Gruenhagen said he will help repair Minnesota’s aging road and bridges by addressing one factor that makes the work expensive.
“We need to reform Minnesota’s prevailing wage law,” he said. “It artificially inflates the cost.”
Prevailing wage sets the hourly wage employers must pay workers on construction projects that receive state money. Gruenhagen said the mandated pay hurts state projects, and local projects that receive state money.
“Minnesota is among the four states with the highest prevailing wage law,” he said.
To see the prevailing wages for state-funded projects in Gruenhagen's district, check out Region 7 (includes Sibley County) here and Region 8 (includes McLeod County) here.
After he takes out "artificial" prevailing wages, maybe he'll go after worker safety measures and restrictions on child labor, both of which drive up the costs employers face. Perhaps prison chain gangs doing road work, rather than reopening the closed private prison in Appleton, could replace honest construction workers while we're at it. For a bit of porridge and bread crusts--roads would be repaired, prison overcrowding solved.
Photo: Glenn Gruenhagen arguing for his bill to make sure people use the bathroom assigned to their biological gender at birth. Maybe Minnesota construction workers could get second jobs as bathroom monitors if both of Gruenhagen's "reforms" succeed. Photo by Tom Olmscheid via MinnPost.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Those who follow the public relations charm offensive (is there anything else?) pushed by the North American High Speed Rail Group know to look for the changes that magically appear in different press accounts.
There's a fun contrast in reports of next week's Chinese rail delegation visiting next week.
That’s the question a group of Chinese investors and technical advisers visiting the state next week will discuss before deciding whether to back a proposed privately funded $4.2 billion high-speed passenger rail line linking the two metropolitan hubs.
The Bloomington-based North American High Speed Rail Group is currently doing a preliminary study of the proposed route along Highway 52. The group will host at least three people — investors and technical advisers from China — for seven or eight private meetings with local business leaders and community stakeholders along the 77-mile route.
The delegation will include six to 10 individuals from China, including representatives of the China-owned rail corporation. Also with company leaders will be technical experts and individuals responsible for overseeing sovereign funds. The group is slated to arrive on Monday and will spend the week attending private meetings with business and civic leaders, along with possible investors, according to Wang. Those meetings will happen in locations from the Twin Cities to Rochester.
Maybe air fares went up and so the visitors will each be doing triple duty.
But company officials are first trying to figure out whether there are enough investors to support the build-out and enough support from community leaders and local officials to follow through. They won’t be meeting with state legislators yet.
“Those meetings are not published; we don’t have public leaders in general coming,” said Wendy Meadley, chief strategy officer, North American High Speed Rail Group. “It’s business people coming together and ensuring that it makes sense to go forward.”
We have to wonder why she's so insistent on the notion of skirting public meeting laws, since at least one elected official does plan to meet with the delegation: the mayor of Rochester. Again, one has to read both news articles to put the pieces together. Carlson reports in the Post Bulletin:
Rochester Mayor Ardell Brede said he will have a chance to meet with the representatives from China. He added that figuring out how to improve transportation between Rochester and the Twin Cities is critical as DMC advances.
Perhaps Brede isn't a public leader in general. But since the meetings aren't "published," we'll never know who shows up.
Photo: Chinese visitors may not know that the peasants aren't happy about this project (something about losing their property through eminent domain to private investors). Here's a reminder.
Eminent domain may factor into the passenger rail line, Wang acknowledged in an interview Wednesday.
Parts of the route have curves that won’t work for a train traveling between 200 and 230 miles per hour. The company doesn’t know where or how much private land would be needed for the project, but Wang said it would be a small amount and that the Rail Group would aim to affect local landowners as little as possible.
Heather Arndt, a leader of Citizens Concerned About Rail Line, a group formed in opposition to high-speed rail in the area, is skeptical of that claim.
“It’s not negligible if you’re the farmer that has lost that land [that is] taken out of production,” she said. “It’s not negligible if it’s your house.”
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Joseph Wang, CEO of the North American High Speed Group, tells Heather Carlson at the Rochester Post Bulletin that he was "shocked" that America had no high speed rail system when he moved to the United State in 1991.
Bluestem thinks the bigger shocker here is Wang's claim that the Chinese high-speed rail system was built and operational when he lived in China until 1991.
In an interview, Wang said he understands that many Americans are skeptical of high-speed rail. But he said he has seen firsthand the benefit of such projects. Wang was born in Taizhou, China. He worked for China National Technical Import and Export Corp., overseeing construction of massive infrastructure projects financed with foreign dollars. He also did a lot of traveling in China, Japan and Taiwan and saw the impact high-speed rail projects had a region.
"I saw how high-speed rail changed the human beings' lives. How high-speed rail improved the economy and created jobs," he said.
Wang moved to the U.S. in 1991 and became a U.S. citizen. He said he was shocked when he moved to America that there was no high-speed rail. [emphasis added]
That's a charming tale. But Bluestem struggles to understand how Wang could have been shocked at the absence of high-speed rail in the United States when at the time, high-speed rail in the People's Republic of China was only a glimmer in party officials' eyes.
Policy planners debated the necessity and economic viability of high-speed rail service. Supporters argued that high-speed rail would boost future economic growth. Opponents noted that high-speed rail in other countries were expensive and mostly unprofitable[citation needed]. Overcrowding on existing rail lines, they said, could be solved by expanding capacity through higher speed and frequency of service. In 1995, Premier Li Peng announced that preparatory work on the Beijing Shanghai HSR would begin in the 9th Five Year Plan (1996–2000), but construction was not scheduled until the first decade of the 21st century.
According to the entry, high-speed rail was launched in China in 2007. What Wang saw there in 1991 is anyone's guess, but whatever he and Carlson were smoking during that interview, they should learn to share.
The 2007 date is mentioned in Tom Zoellner's une 14, 2016 article in Foreign Affairs, China's High-Speed Rail Diplomacy. It's an interesting read, and includes news of the American regulation ( "a federal mandate that high-speed rail train sets must be manufactured domestically") that shut down the Xpress West proect from Vegas to Southern California. (North American High Speed Rail once claimed to be negotiating to operate that line).
Taiwan's high speed rail line dates from the same year. Time reported in A Brief History of High-Speed Rail that Japan built its first bullet train for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics; by 2009, 1,500 miles of high speed rail lines had been built on the island nation. The article noted:
The sobering expense of high-speed train travel has tempered the expectations of even the strongest rail advocates. "It sounds like a lot of money to Americans, but it's really just a start," James P. RePass of the National Corridors Initiative told the Washington Post. Some critics also predict a massive price tag to operate new rail lines, pointing to Amtrak's perennial shortfalls, and a proposed link between Anaheim and Las Vegas (in the home state of Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid) sparked outrage and derision among many Republicans.
In the seven years since, little headway has been made.
There also exists the strong possibility of a political backlash to the idea of Chinese-financed high-speed rail projects. In 2005, fears of growing Chinese influence—stoked by U.S. politicians and pundits—helped doom a bid by CNOOC, a Chinese firm, to acquire the U.S. oil producer Unocal. Today, anti-Chinese sentiment is running even higher than it was then, thanks in no small part the presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who regularly berates Washington elites for not taking a tougher line on Beijing. And critics of Chinese involvement in U.S. rail will no doubt exploit public concerns over safety. In 2011, a malfunctioning signal box caused the collision of two Chinese-built high-speed rail trains near the city of Wenzhou, killing 40 and injuring almost 200 more. The Chinese government moved to squelch criticism, even though investigations found that the rail line had been built hastily with substandard materials amid an atmosphere of official corruption.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an arm of the Treasury Department designed to protect the nation from financial threats to its national security, would presumably review any large-scale involvement by Beijing in a critical piece of U.S. infrastructure. But the CFIUS approval process is somewhat opaque, and the committee’s decisions can apparently be swayed by high-priced lobbyists. When asked about their review process, a U.S. Treasury spokesman responded in email that the committee “does not comment on information relating to specific CFIUS cases, including whether or not certain parties have filed notices for review.”
Details, details.
Whatever the case, Bluestem thinks it's safe to bet that Wang, North American High Speed Rail Group's strategic communicator Wend Meadley and the rest of the gang are full capable of building the high speed rail that flourished in China and Taiwan over 25 years ago.
Perhaps they'll offer Mayor Brede a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge next or market vaporware to the DMC.
Photo: Maybe Wang was thinking of "theAsia Express steam locomotive, which operated commercially from 1934 to 1943 in Manchuria could reach 130 km/h (81 mph) and was one of the fastest trains in Asia" (Amtrak'sAcela Express on the east coast can reach 150 mph). Photo credits: This photographic image was published before December 31st 1956, or photographed before 1946, under the jurisdiction of the Government of Japan. Thus this photographic image is considered to be public domain according to article 23 of old copyright law of Japan (English translation) and article 2 of supplemental provision of copyright law of Japan.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
The crash marked the latest in a long line of driving-related maladies for Daudt, the highest-ranking Republican in the state. In recent years, Daudt has been cited with four moving violations and two license suspensions for failure to pay fines in Minnesota.
Daudt has received two tickets driving at least 15 miles per hour over the limit, a third for speeding and a fourth for texting while driving, all since joining the Legislature in 2010.
The speaker declined to comment on the story, but sent a statement through his spokeswoman. House GOP spokeswoman Susan Closmore said the crash was unremarkable, but that political rivals are using the incident to try to damage Daudt politically.
While only a poor country blogger rather than a political rival, Bluestem pauses to join the dog pile.
On April 28, 2015, Daudt voted against an amendment to SF 878, offered by Joe Atkins, DFL-Inver Grove Heights, which would have increased fines for texting while driving that occur within one year of the first violation. Under the amendment, a second violation within one year would incur a fine of $350, and a third or subsequent violation within one year would incur a fine of $500.
Did Daudt's dubious driving record influence the Speaker to vote against the Atkins amendment? Or was it just one of those partisan-line votes?
"I paid my speeding ticket and I fully intended to pay the right amount," he said. "People shouldn't speed, people should pay their speeding tickets, and I shouldn't have sped. There's no excuse."
. . ."I'm in the public eye and rightfully have to be held to a very high standard," he said. "I will get it fixed."
Perhaps Speaker Daudt, who reportedly has gubernatorial ambitions, might think about that concept.
Photo: Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Daudt in a pout.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
The North American High Speed Rail Group double-plus promises everyone that it's going to be completely, one-hundred-percent totally amazeballs privately built and operated.
But the explanation from its mighty strategic communications director, Social Wendy Meadley, on why the corporation needed an extension on its two non-metro work permits for MNDOT right-of-ways suggest that this private passenger rail project isn't going anywhere without public assistance.
Earlier this month, the rail group requested the Minnesota Department of Transportation extend the deadline for two work permits set to expire at the end of the month. MnDOT granted the request, setting a new deadline of Dec. 1 for the permits. . . .
Initially, the company had hoped to complete its preliminary study of the line by the end of the month and present a summary report to MnDOT. But Meadley said the rail group needs more time to meet with key stakeholders before making a final decision whether to push ahead with the project. One reason for the delay was discussions about a possible special legislative session this summer, which made it tough to talk with key officials.
"There were stakeholder meetings that we needed to have that were basically delayed because of the potential special session," she said.
Minnesotans may have noticed that the entire business of government has shut down while those details about a special session are worked out. No? Bluestem missed that part too.
There's the other question about "stakeholder meetings" of course: if the train is private, why are "key officials" and the agencies and bodies they represent "stakeholders" at all?
Moreover, the sentence "North American High Speed Rail Group is seeking to build the first privately financed high-speed rail line in the United States" seems to exist in a Shangri-la for scheming grifters. Although it's meeting resistance, Texas Central, a private 240-mile line between Dallas and Houston, hopes to begin construction in 2017. Unlike the North American High Speed Rail Group, Texas Central has announced its foreign partner, Japanese train operator JR Central.
Image: Marge Simpson stops by the office in "Marge vs. the Monorail." Perhaps this is the potential partner Wendy Meadley is courting.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Is the Minnesota House Republican caucus losing its direction and message discipline? Two recent articles suggest that the caucus isn't united on transportation funding.
For Duff and his backers, however, Daudt is just another Republican gone soft in St. Paul. . . .
Duff cites the Daudt proposal to raise car tab fees as a prime example.
“I don’t understand a Republican asking for that increase,” he said.
Daudt replied that his 18-month campaign against Dayton’s gas tax increase was ultimately successful. He said the car tab proposal was a tactical ploy to show Minnesotans that Dayton wasn’t serious about making a deal on transportation, a Daudt priority since so many rural residents are driving on crumbling roads.
Duff also points to what he views as unacceptable spending increases and the House GOP’s proposal — currently in limbo as Daudt negotiates with Dayton — to borrow $1 billion to spend on infrastructure like roads, bridges and water systems.
“We have a large surplus. During that time we have a Republican asking for bonding, for more debt, for roads. That’s not the way I manage my family household,” Duff said.
Contrast Daudt's vision with that espoused in Mazeppa Republican representative Steve Drazkowski's op-ed piece in the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Baited with roads and switched to light rail:
The reality is road improvements have not been ignored in this state — far from it.
It’s time to step back and remember that state government remains fully funded, and MnDOT crews are out in force across this state repairing your roads. Let’s also recognize that Gov. Dayton is most interested in what’s best for him and his political partners, and not what’s best for Minnesotans.
This year alone, MnDOT will work on more than 200 road projects; 140 of them are in Greater Minnesota, more than 60 are in the metro area, and some are seeing multiple stretches of improvements on the same highway.
For fiscal year 2016, Minnesota collected roughly $897 million in gas taxes, $722 million in registration taxes and $428 million in motor vehicle sales taxes. All three sources are expected to increase again in fiscal year 2017 by nearly 3 percent.
In short, over this two-year budget cycle MnDOT expects to collect $4.2 billion from these three tax sources. In the past eight years, their collections have increased by 58 percent. All of this is now being spent on statewide roads and bridges.
So let’s be clear: Minnesota’s road and bridge needs are fully funded for the next two years . . .
Draz targets Governor Dayton in his column--but stating that transportation funding is just hunky-dory, Draz kicks the legs out from Daudt's ambitions.
And by claiming that Greater Minnesota is getting its fair share of transportation funding, Draz takes away the ability to stoke a sense of injured merit so needed for the HRCC's anti-metro placebaiting.
Crumbling roads or construction projects? Daudt and the Draz should maybe pick one route to retaining control of the House and stick with it.
Photo: Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Daudt.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
I urged the governor to call for careful evaluation of existing light rail operations. They are not meeting original projections of ridership, etc.If people do not use it, we do not solve problems of traffic congestion.
After two years of operations, the region’s second light rail line is exceeding expectations.
Average daily ridership on the Green Line is 37,402, well on its way to the 41,000 daily trips forecast for the year 2030. Investment along the line, which connects downtown St. Paul with downtown Minneapolis, has totaled $4.2 billion, according to Metro Transit estimates. And market-rate housing projects have sprouted all along the route, even as 3,600 units of affordable housing have been created or preserved.
As such, praising the $1 billion Green Line is a sure-fire applause line for politicians in both the east and west metro.
But southwestern Minnesota, a state senator seems certain that voters won't care about facts, but will applaud the place-baiting.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
A reader sent us a reminder of another undelivered promise made by Wendy Meadley, strategic director of North American High Speed Rail Group. In Michael Brun's April 2, 2016 article in the Red Wing Republican Eagle, Comment period opens on high-speed rail, the staff writer reported:
Minnesota-based North American High Speed Rail Group will accept comments through April 29, either submitted online at www.nahsr.com or mailed to 8009 34th Ave. South, Bloomington, MN 55425.
“NAHSR is currently in a preliminary study process to assess if there is a business case to pursue the project further,” according to a news release. The business says it will incorporate comments and input from planned public meetings when making a decision to proceed.
UPDATE: A reader called our attention to the full press release here at Slideshare. The press release states:
Prior to the completion of the Preliminary Study period, NAHSR will participate in a Town Hall public engagement session. Information about the session will be posted on NAHSR’s website and communicated via press release to regional media, and sent via email to NAHSR’s option database. To be included in NAHSR’s ongoing public communication, you can sign up for the database at http://nahsr.com/contact-nahsr/.
The Town Hall never happened. Here's the image downloaded from Slideshare:
It's not as if the group enjoys a reputation for transparency. Back in early October 2015, Representative Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa wrote in Covert high-speed rail behavior needs scrutiny, op-ed commentary published in the Rochester Post Bulletin:
Recently, the North American High Speed Rail Group entered the fray. It's looking to build a high-speed rail line from Bloomington to Rochester along the Highway 52 corridor, supposedly on its own.
So what do we know about this outfit? . . .
Draz walks readers through elements of the now-discarded business plan, then raises points about the way "this outfit" operates:
I recently wrote a letter to the Federal Rail Administration to share my growing concerns over this project and to relay the numerous issues that are causing elevated angst levels from my constituents. They include:
• Lack of transparency: The stated FRA process of an open, publically engaged fact-finding mission for Zip Rail simply isn't happening. We've seen multiple examples of public meetings either not posted or publicized in local papers, delayed or abruptly canceled, creating the impression that public input really isn't wanted because the high-speed rail outcome has been predetermined. Some of the cities that would fall within the proposed corridor were never notified of upcoming meetings.
• Authenticity of community adviser committee: This group seems to be nothing more than a rubber-stamp assembly purposed to create the illusion of seeking community input while "checking-the-box" for the FRA approval process. To date, it's held one meeting.
• Lack of support for Zip Rail: My constituents aren't the only ones expressing doubt. Last session, the Minnesota House passed a bill prohibiting the use of government money to fund a Zip Rail project, ensuring eminent domain will not be used to build it and requiring any developer to demonstrate the ability to pay for the full costs if Zip Rail fails. There have been numerous formal resolutions and strongly worded letters of opposition to Zip Rail from many Minnesota cities, townships, counties, farm groups and individual citizens. None of these entities finds public benefit from the proposal. . . .
It's a good thing that Bluestem is indexed in Nexis, or those investors doing due diligence on this project might never learn that those "planned public meetings" never happened--or if they did, NAHSRG forgot to tell anyone along the route about them. Or other phantom projects once associated with the corporation.
Photo: No Zombie Zip Rail, CCARL's yard sign campaign against the project that won't die.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Is Poker Wendy Meadley bluffing again--or is she just have to have a grift?
In Group pushes ahead with high-speed rail plans, the Post Bulletin's Heather Carlson reports that the new moneymaker Meadley is shaking for the $4.2 billion, maybe-not-so-high-speed, 77-mile-long passenger rail line between the Twin Cities and Rochester is to become the world's most expensive package delivery system:
The company is also looking to incorporate freight for "small, high-value" items. She referenced the potential to ship packages to consumers same day via the rail line. Seeking to develop real estate in connection with the proposed rail line also remains a key part of the plan. . . .
The company is also considering building four stops along the line. One would be known as the "North Terminal" and would likely be built in Bloomington near the Minnesota-St. Paul International Airport. Another stop would be constructed in a southern metro suburb to allow commuters to hop aboard. Up for debate is whether to build one or two stations in Rochester — one downtown and another at the airport. . . .
This seems like a very pricey way to duplicate service that's already provided by UPS, Fedex and other carriers using the existing roads and airports. But perhaps Meadley feels to have another reason to confiscate property along the line via eminent domain so her investors can prosper when developing that seized real estate.
Condemning condemnation
It's not often that we agree with Rep. Steve Drazkowski. He tells Carlson:
Drazkowski said he remains deeply concerned about the project. One of his biggest worries is the potential for the private company to seize landowners' property via eminent domain.
"I struggle with the idea that a private company is going to eminent domain private property. That is very troubling and something I think we certainly need to address in law," he said.
Meanwhile, the freight rail guy and longtime Fedex employee advising the private group claims that if the no-so-high-speed rail isn't built, the smart people won't be able to deal with Highway 52 and they'll relocate to Denver, Beijing or Berlin. He tells Carlson:
Bill Goins, a longtime Fed Ex employee who serves on the MInnesota Freight Advisory Commission, has been advising the rail group. He said it makes sense to consider building a high-speed rail line between Rochester and the Twin Cities because of the massive Destination Medical Center economic development project. DMC is projected to add another 30,000 to 40,000 jobs in Rochester over the next 15 or 20 years. He said it's likely that some of those employees will live in the Twin Cities and commute to Rochester. That will put a heavy strain on the four-lane U.S. Highway 52, which is vital to commerce in the region.
"If we don't continue to be creative and innovative, we stand the chance of good companies, good employers saying, 'Hey, we could move to Denver or we could move to Beijing or we could move to Berlin' or whatever it might be, and our market loses," Goins said.
Whatever. In last month's Stealth Train, Twin Cities Business executive editor Adam Platt scrutinized claims about Highway 52's capacity:
NAHSR’s interest in a Rochester rail link centers on a sense of infrastructure need and business opportunity as the Destination Medical Center (DMC) effort comes to fruition.
“Accessibility is key to the DMC vision,” says state transportation commissioner Charlie Zelle. Rochester does not face a transportation crisis today. Highway 52 is free-flowing, says Olmsted County chief transportation planner Charlie Reiter. He says Rochester’s housing supply is “tight” and additional commuters are expected (see Rochester infographic).
Currently, “we don’t see a lot of excess [transit] demand,” says Dan Holter, general manager of privately held Rochester City Lines, which operates coach-style buses for Rochester-bound commuters from the Twin Cities. “We’ve tried to add service going north, but people don’t want to transfer at Mall of America,” which would roughly be NAHSR’s terminus. Rail advocates point to inevitable gridlock on Hwy. 52 if DMC’s jobs vision is validated, but MnDOT says it has no data one way or another on that topic.
Will all those new Rochester workers be commuting from the Twin Cities--or living north of Rochester, thus clogging the roads? The Med City is also connected to Highway 14, a corridor of commerce that runs east-to-west, and some Mayo employees already chose to commute from small communities south of town like Chatfield.
But Meadley insists the company is making headway when it comes to convincing city and county officials to be open-minded about the project. She said the company will be looking to build a maintenance facility halfway along the line.
"That (maintenance facility) could be placed mid-corridor, so I think there are people in the counties and cities along the line that are open to exploring that before they condemn it because they want to see what the opportunities are," Meadley said.
In an article posted online Monday, Red Wing Republican Eagle's Michael Brun reports in County Board adopts Comprehensive Plan update that the Goodhue County Board has signaled that the North American High Speed Rail Group need to know what every frisky college student learns during freshman orientation: silence doesn't mean yes.
Brun reports in his lede:
Commissioners voted unanimously Tuesday to adopt an update to the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, the first substantial revision in 12 years to the document that outlines the county’s vision for land use and future growth. Among the changes is a paragraph clarifying that land uses not mentioned in the plan should not be assumed to have the county’s support.
“So say a group advocating for, oh I don’t know, a Zip Rail project decided to say that, ‘Well, since Goodhue County does not explicitly take a stand against it, then we’re assuming that they’re for it,’” Board Chair Dan Rechtzigel said. “They can no longer make that statement.”
The plan also has a line requiring that new or proposed rail systems must provide a benefit to the county.
Assuming NAHSR moves forward and can raise sufficient capital, it still faces hurdles, say observers. The lack of public funding makes capital acquisition simpler; the same may not necessarily be true for capital deployment, however.
Opponents will be relieved to learn the Rochester train will face the same onerous, time-consuming, and lawsuit-inducing environmental reviews as a public project. “The environmental review is based on scope of the project, not who’s doing it,” says University of Minnesota law professor Alexandra Klass. (The U.S. Surface Transportation Board recently said it would take three years to complete environmental study of a proposed freight railroad bypass around Chicago.)
We'll continue to watch this shiny thing show as it keeps rising from the dead. In the meantime, passenger rail to Duluth (the rail lines already exist for the Northern Lights Express, so the cost would be far less) --or high speed rail directly to Chicago--would be better investments on the public or private dime than this.
Image: Will the zombie ziprail mutate into zombie package delivery?
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
In Weber addresses critics with added comments, a letter to the editors of the Worthington Daily Globe, the honorable Republican state senator from Luverne hopes to clear up what he perceives are misrepresentations in this letter and this one of his "comments to the governor during his recent visit to Worthington."
We'll have to take Weber's word for what he was trying to communicate to the governor, but there's at least one part of the letter that didn't ring true to us. Weber writes:
I urged the governor to call for careful evaluation of existing light rail operations. They are not meeting original projections of ridership, etc.If people do not use it, we do not solve problems of traffic congestion.
The METRO Blue Line set a new annual ridership record and system ridership increased for the 11th time in 12 years as customers took more than 85.8 million rides on buses and trains operated by Metro Transit in 2015. . . .
Ridership on both the Blue and Green light-rail lines continued to grow as customers used the all-day, frequent service to travel to work, school, special events and other destinations. The ability to transfer between light-rail lines in downtown Minneapolis also boosted ridership.
In all, more than 10.6 million rides were taken on the Blue Line, the highest annual ridership since it opened in mid-2004. The previous record of nearly 10.5 million rides was set in 2010. Average weekday ridership topped 30,000 for eight consecutive months.
Nearly 12.4 million rides were taken on the Green Line during its first full year of operation. Average weekday ridership was 37,400 – just under the 2030 forecast of 41,000 rides. Ridership in the Central Corridor, including the Green Line and bus routes 16 and 94, increased by about 30 percent from 2014 to 2015 and has nearly doubled since 2013, when service was provided by buses alone.
Oh. The Green Line's ridership trajectory appears to be following a similar path to that of the Blue Line, formerly known as the Hiawatha Line. In 2009, Minnesota Public Radio's Dan Olson reported in Hiawatha light rail marks five years; what's next?:
Today marks five years of operation for the Hiawatha line, Minnesota's first light rail service.
Ridership is much greater than projected, and that success has helped spark a debate over how te expand transit in the Twin Cities metro area, and how to pay for it. . . .
Five years and 43 million passenger rides later, the Hiawatha line is coping with success.
Metro Transit spokesman Bob Gibbons says ridership for the line, which connects downtown Minneapolis with the Mall of America, is already 20 percent ahead of what ridership was expected to be 11 years from now. . . .
While I regret that some may be embarrassed by an honest and respectful discussion of issues and differences, I will continue to handle the responsibilities as state senator in such a way that truly seeks to resolve problems rather than give blind deference to the governor or anyone else.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Mr. Fisher told members that on April 15, 2015, Mr. [Benjamin] Skjold registered on behalf of the North American High Speed Rail Group, LLC with the belief that he would lobby on its behalf. However, Mr. Skjold never undertook any lobbying efforts on behalf of the association, was never paid by the association, and never made any disbursements for lobbying purposes. Mr. Fisher said that because Mr. Skjold was not required to have been registered as a lobbyist on the association’s behalf, he was asking to withdraw his lobbyist registration. Mr. Fisher stated that Mr. Skjold had yet to file a lobbyist report for the second half of 2015 and that any late filing fee that would otherwise accrue on this report would be waived if the request was granted.
According to his Linked In profile, Skjold was a member of the Foley & Mansfield law firm. Foley and Manfield is listed as Outside General Legal Counsel in the 2015 business plan that the North American High Speed Rail Group, LLC submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transportation in 2015. Bluestem uploaded the document here.
Mr. Skjold is General Counsel to North American High Speed Rail Group, LLC, which is in a significant growth mode establishing rail corridors and developing transit oriented real estate throughout the country. Mr. Skjold also maintains a private practice where he regularly counsels clients on a wide array of corporate and securities matters, including private financings, mergers and acquisitions, and corporate governance. He has an active banking practice, where he has represented some of the largest banks in the country along with numerous regional banks and credit unions.
We certainly hope that he's been paid for being the private passenger rail group's general counsel. Readers may remember Heather Carlson's January Political Notebook blog post, Michael: I wasn't paid by private group for consulting work:
Olmsted County rail consultant Chuck Michael said he was not paid by the private company seeking to build a high-speed rail line from Rochester to the Twin Cities.
Michael sent an email to the Post-Bulletin following an article published that reported Michael did some consulting work for North American High Speed Rail Group last year. In the email, Michael wrote, "you should be interested to know that my total compensation from NAHSR was $0."
We begin to wonder whether this is an all-volunteer outfit trying to build a multi-billion dollar private rail line.
Photo: Wendy Meadley, North American High Speed Rail Group officer and lobbyist.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
All the rules relating to public engagement start the day you take public funding," said Wendy Meadley, chief strategy officer for North American High Speed Rail Group's project in Minnesota. With private financing, she said, opponents "can't make thousands of public records requests and run the project over."
The company said last year it would seek money from Chinese investors. Now, it said it is considering two foreign partners for the $4.2 billion project, which seeks to connect the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul to the internationally renowned Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, by 2022.
Meadley's statement is fascinating for several reasons. First, Minnesota data practice requests (the state version of FIOA) aren't made to private companies; rather, they're made to state government agencies. Often those asking for documents pay for the cost of obtaining them from the agencies. It's not a burden on the poor dear's private corporation.
Second, Meadley's hostility to transparency is breathtaking, especially given her notion that those making the requests are opponent. The most significant data practices request about the North American High Speed Rail Group's project was made by the Rochester Post Bulletin. The media organization isn't an opponent.
We doubt "thousands" of requests have come in, but we'll be checking with MNDOT.
Wendy Meadley, the group’s strategic officer, did not testify during the bill hearing. In an interview after the hearing, she said the company is already planning to reach out to the public about the project and does not see the need for legislation.
“We don’t believe you need legislation to accomplish what Sen. Schmit stated he was looking to accomplish on behalf of his constituents — to start a dialogue, open communication and transparent reporting of information and progress,” Meadley said.
She added that in an effort to reach out to stakeholders, the company has established a 30-day preliminary comment period about its proposal on its website that will end April 27. She said the group also plans to host a town hall in June.
Some experts remain skeptical that bullet trains can work without government money to finance initial legs of construction.
Rail lines are generally profitable once in operation, said Jim Steer, director of UK-based high-speed rail research organization Greengauge 21. But operating profits are unlikely to be enough to repay massive construction costs.
"No private party is actually going to stump up the kind of money needed to create these things," said Steer.
Supporters of the new rail lines said investors can expect solid returns based on ticket sales and profits from high-end real estate developments near stations.
The North American High Speed Rail Group's original business plan called for real estate developments along the line to assist in making the project viable, the Post Bulletin reported in 2015. How would investors know that the company would be able to promise certainty about securing real estate along the line?
A private rail line is able to exercise the power of eminent domain under state and federal law, as we reported in February. That makes Meadley's love of secrecy (as reported to Reuters) even more troubling, as it suggests that the private group wants to develop plans off the radar, then obtain other peoples' property by any means necessary.
Let's hope that those same citizens, their friends and the press show open to the private rail group's town hall to ask Meadley why transparency includes her glee over blocking citizens and the press from obtaining information about her project.
Photo: Wendy Meadley, Ms. Minnesota Transparency 2016. You betcha.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
We've written occasionally about the notion of regulatory capture. Investopedia defines the concept this way:
Regulatory capture is a theory associated with George Stigler, a Nobel laureate economist. It is the process by which regulatory agencies eventually come to be dominated by the very industries they were charged with regulating. Regulatory capture happens when a regulatory agency, formed to act in the public's interest, eventually acts in ways that benefit the industry it is supposed to be regulating, rather than the public.
Public interest agencies that come to be controlled by the industry they were charged with regulating are known as captured agencies. Regulatory capture is an example of gamekeeper turns poacher; in other words, the interests the agency set out to protect are ignored in favor of the regulated industry's interests.
The Wall Street Journal cited Stigler in a commentary about Regulatory Capture 101:
Enter George Stigler, who published his famous essay “The Theory of Economic Regulation” in the spring 1971 issue of the Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science. The University of Chicago economist reported empirical data from various markets and concluded that “as a rule, regulation is acquired by the industry and is designed and operated primarily for its benefit.”
Recently, the Minnesota-based North American High Speed Rail has taken regulatory capture to its logical extreme. The scheme to build and operate a private high-speed passenger short line between the Twin Cities and Rochester has opened a "public comment" period that the corporation runs by itself.
Oh.
So the corporation hasn't just tried to control the regulatory process, this ghost train has simply set up its own regulatory process. Isn't that special?
In fact, it is special, if we are to trust the definition of "public comment" from Wikipedia:
Public comment is a specific term of art used by various government agencies in the United States, a constitutional democratic republic, in several circumstances. It is sometimes called "vox populi". Generally these circumstances are open public meetings of government bodies which set aside time for oral public comments, or comments, usually upon documents. Such documents may either be reports such as Draft Environmental Impact Reports (DEIR's) or new regulations. There is typically a notice which is posted on the web and mailed to more or less ad hoc lists of interested parties known to the government agencies. If there is to be a change of regulations, there will be a formal notice of proposed rulemaking.
The basis for public comment is found in general political theory of constitutional democracy as originated during and after the French Enlightenment, particularly by Rousseau.[1] This basis was elaborated in the American Revolution, and various thinkers such as Franklin, Jefferson [2] and Thomas Paine [3] are associated with the rejection of tyrannical, closed government decision making in favor of open government. The tradition of the New England Town Hall is believed to be rooted in this early American movement, and the distillation of formal public comment in official proceedings is a direct application of this format in the workings of public administration itself.
What does it mean when a corporation is running a "public comment" period? We think it made be the ultimate trolling of citizens by a private interest.
Regulatory control lite
Meanwhile, legislators are working on creating some sort of public oversight for this rogue zombie train; unfortunately, the private corporation would fund the working group. Heather Carlson reports in Bill creating high-speed rail working group advances:
A bill establishing a high-speed rail working group cleared it’s [sic] first legislative hurdle on Wednesday despite concerns from some lawmakers that the legislation is not needed.
Members of the Senate Transportation and Public Safety Committee peppered Red Wing DFL Sen. Matt Schmit with questions about his bill. The legislation would establish a 15-member advisory group focused on a potential high-speed rail line from Rochester to the Twin Cities. The goal behind the bill would be to have the private company that is considering building the rail line — the North American High Speed Rail Group — fund the working group. Schmit told committee members the cost could amount to a couple hundred thousand dollars. . ...
Others said they wanted to see changes to the bill to address concerns raised by residents who live along the proposed corridor. That would include making sure the names of donors who pay for the working group are disclosed and requiring the working group to be established as soon as the private company applies for any sort of permit from the Minnesota Department of Transportation — not just when they begin negotiations for right-of-way to build the line.
“The biggest thing is this is a hugely, hugely expensive proposal and generally before investing this much effort, there’s a lot more discussions that comes along,” said Sen. Mary Kiffemeyer, R-Big Lake.
Schmit told senators he is open to changing his bill to address concerns being raised by the committee. But he rejected the idea that his bill is not necessary. He said there was a lack of communication and transparency about Zip Rail, a proposed public high-speed rail line from Rochester to the Twin Cities. Work on that project has been suspended by the state and Olmsted County due to a lack of funding. Still, Schmit said that experience highlights the need for a working group that takes into account the concerns of stakeholders who live along the route.
Wait for it:
The bill would establish a 15-member advisory working group that would be overseen by the University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies. The group would include a county board-appointed resident from each of the following counties: Dakota, Dodge, Goodhue, Hennepin, Olmsted and Ramsey. The group would also include lawmakers, state agency representatives and someone from the Center for Transportation Studies.
A rail line will be valuable when the city of Rochester – boosted by the multibillion-dollar Destination Medical Center initiative – sees the business and population growth it’s projecting in coming years, said Bill Goins, chair of the Minnesota Freight Advisory Committee, who attended the meeting.
“We recognize that [growth is] going to put a tremendous amount of pressure on Highway 52,” he told attendees. “There’re all kinds of options … but even from the movement of goods and commerce, we want to avoid gridlock on [Highway] 52.”
We're curious if he did disclose his service as NAHSRG's advisory group chair.
Whatever the case, the bill seems to build-in some conflicts of interest, and the CCARLS activists do well to demand transparency on who is paying the freight for working groups.
But at least the working group would be subject to ordinary regulatory capture, rather the high-speed, 21th Century version operating in the "public comment" period the corporation is operating now.
Background: Southeast Minnesota residences are concerned about a private passenger rail line that would not stop in their communities. They're also concerned that the private rail line could use eminent domain to condemn and acquire property that would then be developed to generate operating funds for the trains (check the business plan)--and that the train would disrupt existing businesses like farms.
CCARLS is meeting tonight, so we'll be looking out for reports in local papers about the gathering.
Photo: CCARLS has started a yard sign campaign against Zombie Ziprail, the project that won't die.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Goodhue County Public Works Director Greg Isakson reported at the March 1 County Board meeting that a resolution had been drafted stating that the County is opposed to the proposed Zip Rail project that was suspended last month by MnDOT. The resolution will be sent to Mn/DOT, Commissioner Zelle and to Olmsted County, and will be added to the comments about the content in the Alternatives Analysis document.
The resolution is strongly worded and states: "This project is not consistent with local plans, and it is presumptuous and downright wrong to imply passive support for a project simply because the County's Comprehensive Plan is mute to the issue. It would create substantial and unacceptable adverse environmental, economic and social impacts on the lands and citizens of Goodhue County. The Goodhue County Board of Commissioners hereby declares there is no support for, and there is opposition to the Zip Rail project as presented in past meetings, past reports, and envisioned in the last study before the project was suspended, specifically the Alternatives Analysis project for the Investment Plan and the Tier 1 EIS study."
The resolution is important because comments in the Alternatives Analysis infer that local governments and communities were in favor of the Zip Rail project. Rechtzigel noted that over 25 cities, townships and agricultural co-ops in Goodhue County have also sent in resolutions stating that they are opposed to the project.
Commissioner Brad Anderson suggested that when the new County Comprehensive Plan is updated, it should state that whatever project comes forward in the future, it must benefit Goodhue County or approval will not be granted.
Why was this resolution necessary? Isn't the ZipRail Project dead? Sadly, private rail promoters have been bitten by the walking corpse of ZipRail and simply seem to keep coming.
We're not sure from the Cannon Falls Beacon exactly where the MNDOT report implied local support, but we did find this sort of thing in the text
Clearly, the Goodhue County Board doesn't think the project was consistent with its land use plans, and will be strengthening language when updating its new County Comprehensive Plan.
Secondly,the original business plan for the North American High Speed Rail Group's private "Velos" high speed passenger rail line between the Twin Cities and Rochester implied that local governments had reviewed and approved the concept. We wrote back in November:
The first was this statement on page 3 for Stage I: Proof of Concept Assessment: Rail and Real Estate:
Obtained acceptance and approval by Federal, State, County and Municipal governments.
The suspicions of citizens living in "fly over" area where no stops have been planned seem confirmed by this sort of assertion. We have not found "approval" of the project--or the Ziprail before it--by Goodhue County. Quite the contrary.
Moreover, while the spokester for the private bullet train and other supporters frequently note publicly that their project is much different from the Ziprail, the business plan asserts that earlier studies for the Ziprail are being used to support their project. We're not sure they can have it both ways.
We'll watch to see if the private group cribs the "pro" concept language from the MNDOT report. Perhaps more importantly, we'll look to see whether the Twin Cities press manages to report on local government opposition as well, rather than lazily spinning this as a tale of angry residents against the shiny thing.
The line, which would reach speeds between 180 and 200 mph, is expected to sustain itself financially, even without any business development attached to the project, she said.
Still, new development is an integral part of the project, she said. The group currently doesn’t own any property, but that would change if plans move forward.
“So we see the rail as the centerpiece of an overall project,” Meadley said during the meeting. “We will buy land and create end-point stations.”
No public funds are requested for the project, with all project planning and capital funding requirements provided through private sources, and all operating costs supported by farebox revenues as well as related commercial, institutional, mixed use and industrial development revenues.
If project "needs" development property for operating costs, must neighbors sell?
What if those along the line don't want to sell their property so that Wendy Meadley and her investors can prosper, but simply want to tend their land peaceably as their families have for generations, just like Naboth sought to do in his vineyard in the Old Testament?
Fortunately, present landowners won't be facing Jezebel's covetous stinkeye, but it's possibly for private railroads--even those that aren't using public money to build and operate their projects--to use eminent domain (condemnation).
As a private entity, what is their process for land acquisition?
We do not know that yet. They can have eminent domain authority if they become a private railroad but they would have to get that authority from the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
Railroad corporations have the power to acquire land by purchase or eminent domain. This applies to any land that is needed for roadways, spur and side tracks, rights-of-way, depot grounds, yards, grounds for gravel pits, machine shops, warehouses, elevators, depots, station houses, and all other structures necessary for the use and operation of the road.
Every foreign and domestic railroad corporation shall have power to acquire, by purchase or condemnation, all necessary roadways, spur and side tracks, rights-of-way, depot grounds, yards, grounds for gravel pits, machine shops, warehouses, elevators, depots, station houses, and all other structures necessary or convenient for the use, operation, or enjoyment of the road, and may make with any other railroad company, such arrangements for the use of any portion of its tracks and roadbeds as it may deem necessary.
According to the North American High Speed Rail Group's business plan for the "Velos" private train, side real estate developments along the line will pay for the train, rather than ticket sales. In short, residents along the line face the distinct possibility that a private corporation with absolutely no track record can force them to sell their land along MnDOT right-of-ways, so that the corporation can use it to underwrite speculative real estate developments.
Remember: the rail group's strategic communications director told the City Pages:
It is the North American High Speed Rail Group's interest to plan, design, build and operate this passenger rail corridor through a private funding approach. In this way a full range of economic development opportunities that complement the passenger rail service can be included in a new financial model. When combined, the economics of a project like this are integrated and amplified in a new business model focused on a larger development landscape.
We'd wondered how Social Wendy would acquire property for that vision if the family farmers now occupying the land weren't willing to quit that imaginary landscape.
We'll go out on a limb here and suggest that this project is the sort of pro-professional policy that Thomas Frank decries (in a different context in a recent column for the New York Times). People in the way of a shiny new thing to convey the New Economy’s winners 77 miles between The Cities and Rochester? What losers.
Surely, if everyone connected with this project is so gung-ho on making this a truly private project, they'll get on board and support the bill. Right?
Photo: The Rolling Dead, because regardless of the impossibilities of a short line in relatively a small transportation market, this thing just won't die.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
It looks like 2016 is emerging as the Minnesota Session of Irony. We're likely to see the supporters of a plan for a private high speed passenger shortline railroad oppose a bill that will assure they're truly privately funded. Meanwhile, the strategic director for the private rail group told an American-Chinese business group that more transportation projects--including roads and bridges--should be privately funded.
Perhaps the legislature should just craft and pass a transportation bill.
Draz bill on keeping private passenger rail private
The battle over a proposed high-speed rail line from Rochester to the Twin Cities is expected to continue in St. Paul this spring.
Mazeppa GOP Rep. Steve Drazkowski has said he plans to push ahead with a bill that would prohibit public funding for the rail line. It would also prohibit the use of eminent domain to build the line and requires a private rail developer to provide financial assurances before the project can be built.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation and Olmsted County recently announced they were suspending work on the publicly-funded Zip Rail proposal. However, a private company — North American High Speed Rail Group — is studying whether to move ahead with a privately-funded, elevated high-speed rail line linking Rochester to the Twin Cities.
Since the North American High Speed Rail Group touts the private nature of its hypothetical project, we can't see why they'd object to the first two provisions of this legislation. If one's project is private, what's the problem with addressing local concerns?
But there's more.
Meadley: "we’re going to have to privately fund a number of things" for transportation
At a talk Wednesday before [U.S.-China Business Connections,] a business group, a company representative offered more clues about the vision and why executives think it’s time for privately funded infrastructure in Minnesota.
“We can’t afford to pay for our roads and bridges,” said Wendy Meadley, the rail group’s chief strategy officer. “This is the moment in time that we’re going to have to privately fund a number of things to really complete the United States’ and Minnesota’s transportation network.”
The article was earlier published in Finance and Commerce.
CCARL shoots back at the zombie ziprail
In an email to Bluestem, Citizens Concerned About Rail Line (CCARL) organizer Nora Felton, who had attended Meadley's talk, responded to the article. A few of the points she raised were that the state should own and maintain roads and bridges and that MNDOT statutes will not allow for the encroachment of its Right of Way (that's why CapX poles are outside it, according to Felton).
Moreover, Felton asserted that Meadley "stated in the Q & A following that NAHSR threw out" that business plan last Fall."
This isn't surprising, given the departure of the group's original CEO and the return from using HB-5 visas some investors would have obtained through from a rather sketchy regional center. We'd want to get that business plan off the table too (it's embedded in a Bluestem post Data practices request document: North American High Speed Rail Group's business plan).
What is surprising is that media operations like KARE report things like "work is being done on a business plan and funding for the privately financed project." If we were an investor, we'd like to know that this plan will be the second try by the NAHSRG (and the circumstances for the abandonment of the first iteration).
Felton also wrote:
. . .Meadley stated 1) "there are no big answers...we imagining technology," 2) the Federal Railroad Administration does NOT consider this project to be true HSR because it's too short (needs to be 150 miles or more---this project is 77 miles), 3) that this project "doesn't cover the last mile" and that Americans needed to get used to the idea of "interoperability/intermodal" forms of transportation that require "more than 1 mode of transportation (READ: at least 1 transfer even on a 77 mile trip) to get to your end destination," that 80% of her presentation talked about HSR in OTHER parts of the world, 4) that Federal FAST ACT funding was "needed to minimize financial risk to investors" (i.e TAXPAYER $$$--despite all the claims that this project would be "privately funded"), and lastly, that a member of UCBC ended the meeting by stating that "the station end-points don't fit user needs;" especially for a 77 mile project.
Heckova a deal, Sparky.
We suggest that the legislature pass a comprehensive transportation package, one that won't write any checks to Ms. Meadley. After all, this is what she wants, no?
Next CCARL meeting is Thursday, April 7
We received this notice from CCARL:
CCARL ZIP RAIL MEETING Thursday, April 7, 2016 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Kenyon-Wanamingo Elementary School Media Room (across from Lunch Room) 225 Third Avenue Wanamingo, MN 55983 Come to Hear the Latest Updates on Zip Rail
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation announced Wednesday it would stop work on the Zip Rail project, pending a vote by the Olmsted County Regional Rail Authority on Tuesday. A resolution before the county board would suspend work on the Zip Rail project "for the indefinite future," citing the private-sector efforts. MnDOT also revealed it had approved miscellaneous work permits for the North American High Speed Rail Group, allowing the private company to move ahead with a feasibility study along the proposed high-speed rail corridor.
Here are the documents, obtained by a reader via a Data Practice Request:
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Far from being dismissed as "NIMBYs," the grassroots group, Citizens Concerned About Rail Line (CCARL) is garnering coverage of its efforts in opposition to a shortline high-speed rail line from the Twin Cities to Rochester.
Coverage of last night's meeting in Cannon Falls illustrates the group's growing profile in Southeast Minnesota. In the Red Wing Republican Eagle, Michael Brun reports in MnDOT commissioner tackles questions on high-speed rail:
State Transportation Commissioner Charlie Zelle fielded a barrage of questions Tuesday night from a packed crowd of southeastern Minnesota residents anxious about proposed high-speed rail projects between the Twin Cities and Rochester.
Zelle and other Minnesota Department of Transportation officials took part in a town hall-style meeting hosted by state Sen. Matt Schmit in Urland Lutheran Church. The meeting was called in response to public concern over the recently shelved Zip Rail project and a separate proposal by a private rail developer.
The Minnesota-based North American High Speed Rail Group contacted MnDOT about a year ago to pitch its idea for rights to study and build a privately funded line connecting the two metropolitan centers, Zelle said Tuesday in his opening remarks. . . .
Both projects drew strong criticism from several audience members who questioned the impact of a new rail line on area farmland and whether eminent domain would be used to construct it.
“We’re not standing here just because we don’t like an idea; we’re standing here in defense of ourselves and in defense of our communities and in defense of our homes,” said Heather Arndt with the grassroots group Citizens Concerned About Rail Line.
Zelle said any high-speed rail line — private or public — would require an environmental review process with opportunities for residents to make comments.
MnDOT also announced Tuesday it will include public comments in the state record alongside a Zip Rail alternatives analysis report released just before the project was suspended. The document, which identifies eight potential routes for Zip Rail, can be revisited in the future if interest in the project returns.
A group of concerned citizens met Tuesday night with MnDOT Commissioner Charlie Zelle to discuss the zip rail project from Rochester to the Twin Cities.
A major concern discussed was whether land owners along the Highway 52 corridor would lose any of their land to eminent domain. Many of the citizens also expressed concern about just how much they'll have to pay in tax dollars should the high speed rail be financially unsuccessful.
"We have to continue to be vigilant to safeguard not just our communities but all of the state of Minnesota. Money that goes into this project will be money that will not be spent other places," says Nora Felton, co-founder of Citizens Concerned About Rail Line, "And even with a private firm, you heard them say that the Minnesota Department of Transportation will still have to be involved in terms of environmental analysis and basically being the third party due diligence." ...
Many people living between the lines of the Rochester to Twin Cities zip rail proposal packed Urland Lutheran Church near Cannon Falls Tuesday evening with one request.
"We'd like to get some good answers, some clear answers, and some solid answers," said Hader resident Heater Arndt, a member of anti-zip rail group Concerned Citizens About Rail Line. "People have concerns and people have technical questions."
Providing the answers to those questions was MnDOT commissioner Charlie Zelle, who touted the plan as the next big thing.
"Rail is going to be a mode that will be in North America and will be in this area," said Zelle. "The question is when, how, and how long in the future?"
"However, many who live within the corridor, including Goodhue County commissioner Dan Rechtzigel, remained worried that the future would result in their way of life being sacrificed.
"This will cripple this county and any other county it goes through for the benefit of a few people," said Rechtzigel.
The zip rail plan finds itself in murky water, as MnDOT gave up development rights to a private company last month. In fact, Zelle said the private plan is still very much in the beginning stages and even he doesn't know which way it will go.
"I would ask all of you to join me in being openly skeptical, but let's just see what it is that we're talking about."
Whichever way the zip rail is headed, the concerned citizens caught in the middle made it known they want to be heard.
The Dodge County Board dealt with a variety of mostly routine issues at last week’s meeting with the most discussion centering on a renewal of the waste hauler license for Skeveland Enterprises in Claremont. The board also met after their regular meeting as the Regional Rail Authority to elect officers for that group and again express their disapproval of the proposed Zip Rail high-speed train connection between the Twin Cities and Rochester.
We'll keep an eye out for additional coverage.
Photo: A still from the KAAL report.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
It's not posted online yet, but a reader has sent the text of the lead article and screengrab of the frontpage of the digital subscriber's edition of the Red Wing Republican Eagle with the top-of-the-page headline, Kelly: Eight years in House is enough.
State Rep. Tim Kelly will leave his House District 21A seat at the end of this term.
He intends to issue a statement later this week to the Capitol press corps, he told the Republican Eagle.
“I had actually made the decision not to run the last time around, and then got asked to take one more shot at it,” Kelly said. . .
Chairman of the House Transportation Committee, the Red Wing lawmaker said he planned to make his departure public after the 2016 session, which opens March 8 and must adjourn by May 23.
However, making the announcement now opens to the door for prospective Republican candidates to start raising money and campaign, he said, and gives them the same opportunity as Democrat Lisa Bayley, a Red Wing City Council member who declared her House 21A candidacy in January. The political caucuses will be March 1, followed by the endorsing process.
Here's the DFL challenger, whom we posted about when she filed her committee with the campaign finance board in January.
Jacobson continues:
Timing also is good from a personal standpoint, Kelly said. He and wife Sue’s youngest child will graduate from Red Wing High School this spring. They became grandparents in December 2014 and his daughter, son-in-law and 1-year-old grand- daughter are moving to Red Wing.
Kelly said he also will gain time for his business, Discovery Financial, and finally take a vacation for the first time in eight years.. . .
But first comes the 2016 session.
“We are going to have the best transportation package we’ve ever had — it will have taken two years for us to get it,” Kelly predicted.
We'll post a link when the story goes online so readers can check out the entire story.
Minnesota lawmakers kick-started negotiations Monday for a road-and-bridge-repair funding package, but offered few signs that the large divide between competing plans has narrowed.
It's a struggle more than a year in the making. Despite flagging it as a top priority, the Legislature wrapped up last year's budget without a transportation package, instead leaving close to $1 billion on the state's bottom line to pursue a final deal.
But questions over the scope of the construction backlog remain — state estimates put it at $6 billion over the next decade — as do the partisan differences over how to pay for it. The top lawmakers on either side of the aisle leading negotiations expressed hope after Monday's joint hearing that last year's stalled debate would pave the way for a quick deal when the Legislature returns March 8.
"We certainly have the advantage of where we left off," said Rep. Tim Kelly, a Republican who chairs the House's transportation committee. ...
Read the rest at the Post Bulletin. We wish Representative Kelly the best of luck in the coming session and his life in retirement with his family.
Screengrabs: The front page of the Red Wing Republican Eagle (above); Lisa Bayley's campaign website in January (below).
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original posts and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
With just weeks to go before Minnesota's March 1 precinct caucuses--where delegates for the endorsement process spring--activists got one last opportunity last Monday night to hear a debate between the Republican candidates running for Minnesota’s only open congressional seat. The Uptake live streamed it and has posted a full transcript here.
One issue that's particular to the district? Plans for high speed rail from the south metro to Rochester. The first plan, recently shelved, was for a publicly funded Zip Rail. Beginning in 2014, supporters of a private rail project started chattering about the possibility; plans were finally announced for a line built by the North American High Speed Rail Group's "Velos" elevated train late last winter.
Standing in the way of this shiny thing? The people who live in between stops (most of the line) and concerns that the short line between a middle-sized metro area and a smaller metropolitan area might not be the most viable place for billions of transportation investments, regardless of who's footing the bill.
Bluestem has been among the critics--though we're supportive of other, more robust HSR projects.
The Republican congressional candidates might learn more about the issue tomorrow night. There will be a meeting about the projects featuring MnDOT Commissioner Charlie Zelle on Tuesday, February 16, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Cannon Falls' Urland Lutheran Church
Via The Uptake, here's the clip of the moment, followed by a transcript and fact-check.
Transcript and fact check:
MOD: Any other? Seeing no other rebut cards we will go on to the next question. This goes to John. Same rules apply. Ah since this is a critical issue in the ah in the district here, I’ll read the full question. Governor Dayton and Olmsted County favor a high-speed Zip rail passenger train between the Twin Cities and Rochester. This train could, if it is at grade level, cut CD2 in two and cause horrendous hardship to the residents in its path. And if it is an elevated bed, the cost will more than double, even triple.
According to proponents, this project is to be funded by private investors – would you believe communist China – ah, that’s part of the question – and no state or local public funds are to be used. However, the FRA will be involved, and if any federal funds are in play, the horrors of eminent domain may apply.
FACT CHECK
That's not really a question but a statement that the candidates are to respond. To our knowledge, we have not seen support for the project from Governor Mark Dayton. We also found a couple of premises about eminent domain to be incorrect.
The Federal Railroad Administration does not determine whether a private railroad has the authority to use eminent domain to acquire property; rather, this determination is under the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board.
As a private entity, what is their process for land acquisition?
We do not know that yet. They can have eminent domain authority if they become a private railroad but they would have to get that authority from the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
Railroad corporations have the power to acquire land by purchase or eminent domain. This applies to any land that is needed for roadways, spur and side tracks, rights-of-way, depot grounds, yards, grounds for gravel pits, machine shops, warehouses, elevators, depots, station houses, and all other structures necessary for the use and operation of the road.
Every foreign and domestic railroad corporation shall have power to acquire, by purchase or condemnation, all necessary roadways, spur and side tracks, rights-of-way, depot grounds, yards, grounds for gravel pits, machine shops, warehouses, elevators, depots, station houses, and all other structures necessary or convenient for the use, operation, or enjoyment of the road, and may make with any other railroad company, such arrangements for the use of any portion of its tracks and roadbeds as it may deem necessary.
According to the North American High Speed Rail Group's business plan for the "Velos" private train, side real estate developments along the line will pay for the train, rather than ticket sales. In short, residents along the line face the distinct possibility that a private corporation with absolutely no track record can force them to sell their land along MnDOT right-of-ways, so that the corporation can use it to underwrite speculative real estate developments.
Remember: the rail group's strategic communications director told the City Pages:
It is the North American High Speed Rail Group's interest to plan, design, build and operate this passenger rail corridor through a private funding approach. In this way a full range of economic development opportunities that complement the passenger rail service can be included in a new financial model. When combined, the economics of a project like this are integrated and amplified in a new business model focused on a larger development landscape.
We'd wondered how Social Wendy would acquire property for that vision if the family farmers now occupying the land weren't willing to quit that imaginary landscape. Perhaps this is why Nora Felton raised these points in her letter to the editor of the Red Wing Republican Leader, ‘Zombie’ Zip Rail project has not stopped its march:
Please know NAHSR has now received permits to do survey work within the right-of-way Highway 52. Information from the Zip Rail Community Advisory Committee discussion reveals that MnDOT does not own all of that right of way. For some parts (Krom stated about 1,000 parcels), the state only has easements.
So, dear readers, if your private property is adjacent to Highway 52, check your property deed. . . .
One suspects that there will be points where the tracks rise above land outside the right of way. Bluestem would think that possibility that that land can be subject to condemnation (eminent domain)--even more than Chinese investors or the use of federal funds--would send the opponents of the project to their barns for pitchforks and torches.
The transcript continues:
MOD cont'd: Ah will you oppose this project, and what can you do to keep the federal funds out of this project? John, one minute.
John Howe: Certainly I would not support the project and I’ll do everything in my power to make sure that federal funds aren’t available for that project. Y’know one of the things that you hear from ah people that ah like government solutions to y’know problems is ah we’re gonna get federal dollars for that. Well you maybe get federal dollars for the creation, but not for the operation, for the continued operation. And y’know. I mean to say this off the top here but y’know if you look at the land acquisition or what it would take to build a Zip Rail or high-speed rail, you could probably provide bus service for a few hundred years just ah just in what the acquisition cost is gonna be. So I don’t think there’s a demonstrated need here ah again it’s a y’know it’s a solution in search of a problem and ah I would not support it.
MOD: Jason.
Jason Lewis: Y’know I fought really hard against the AWA Goodhue Wind Power Farm with my column in the Star Tribune, on my radio program, and thanks to the people down here, who actually did the hard work, we stopped that for now. The same is true here. I mean what’s 4.2 billion among friends, right? (laughter) That’s supposedly the cost not to mention the E5 visas where we hand out green cards like candy to anybody who throws in some money, and there’s been a number of scandals there.
In early October we reported in What's up with EB-5 visa center's current project? EdCampus seems dead for years, that we contacted the City of Chaska's planning department, we learned that the developers for the EdCampus project--still actively being offered on the visa center's website--had not communicated with the city for many years.
It's too bad Lewis wasn't informed about those developments, since they underscore his more general suspicions about the EB-5 program.
Lewis continues:
Jason Lewis: Part of the problem is, when it comes to transportation at the federal level, is we’ve adopted this mass transit account in the Highway Trust Fund. And that’s where your federal gas tax dollars are going, being siphoned off for these rail projects. And that’s why we keep they keep saying “We’ve gotta raise taxes” but we don’t build roads.
FACT CHECK
Since the developers of the private train claim that they won't be using federal funds, Lewis' call to direct all High Trust Fund money to roads expands the question into federal funding for transit in general. Would eliminating funding for transit projects--desirable or not--plug the hole in the budget? Such plans have been floated in Washington. In Republican bills would cut mass transit from transportation fund, Scripps Howard Foundation multi-media fellow reported last year:
First established in the 1950s, the trust fund was designed to be a self-sustaining source of federal money for transportation projects. It was based on the premise of user fees: People who need highways (drivers) pay a federal gas tax that would finance their roads.
But in recent years, the gas tax has become an inadequate source of money for several reasons. Among them, people are driving more fuel-efficient vehicles that don’t need as much gas, and Congress hasn’t raised the gas tax to keep up with inflation.
Today, about 20 percent of the $50 billion spent annually by the Highway Trust Fund goes toward mass transit, with more than half of that money going toward urban mass transit, maintenance and repair work. . . .
The bills on their own don’t provide a long-term fix for the Highway Trust Fund, which tallies an estimated deficit of $16 billion each year and is scheduled to expire May 31 [2015]. Eliminating the mass transit account would reduce that deficit by about $10 billion annually.
Lewis is trading in hyperbole when he asserts "we don’t build roads." And even without the mass transit account (if removing it were desirable), the fund would be inadequate to fund highway projects at their current level without going into the red.
Back to the debate:
MOD: Darlene.
Darlene Miller: I would definitely ah oppose this Zip line. Again it’s a government oversight, a government deciding what we should do in this community rather than letting the people of the state or the county or the communities decide what’s best for them. Instead of putting that money into a Zip rail, what about our bridges and our roads. And our other infrastructure that needs to be improved. We need to get government to stop deciding in D.C. what needs to happen here.
MOD: Gene, 30 seconds.
Gene Rechtzigel: Ah we need to go ahead with the superhighway system, not a Zip Rail. We need to double the lanes on 494, 694. We need to have a ah superhighway system going from major city to major city across this country. And we better do it quick because time is money, and the people’s money is ah going basically nowhere. And going ah in the negative when you have to sit and sit in ah freeways that aren’t even moving.
MOD: David.
David Gerson: Transportation is inherently local and we need to get the federal government out of transportation, and there’s a conservative bill out there that does just that. It’s called the Transportation Empowerment Act. What it does is it lowers gasoline taxes from 19.3 cents to 2.9 cents over time, and transfers responsibility back to the states where it belongs. We need to get behind these true conservative solutions and move back to local control and ensure that we follow the Tenth Amendment.
MOD: Pam, 30 seconds.
Pam Myrhra: Thank you. Gas taxes are collected on people who drive cars and trucks. And those taxes, those revenues, should be used to build roads and bridges. Not transit.
In short, all of the candidates are against using public funding for high speed rail, but only Lewis tries to address another part of the "question"--those "Chinese investors," some of whom would be trading an investment for a visa. The statement to which they respond does upon examination raise questions about eminent domain.
Images: Heckova morning commute with that zombie train via Global Cool (above) and a Zip Rail Zombie specific cartoon, via CCARL email.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
We're not sure if we agree with all of the conclusions made by Citizens Concerned About Rail Line (CCARL) activist Nora Felton, but we can't help admire her framing of the North American High Speed Rail Group's "Velos" private project as Zombie Zip Rail.
Taxpayers should be aware that a recent announcement by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Olmsted County Regional Rail Authority stating the tax-funded Zip Rail study will be “shelved” (suspended) does NOT mean proposed Zip Rail has stopped.
At meetings Jan. 28 of the Zip Rail Technical and Community Advisory committees, MnDOT’s Dan Krom related there was no money and no political will to continue with this project at this time. Yet, many questions and red flags continue to be raised. Taxpayers know that ill-conceived zombie projects rise again to walk amongst us and misuse public resources.
The proposed Twin Cities-Rochester high-speed Zip Rail has been turned over to the private company, North American High Speed Rail. Olmsted County’s Ken Brown commented on the shelved study, “That work won’t be wasted. It won’t disappear. It will be used by the group that takes it over and runs with it.” . . .
Read the whole thing at either publication. Felton concludes with an invitation to a meeting:
If you do not support a multi-billion dollar high-speed “shiny toy” which will break and default, plan to visit with MnDOT Commissioner Charles Zelle, who has agreed to come down to our area for a meeting 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Feb. 16 at Urland Lutheran Church. The church is two miles west of Highway 52 on County Road 9.
Engaging in eternal vigilance will be the cost of freedom from a zombie rail project.
As some of you may know, MnDOT suspended/shelved the Zip Rail passenger, non-stop high-speed rail project officially last week. This does NOT mean that the Zip Rail project is dead by any means.
This project can be taken off the “shelf” and revived again in three to five years or more per MnDOT’s Dan Krom at last week’s meeting of the Zip Rail Technical and Community Advisory Committees in St. Paul.
The problem with this project is that taxpayer monies were spent on this project to see it through to the ZipRail Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). That did not happen. At this point, following last week’s release of the Zip Rail Alternative Analysis Report (AAR) by MnDOT, there is no public comment period. Had the project been taken to the Tier 1 EIS, the public would have had a comment period.
Also, there were corrections needed to the AAR and those have not been posted to the Zip Rail website. This document needs to be fully corrected before the document is shelved.
Stussy details those corrections in the body of the letter, concluding:
Today, I write you to inform you of a public meeting with MnDOT Commissioner Charlie Zelle regarding the Zip Rail proposal and developments on Tuesday, February 16, from 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Urland Lutheran Church (two miles west of Hwy 52 on Goodhue County Road 9). This is your chance to raise concerns and ask questions about the above.
As citizens, let’s join together once again to meet with Commissioner Zelle with our voices and our questions. We need everyone to pack the meeting location to the rafters. Call/contact your friends, neighbors, and family with details to attend. This is our chance to be heard by the head of MnDOT. Make no mistake, this IS a very important meeting regarding this issue. We may not have another time to make our concerns known on Zip Rail at this level.
We're not sure of the source of this cartoon, but we received it in a CCARL email blast:
Zombie train rolls into MN02 Republican debate
Another sign of the zombie train? The issue rolled into the last Republican candidate debate in Cannon Falls. The Uptake has the moment preserved on a clip on YouTube, along a description in MN02 GOP Candidates On Zip Rail Proposal:
Six Republican candidates for Minnesota's only open congressional seat are asked about a proposal to build a high speed passenger "Zip rail" through the district to go from the Twin Cities to Rochester. Participating in the debate at Cannon Falls High School are Pam Myhra, John Howe, David Gerson, Darlene Miller, Jason Lewis and new candidate Gene Rechtzigel.
We'll have an examination of their responses along with an embed of the video in a future post. Some of the candidates were more well-versed in the issue than others.
Images: Heckova morning commute with that zombie train via Global Cool (above) and a Zip Rail Zombie specific cartoon, via CCARL email.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors. While progressive in outlook, she does not caucus with any political party.
.jpg){kind=link}
Recent Comments