|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
BeBack
Unregistered
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 01 2004,8:58 am |
|
   |
Lil Pimp, the Mankato Civic Center is truely a very nice building, and it would be a great addition to any community. That being said, it is my understanding that the functions that the Civic Center puts on continuously loose money. In fact the Civic Center has never been in the black. it survives on the sales tax.
Another point that you have failed to look at is the fact that Albert Lea's retail economy is quite a bit smaller than Mankato's. If you don't think so, maybe you can tell us when was the last time you came from Mankato to Albert Lea specifically to buy something!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
Lil Pimp 
Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: Oct. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 01 2004,9:25 am |
|
 |
Actually, I believe 2003 will be the first year that the civic center finishes in the black or at least breaks even but you are right, it has lost probably a couple hundred thousand $ in the past 10 years. As with most venues like the civic center, it is not a money making facility. When it was built no one ever promised it would make money, the hope was that it could break even.
I hear you on the tax generating capacity (Mankato vs. Albert Lea). How much is Albert Lea expected to generate from the tax? The civic center was around $35 million and I believe the sunset for the tax was around 10 (maybe 15) years.
How much $$$ are they talking about to clean up the lakes? Is downtown restoration still in the mix on the tax or was that just talk? If it is, how much is projected to fund this?
Anyone know?
Happy New Year to all 
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
GEOKARJO
Google This!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 7799
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 01 2004,10:22 am |
|
|
Yeah and Alabama would have to have another farewell show for them to finish in the black again
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
cwolff
Group: Members
Posts: 265
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 01 2004,10:49 pm |
|
|
Minnesota added lakes for the first time to Minnesota's Impaired Water's List in 2002. Every two years the list is updated. Heron Lake, which is currently the only lake in the seven county area in Southwest Minnesota on the list, was not on the initial list out for public comment in 2001. I wrote a letter and asked that Heron Lake be added to the final list, and indeed Heron Lake was put on the final 2002 list.
The process for how Heron Lake will be cleaned up is still being formulated by the MPCA. In fact, you can attend the free seminar on January 13, 2004 at the St. Cloud Civic Center where the MPCA will be gathering public input on how Minnesota will clean up its lakes and streams that are on the current Impaired Water's List. Once, your lakes are on the list, they cannot come off of the list until they meet water quality standards, which were set by the Clean Water Act of 1972. The Clean Water Act requires the MPCA to acess and monitor all of the water bodies of the state Minnesota.
The process for cleaning up the lakes and streams will be facilitated by the MPCA through the watershed districts. The process basically finds out who the polluters are and asigns responsibilities to them. In other words, if you are the cause of the problem, then you will have to clean up your act. If wastewater treatment facilities are putting out more than one part per million of phosphorous then they may have to cut back their phosphorous discharge. In some cases the phosphorous may have to be cut back to less then one part per million if water quality standards are not being met.
If you have any questions, fire away?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
Lil Pimp
Group: Members
Posts: 62
Joined: Oct. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 01 2004,11:47 pm |
|
|
| Quote (GEOKARJO @ Jan. 01 2004,10:22:am) | | Yeah and Alabama would have to have another farewell show for them to finish in the black again |
That concert isn't until spring '04 (May?) GEO. That being said, it should insure a second straight year in the black. 
What I would like to know is this:
1) How much revenue does the city plan on generating from this tax?
2) How long do they expect it (length of tax) to last?
3) Will downtown renovations be included in the tax?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
guest
Unregistered
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 02 2004,12:35 am |
|
|
1) How much revenue does the city plan on generating from this tax?
They don't know. But estimates on lake cleanup are $20million-$40million
2) How long do they expect it (length of tax) to last?
They don't know. But I would guess until the lake is clean.
3) Will downtown renovations be included in the tax?
No, they tried that last year and it didn't work so this year they are dropping the downtown renovation part and they will try for lake cleanup only.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
BeBack
Unregistered
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 02 2004,12:16 pm |
|
|
And what about the Watershed Board's plans for taxing to clean up the lakes? Will they be passing their own tax on top of the sales tax, or will they be content to receive money from the city sales tax.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 02 2004,12:26 pm |
|
|
Beback--you beat me to the keyboard--I was going to post the same question. The Watershed board has a budget of $250,000--and the taxing ability for much more. If the WATERSHED board--with taxing capability for most of the COUNTY is taking tax money, why do we need it in the CITY?
There are also jurisdictional problems. Remember, one of the reasons for the creation of the Watershed Board was that, despite the County contributions to plans for lake rehab, the originators felt the County was not doing enough. Now, the City would raise money--but what do they do with it? Give it to the Watershed Board? Why not let the Watershed Board exercise their tax capability directly? It wouldn't require authorization from St. Paul, either.
Good discussion--interesting, informative, civil, lots of new input.
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
Concit
Unregistered
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 02 2004,12:49 pm |
|
|
The first step to clean up any watershed is stopping the point and non-point pollution. I would wager that every poster knows some farmer (or non-farmer) that has their septic system hooked up to tile lines or directly to a drainage ditch. If you don't, you should perform a water quality test on your nearest drainage ditch and I can almost guarantee you'll find some percentage of human sewage. Second, the amount of fertilizer put on fields and yards that because part of the run off is another major problem that needs to be addressed. People are well aware of these problems but they don't want to confront them (or pay to fix them) until they are forced to by a regulation authority. It's sad.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
guest
Unregistered
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 02 2004,1:23 pm |
|
|
Things needed to clean the watershed.
1. Have a watershed wide ban on fertilizers that contribute to algae blooms and harm the watershed and ecosystem.
2. Install more filter strips along farm fields to limit the amount of erosion that comes from the farm fields.
3. Work on installing additional erosion control on all ditches and streams that enter Fountain and Albert Lea Lakes as well as better erosion control on the lakes themselves. What I am talking about here is actual erosion control, not just riprap. Riprap is not the cure all. We must reslope our lake shores so they are more gradual to the lake. That way the wave energy can be dissipated as the wave laps along the shore instead of just bouncing off of the riprap and continue to bounce from one side of the lake to the other.
4. People need to be more conscientious when it comes to our environment. Do not blow your leaves and grass into the street, they eventually make their way to the lakes and add nutrients to the water which further pollutes the water. Don’t litter. I am amazed at how much trash people, including fishermen, leave along our lake shores.
5. Reduce the quantity of rough fish in the lakes. Start netting carp, bullheads, sheepheads, etc. Get them out of the lakes in mass quantities. All they do is stir up the bottom which makes it impossible for aquatic vegetation to grow. We need the aquatic vegetation to act as a filter and help clean and clear up the water. The vegetation will also help establish more game fish by giving them sources of food and shelter as well as spawning grounds.
6. Get the City to make improvements to their sanitary sewer system so they do not have to by pass raw sewage into the lakes during heavy rain events. This practice has reduced greatly in the last few years; however it does still occur from time to time.
7. After, and only after, water quality improvements are being seen can you then consider any dredging of the lakes. If you just dredge without making the other changes you will eventually fill in all that you have dredged, which is what has already happened.
All of this will take much time and money. First goals must be made, ways of monitoring the watershed to determine if the goals are being met must be defined, and an end product must be agreed upon. After this is done then the cost of this can be determined. Once the costs are known, we, as a community, can decide how we are going to fund this endeavor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
