeline permit request in September.

Summit has said it is working to modify its route to comply with the county requirements and will reapply for a permit. It’s unclear when that will happen.

This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: A CO2 pipeline in Mississippi ruptured near Satartia in 2020, sickening dozens of people. Two Iowa counties passed ordinances requiring setbacks from homes and other places. Federal judge? Forgeddaboutit.

Related posts

• Poor beleaguered ethanol carbon operatives organize to escape chains of oppression
• Ethanol carbon capture update: Lincoln could become 6th county to regulate carbon pipelines
• South Dakotans First: property rights coalition plans to lobby for eminent domain restrictions.
• Final arguments for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline Iowa permit are due in January
• Critics allege CO2 pipelines ‘farm the government’ for climate $$ while helping oil industry; bills fuel debate over ethanol’s environmental impact, with climate implications
• Ethanol carbon pipeline update: Summit permit decision in Iowa not expected until next year
• If first you don't succeed: Summit's new route in North Dakota adds thirteen miles of pipeline
• Defying the odds: Meet the attorney for 1,000 clients who beat two pipeline companies
• Summit Carbon stands to benefit from Navigator's canceled pipeline, but IA opponents sue to block Summit Carbon water permit
• Cancel culture: Navigator withdraws ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Iowa 
• Navigator CO2 cancels multistate pipeline project
• Summit Carbon Solutions says ethanol carbon pipeline system won’t be operational until 2026
• Some Iowa landowners were confused by Summit Carbon Solution eminent domain process
• Navigator CO2 pulls its ethanol carbon pipeline permit application in Illinois
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Gevo aviation fuel needs Summit Carbon Solutions and more!
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Summit pipeline hearing will resume on Tuesday; Navigator asks Iowa regulators to pause its pipeline permit request
• Iowa Capital Dispatch: Local officials in Iowa have potential to block carbon capture projects
• IA Capital Dispatch: Summit permit process in North Dakota has reached ‘uncharted waters
• North Dakota Public Service Commission votes 2-1 to reopen Summit Carbon pipeline case
• Navigator CO2 has not ‘taken any state off the map’ after SD pipeline permit rejection 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline digest: reaction to denial; water use in IA; rich guy resists subpoena
• Iowa utility regulators want to finish Summit pipeline permit hearing by month’s end
• State denies Summit permit; both ethanol carbon pipelines proposed in South Dakota now rejected
• Summit Carbon Solutions forges ahead despite SD PUC staff's motion to deny pipeline permit 
• SD PUC staff motion: non-mysterious portents in the air about potential denial of Summit Carbon Solution's pipeline permit application
• South Dakota Navigator pipeline decision might jeopardize Summit Carbon Solutions proposal
• Breaking: South Dakota Public Utilities Commission unanimously denies Navigator ethanol CO2 pipeline project permit

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Governor Noem’s spending plan totals $7.28 billion, down slightly from current budget

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem revealed her proposed fiscal year 2025 budget today in Pierre.

Coverage from the South Dakota Searchlight:

Noem’s spending plan totals $7.28 billion, down slightly from current budget
By Joshua Haiar

PIERRE — Gov. Kristi Noem unveiled a $7.28 billion budget proposal during a speech Tuesday at the Capitol, which would be a 1.33% decrease from the current budget. 

She said it’s time for state government to tighten its belt.

“Last year, the Legislature spent tens of millions of dollars that wasn’t in my budget recommendation,” Noem said during her annual budget address. “Clearly, I signed that budget, but this year will be different. I am committed to budgeting conservatively, spending within our means, returning money to the taxpayers and focusing on our priorities.”

The state’s income increased rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic as billions in federal aid flooded into the state. Noem’s proposed budget includes the last remaining portion of that aid.

To help offset the impacts of inflation, Noem is proposing 4% funding increases for K-12 school districts, state employee compensation, and reimbursements for health and human services providers. That would mean $46.5 million more for schools, $20.6 million more for state workers, and $26 million more for health and human services providers.

Noem’s budget is only a proposal. The next step for legislators is to meet from January to March and adopt a budget for the 2025 fiscal year.

Senate Majority Leader Casey Crabtree, R-Madison, said the budget address left him with a sense of optimism. 

“At a time when we’re seeing massive inflation across every aspect of life, a conservative budget address is smart,” Crabtree said. “It tackles the issue head-on.”

Rep. Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, was surprised to hear Noem say schools have been awarded 26% more funding since she took office, but teacher salaries have lagged behind.

“I want to make sure that we’re getting those funds to teachers,” Odenbach said. “I think we need to look into that.”

Meanwhile, a Democrat said Noem omitted an important issue. 

“Did you hear one word about our Native American population and how we’re going to lift up our poorest populations?” said Rep. Linda Duba, D-Sioux Falls. “Republicans continue to treat this state like a two-class system.”

Some revenue above estimates

While Noem said the budget will be tight, she also said some revenues are surpassing projections, with an additional $115.6 million expected in ongoing revenue for the next fiscal year and $208 million in one-time funds.

Sales tax, a major revenue source, is $2.5 million above estimates. Noem said she supports the idea of permanently cutting the sales tax from 4.5% to 4.2%, after lawmakers passed the cut last year but only made it effective through 2027. 

“Remember, every interest group has a lobbyist in this Capitol building who wants a piece of this budget during legislative session,” Noem said. “It is our job to be advocates for the South Dakota taxpayers.”

Noem said unclaimed property receipts are $76 million above expectations but did not offer a detailed explanation of why. She said State Treasurer Josh Haeder is exploring unclaimed property marketing strategies, like ads, to ensure residents reclaim their funds before they revert back to the state.

Unclaimed property consists of abandoned financial assets such as checking and savings accounts, unpaid wages, securities, life insurance payouts, uncashed checks, and the proceeds of safe deposit boxes that are without activity for a certain period of time.

Investments in education

Noem said despite state funding for K-12 education increasing by 26% since she took office, “average teacher salaries have lagged far behind.” 

“Why would we continue to send money to school administrators and school boards when they don’t pass it on to teachers?” she said.

Noem said she is working with the Department of Education to address that, but did not provide further details. 

The budget also addresses declining literacy rates with a $6 million proposed investment in a statewide literacy initiative, emphasizing phonics-based teaching methods. 

Additionally, Noem highlighted the success of the Jobs for America’s Graduates program in aiding at-risk students. She proposed expanding the program with two new positions and $500,000 in federal funds to enroll more students. The program provides participants with classroom and work-based learning experiences leading toward the goal of a quality job.

A ‘quantum’ workforce

Noem proposed a $6 million investment for a new Center for Quantum Information Science & Technology, which would be a collaboration among Dakota State University in Madison, South Dakota Mines in Rapid City, South Dakota State University in Brookings, and the University of South Dakota in Vermillion. 

Noem did not say whether the center would have its own physical location. The center would focus on using quantum computing in fields like cybersecurity, agriculture and health care.

“Our universities will be on the cutting edge of quantum computing,” she said. 

Additionally, the budget proposes $4.8 million in one-time funding for updating equipment at South Dakota’s technical colleges.

Health and child care

Noem wants to expand the Bright Start program, which offers nursing services to first-time mothers from pregnancy until the child’s second birthday. She proposed using $194,000 in federal funding to add two positions for the program.

The proposed budget would also fund “additional family treatment foster homes for kids that have more significant emotional or medical needs,” Noem said. “We will also provide additional support for families after they choose guardianship or adoptions.”

Noem also addressed Medicaid expansion, which South Dakota voters passed in 2022. She wants an additional $18.3 million to cover the continued cost of expansion.

“We will need to continue to address these funding issues in years to come,” Noem said. 

Water and infrastructure

The state has around $131 million in remaining federal American Rescue Plan Act funds, which must be allocated within the next year.

Noem recommended spending  $121 million on water projects, with the majority directed to Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources water programs. This follows a previous allocation of $600 million for similar purposes two years ago. 

About $25 million is proposed for state water and wastewater projects. 

Sen. Helene Duhamel, R-Rapid City, said she was disappointed to not hear Noem allocate funds toward an effort to build a water pipeline from the Missouri River to the Black Hills.

“We know we will need more water as the region grows,” she said. “So, I’m hoping we can address that this session. I’ve been asking about this for a long time.” 

For dam infrastructure, the proposed budget includes $9.7 million for repairs to Richmond Dam in Brown County, enabling the leveraging of federal funds for the remaining costs. Additionally, $2 million is allocated for repairs to the Lake Alvin dam in Lincoln County and Newell Lake dam in Butte County, with federal funding expected to complete the projects.

The budget also proposes $7 million in one-time funds for information technology modernization within state government systems. This investment aims to enhance security and protect citizen information against cyber threats.

“By funding all of these infrastructure projects, we avoid having to bond for those needs,” Noem said. “That means that we don’t incur debt – debt that our kids will be responsible for paying off in the future.

Dodging prison debt

For the proposed new men’s prison near Sioux Falls and the women’s prison being constructed in Rapid City, Noem proposed setting aside another $262 million from a combination of federal and state funds. That would bring the total set aside for the projects during the past several years to $656 million, aimed at addressing space needs and enhancing rehabilitation services like behavioral support, substance abuse treatment and skills training. The women’s prison would be an additional facility, while the men’s prison would largely replace the antiquated penitentiary in Sioux Falls.

Noem said the upfront investment is expected to save over $600 million in interest and fees over 25 years.

Regarding the women’s prison, Noem said, “since we broke ground, we learned that there is a $27 million shortfall to build this facility with the space and programming that it needs.” She did not elaborate on the reasons for the shortfall but proposed covering it with $4 million in unused land and design funds and $21 million in new funds.

Noem also recommended establishing a statewide indigent defense commission, including a statewide appellate defender office. This initiative, with proposed ongoing funding of $1.4 million, aims to help provide legal counsel for defendants who can’t afford it, as required by the U.S. Constitution. That responsibility is currently shouldered entirely by counties, and Noem said the proposal, formulated by a task force, could save counties up to $600,000 annually.

“The people of South Dakota are strong. They are hardworking. And they inspire me each and every day,” Noem said as the address concluded. “I pray that we can deliver a budget that they can be proud of — a budget that puts them first.”

More budget address coverage from South Dakota Searchlight

• Governor criticizes school districts for lagging teacher pay
• Budget proposal includes $6 million for quantum computing center

Photo: Gov. Kristi Noem presents her fiscal year 2025 budget address to the South Dakota Legislature on Dec. 5, 2023, at the Capitol in Pierre. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Selection of loon state seal makes Minnesotans wonder: why not just use it on new state flag?

When I saw the image of the commission's selection for the seal above in the Minnesota Reformer and the Star Tribune, I though: why not just use this concept for the state flag as well?

Sure, there will be some minor tweaks, as Star Tribune reporter Briana Bierschbach posted on X:

NEW: The State Emblems and Redesign Commission members have picked state seal S224 to move forward as their top finalist, with revisions likely to still come as they debate the motto, date and other potential design changes at their next meetings. pic.twitter.com/akWJ0PrnH7

— Briana Bierschbach (@bbierschbach) December 5, 2023

Readers probably gathered from my post LTE of the day: loons visit everywhere in Minnesota though not on finalist flags that Bluestem favors team loon. 

Sure, picking the new seal for the state flag would toss the process. To heck with process.

A report on the seal choice, from the Minnesota Reformer:

Commission selects loon-centric design for new Minnesota state seal
By Madison McVan

The new Minnesota state seal will feature a loon, the North Star, wild rice, lake water and the state motto, “l’étoile du nord.”

The State Emblems Redesign Commission voted Tuesday to select the final design for the state seal, landing unanimously on design S224.

“This symbol represents the abundance of natural resources that are the foundation of the economy and vitality of Minnesota,” the designer wrote as part of the submission. 

The commission may still make changes to the design, including “dates, language, design of the stars, and color of the loon’s eye,” according to a Minnesota Historical Society press release. 

The seal choice was obvious; in the process of narrowing down the designs, each commissioner included S224 among their top choices. 

“The support is there,” State Emblems Redesign Commission member Aaron Wittnebel said during Tuesday’s meeting. “When you look through the comments section for the seals, this seal received a little over 3,300 comments. Five-sixths of those comments were positive. The rest of the seals received less than 1,000 comments and the majority of them were negative comments.”

The commission will meet in-person Dec. 12 to discuss potential tweaks to the final seal design and move forward on selecting a new state flag. The commissioners have narrowed the flag design proposals to six finalists.

The decision on a new state flag has been far more fraught; the commission’s choices of finalists caught a wave of online criticism when they were recently announced. 

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Image: The finalist for Minnesota State Seal.

Related posts

• LTE of the day: loons visit everywhere in Minnesota though not on finalist flags
• Formal effort begins to replace ‘cluttered genocidal mess’ on Minnesota state flag and seal

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Twin Cities metro sends money to rural counties

When I read a November 15 article in the New Ulm Journal, Dahms urges more rural voices in political process, Dahms' claim that that "a disparity has developed between metro and rural spending on transportation, heath care and education. . ."  I was reminded of a 2021  Ricardo Lopez article in the Minnesota Reformer, Debate about who pays the freight divides an already polarized state.

I wondered if things had changed that much with the DFL trifecta, but lacked knowledge of the tools to assess Dahms' claim. Senator Dahms ordinarily isn't a bomb-throwing place-baiter, so I wondered what there was to his position.

Fortunately, the Reformer's Madison McVan's mad skills turned to addressing the question.

Twin Cities metro sends money to rural counties
By Madison McVan

A common refrain from Minnesota Republicans goes something like this: Rural communities are overtaxed, underfunded and ignored by legislators. Greater Minnesota sends their tax dollars to the Twin Cities, where metro residents benefit from government programs.

At a Nov. 15 event in New Ulm, Republican State Sen. Gary Dahms repeated the sentiments that have fueled the kinds of outstate Republican campaigns that helped them win the Minnesota House a decade ago: 

“If you look at the money that’s collected in rural Minnesota, for gas tax and things like that, we do not get our fair share for transportation. If you look at health care, we do not get our fair share for health care,” Dahms said, according to the New Ulm Journal. “It really shows up in education, when you see what we get per student, versus what the seven-county metro area … there is a major, major difference there.”

It’s a sweeping argument that plays into the state’s often bitterly divided partisan and geographic politics, which have become deeply intertwined during the past decade, with Republicans dominating greater Minnesota while the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party has locked down the metro. It also simplifies a complicated web of tax and revenue distributions — and it’s factually untrue. 

Department of Revenue data show that the Twin Cities metro is the state’s biggest driver of tax revenue, and rural counties benefit more than the metro area from government aid.

Twin Cities metro residents paid an average of $4,362 in taxes and received $3,252 in aid and credits per capita in 2019, according to analysis by the Minnesota House Research Department. In the non-metro area counties the same year, residents paid an average of $2,871 per person in taxes and received $3,423 in state aid and credits per capita.

That the 7-county metro would contribute more to Minnesota’s overall tax base isn’t surprising, nor complicated: The metro has more people, its jobs pay more, and the property values are higher. Because both income and property taxes are progressive — the more you make and the more your house is worth, the more you pay — the metro’s contribution is larger.

And when it comes to distributing that revenue, rural programs need more money per capita because programs are less efficient when people are spread out, said Kelly Asche, a researcher at the Center for Rural Policy & Development. 

“In a rural area, we are fighting against the economies of scale. It is the rural enemy to be efficiently run,” Asche said. 

Last year the House Research Department launched an online tool that allows users to explore and compare state taxes, aid and credits. The tool includes breakdowns between Twin Cities metro and greater Minnesota. 

In some areas, like the gas tax, non-metro Minnesotans pay more than Twin Cities residents.

Everyone pays the same rate — 28.5 cents per gallon, which will be adjusted for inflation in coming years — but rural residents use more gas. (Farmers are exempt from the gas tax.)

But for the tax categories that make up the bulk of state collections, however, metro residents disproportionately contribute to the revenue pool.

About 44% of the state’s collections come from income tax.

In tax year 2020, the most recent year available from the Department of Revenue, 2.2 million Minnesotans owed taxes. About 57% of those taxpayers lived in the seven-county metro area, but their tax liabilities made up 66% of the state’s collections.

The next-biggest chunk of the state’s tax revenue — 20% — comes from sales and use taxes. 

Like income taxes, the state sales tax rate of 6.875% applies evenly across the state. Municipalities can tack on their own local sales taxes, leading to different sales taxes across the state, but the state’s share is the same everywhere.

More sales tax revenue comes from the Twin Cities than from greater Minnesota, presumably because some rural Minnesotans travel to the cities to do their shopping. 

Property taxes are another important revenue source for the state and local governments, making up the majority of public school funding across the state. 

In the Twin Cities metro area, property values are much higher on average than in non-metro counties. 

A Department of Revenue analysis for the 2021 tax year showed that residents of the Twin Cities metro area carried a slightly higher tax burden. That year, metro homeowners paid an average of 2.8% of their household income on property taxes, compared to 2.4% in Greater Minnesota. 

Distributing the money 

In his comments at the event in New Ulm, Dahms called out three specific areas where he believed rural Minnesotans don’t get their fair share: transportation, health care and education. 

Dahms later clarified that by “health care,” he was referencing nursing home Medical Assistance reimbursement rates, which the Minnesota Department of Human Services sets based on a facility’s operating, facility and external costs.

“Nursing home reimbursement rates vary wildly across the state but I’ve heard from nursing home administrators they are frustrated when my district receives an average of about $640 in reimbursements and some facilities in the metro- and in other areas too- are receiving $700 to $800 reimbursements for the same base rate,” Dahms said in a statement. 

A Reformer analysis of Medical Assistance reimbursement rates showed that five of the seven metro area counties receive reimbursement rates below the state average of $410.

In Dahms’ district in southeast Minnesota, two of the five counties he represents received significantly more than the state average, at $515 and $467.

When it comes to education, some districts in both the Twin Cities metro and in greater Minnesota are underfunded, according to an analysis by Minneapolis Schools Voices. A lack of funding is correlated with the rate of poor students, students of color and English language learners, more so than the district’s rural or urban status. 

Minnesota public schools are funded through a combination of local property taxes and state money. For the state’s part, all schools start with the same baseline funding — around $7,100 per student.

The rest of the state funding comes from the education formula, a 14-component algorithm that is built to compensate schools for the cost of educating populations that need more support, like English learners and special needs students.

The formula has an “equalization” component that gives extra money to districts in areas with low property values, in order to bring funding closer to that of property-rich districts without increasing taxes on those lower-value properties. Rural and city schools alike benefit from the equalization component. 

Some formula components benefit rural schools, including increased compensation for small schools and sparsely populated districts, plus a transportation allowance for spread-out districts, according to the Center for Rural Policy and Development’s report on the education formula.

Other components tend to benefit urban schools, like compensation based on the number of English learners, which are more prevalent in cities than rural school districts. Some greater Minnesota Cities, like Worthington, St. Cloud and Willmar, also serve large populations of English learners.

Rural and metro schools alike receive additional funding based on how many students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.

Belgrade-Brooten-Elrosa Public School District, a rural district in central Minnesota, received nearly $13,000 per adjusted pupil unit in fiscal year 2022, the highest in the state. (Adjusted pupil units are used to count students for formula purposes, and are weighted based on grade level.) 

A large part of that funding — about 37% — came from the “sparsity” components of the formula.

Minneapolis Public Schools received a total of $8,790 per adjusted pupil unit. About 16% of the funding came from the “compensatory” component of the formula, which is based on the percentage of students qualifying for free- and reduced-price lunch. 

Ada-Borup-West Public Schools, in rural western Minnesota, received less than Minneapolis Public Schools in 2022 with $8,474 per adjusted pupil unit; the district isn’t as sparse as Belgrade-Brooten-Elrosa and serves fewer low income students than Minneapolis Public Schools.

Suburban districts tend to receive the least amount of state funding because they generally feature high property values, are not sparse, and have a lower percentage of poor students. 

Transportation funding is largely the responsibility of cities, counties and townships in Minnesota, usually paid for with local property taxes. The state is responsible for maintaining the highway system —  interstates, U.S. highways and state highways — which accounts for around 8% of road miles; the federal government chips in funding for those roads.

State transportation funds mostly come from the gas tax, the motor vehicle sales tax and tab fees. 

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Graphic: From Minnesota House Research Department data via Minnesota Reformer.

Related posts

• Wesenberg throws place-baiting shade on bonding bill's tree planting provisions 
• The folly of place-baiting: Why Minnesota Republicans can’t afford to write off the Cities

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Don Peay shows up: will Hunters4Hunters be on receiving end of Utah's $500,000 war on wolves?

There's a new non-profit in Minnesota, duly registered with the Minnesota Secretary of State's office: Hunters for Hunters. I've been curious about its sudden rise--and now, whether it's connected to a mid-March story in the Salt Lake Tribune, Lawmakers spend $500,000 to recruit out-of-state hunters for Utah’s war on wolves; Hunter Nation, based in Kansas, to get $500,000 to rally Midwestern hunters to the delisting cause.

Brian Maffy reported:

Before you roll your eyes at the specter of the Utah Legislature dolling out more money to campaign against wolves, Keith Mark wants you to give him a chance.

The founder and president of the Kansas-based Hunter Nation Inc. will soon be spending $500,000 of Utah taxpayer money to educate Midwestern hunters on the alleged evils of protecting the gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

“There’s some people that believe that if you just do nothing, that [wild] animals somehow miraculously manage themselves,” Mark, who describes himself as a lifelong Democrat, said in a recent phone interview. “There’s nothing magical about how wolves manage themselves. They kill and they breed. And if we don’t manage them, they’re going to kill more, continue to breed and then there will be no elk, no moose, no bighorn [sheep].”

Mark said his group will use Utah’s money to rally hunters in Wisconsin, Minnesota and other Midwestern states where wolves still roam wild to get more politically engaged, especially on the issue of “predator management.” The ultimate goal is to convince Congress to, yet again, pass legislation delisting wolves nationwide.

Thanks to the successful wolf reintroduction in the Yellowstone region, the gray wolf is no longer listed in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, where they can be lawfully hunted. . . .

Jeepers. The Utah state legislature did end up funding Hunter Outreach, This funding provides $500,000 one-time for Hunter Nation, according to its website. 

The Salt Lake Tribune article turned up in a Google search when I grew curious after watching this video on Hunters For Hunters Facebook page:

Sharing the video on his deer farm's Facebook page, Hunters for Hunters board member Steve Porter led with this headnote:

Don Peay, MN Senator Nathan Wesenberg, and the board of H4H just had an awesome one hour meeting on how Don and his team were able to get the wolves delisted out west. We now have friends in high places who do have a blueprint.

In the video, Peay mentions Hunter Nation and Keith Mark as  models.

Peay  and  Mark both appear down column in the Salt Lake Tribune's Lawmakers spend $500,000 to recruit out-of-state hunters for Utah’s war on wolves; Hunter Nation, based in Kansas, to get $500,000 to rally Midwestern hunters to the delisting cause:

Appearing before a legislative committee on behalf of Hunter Nation last month was none other than conservative political activist Don Peay, Utah’s leading advocate for big game hunting.

Peay cofounded the two Utah groups that received previous anti-wolf appropriations, first to Sportsman for Fish and Wildlife, then later to a spinoff political outfit called Big Game Forever (BGF). Over these years, the gray wolf has teeter-tottered on and off the endangered list, depending on which party was in control of the levers of power. . . .

Peay’s latest remedy is to recruit Midwestern hunters to support congressional action delisting wolves. Such legislation has been introduced by Wisconsin Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D) and Ron Johnson (R), but the bill targets only the upper Midwestern states for delisting.

“If we can convince the Wisconsin hunters to ask [Baldwin] it’s all the West or no deal, then she can help put Utah on that,” Peay said. “This money will help us go into Wisconsin to get the hunters to make sure that their senators know that Utah’s gotta be a part of the deal.”

Hunter Nation is registered as a 501(c)4 nonprofit, which is allowed to engage in political activity.

While Peay claimed to “represent” Hunter Nation at the Legislature, Mark emphasized that he is no longer an officer with his group.

“Don is one of the most knowledgeable people in the country when it comes to wildlife conservation, especially predator management,” Mark said in an email. “His expertise has been quite valuable to Hunter Nation in the past.”

He promised Utah’s money won’t be wasted and he will be transparent with how it’s spent. In contrast, Big Game Forever has never disclosed how it spends its state grants and is litigating a long-running fight against Utah journalist Eric Peterson to keep him from obtaining key financial information. . . .

While Peay isn't a current board member of Hunter Nation, is he representing Porter et al's friends in high places? Are those friends in high places spending Utah taxpayers' money? 

The mission sure seems parallel.

Hunters for Hunters has been gaining a lot of publicity as Northeastern deer hunters speak out for opening a season on wolves after a meager hunt, though Minnesota Reformer's data journalist Christopher Ingraham reported on November 22 that Wolves aren’t to blame for a disappointing deer hunt, data show. Itasca County hunter and journalist  Aaron Brown provided another explanation in Where the wild deer are.

These seem to be minority voices. And other media coverage suggests that the group is a spontaneous, grassroots effort.

Reporting for the Duluth Tribune, John Myers wrote in New Minnesota deer hunting group to hold meetings on woles:

 . . .“We’re a grassroots group of passionate hunters and landowners who see our tradition of deer hunting being destroyed because of wolves,” Lake Bronson resident Steve Porter, a member of the group, told the Duluth News Tribune.

At the Star Tribune, Tony Kennedy reported in A new Minnesota deer hunters group wants to shake up the politics o wolf control:

In a revolt against what it says is an overabundance of wolves in the North Woods, a group of deer hunters concerned about the scarcity of whitetails has formed a new hunters rights group eager to rock the boat on the politics of wolf management.

Still in its infancy, Hunters For Hunters will rally next week to build its membership with open-invitation meetings in International Falls, Carlton, Aurora and Coleraine. Subsequent meetings are scheduled in Bagley and Detroit Lakes. The group's recent "wolf control'' meeting in Squaw Lake — announced only eight days in advance — drew a crowd estimated at more than 200 people, including three state senators.

"The chairs were full, and the people were standing all around the sides,'' said Sen. Steve Green, a Second District Republican who attended the meeting in Squaw Lake. "The interest is pretty obvious. There's a lot of frustration. A lot of frustration.''

Steve Porter of Lake Bronson, Minn., a Hunters For Hunters board member, said in an interview this week that the group has been swamped with a frenzy of interest and offers from hunters to act as volunteers. Additional meetings are being organized, he said.

"There's just too many wolves,'' Porter said. "People are livid, and they are just searching for how can we fix this problem and how can we have a voice.'' . . .

Peay opens by saying hunters are rugged and independent folks who usually fail--but he's says: " Minnesota, we're going to link you up with a bunch of hunter groups and individual hunters in other Western and other Midwestern states...."

Will the group be linked to Utah's taxpayer money, funneled for that purpose by Hunter Nation? Is there a point where Minnesota's lobbying and campaign finance regulations require the group to register and disclose? Will Minnesotans have to look to disclosure statement in Utah to answer questions?

Or will answers be as hard to find as a whitetail on opening day after a snowy winter?

Photo: A wolf. Source: Associated Press, via Star Tribune.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

This is fine: update on MN state agencies' response to EPA letter on karst country nitrates

Early this year, National Public Radio reported A decade on, the 'This is fine' creator wants to put the famous dog to rest.

Unfortunately, three Minnesota state agencies, Forum Communications, and state representative Steve Jacob, R-Altura, are demonstrating why the meme stays fresh.

As republished online at the Rochester Post Bulletin, AgWeek's Noah Fish reports in Minnesota agencies release nitrate protection plan, say federal resources are needed to enact:

The state of Minnesota has vowed to continue its long-term management to positively impact groundwater and drinking water in the region, but addressing immediate concerns of rising nitrate levels in southeast Minnesota will require federal funding and resources.

In a Dec. 1 letter from the commissioners of the Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Agriculture and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the state rolled out its plan to meet the requirements by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to protect drinking water in southeast Minnesota from nitrate contamination.

"While we have made great strides in recent decades to ensure the safety of drinking water in our state, there are a variety of threats that must be acknowledged and addressed by all levels of government," read the letter.

Executive branch agencies split authority for water, with the Minnesota Department of Health as the lead for the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, while the Clean Water Act is implemented by shared work of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. . . . 

As Bluestem noted in Friday's post, Office of Legislative Auditor places MPCA nitrate rulemaking on list of possible 2024 audit topics, a preliminary review of the MPCA's ntirate rulemaking record have put the agency on the watchdog's potential 2024 audit topics.

Here's the OLA's response:

The agencies' letter is embedded in Bluestem's post and the Fish article at the Post Bulletin.

But there's more. Post Bulletin news editor Brian Todd jumped for a seat at the burning banquet with Minnesota answers EPA's groundwater demands, pulling out a seat for MegaFarm fan, Representative Steve Jacob:

. . . Minnesota Rep. Steve Jacob, R-Altura, said he thought the response looked "relatively fair and balanced."

"I didn't see anything in that letter that added an immediate onerous (requirement) to feedlots," Jacob said.

The action by the EPA was in response to an April 24, 2023, petition filed by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) and 10 other groups, which asked the EPA to "exercise its emergency powers under Section 1431 of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to address groundwater nitrate contamination that presents a risk to the health of the residents in eight counties of the Southeast Karst Region."

That petition focused on feedlots, claiming large feedlots — concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs — are a main source of nitrate contamination. The petition had asked the EPA to restrict permitting of any new CAFOs or the expansion of any current CAFOs in the region.

Jacob said he was glad to see the response letter did not contain any language about a moratorium on feedlot expansion.

"That's not in there," he said.

What the letter did do, Jacob said, is reiterate actions already being taken to improve groundwater in Southeast Minnesota. For example, he noted that the state pointed out to the EPA that in 2019 Minnesota implemented the Minnesota Groundwater Protection Rule, which prohibits the fall application of commercial fertilizer on fields.

Jacob said this is a program that will greatly reduce nitrate levels, but because the contamination of groundwater — and subsequent cleaning of groundwater — is a years-long process, the benefits have not yet shown up though testing of drinking water from wells in the region.  . . . 

Perhaps residents of the karst region can bring hot cocoa to Representative Jacob, in honor to his acumen.

In his defense and that of Todd, they probably hadn't seen the Office of the Legislative Auditor's response to Legislative Audit Commission  co-chair Rick Hansen's queries about the MPCA water quality management standards development.

This is fine.

Image: The panel on the right, from KC Green's web comic strip "On Fire," became a popular online meme by 2014. KC Green, via A decade on, the 'This is fine' creator wants to put the famous dog to rest.

Related posts

• Office of Legislative Auditor places MPCA nitrate rulemaking on list of possible 2024 audit topics
• Land Stewardship Project applauds court’s support of Winona County; launches ‘Story Center Powerline’ initiative for rural residents
• Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal
• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem 
• Following emergency petition regarding nitrate contamination in SEMN karst region, EPA sees further action needed to protect public health
• On ‘Cancer Road,’ a group of southeastern MN families ask if nitrate exposure is to blame 
• Strib scrutinizes MN Department of Ag action on nitrate-related Groundwater Protection Rule
• Nitrates in Southwestern Minnesota water: 'Do not give the water to infants' in Ellsworth
• Commentary from MinnPost: Can the state control nitrates in Minnesota waters?
• Minnesota Department of Health isn’t properly enforcing drinking water law, and kids will suffer
• Jean Wagenius: For climate and clean water, state agencies need Walz to lead

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6