Mark Dayton is a complete Dip Sh.yat.
I can’t believe I heard that come out of his mouth.
Anyone who voted for him should write him a letter and explain the intent of those dollars.
Dog
October 28, 2011 at 9:06 pm
#1274331
Legacy Dollars for New Viking Stadium?
-
October 28, 2011 at 9:09 pm #1004990
Just a refresher for those of you that forgot what this was……I voted “no” but that was because I was afraid that the funds would be mis-appropriated. I just did not think it would happen in 3 years.
In November 2008, Minnesotans passed the clean water, land, and legacy amendment to the Minnesota Constitution. As a result, over the next twenty-five years, 3/8 of one percent of the state’s sales tax will be dedicated as follows:
33 percent to a clean water fund,
33 percent to an outdoor heritage fund,
14.25 percent to a parks and trails fund, and
19.75 percent to an arts and cultural heritage fundProceeds from the arts and cultural heritage fund “may be spent only on arts, arts education and arts access and to preserve Minnesota’s history and cultural heritage.”
October 28, 2011 at 9:11 pm #1004991From a prior post:
Attention Minnesota Voters!
Click Here to find your State Rep. Enter your address and you will be given links to your state and federal reps. Send your note of opposition to your STATE reps only.
http://www.gis.leg.mn/OpenLayers/districts/
Easy – this will take less than 5 minutes. Keep your comments brief and polite! Thanks in advance.
I wrote:
I oppose any public funding for a new Vikings Stadium. I especially oppose any funding using the Legacy Ammendment money. Thank you.
-J.
Reply from My State Rep:
Hello Jon,
Thank you for sharing your opposition to the use of Legacy funds to helppay for a proposed new football stadium. I appreciated knowing your views, and I share them.
This is a suggestion that has received some attention since beingbrought up several days ago by Rep. Kurt Daudt, an assistant Republican Majority Leader. I agree with you that such a plan would be contrary to the intent of the amendment that was passed by Minnesota voters and taxpayers in 2008, as well as the intent of legislators who put the question on the ballot. As Don McMillan of the Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Alliance pointed out, this proposal could become a slippery slope that would leave other categories of Legacy funding vulnerable. “Once it starts there, I just fear that they’re going to come after the outdoor funds and the clean water funds and try to subvert them,” McMillan said. It remains to be seen how much, if any, traction this suggestion will gain. However, there has already been talk of litigation if there is an attempt to use Legacy funds to help pay for a new stadium. As your legislator, please be assured that I will oppose any effort to divert Legacy funds meant to preserve our state’s arts and cultural heritage. Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope you’ll stay in touch with your questions, opinions and concerns.
Sincerely, Sheldon Johnson
-J.
October 28, 2011 at 9:14 pm #1004992Hate to say it, but “to preserve Minnesota’s history and cultural heritage” can be applied to ‘saving’ the Vikings. One can make the argument that they are part of the culture and heritage.
Before you poop on me, I am not saying I agree.
October 28, 2011 at 9:17 pm #1004993Thanks Jon –
I have been out of town for the past week and just heard this on the radio.
WTF?
October 28, 2011 at 9:18 pm #1004994Quote:
Hate to say it, but “to preserve Minnesota’s history and cultural heritage” can be applied to ‘saving’ the Vikings. One can make the argument that they are part of the culture and heritage.
Before you poop on me, I am not saying I agree.
Plug? Please come back out of the shallow end of the pool
Dog
October 28, 2011 at 9:46 pm #1005001Quote:
Mark Dayton is a complete Dip Sh.yat.
I can’t believe I heard that come out of his mouth.
Anyone who voted for him should write him a letter and explain the intent of those dollars.
Dog
“This is a suggestion that has received some attention since beingbrought up several days ago by Rep. Kurt Daudt”
Honestly, put the blame where it belongs also Dayton never said he supports this idea he just wants all the ideas brought forward to be discussed.
I understand the dislike of Dayton by some and thats fine by me but I don’t understand nonfactual arguments to support ones dislike.
October 28, 2011 at 10:08 pm #1005006This is a quote I heard from WCCO News at 5. The Govenor of Minnesota called Minnesota sportsmen “casters and Blasters”am I the only one that is insenced by this comment?!!
October 28, 2011 at 10:38 pm #1005009I wear that as a badge
especially the blaster.. remind them we are armed 
October 28, 2011 at 11:05 pm #1005015Quote:
This is a quote I heard from WCCO News at 5. The Govenor of Minnesota called Minnesota sportsmen “casters and Blasters”am I the only one that is insenced by this comment?!!
You are not!!!!! This guy is a complete joke!!!!
October 28, 2011 at 11:24 pm #1005019What does insenced mean ?
Maybe I am … insenced.. 
October 29, 2011 at 12:12 am #1005023Quote:
Plug? Please come back out of the shallow end of the pool
Dog
I clearly stated where I stand, but playing the devil’s advocate, I stand by that the Vikings are a part of the cultural heritage, even history.
Then again you could probably try and fund just about anything and put it under that umbrella. That’s why laws have to be worded to where they are not open for interpretation.
October 30, 2011 at 3:16 am #1005150Dear Brian,
Thank you for writing. I also oppose ANY tax payer dollars to fund a Vikings Stadium.Kind regards,
KathyKathy Lohmer
State Representative
521 State Office Building
(651)296-4244
[email protected]October 30, 2011 at 12:04 pm #1005167Here’s the reply from Pat Garofalo’s office (District 36B Farminington). In a way he is making the same statement as Pug. He also doesn’t come out and say that he would be completely against it.
————————————————————
————————————————————Thanks for the email Robert. I do not have a bill to read so I cannot promise you how I will vote on this. That being said the language of the amendment allows for this spending. It doesn’t mean I will support it, but clearly it is legal.
Rep. Pat Garofalo
Chairman Education Finance Committee
District 36B
537 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
(651) 296-1069
1-888-667-3337October 30, 2011 at 12:14 pm #1005170Clearly the voters were mislead on that amendment and what the $$$’s could/would be spent on…
October 30, 2011 at 2:04 pm #1005200
Quote:
but clearly it is legal.
Rep. Pat Garofalo
Chairman Education Finance Committee
Clearly he needs an education.
October 30, 2011 at 2:16 pm #1005205Clearly the bill was written with obtuse language. Clearly for obtuse people who wanted to be able to circumvent the intentions of the people who voted for the bill.
October 31, 2011 at 2:06 pm #1005387clearly people should have been able to see through the smoke on that amendment and voted NO!!
October 31, 2011 at 2:55 pm #1005410Quote:
clearly people should have been able to see through the smoke on that amendment and voted NO!!
Well, I would say you should have seen the benefit to having dedicated funds and voted yes.
In your mind is it better to never have had the Legacy funding? Or would it be better to fight to keep the funding?
Here are the facts………in 2 years over $90 million has been poured into the outdoor side of the amendment that would have NEVER been available any other way. Are we to just turn our backs to that money because the state wants to raid the fund? I don’t think so. We have passed the amendment, we have the funding, now it’s our duty to see that the politician’s don’t don’t make a grab for it.
October 31, 2011 at 3:06 pm #1005413Consider your post “LIKED” Dutchboy.
One of the reasons I support MOHA by purchasing their calendars is to help them keep an eye on the foxs that are trying to raid the henhouse…that and having a chance to win 104 guns.
October 31, 2011 at 3:17 pm #1005418Quote:
Consider your post “LIKED” Dutchboy.
One of the reasons I support MOHA by purchasing their calendars is to help them keep an eye on the foxs that are trying to raid the henhouse…that and having a chance to win 104 guns.
Well thank you
my posts don’t get “LIKED” to often 
October 31, 2011 at 3:17 pm #1005419If you “Read Between the Lines” of the reply from Sheldon Johnson in my post above, it sounds like they want to target money from the Legacy fund that has been allocated to the “Arts and Heritage” portion rather than the outdoors portion. Either way, I agree its a slippery slope. Once money is diverted there is no end to what these idiots will do!
So when you get replies from your reps saying “I do not supprot funds from the outdoors portion, they may very well support funds from the arts side. Again – politicians talking out of both ends. One being their azz!
-J.
October 31, 2011 at 3:24 pm #1005424
Quote:
Dear Brian,
Thank you for writing. I also oppose ANY tax payer dollars to fund a Vikings Stadium.Kind regards,
Kathy
I think Kathy passed the sniff test.
October 31, 2011 at 3:36 pm #1005429Quote:
In your mind is it better to never have had the Legacy funding? Or would it be better to fight to keep the funding?
Here are the facts………in 2 years over $90 million has been poured into the outdoor side of the amendment that would have NEVER been available any other way. Are we to just turn our backs to that money because the state wants to raid the fund? I don’t think so. We have passed the amendment, we have the funding, now it’s our duty to see that the politician’s don’t don’t make a grab for it.
In my mind it’s OK to have Legacy Funds budgeted and allocated, but would have been better for it to NOT be “constitutionally” established.
For me, the chance of the foxes raiding the hen-house was a secondary matter; the primary issue was that establishment of “constitutionally dedicated” funding sets a bad precedent.
BUT … we had THAT debate four years ago
SO, gotta be practical within the current reality … Now that we DO have the Legacy Fund, it is essential to maintain the integrity of how the funds are allocated (and that need for integrity applies to the Arts portion just as much as the Outdoors portion).October 31, 2011 at 4:11 pm #1005438Quote:
Quote:
clearly people should have been able to see through the smoke on that amendment and voted NO!!
Well, I would say you should have seen the benefit to having dedicated funds and voted yes.
In your mind is it better to never have had the Legacy funding? Or would it be better to fight to keep the funding?
Here are the facts………in 2 years over $90 million has been poured into the outdoor side of the amendment that would have NEVER been available any other way. Are we to just turn our backs to that money because the state wants to raid the fund? I don’t think so. We have passed the amendment, we have the funding, now it’s our duty to see that the politician’s don’t don’t make a grab for it.
Thats great news!! they are spending the legacy funding on outdoors, like its supposed to be.
Yet, our national high tax dollars are still mis-spent every year and not accounted for.
We are basically supplementing the junk spending of our state government. and if you’re ok with that, well, i have no answer for you.
October 31, 2011 at 4:17 pm #1005441Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
clearly people should have been able to see through the smoke on that amendment and voted NO!!
Well, I would say you should have seen the benefit to having dedicated funds and voted yes.
In your mind is it better to never have had the Legacy funding? Or would it be better to fight to keep the funding?
Here are the facts………in 2 years over $90 million has been poured into the outdoor side of the amendment that would have NEVER been available any other way. Are we to just turn our backs to that money because the state wants to raid the fund? I don’t think so. We have passed the amendment, we have the funding, now it’s our duty to see that the politician’s don’t don’t make a grab for it.
Thats great news!! they are spending the legacy funding on outdoors, like its supposed to be.
Yet, our national high tax dollars are still mis-spent every year and not accounted for.
We are basically supplementing the junk spending of our state government. and if you’re ok with that, well, i have no answer for you.
Cool, I wasn’t looking for your blessings or approval. You can’t start mixing your overall government feelings with the reality of the Legacy amendment. The amendment was voted on and PASSED by the voters of Minnesota. Time to move on and protect those funds.
October 31, 2011 at 4:18 pm #1005443I can’t believe you guys don’t see it……
It is supposed to be an OUTDOOR Stadium
October 31, 2011 at 4:22 pm #1005448Quote:
I can’t believe you guys don’t see it……
It is supposed to be an OUTDOOR Stadium
And that is our HERITAGE; just ask anyone who was ever at a game in the “Old Met”
October 31, 2011 at 4:26 pm #1005450
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.