Prior Lake American - Regional news - Comments

I watched on the rainy night

Ruth Anne Maddox — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:16:17 -0500

I watched on the rainy night that this trouble first surfaced, when three men in reflective vests stood leaning on shovels and looking into a big hole at the center of the road.

Since then, the hole has been filled with sand a couple times and three big orange and white barrels are keeping vehicles from running through it.

Hopefully, the quick fix will keep the spot from becoming a much bigger sinkhole -- and, hopefully, the paving and other roadwork will be done on County Road 21 and Franklin Trail by the time this work starts or I'm not sure I'll be able to get home.

Regarding the plant near

Savage Guy — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:59:46 -0500

Regarding the plant near Granite Falls, the aquifer did go down, but the DNR had given a baseline to meet, and if the water kept going down, the facility would need to find another source for water. The facility did decide to install a very expensive water treatment plant at the site and is now and has been taking water from the Minnesota river and using that for process water. Since they started, the aquifer over the past 4 months has nearly fully recovered from the time they stopped pulling ground water. They expect that the aquifer will be fully recharged in another month or so. The facility now uses river water (from one of the two most polluted rivers in the state) along with water that is collected in their storm water retention ponds.

There is another side to the

Savage Guy — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:57:27 -0500

There is another side to the water issue. Read the following story from our neighbors in Shakopee.

Flushing out the whole story

Minnesota Corn Growers dissolve myths on ethanol water usage

SHAKOPEE, Minn. (February 21, 2008) Recent reports on water usage by the ethanol industry need an airing out, the Minnesota Corn Growers Association (MCGA) said today. Like most industries, ethanol processing requires water, the Association said, but this requirement should be viewed within the larger context of water consumption by other activities.

“In 2005, Minnesota’s ethanol industry used less than two-tenths of one percent of all water used in the state,” said Roger Moore, president of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association. “At the same time, the Twin Cities Metro area used as much water in two days as all of the ethanol plants in the state use in one year.”

When the facts are put into perspective, it is easy to see that the ethanol industry use of water is much less than other common commodities and uses. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that it takes:

2– 3 Gallons of Water to produce 1 Gallon of Ethanol
Versus …

9.3 gallons of water – one can of vegetables
16.6 gallons of water – one pound of beet sugar
24 gallons of water – one pound of plastic
44 gallons of water – one gallon of refined crude oil
1,500 gallons of water – one barrel of beer
2,075 gallons of water – 4 tires
107,000 gallons of water – average home use in one year
Water is also used in such recreational things as golf courses, where about 680,000 gallons of water are consumed annually to irrigate just one acre of a golf course. Compare this to less than 4 percent of Minnesota field corn that is being irrigated.

Water usage by ethanol plants is expected to continue to drop, as new technologies come on board. Already, many plants discharge little or no wastewater, with the biggest water loss coming from water that remains with the leftover mash that is in turn fed to livestock.

“Farmers and other owners of renewable energy production in Minnesota employ state-of-the art technology to make water use as efficient as possible,” said Moore. “No one is more concerned about conserving resources than the farmer-owned bio fuels industry.”

Though concerns have been raised that ethanol plants may drain ground water from aquifers, the truth is that only one incident has been reported in Minnesota where an aquifer was drawn down faster than expected. In response, the plant accelerated plans to construct a pipeline and filtration system, and the aquifer has been recharging itself.

“The good news is that much of ethanol’s water needs can be met with appropriate planning,” said Dr. Dennis Keeney, in a 2006 Institute for Agricultural and Trade Policy report. “The ethanol industry is committed to judicious water use,” added Moore.

About Minnesota Corn Growers Association
The Minnesota Corn Growers Association (MCGA) founded in 1978, celebrates its 30th anniversary in 2008. MCGA is a membership-based organization with more than 5,900 members making it the second largest state corn growers organization in the nation. MCGA is dedicated to promoting and creating opportunities for Minnesota corn farmers while enhancing quality of life. Additional information can be obtained at www.mncorn.org.

-End-

Mark Hamerlinck
Communications Director
Minnesota Corn Growers Association
952-233-0333
hamerlinck@mncorn.org

I got hit by a drunk driver

Joanna Miller — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:55:10 -0500

I got hit by a drunk driver on the way to work. At 9 a.m. in the morning, the last thing you expect is a drunk to plow you off the road into a guard rail.
She'd had a prior DWI offense.
I was mad she put my life at risk, injured my neck, and totalled my car. But mostly, I thought how lucky I was to be in one piece, and how pathetic she looked stumbling out of her car, failing the field sobriety test.
I'm sure she'll serve almost no time and be back driving around in a new Mercedes soon.
I guess the system hopes people can/will change their actions and learn from mistakes. It doesn't account for the power of alcoholism over common sense.
Accidents happen, but getting behind the wheel when you're three times the legal limit isn't an accident.

4 years for killing

dbmasters — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 08:02:23 -0500

4 years for killing somebody, eh? Lucky for him he didn't steal the car, he might have gotten punished...

Punishing the children is

C Whitehair — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:41:18 -0600

Punishing the children is exactly correct. My middle school student told me that his teacher in his final hour yesterday literally RACED the kids back to the classroom from the media center so that she could "lock up" her classroom on time. Meanwhile the kids that need a little extra help in subjects are not getting it!

Cindy

I think if a teachers raise

C Whitehair — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:33:49 -0600

I think if a teachers raise had been presented as part of the levy request it would have been accepted by the voters and maybe event have changed a few votes. However, it was a hidden reason - as so many other things have been. That is one reason why tensions are so high between the school board and the taxpayers of the district. They have a history of being less than forthcoming with the public and (apparently) the teachers.

Cindy

I totally agree that reform

Savage Guy — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:36:36 -0600

I totally agree that reform in education funding is needed, but it is disheartening that the union rejected the performance pay option because it results in MORE funding from the state. A relative of mine works in a district where they opted in to the performance pay program and he is making more than he would have under the standard contract and he should because he is a great, highly educated and qualified teacher!

With that said, we have to live in the here and now and the reality here and now is that the district has to livw within its means and that is going to mean the union getting less than it wants. I strongly value public education and believe we should value educators with higher pay and benefits, but that reform has to happen at the state level (which I have written to my reps and senators about).

So if someone doesn't use

Rational Thought — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:55:33 -0600

So if someone doesn't use their real name, they're a coward? How closeminded of you. People have other reasons for not using their real names than to hide from you in case they ever run across you on the street and you look to hold their words against them.

I understand that the health

LeftRightCenter — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:25:47 -0600

I understand that the health benefits are a large portion of their increase, but it is still a 2% salary increase that they receive, which is lower than most other jobs. I also realize that schools are not for profit - they don't have anything to sell to make more money - I realize they have to work within a budget. I find it interesting that neither you nor Savage Guy responded to the comments about the value of our public school system. What do we have in the future without our public school system? Sometimes the value of a job can't be defined with dollars and cents, but when it is, the teachers are trying to get what they deserve. Many teachers don't make enough money to begin with to afford higher premiums, co-pays or any other insurance increase. If their premiums go up, and then they still receive the same 2% salary increase, then some of the younger teachers may actually have a net loss - how are we going to keep quality teachers around with that plan. They have to fight for their health insurance benefits, because if they give them up, the district isn't going to turn around and give them a 7 - 10% salary increase to balance it out. The bottom line is the way that teachers are paid needs to be reformed, but nobody has come up with a great solution yet. You mentioned that they voted down the performance pay, but where do you think that money is coming from? That money was set aside by the governor and it comes right out of the state taxpayers money.

It's not just a 2% increase

Robert Thibodeaux — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:02:15 -0600

It's not just a 2% increase -

This is the common union canard.

The comment:
"What the teachers are negotiating for is a pay increase of right around 2% - Most other jobs give raises at least once a year and a vast majority of them are over 2%" is typical of this disinformation.

The teachers existing contracts already call for yearly increases (the steps and lanes). So this is an increase on the built in increases.

Even if they signed the same contract they would be still be getting increases larger then that.

So a that "small" 2% increase is not a 2% increase, it is much larger.
And as Savage Guy pointed out, that doesn't take into account the defined benefit plans, generous health care and tenure that other industries have abandoned because they are economically unsustainable.

A 2% salary increase would

Savage Guy — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 07:44:55 -0600

A 2% salary increase would be fine if the cost of their health insurance wasn't skyrocketing. The issue isn't just the salary increase. The issue is the total compensation increase including health insurance. The teachers need to accept higher deductibles, co-pays, share of the premium, etc. to balance things out. That is the way it works for just about every other employee under the sun.

Also, remember the district can't go sell more widgets and say we'll find a way to pay for it. They can only spend what is available to them in tax dollars. They cannot continue to run in the red in perpetuity (talking about the general fund balance which has been at a cumulative deficit position for over 10 years).

Teacher pay and benefits is the biggest piece of the budget. That is the only place they can cut that will make a meaningful difference in cost savings. The other alternative is to further increase class sizes and terminate teachers which would allow the remaining teachers to receive more, but that would fly like a lead balloon with the public.

I understand that teachers don't want to give up past gains but the reality is the district can't pay money it doesn't have. Teachers have richer health and pension benefits than the average worker and school districts simply cannot afford them anymore. Something has to give. Future referendums will have even less of a chance of passing if the district commits to a contract they can't afford.

I'm sure the union didn't

LeftRightCenter — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 22:22:04 -0600

I'm sure the union didn't mention anything before the election because the vibe in the community was already a negative one towards the referendum and the schools. We have to remember that, for the most part, what the teachers are negotiating for is a pay increase of right around 2% - that doesn't seem extreme or over the top. Most other jobs give raises at least once a year and a vast majority of them are over 2%. I agree that teachers should get pay raises based on performance, but what nobody here has brought up is how to rate their performance. Who is going to decide which teachers are performing the best? How are you going to rate one teacher compared to another? If we use standardized test scores, then you will have teachers teaching to the test to get their bonus money - is that what kind of teaching environment you would want for your kids? Do we really want teachers competing with one another for their pay? Do you really want building principals rating teachers to decide who is "the best"? There is no great solution to the teacher pay - to just throw out performance based pay without really understanding what it is is not a solution. Also, not everyone has stress in their jobs like teachers do. I have some very close friends that are sales reps for large companies and they repeatedly say that their job is as easy as it gets and they both make six figures.

One final thought - somehow in all of this discussion we have missed the whole point: We don't have a functioning society in 20 years without our public school system - end of story. If they are asking for a 2% raise, I think that it is reasonable considering that these teachers are helping to shape the future of our community and state. Take a trip to a classroom sometime to see exactly what our teachers do and then come back and let us all know if the 2% raise is still outrageous.

I assume that was the need

Dot_Connector — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:39:35 -0600

I assume that was the need based voucher plan for inner city school children of Minneapolis and St. Paul put forward by Mark Buesgens along with the proposal to break up districts into smaller districts? These were non-starters. Someday we'll have to have a discussion why these wouldn't fix education but only satisfy personnel agendas.

Actually, since you asked

Robert Thibodeaux — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:57:32 -0600

Actually, since you asked -
I worked with our legislative delegation and the education policy and reform committee.

Some of the plans were focused on improving inner-city education as a start, but would have led to reforms statewide. Also, there was some legislation that would have directly impacted our School District.

Wouldn't suggest that for your daughter's plan however - most politicians definitely aren't prince material (and the ones that we have are already married.)

As for the time machine, that probably has as good a chance as education reform right now in the legislature.

That's one of the reasons I not a coward and don't mind using my real name on my statements. In addition to complaining and pointing out the flaws in the system, I actually work to get things done and improve them.