It’s certainly okay to challenge the content of someone’s  argument.  Here’s an example:  “I disagree with your statement that tax increment financing is detrimental to our city’s economy; I think a TIF district provides important incentives for drawing new industry,  jobs, and families to our community”.

A civil discourse breaks down when, instead of addressing the elements of the person’s argument, the person him/herself is maliciously attacked.  I know, that’s pretty common.  Some people haven’t improved much on their argument skills since they were eight years old, when their disagreements went like this:

“I want to play kickball.”

“No!  I want to play Red Rover!”

“We always do what you want to – we should take turns deciding.”

“Yeah?  Well, you’re stupid, and ugly… and you walk funny!!”

I think its worth the effort to be uncommon.   As individuals, its important to leave our childish behavior behind, to mature and grow.  As a community, its equally important to mature in our social and cultural disciplines.  There will be a lot of opportunities ahead of us here in Fergus Falls to work on our practice of civil discourse.

I think we can learn to regulate our emotions while we examine important issues from all sides to determine the best course of action.  I think we can find ways to compromise, and even when we can’t find compromise, we can always disagree respectfully.

I’ve been asked about my voter recommendations for city council candidates for Fergus Falls.  I have waited to see how the local media handled voter information about the candidates through the forums and published questionnaires.

The forums for the candidates from each ward which were held at City Hall were good efforts, but I felt the questions were pretty easy softballs that were lobbed toward the candidates. It would have been difficult for the candidates to strike out in the eyes of voters who are on any side of the issues (although there were still some responses that caught nothing but air!).  There were a few answers which clearly dodged the concerns on voter’s minds, a couple of new candidates made strong statements which reflected their value to represent voters, and incumbent council members stood by their public positions on past/current concerns.

I thought the Daily Journal brought it up a notch, with some direct questions for which the answers should have at least given voters a hint about the candidate’s view on city government.  I was specifically listening for the candidate’s values regarding local leadership.  Again, it was easy to see which candidates dodged the issues which concern voters and which ones took a clear stand on representative leadership.

Local government is where the rubber hits the road for representative democracy.  I have heard people say things like, “…representative government means that my only responsibility as a citizen is to vote for a candidate, then it’s the job of the elected representative to ‘make the hard choices’.  The voters don’t have all the information the elected officials have”.  That is simply irresponsible, and plain laziness.  There is no excuse for voters not being fully informed about local/city issues, or even on state issues.

My picks for Fergus Falls City Council have each taken a solid position on true representative local government, and I think they have each demonstrated their commitment to serving Fergus Falls through tangible past service to the community.  My choices for Fergus Falls City Council are:

Ward One: Stan Synstelien
Ward Two: Scott Rachels
Ward Three: Jerry Gullickson
Ward Four: Randy Synstelien

I know, you were told it would be a “Community” ice arena, – but if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

The City Council touted that the school district was contributing $1.6 million of “in-kind” contribution to the project, which included providing land for the project. After donations from hockey supporters, the City Council said Fergus Falls’ taxpayers would only pay $3 million to finally own a “community” ice arena.

The City Council isn’t talking publicly about the truth, so let’s review these comments by School District 544 superintendent Jerry Ness,

“The usage of the ice arena would be very similar to the current way we are doing business… The first agreement would be a Ground Lease between the District and the Port Authority to allow the construction of the ice arena on School District property. The School District would retain ownership of the land and building.” The second agreement would be an Operating Lease… whereby we lease the ice arena according to the district’s use of the facility…” ~ Ness, J. (2010, October 20). Schools: ‘Where excellence is expected’. Daily Journal (Fergus Falls, MN)

So there it is – the School District will allow the city to build the school hockey arena, and the School District will retain ownership of the land and building.

In the past, school district voters refused to approve a building levy for School District 544 until the district set aside expensive, nonessential extras like…  ice arenas.  Then someone decided to go after the taxpayers of Fergus Falls for that special school funding. The City Council snookered its own constituents.

It’s like there are two school boards trying to appropriate taxpayer money for District 544 in the current election.  There is the elected District 544 School Board, which follows the law requiring voter approval of its levy. The school referendum question on the ballot is legitimate and important for the education of the district’s children. I will vote “yes” on the legitimate school referendum question.

The fake school board (Fergus Falls City Council) is abusing an economic tool (Fergus Falls Port Authority) to circumvent voter approval… to build a school facility.

Seven City Council members agreed to that plan, sacrificing their integrity as city representatives on the altar of “progress”. Now they have placed two cups of poison in front of city taxpayers in the form of a ballot question.

Whether a sales tax or a property tax, any unnecessary tax will draw important business and consumer dollars out of the local economy to build and operate an expensive school district facility. The posers on the City Council want you to choose the type of poison which they will pour into our city’s economy.

So, do you prefer your poison to have a grape, or cherry flavor? It’s a fool’s question, and I refuse it. It is voter coercion – shame on the City Council.

Fergus Falls’ voters made the grave mistake of electing a city council devoid of leadership qualities or community values. It’s best if we avoid that mistake again. Sometimes the best way to learn to avoid making the same mistake again is to walk through the pain of the mistakes we have made.

It will hurt taxpayers to pay an additional 10% in property taxes for the District 544 Hockey Arena over the next 20 years. It should hurt. I hope it hurts enough to motivate continued participation and dialogue about local government in the public square.

I hope voters are paying attention in this election. I hope they are asking the candidates hard questions and demanding straight answers about the candidate’s values pertaining to local government and representation.

To provide some background, remember that during the initial months of the City Council’s campaign in late 2009 to build the high school hockey arena, they touted such things as “the arena will be an amazing capital asset for the city – how else could the city obtain a $7.6 million asset for only $3 million cost?”

Often Fergus Falls’ voters heard about how the generous hockey supporters would donate $3 million, and the school district was chipping in a huge amount of support for the city’s community ice arena,

“…the Fergus Falls School District pledged an in-kind contribution of $1.6 million, which included providing land for the project” ~ Hage, J. (2010, May 18). Fundraisers surpass $3 million arena goal. Daily Journal (Fergus Falls, MN)

It will be a good deal for the taxpayers of Fergus Falls, the City Council said.  Fergus Falls’ taxpayers will only pay $3 million to finally have ownership of their very own “community” ice arena.  No more being stuck with “leasing” old broken-down county-owned ice arenas…

This is a big layer being peeled off the onion now, and I think it stinks.  Read the following from District 544 superintendent Jerry Ness very carefully, and you will hear who will actually own the ice arena which you are paying for.

“The usage of the ice arena would be very similar to the current way we are doing business… The first agreement would be a Ground Lease between the District and the Port Authority to allow the construction of the ice arena on School District property. The School District would retain ownership of the land and building.” The second agreement would be an Operating Lease… whereby we lease the ice arena according to the district’s use of the facility…” ~ Ness, J. (2010, October 20). Schools: ‘Where excellence is expected’. Daily Journal (Fergus Falls, MN)

Did you hear it?  The school isn’t “contributing” the property to the city taxpayers – it’s contributing to the “project”… the project to build a District 544 Hockey Arena.  Yep, we’re building a hockey arena for the school district.

But it doesn’t end with building it and paying for it.  It is obvious to me that the City Council is planning to have Fergus Falls’ taxpayers shoulder the responsibility for the annual operating expenses of the District 544 Hockey Arena.  Sure, the school district and the hockey association will kick in a few dollars to “help” the city with the operating costs, as Mr. Ness states in the same article,

“The second agreement would be an Operating Lease, which is the current way we are doing business with the City, whereby we lease the ice arena according to the district’s use of the facility…” ~ Ness, J. (2010, October 20). Schools: ‘Where excellence is expected’. Daily Journal (Fergus Falls, MN)

But what’s the point of such a complicated arrangement?  Why wouldn’t the school district just take care of the expenses for its hockey arena?  The only thing that makes sense is that the annual operating costs of the new District 544 Hockey Arena will likely be much higher than the school and the Hockey Association are willing (or able) to spend.  So this City Council has decided that Fergus Falls’ taxpayers should step up to pay the bill for the school district.

Have you tried asking the City Council or city staff for a proforma annual operating budget for the arena (not past budgets for the current county-owned arena)?  No luck with that, right?  After 14 months of planning, they still don’t have that information “available”.  Can you figure out why?

That is why I will now refer to the ice arena as the District 544 Hockey Arena.  We were sold the idea of a “Community Ice Arena”, but it’s obvious that was just a bill of goods.

Within two weeks, that number doubled when the Council, in a 7 to 1 vote, approved a resolution to commit $4.0 million of city property tax increases to an arena project.  When asked about projected annual operating cost for this significant facility, the answer was “…um, no idea”. Blunder.

The architectural firm hired by the city estimated the cost of construction at around $6.0 million.  What would be the annual operating expenses for the facility?  “that’s something city staff are working on”.  Blunder.

Council members spoke stridently about how essential it was to capitalize on the opportunities of the current economy.  By following an expedited timeline to begin construction in 2010, they expected bids from contractors (who would be hungry for work) to come in under the $6 million budget.  Blunder.

Two times, in December of 2009 and five months later in May, Fergus Falls voters petitioned the City Council for the right to vote on the use of property tax dollars for this project.  Twice the City Council told the voters to “call someone who cares”.  Isn’t that blunderful?

All the way to June, 2010; voters have been told the ice arena just needed to be built – their approval doesn’t matter.  But how many hundreds of thousands of dollars will the annual operating expenses add to the city budget?  Again, “… no idea”.  Is that responsible budgeting and planning for use of future taxpayer dollars?  Blundering on.

Now the actual bids have come in – the low bid is $9.1 million – 1.5 times the estimate.  Oops, looks like someone might have… blundered.

I wonder how the Fergus Falls City Council will handle this $3.0 million “reality check”.  It is foolish to retain confidence in the Architectural firm who blundered so badly in estimating construction costs in their planning process; they should be fired.  There should be a thorough review of all decisions and conclusions about this project – what other blunders have occurred?  I think it would be a serious blunder to frantically push forward without critical evaluation of what has occurred up to this point.

By the way, because the fiscal responsibility of our city government is important, ask your councilperson – WHAT ARE THE PROJECTED ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES FOR THE PROPOSED ICE ARENA?  Is it possible the City Council would pull out all the stops to build a multi-million dollar facility without having completed a pro forma Annual Operating Budget?  No way – that would be an insanely irresponsible blunder!  Ask for a printout on city letterhead…

The Defendant City of Fergus Falls is a Charter city located in the county of Otter Tail, State of Minnesota.  The Defendant Fergus Falls Port Authority is a municipality located in Fergus Falls, and is organized under MN Statute 469.075.

The central element of this complaint is the City’s rejection of a lawful petition of the People for referendum on City of Fergus Falls Ordinance 122A.  The ordinance was adopted by the City Council, authorizes the Fergus Falls Port Authority to issue up to $7.14 million in general obligation bonds, and authorizes the levy of taxes for the payment of the Bonds.  By rejecting the petition for referendum, the City Council is unlawfully proceeding with the unapproved accrual of millions of dollars of public indebtedness.

The governing Charter of the City of Fergus Falls protects the Initiative and the Referendum as powers reserved by the people, and introduces both powers in Section 6.01:

SEC. 6.01. POWERS RESERVED BY THE PEOPLE. The people of the City reserve to themselves the power, in accordance with the provisions of this Charter, to initiate and adopt any ordinance, except an ordinance appropriating money or authorizing the levy of taxes, to require such an ordinance when adopted by the Council to be referred to the registered voters for approval or disapproval (emphasis added), and to recall elected public officials. These powers shall be called the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, respectively.

The phrase “except an ordinance appropriating money or authorizing the levy of taxes” modifies the preceding phrase (the initiative) and is the subject of the following phrase (the referendum).  In other words, the People do not have the power to initiate and adopt an ordinance which appropriates money or authorizes the levy of taxes, and when such an ordinance (one which appropriates money or authorizes a levy of taxes) is adopted by the Council, the People have the power to require that ordinance to be referred to the registered voters for approval or disapproval.   It is clear that “such an ordinance when adopted by the Council” refers to “an ordinance appropriating money or authorizing the levy of taxes”, since the initiative is an ordinance which is adopted by the people.

Section 6.10 provides the procedure to petition the City Council for repeal of “any ordinance which the Council has adopted”.  That Section 6.10 uses this broad language to identify the ordinances which are subject to the referendum is congruent and harmonious with the introduction of the referendum in Section 6.01, where the Charter specifically identifies Council-adopted ordinances which appropriate money or authorize a levy of taxes as being subject to a petition for referendum.

Of particular importance to this complaint, is the timing of the certification of sufficiency of such a petition by the City Administrator in relation to the effective date of the ordinance which is the object of the petition.  Section 6.10 states:

Any ordinance, which has been adopted by the Council, but which is not yet effective, and upon which a petition has been filed, shall be suspended in its operation as soon as a petition is found sufficient…

On May 17, 2010, the Fergus Falls City Council voted to adopt Ordinance 122A.  Fifteen days after being published in the newspaper, the ordinance was scheduled to become effective on June 4, 2010.

Ordinance 122A, in Section 2, states “The City Council hereby gives specific consent to the pledge of the City’s full faith, credit, and resources to the payment and security of the Bonds and authorizes the levy of taxes for the payment of the Bonds.”  As an ordinance which authorizes the levy of taxes and which has been adopted by the Council, the Charter preserves the power of the people to require the ordinance to be referred to the registered voters for approval or disapproval.  If a sufficient petition is received by the City Administrator prior to the ordinance’s effective date, the ordinance is to be immediately suspended.

Pursuant to Chapter 6 of the City Charter, five registered voters formed a committee, and submitted a petition for referendum on Ordinance 122A to the City Administrator on May 18, 2010.  The completed petition was certified as sufficient on May 24, 2010 by the City Administrator, prior to the ordinance’s effective date of June 4, 2010; therefore Section 6.10 of the City Charter suspended Ordinance 122A.

The City Administrator presented the petition to the City Council at its next regular meeting held on June 7, 2010.  At this meeting, the City Attorney advised the Council to reject the People’s petition.  The Council then passed Resolution #119-2010 to that effect.

The City Council is noncompliant with the governing Charter’s mandates regarding the suspension of Ordinance 122A and the submission of the question for approval or disapproval on the election ballot in response to the People’s lawful petition.

The plaintiff prays for swift, but long term relief from the Court – that the 12,000 individual citizens who comprise the Fergus Falls Court of Public Opinion execute their duty to be fully informed about local issues, to participate responsibly, and to hold  elected officials accountable for their actions in local government.

You can click on the pages below to open them in a different window for easier reading, or you can click on this link: 2010-01-07, Bond Counsel, Letter on Referendum.

A huge “Thank you!” to all the circulators who worked so hard over the past six days.  You have put feet to your civic responsibility.  Congratulations, and well done!

Signatures are needed now!

Call Your friends,neighbors, coworkers, family members…

The petition is available at:

DAYS/TIMES
Sunday,       Call Daryl Synstelien:  205-0400
Monday,      9:00 am - 2:00 pm (all locations)

LOCATIONS
City Hall Park
112 W Washington Avenue
(on the east side of Fergus Falls City Hall)

Scott’s Machine Shop
1611 Pebble Lake Road
(just behind the Pebble Lake ’Take 5′, Clark gas station)

Synstelien Community Services
128 E. Meadowlark Lane
(directly east of the Fergus Falls Veteran’s Home)

We need an intense word-of-mouth campaign by everyone, encouraging folks to get to the locations to sign the petition today.  The time window is closing fast!  For questions or other information, call Daryl Synstelien at 218.205.0400