http://minnesota.publicradio.
http://minnesota.publicradio.
http://minnesota.publicradio.
http://minnesota.publicradio.
http://www.twincities.com/ci_
http://www.twincities.com/ci_
http://www.startribune.com/
http://www.minnpost.com/
http://www.myfoxtwincities.
[I found the MPR links to be the most comprehensive at this point, especially the top two]
Only a few dozen hours in advance of an anticipated shutdown of state government, Ramsey County District Court Chief Judge Kathleen Gearin ruled the state must maintain critical public safety and health programs; care for prisoners and residents of regional treatment centers, nursing and veterans homes and residential academies; provide benefit payments and medical services to eligible persons, and preserve the essential parts of the state's financial system. Gearin also ordered continued payments to the governor's office and the Legislature so they can fulfill their constitutional duty to fund state government.
Particularly significant to the City of St. Paul, Judge Gearin also required the state to make its scheduled payments of Local Government Aid. St. Paul has anticipated a payment of something in the range of $55 million (I'm working off of memory). Without that payment, the City would be faced to make drastic choices about how to provide services throughout the the remainder of the year.
-------------------
SO, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I'm looking forward to hearing people's reaction!
What will be the impacts of Judge Gearin's decision on St. Paul and other people you may know?
Does she allow enough core services to continue? Too many?
Did she rule wrongly on specific services?
--------------------
YOU MIGHT BE WONDERING RIGHT NOW: WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR DISCUSSION ON SPIF? This is an unusual circumstance, with a broad blurring of lines between state and local responsibilities across so many program areas. As a result, we're going to allow a wide-ranging discussion of the impact of the shutdown on the daily lives of people in St. Paul. There are, for example, a lot of state workers in St. Paul. What's the impact to our city to having probably thousands of our residents unemployed for potentially weeks? I don't know. But the point is, there must be a substantive connection of the issue you raise to St. Paul. Discussion of agricultural programs, for example, is off-limits.
Also, unless notified otherwise, discussion of the politics of the legislative stalemate at the Capitol is most appropriately discussed elsewhere, and will be considered outside the rules of this forum. So feel free to discuss what is funded, what is not, and the impact the shutdown is or is not having on St. Paul, along with the impact potential budget choices might have on St. Paul.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE. It is okay to offer fact and information on the budget negotiations as a way of making your case for or against a specific budget proposal that will have substantive impacts on St. Paul. For example, you might share the factual information that a cut of 20% to a specific program in the last bill passed by the legislature, but that the Governor vetoed it. Stick squarely with the facts on the state-level politics, and you are okay. What is *not* appropriate is to go beyond that, and focus in particular on the state-level politics of the decision. It is not appropriate to say "that *&@(! Governor Dayton/Speaker Zellers/Majority Leader Koch got us in this mess because they wouldn't compromise on X," nor is it appropriate to say "pox on all their houses".
IF YOU'RE AT ALL UNCERTAIN YOUR POST PASSES MUSTER, just run it by me first privately, or risk being found in violation of the rules.
Please post responsibly. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment