Herald Journal Blogs & News » Letters to the Editor

I have a vision for downtown Winsted

Staff — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 19:58:01 +0000

From: Winsted Mayor, Steve Stotko
Imagine what Winsted would feel like if the downtown embodied the collective vision of the community’s citizens. Can we picture a downtown that is built around the shared economic, social, cultural, and environmental vision of the community? Is it reasonable to expect our downtown to once again be a focal point for community? To be a place we want to live, work and play? To be a place of pride?
These questions form the basis of the work of the Downtown Vibrancy Task Force. But before we can answer those questions, we need to know where we want to go. We need a vision of what we want from our downtown.
Vision is the important first step on the way to reaching our goals. A vision is a dream with a plan. It is the ability to look into the future, to envision the possibilities, but also to understand the challenges and responsibilities along the way. A vision allows us to maintain a common focus as we work together to make the dream reality.
What is the ultimate goal? What do residents expect from their downtown? What will be required to get us from here to there? What actions do we need to take? What role does each of us need to play? What resources will be required?
It is important to acknowledge the magnitude of the work that will be involved. What is required is a long-term, community-wide commitment to creating the vision, doing the hard work that will be required to make it a reality, and sufficiently resourcing the initiatives with clear lines of communication and accountability. Patience and perseverance will be required, and expectations will need to be managed.
Coordinated, consistent political and administrative will is required to put a strategy in place, to resource it, and to follow through with its implementation over the long term. In order to do so, the process must have a leadership model that is a political, cross-sectoral, and accountable. City hall can provide formal leadership in guiding the process. But a task such as this one will require leadership and involvement from all parts of the community, from senior levels of government, and from a host of individuals, organizations, and businesses. Resources needed to achieve goals must be identified, secured, and allocated appropriately.
Most importantly, the community must believe in the achievability of the vision, and easily understand and see the way forward. The community must take ownership of the vision and contribute to its implementation.
Together, we can do this. Together, we will do this. We are Winsted; that’s what we do.

It’s time to finish the job

Staff — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:20:42 +0000

From: Hutchinson Mayor, Steve Cook; Winsted Mayor, Steve Stotko; Silver Lake Mayor Bruce Bebo, and McLeod County Commissioner Bev Wangerin
As the next session of the State Legislature gets underway, the traditional even-year bonding bill will receive significant discussion as investments in statewide and regional projects are weighed and considered. State owned parks and trail projects, including the Luce Line State Trail, will be a part of those discussions, and the possible use of Legacy funds as an alternative funding source will likely be discussed, as well.
However, it is important to remember that the constitutional amendment creating the Legacy program specifically included language that states that Legacy funds “must supplement traditional funding sources for these purposes and may not be used as a substitute.”
This language was included to help ensure that new and expanded improvements to water quality, the environment and natural resources, arts and culture, parks and trails, and outdoor heritage are provided for, rather than just replacing existing and traditional funding and thus simply maintaining the status quo.
Discussion and analysis has already taken place by legislative analysts on how to interpret the supplement/not substitute and traditional funding source language. Since “traditional funding sources” is not defined, it is assumed that all funding types consistently used in the past would be included, including bonding. Plus, it is clear that the language applies to legislative appropriations, which also include state bonding. In addition, the development of state parks and state trails has traditionally been funded with state bonds.
Taken together it is clear that trying to shift state parks and trails development to Legacy funds would be contrary to the constitutional language. This is recognized by the fact that state park and state trail projects, such as paving the Luce Line, are prohibited from applying for Legacy grants (a point that has been confirmed).
State parks and state trails are state assets, just like other state facilities. Besides providing valuable recreational and healthy lifestyle opportunities to residents and visitors, state parks and trails also provide significant economic benefits to nearby cities, the surrounding region, and the state. While Legacy funds can help, state bonding is the appropriate funding source for developing those types of projects, including paving the Luce Line State Trail.
As such, the Luce Line and other state trails deserve to be part of the bonding discussion and seriously considered during the upcoming legislative session. For the Luce Line from Winsted to Cedar Mills, after 34 years and all the prep work, it’s time to finish it so more people can enjoy the trail and its vision, and untapped potential can finally become a reality.

Staff — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:19:38 +0000

From: Aaron Kubasch
Winsted
Citizens of Westgate Drive, Westgate Terrace, and Westgate Circle should be aware that Tuesday, Feb. 21, the Winsted City Council could go ahead with a project that could raise your taxes over $4,900 for street improvements in our neighborhood. Please attend this meeting if you are in favor of this project or if you are opposed to this project. It is very important that you make your feelings known to the council. The meeting is Feb. 21 at 6 p.m. at the Winsted City Hall.

Appreciation noted for Montrose resident

Staff — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 21:18:44 +0000

From: Sheila Salonek
Montrose
In last week’s paper, the list of wages for Montrose city employees and city council members was published.
What wasn’t mentioned, was that council member Scott Czanstkowsi’s pay was donated back to different city committees and organizations. Some went to the Montrose Days Royalty Committee, some towards the Montrose Days car show. A portion also went to a fundraiser for a former Montrose fireman’s family.
It should also be noted that council member Czanstkowski was responsible for reducing the pay each council member (and mayor) receives per meeting.
I appreciate his generousity to the city of Montrose and its citizens.

Freedoms and rights should be maintained

Staff — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 23:00:16 +0000

From: John Norman
Buffalo
Are we getting mixed messages from the Minnesota Republican Party and their legislators? They have taken the high ground on family values and fiscal responsibility under false pretenses, and now appear to have abandoned them completely.
Recent events demonstrate their inability to manage their own party, let alone govern our state. They always claimed that government doesn’t work and now have proved it, after taking control of the legislature in 2010. Examples are the state shutdown and the two proposed constitutional amendments.
In order to bypass Governor Dayton’s potential veto, they proposed putting a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the 2012 ballot. This amendment is in complete opposition to the concept of individual freedom of all citizens to marry the person they love.
Our constitution guarantees the right of every eligible citizen to vote. This right is threatened by the GOP’s proposed constitutional amendment to require a photo ID for all voters. The supporters of this amendment make the frivolous claim of voter fraud, but it is a blatant attempt to discourage the elderly, students, and lower-income citizens to exercise their right to vote.
To defeat these amendments, we Democrats have to make sure the voters hear the truth about what the Republicans are proposing to do to the gay community and our potential Democratic voters.

Did the voter process work?

Staff — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 22:59:33 +0000

From: Harlan Wegschied
Winsted
I noticed a small item in the Jan. 2 edition of the Herald Journal mentioning that the local school superintendant commented on the bond referendum. Quote “the biggest factors were the total cost and the tax impact. He said the school board had received the same feedback.”
A group of us have been at every meeting of the board since the referendum failed and I guess I have not noticed any evidence that they got the message. People keep asking me what was the point of having a referendum in the first place, since the board seems to be hell-bent on spending every last dollar they can get away with.
I went back to the comments made on your blog site right after the vote; it makes for interesting reading. Chairman Bob Carlson, “I now have to seriously consider changing my philosophy based on the decisions of the majority. There will be a lot of thought and review over the next few months.” Yeah, like about five seconds.
A week later, they had a plan to get around the expressed wishes of a large majority of the voters. Fred Blaser said, “It is your right to vote the way you want, it is your responsibility to vote informed.”
So, how many people knew, until it came out in the paper one week before the vote that there was really a $7.5 million plan on the table? Who did such a good job of keeping the public informed?
Ann Meyer said, ”I’d like to see referendum opposers step up and help make a plan that they will support.” Point of fact, a group of us have been at every meeting since the vote, we’ve been on the phone with boiler companies, we’ve had reps from two of the largest come out and look at them, l’ve been on the phone with the Minnesota Dept of Education finance division, the ones who approve or disapprove the plan.
I’ve had some very interesting conversations. A citizen at the last meeting asked the board’s consultant, advisor, or whatever, what he was wearing that night, “How much do you get for this?” Answer: 18 1/2 percent. On the original plan for $7.5 million, he would have gotten $1.387 million. If he gets that percentage on whatever comes out eventually, do you think the board is getting unbiased advice? I don’t . . . .
Does anyone on the board, or the referendum supporters for that matter, read the local paper? How about the statement by the county auditor-treasurer, Cindy Schultz, at a meeting in Winsted, “I feel for the main street commercial property in McLeod County. I don’t see much future if it keeps going the way it is.” Have any of you “yes” supporters taken the time to ask them how bad they are getting hit this next year, not to mention what will happen after next year, when the taxes for this project come online?
Somehow, the supporters argued that this $7.5 million was going to grow the town. Go figure I’ve held up on this letter one full day while Gene Feltman tried to get the reps from these two boiler companies on the agenda of the next board meeting, but nobody wants to talk to us and they sure don’t want anyone who knows what they are talking about to tell them why the biggest mistake they can make is throw out two Kewaunee boilers that were built to be repaired, and incidently, are built for both steam and hot water, and replace them with modern day throwaways.
We could just have them show up and take advantage of the three minutes allowed anyone there for comment period, subject to a total of five person, 15 minute limit, but, the hell with that. Ah, democracy in action.
I’ve been a member of this district for 51 years, paid my taxes like a good little boy, used the school two years when my sons went to kindergarten, and, like a lot of other people, stayed out of school politics.
That was a big mistake. We end up with a board of spend-thrifts. We get no vote on any of this foolishness, but there will be votes in the future, called school board elections.
I still think people will look back in the not-too-distant future and wish they had never opened this Pandora’s box of troubles. I even tried to get a community meeting with pro-voters to see if we could reach some kind of agreement on a program we could all agree on, but that fell flat on its face
Suddenly, people who signed their names to letters to the editor in support don’t want to be connected in any way. So, it’s back to retirement in my private stockade. This time, I will abide by the oath I took 23 years ago, to never, ever, ever again get involved in anything other than an individual’s issues. Bon-jour. Honk as you go by.

Letter of apology to the citizens of Lester Prairie

Staff — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 19:03:42 +0000

From: Andy Heimerl, Mayor of Lester Prairie
As mayor of Lester Prairie, I would like to apologize for my error in judgment during the Prairie Day’s parade July 16, 2011.
I would like to apologize to the people in attendance who witnessed the action of me throwing three cans of beer to my friends and family, who were seated in the crowd that lined the parade route on the corners of Central Avenue and Elm Street. I regret my actions. Certainly this type of behavior is unacceptable for anyone to demonstrate, but it was particularly unacceptable for me, since I was representing our fine city of Lester Prairie as its mayor.
I also owe an apology to all of our community members, even those who were not present. My actions have brought negative attention to our city and I am sorry for that. Not only did I endanger people that were sitting at that location, but I opened the city up to potential financial liability.
I would like to apologize to the Lester Prairie Police Department, not only for redirecting their efforts from other important duties that night, but also for putting them in the uncomfortable situation of dealing with a city leader, someone that should be held to a higher standard.
Last, but certainly not least, I would like to apologize to my brother, parents, cousins, aunts, uncles, and other family members and friends that were present. This incident did not live up to the standards that I have set for myself. It definitely fell short of the type of behavior I want my three boys to strive towards.
While I certainly intended no harm to anybody, I understand that the act of throwing full cans of beer to my family and friends was an unreasonable act. I ask for forgiveness and can assure you that as mayor of Lester Prairie you will not witness a repeat of such behavior.

Who’s watching out for the kids?

Staff — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 19:58:00 +0000

From: Margaret Jordan
Howard Lake
An article in the Nov. 21 Star Tribune prompts this reflection.
Growing up on the farm, I knew our farm tom-cat wouldn’t hurt baby kittens. It was the outsider, who would sneak in if tom-cat wasn’t around and kill the babies, hoping he could soon impregnate the grieving mom-cat.
Once again we read of a boyfriend killing a baby – a boyfriend babysitting while mom works. Where is baby’s dad? Boyfriend, absent dad, and poor excuse for a mother could all take a lesson from nature. Mothers protect your babies. Dads be more than sperm-donor; protect your little ones.
I write this with sorrow for what has happened to our society.

School improvements make sense

Staff — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 20:36:11 +0000

From: Jen Thiry
Lester Prairie
I have attended four of Mr. McNulty’s Lester Prairie school referendum informational sessions. The four I went to were not well attended by residents of the district.
I wanted to make sure I knew why this referendum was being asked for.
There is a misunderstanding as to how the proposed commons area is to be used.
The primary purpose for the commons area is to be the school’s cafeteria. The size of the current cafeteria will be expanded into the old FCS room, which is currently just used for the after-school program (and no longer used for home economics, a class that is not required by the state and has also been dropped by other area schools. This will put this space to much better use.
The current cafeteria has a limited seating capacity, which requires that there be four lunch sessions. There are groups of kids who eat lunch very early, and some who eat lunch over 4 hours after starting school, so even longer since breakfast.
The high school day goes from 8:15 a.m. to 3 p.m.
The elementary school day from 8:20 a.m. to 2:55 p.m.
The first elementary lunch session is from 10:55 to 11:20 a.m.
The junior high lunch is from 11:51 a.m. to 12:17 p.m.
The second elementary lunch session is from 12:17 to 12:42 p.m.
The high school eats from 12:46 to 1:12 p.m.
With the expanded cafeteria (commons), the plan is to be able to reduce the lunch periods from four to two. This will allow kids to eat lunch at more reasonable times. This area will be filled with cafeteria tables, not couches as alluded to in a previous letter to the editor.
This shared cafeteria/commons area will also be the new entrance into the gymnasium and the new location for the concession stand.
If you attend school events, you know how cramped the current entrance is, with ticket sale and concession stand lines often “colliding” and very little extra room for people to stand.
The plan for this area is also flexible, so either part of the current gym stage will be maintained or this commons/cafeteria space will have an elevated area that can be used for performances/plays.
This cafeteria/commons space will be available for groups to use, as the current one is, but that is not its primary purpose for being redone.
Do not believe the gossip, and make sure you do your own homework and have all the information you need to make an informed vote.

What are the real facts?

Staff — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 20:27:37 +0000

From: David and Arla Huser
Lester Prairie
Wow! After reading the Herald Journal last week on the breakdown of the costs for each area of this proposed referendum, we should all be voting no.
We, in fact, are not voting for $5,200,000, because now the total package has reached $7,795,000. We were told at a community meeting at Central Cafe that this $1,910,000 would be used only if the referendum failed, not “plus” a voter approved referendum.
We would have almost $2 million to use if needed, so why not use this to upgrade the boiler, the kitchen and ventilating the science lab? Who does the school board think is going to fund the extra $2 million?
You guessed it! We are! The taxpayers! Is this on the tax calculator on the school website? No.
The wool is being pulled over our eyes. All we have been hearing is, “This is for our children, our community.” We read about how great our school is and then we read on page 6A of last week’s Herald Journal about teens and sexting in our community. What about the bullying going on in our school? Sports seems to be more important.
We feel before we approve this huge amount, the school board needs to address some real issues going on in our school, not concentrate on spending our money. We need $2,137,974 for upgrading the kitchen/commons area? We could hire a food service for less than that. The school board fired the janitors and hired a professional cleaning service. Why not fire the cooks, too, and create even less job opportunities in our town?
We have been accused of not knowing the facts. The truth is, we have not been given all the facts. One week before the election we are told our school plans to spend over $5 million, but in fact they will be spending closer to $8 million if this passes.
Get out and vote no Tuesday, Nov. 8 at the high school.