ACTION ALERT: Keep Local Democracy Strong in Minnesota

Oppose State Legislation Favoring Corporate Control Over Local Control

• Listen to LSP’s radio ad on this issue here.
• Listen to the Minnesota News Connection story on the issue
featuring an interview with LSP member Lynn Mizner here.
• Read the Feb. 2, 2012, Agri News editorial calling for protection of local control and the rejection of House File 389/Senate File 270 here.

UPDATE Jan. 26: The bill to weaken local control, House File 389, is stalled in the Local Government Operations and Elections Committee for now. An outpouring of phone calls and e-mails to members of the committee, along with strong testimony opposing the bill, led to it being tabled. However, this proposed legislation is still alive, and could come up for a vote anytime. That's why it's important that lawmakers hear immediately why it's a bad idea.

Read more below and take action to keep this positive momentum going.

1/25/12
During the 2011 session of the Minnesota Legislature, the Land Stewardship Project stopped attempts by corporate interests to weaken township and community rights in the state, but they are pushing the same bills again this year.

House File 389 is authored by Reps. Michael Beard (R-Shakopee), Duane Quam (R-Byron), Michael Nelson (DFL-Brooklyn Park) and Tim Sanders (R-Blaine).

Senate File 270 is authored by Sen. Warren Limmer (R-Maple Grove).

House File 389 and Senate File 270 will make it more difficult for citizens who want their township, county or city to take action to protect the community from unanticipated, harmful development. The bill does this by weakening the power of local governments to enact interim ordinances. An interim ordinance allows local governments to quickly put a temporary freeze on major development.

This power is essential when the community is caught off-guard by unanticipated and potentially harmful proposals, especially those from outside corporate interests and outside investors, such as big box stores like Wal-Mart or a large-scale factory farm. An interim ordinance freezes the status quo and gives the community time to review or create the appropriate ordinances. (More details below).

Status of the bill: House File 389 was the very first bill to be heard in the House Government Operations and Elections Committee on Thursday, Jan. 26. However, because of an outpouring of phone calls and e-mails as well as strong testimony in opposition to the bill, it was tabled for now. It could come up again anytime. Let committee members know that this bill should not pass.

TAKE ACTION! Make these calls TODAY:

Call members of the House Government Operation Committee today. Members are listed in priority order.

First priority:

• Rep. Dean Urdahl (R) at 651-296-4344 or rep.dean.urdahl@house.mn
• Rep. Tim O'Driscoll (R) at 651-296-7808 or rep.tim.odriscoll@house.mn
• Michael V. Nelson (DFL), DFL Lead and bill co-author, at 651-296-3751 or rep.michael.nelson@house.mn
• Rep. Joyce Peppin (R), Committee Chair, at 651-296-7806 or rep.joyce.peppin@house.mn
• Rep. Rich Murray (R), Vice Chair, at 651-296-8216 or rep.rich.murray@house.mn

Second priority:

• Rep. Beard (R-Shakopee) at 651-296-2146 or 800-657-3550, or rep.mike.beard@house.mn
• Rep. David Hancock (R) at 651-296-4265 or rep.david.hancock@house.mn
• Rep. Carol McFarlane (R) at 651-296-5363 or rep.carol.mcfarlane@house.mn
• Rep. Duane Quam (R) (also bill co-author) at 651-296-9236 or rep.duane.quam@house.mn
• Rep. Tim Sanders (R) (also bill co-author) at 651-296-4226 or rep.tim.sanders@house.mn
• Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL) at 651-296-7026 or rep.ryan.winkler@house.mn

If you have more time:

• Rep. Steve Simon (DFL) at 651-296-9889 or rep.steve.simon@house.mn
• Rep. Bev Scalze (DFL) at 651-296-7153 or rep.bev.scalze@house.mn
• Rep. Marion Greene (DFL) at 651-296-0171 or rep.marion.greene@house.mn
• Rep. Frank Hornstein (DFL) at 651-296-9281 or rep.frank.hornstein@house.mn

Here is a suggested message:

“Minnesotans value strong local control and township rights. House File 389 undermines these rights, specifically the right to enact an interim ordinance. I urge you to oppose this proposal. An interim ordinance allows the township, county or city to quickly put a temporary freeze on major development. This power is essential when the community is caught off-guard by unanticipated proposals, especially those from outside corporate interests. This power needs to stay strong. Weakening local control in any way should be off the table.”

The power to enact an interim ordinance matters
For example, communities in southeast Minnesota have been bombarded with outside corporate interests wanting to mine for sand to be used in frac mining. These mining proposals are much different in scale and scope from the aggregate excavation that takes place there now. In response to citizen concerns, Wabasha, Goodhue and Winona counties enacted interim ordinances that put a moratorium on frac sand mining while they study the issue.

Here are the details of how these bills weaken local control:
Under the proposed legislation, merely applying for a permit exempts a proposed development from any future interim ordinance. But all too often neighbors do not get any information about a project until AFTER the permit has been applied for. When that happens, an interim ordinance may be needed to freeze the status quo and create time to assess the situation.

The legislation requires a two-thirds vote (a super majority) to enact an interim ordinance. Currently, an interim ordinance can be enacted by a simple majority — that’s how democratic rights should work. There is no reason to make adopting an interim ordinance so difficult. The legislation slows the process for enacting an interim ordinance by mandating public notice and a hearing before an interim ordinance can be enacted. In many cases, a local unit of government — particularly a township — does not get complete information on a proposed development until shortly before approval. In those cases, there can be legitimate concerns that the local government needs to address.

When that happens, an interim ordinance must be enacted quickly to be effective. An interim ordinance can only be adopted at a public meeting but currently no special notice is required to be given that the interim ordinance may be considered at the meeting. The fact is that the very nature of an interim ordinance is to address unanticipated situations and so there are times when it must be enacted quickly as an emergency measure.

For more information on LSP's work on this issue, e-mail Bobby King at bking@landstewardshipproject.org or call 612-722-6377.

-30-