Advanced Search
Ramsey County Gets F for its Air, and not for “Fresh”
The American Lung Association recently released its 2012 State of the Air Report, and while the state of Minnesota received improved grades for the number and severity of “high ozone days,” it scored worse than previous years for “high particle pollution days.” Of the seven counties graded for particle pollution, St Louis County (home to Duluth) scored best with a B, but Ramsey County (home to St Paul) got the state’s only F.
The county has now hit bottom in a trend that has seen the particle pollution grade decrease from a B in 2009, a C in 2010, a D in 2011 to this year’s failing grade. As a resident of Ramsey County, I have an inkling this grade may be from our location downwind from those polluters across the river in Hennepin County. But there are some serious potential repercussions if the county’s air quality does not improve.
There are the obvious health concerns regarding high particle pollution levels. Early death, cardiovascular harm, respiratory harm, cancer, reproductive and developmental harm are on the list of possibilities. And while we’re all susceptible to these health concerns, the young, elderly, low income earners, anyone outside and of course those who already have health issues are at even greater risk.
But there are other implications as well. David Thornton, Assistant Commissioner at the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), says that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently reviewing their air quality standards when it comes to particulate matter, and will likely make these standards more stringent. A report from the MPCA to the State Legislature released last year indicates that failure to comply with EPA standards will result in more rigorous air permits for Minnesota businesses, leading to more expensive measures to curb emission levels, and resource-intensive (ie, costly) measures required for the MPCA.
At this point, resources will need to be spent in some way, shape or form to mitigate particle pollution in Ramsey County. Regulations and mandated actions from the state and federal government seem to be the most expensive, most cumbersome for businesses, and politically the most painful way of doing this. Rather than zero-sum approaches like this, coordinated action and dialogue between business, government and nonprofit stakeholders can create solutions where everyone benefits (or at least minimizes damage to the parties involved).
A Twin Cities group called Environmental Initiative has been facilitating dialogue between these groups for some time now, with a report to the MPCA forthcoming. Coordinated action sooner rather than later to lower particle pollution in our air could alleviate health and economic damages down the road.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Environment Sustainability
4 Comments ->
Cornucopia, Ch 2
Spring arrived early this year but let’s not kid ourselves. This is Minnesota and we’re still weeks, if not months, away from garden fresh vegetables. All the hoop houses in the world won’t change our climate’s limitations. What’s fresh, locally grown veggie-deprived person to do? We have options.
First, growing and buying locally isn’t restricted to five months of the year. My grandparents ate last season’s preserved vegetables right up until the soil began yielding dinner alternatives. Their jars lining the root cellar’s wooden shelves were as local on May 30 as they were the day that they were canned nine months earlier. Not everyone cans enough food to extend garden production into the following June but it’s something worth considering for the coming year.
Second, locally produced food is produced year round. Minnesota cheese, beef, pork and poultry producers keep regular hours at the Saint Paul Farmers Market’s Winter Market. Minnesota maple syrup is produced in the late winter/early spring with the weather warm-up. Locally grown and milled flour can’t possibly be consumed during fall’s few weeks of harvest. It stores well and is available all year.
Third, eat tomatoes. I know this seems counter-intuitive but those vine-on tomato displays anchoring supermarket produce sections are largely produced in Owatonna. Dutch hydroponic growing technology, combined with market proximity, makes a decent tomato possible. It’s not the same as an August field-fresh tomato, but it’s a night and day improvement over those red woody lumps trucked from California.
Lastly, drink beer. Yes, it’s not a vegetable but Minnesota’s craft beer community is blossoming. From mid-sized brewers Schell’s and Summit to truly small outfits like Brau Brothers and Castle Danger, we are blessed with beer options. The only reasonable response is to drink locally-produced and vastly superior beer.
None of these suggestions really satisfies my desire for the season’s first CSA produce box. But, as a life-long Minnesotan, seasonality teaches patience. I will have my Spring Grove CSA farm’s bounty in time but, for now, early spring demands waiting.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: CSA Nutrition Buy Local
VIDEO: Sensible Incentives on the Road
We have just released our newest Minnesota 2020 economic development report Sensible Incentives. To get the word out about enabling energy efficiency in rental housing markets, we're taking the report on a press tour across the state.
Last week we met with Common Bond Communities and MN Housing Partnership representatives to talk about the implications for low-income housing in Minnesota, as well as Ecolibrium3 in Duluth, which is putting concepts introduced in the report into practice. This week we'll visit several locations in Southern Minnesota.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Energy
North Dakota Sues Minnesota Over NGEA
In 2007, the Next Generation Energy Act (NGEA) created a framework for achieving significant energy conservation efforts and implementing renewable energy sources throughout Minnesota. The legislation passed with strong bipartisan support in both chambers and was signed into law by then-Governor Tim Pawlenty. But earlier this month a federal judge heard opening arguments in a case where the state of North Dakota is suing Minnesota over the bill.
Part of the NGEA stipulates that Minnesota utilities cannot build any new fossil-fueled power plants within its borders, or import new electricity from a large fossil-fueled power plant located in another state unless the utility offsets the increased carbon emissions in other ways. Current agreements that bring fossil-fueled electricity across the border are unaffected, but North Dakota, which is home to a big coal industry, is worried about future economic interests.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is technically responsible for the transmission and wholesale sales of electricity across state borders, so North Dakota is claiming that the NGEA oversteps the Commission’s jurisdiction. Minnesota attorneys claim that the NGEA does not affect wholesale electricity, but merely limits what kind of electricity can be sold at retail in the state and so functions outside the jurisdiction of the Commission.
It is understandable that North Dakota is concerned about its long-term coal business interests. Due to successful conservation efforts, an economic recession that reduced electricity demand across sectors, and the state’s shrinking (albeit slowly) reliance on coal-fired power plants, coal’s share of the electricity generation load in Minnesota has dropped from 65.6 percent in 2000 to 52.3 percent in 2010. A surging natural gas industry and the rapid development of wind farms in Minnesota indicate that this trend is unlikely to reverse itself.
Although this lawsuit may simply be a public show of support for North Dakota’s coal industry rather than a legitimate legal challenge, as one of the NGEA’s authors has stated, it is a case worth watching. If any part of the NGEA is found to overstep the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s legal jurisdiction, the most important bill in pointing Minnesota’s energy policy in the right direction may be in jeopardy.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Energy Midwestern States Regulation
2 Comments ->
The Ominous Environmental Bill
I know, let’s sell Split Rock Lighthouse State Park! Think how much tax income we could secure if it was private condos along those six miles of shoreline!
All those pesky citizens around Ely and Isabella, asking the state’s executive council to protect their private property from mineral leases underneath? Let’s cut them off.
And, do we really have to write that report on how Minnesota can reduce its greenhouse gas emissions? Some folks really liked this freaky warm winter.
These provisions and more are in the current Minnesota House Environment Omnibus bill, HF 2164. Or, as some are calling it, the “Ominous” Environmental bill. As one clever writer from the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) put it, these provisions “need to get buried somewhere in a very dark place.”
Sure, I’m oversimplifying some complex legislative concepts. My point is that there has been a fundamental shift in our policy making, away from proactive, high-quality standards for our state’s natural resources, and toward shortcuts and national political agendas.
This is not just election year sloganeering. It’s a movement of deeply-held beliefs from elected representatives intent on moving Minnesota in a direction very different from what the majority of Minnesotans want.
Environmental policy-making used to be about safe limits for drinking water quality or about adequate funding for land protection. Now environmental policy-making has become a series of proposed shortcuts to make it easier for private companies to impact and extract natural resources, even those resources like parks and rivers we have worked hard in the past to protect.
It reminds me of a question posed long ago by Henry David Thoreau, “What is the use of a house if you haven't got a tolerable planet to put it on?”
If you’re concerned about the policy precedents this bill would set, read more about it at MCEA or at Minnesota Environmental Partnership. The bill is working its way through the House and Senate and a final version will be headed to Governor Dayton soon. We all want clean Minnesota water and clear Minnesota air…and clear Minnesota policy-making as well.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Environment Lakes & Rivers State Parks
1 Comment ->
Message to the hungry: Tighten your belts
News from budget cutters in Washington falls under the category, “This could have been predicted.” On second thought, it was.
Last week's Andrew Taylor AP story reported that House budget cutters plan to take $8 billion out of the food stamp program for the coming year to avoid making budget cuts for the Defense Department budget.
Granted, such proposals remain a long way from becoming law. But this proposal comes as the same House budget people have shot down any thought of raising taxes or reducing tax subsidies for the wealthiest Americans.
It comes after the April 13 announcement from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that showed the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) rose 0.3 percent in March and is up 2.7 percent over the past 12 months. That doesn’t seem too bad, on the surface.
Broken down by parts, however, shows the disproportionate problems this creates for the poor. The food index rose another 0.2 percent in March and is now 3.3 percent higher than a year ago, the food-at-home portion is even higher at 3.6 percent.
Awhile back, this writer told an audience at The Theater of Public Policy (T2P2) that this was coming as well-connected budget cutters would tell the hungry to tighten their belts to spare their well-connected friends any additional sacrifice while the U.S. economy undergoes change.
What was predictable has become proposal. What well-meaning people of all parties and faiths need to do is prevent this mean-spirited budget proposal from turning into law.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Social Services Poverty Nutrition
Thoughts on Swanson v. Dayton
Last week, in Swanson v. Dayton, the Ramsey County district court voided an executive order requiring a vote on union membership among the 4,300 child care providers that receive payments from the state. Although the case raises a variety of issues, it is fundamentally about how labor statutes apply to the self-employed. And it reveals two very different answers to this question.
Minnesota law allows the governor to order a vote on unionization in order to resolve a “labor dispute,” defined as any controversy concerning employment, tenure or conditions or terms of employment or concerning the association or right of representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to arrange terms, tenure, or other conditions of employment, regardless of whether or not the relationship of employer and employee exists as to the disputants.
Minn. Stat. § 179.01, subd. 7 (emphasis added). So a “labor dispute” must “concern employment,” but it doesn’t have to be a dispute between a worker and her boss. For example, the governor could order a vote to resolve a dispute between two unions, each wanting to represent the same group of workers.
The court’s approach fundamentally treats the self-employed child-care providers as business owners rather than workers. The court declared that the governor could not order the unionization vote because “employer-employee relations are not involved,” and therefore the dispute “is not a labor dispute.” For support, it relied on a Minnesota Supreme Court case from 1945 about a different state statute with a similar definition of “labor dispute.” In that case, Minnesota Council of State Employees, No. 19 v. AFSCME, the court held that a dispute between a national union and its Minnesota affiliate over revocation of the affiliate’s charter was not a “labor dispute” because “the only question at issue is an internal dispute between the members of an association itself.”
Minnesota Council, in turn, relied upon a U.S. Supreme Court case interpreting a federal law also containing a similar definition of “labor dispute.” In that case, Columbia River Packers Association Inc. v. Hinton, the dispute was between a union of independent fishermen and a company operating packing plants to which the fishermen sold their catch. The Court held that no labor dispute existed because “[t]he controversy here is altogether between fish sellers and fish buyers. The sellers are not employees of the petitioners or of any other employer nor do they seek to be.”
In Swanson, the Ramsey County court essentially treated the child care providers like the U.S. Supreme Court treated the fishermen in Columbia River Packers. Under its logic, because the child care providers are independent business, they are not anyone’s employees, and therefore cannot be involved in a dispute “concerning employment.”
However, this approach is not the only possible one. In its brief in favor of unionization, AFSCME argued for a more functional interpretation that would treat the child care providers as workers under this provision of Minnesota's labor law. It explained, “These providers’ wages are paid in part by the State. The issues they will discuss will relate to the providers’ wages, potential access to benefits, and other employment-related matters. . . . [T]hese issues are related to the terms and conditions of employment . . . .” To the executive order’s defenders, the child care providers did not need to be someone else’s employees to fall within the protection of the statute. It is enough that they are self-employed and that the dispute concerned the terms and conditions of that self-employment. After all, a self-employed person is still “employed.”
I’m not sure where the courts will ultimately come out on this question. Minnesota courts have the final say on interpreting Minnesota law, and they don’t have to follow a federal court ruling on federal law, no matter how analogous it is. But, however it turns out, the final resolution will set a precedent for the treatment of self-employed people under Minnesota’s labor law, and that could have importance beyond this case.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Courts & Justice Union Working / Middle Class Issues
Safety Thirst
As outbreaks of foodborne illness continue to surface, many are looking to the meat and poultry industry for tighter inspection policies and improved food safety.
What they’re finding, though, is an unsettling trend - inspection duties, once carried out by FDA inspectors, are being turned over to the plant’s own employees.
Take a recent proposal by the FDA to expand a pilot program that allows plant employees to replace federal inspectors who examine birds for signs of contamination or infection. Inspectors will be freed up to spend more time inspecting bacteria testing and other safety programs (and the government will save $90 million through the elimination of inspector jobs) – but is it worth the conflict of interest inherent in giving oversight to the company? It’s especially worrying after some inspectors reported that plant employees had been observed ignoring birds who were clearly contaminated.
Another recent question in food safety is the use of low doses of antibiotics in animal feed. Animals who consume small amounts of antibiotics will grow bigger faster, meaning higher meat production (and bigger profits for the industry). But there’s also a risk that the antibiotics will get passed on to the humans who consume these animals, contributing to increased levels of antibiotic resistance in bacteria that makes it more difficult to treat infection. A couple of new rules were passed last week in an attempt to halt this practice. The FDA ruled that farmers and ranchers will need a prescription for the antibiotics they use on their animals. New guidelines were also released, urging drug companies to change the labels on some medically important drugs in order to make them ineligible for use as growth promoters. Though the FDA reports that most drug companies have bought into this idea, the program is completely voluntary, so there's no guarantee that they'll follow the guidelines.
On the other hand, most small-scale farms use antibiotics when they are needed to treat common illnesses in their animals. Limiting these antibiotics could make it harder for these small local growers, like Minnesota’s turkey and hog farmers, to produce healthy animals for consumption.
Every year, one in six Americans fall sick with a foodborne illness – 128,000 of these cases are hospitalized, and 3000 die. Foodborne illness is a serious issue, and we cannot allow the lobbying power of the meat and poultry industry to limit or privatize food safety regulations. We need to be wary of antibiotic use in meat and poultry farming, but we should be aware that some farmers use antibiotics responsibly. We’re going to have to address food safety – let’s protect both consumers and small farmers.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Agriculture Food Safety
Guidance for Transition
States can be a welcoming culture for new residents such as immigrants and refugees. At other times, places can be abusive and exploitive cultures that prey on new people. States such as Minnesota going through demographic change must be aware of both potential realities.
A conference this past week at St. Cloud State University, with companion presentations at the College of St. Benedict and Macalester College, focused on the challenges that confront local people in making sure their communities and workplaces are the former. Here are some highlights passed along by Stephen Philion, director, SCSU Research Group on Immigrant Workers in Minnesota.
Political science professor Immanuel Ness of Brooklyn College, City University of New York, made the above point. A report from SCSU Communications staff on his talk can be found here. An especially important look at Latino/Chicano relationships in America, and in Minnesota, was offered by Louis Mendoza, chair of the Chicano Studies Department at the University of Minnesota. His address can be viewed here. Another comprehensive look at demographic change and problems was offered by journalist, author and researcher David Bacon. His presentation at Macalester College is available here.
Guidance on how to assure open, respectful and non-exploitive workplaces for future growth and prosperity, however, was offered by Ruth Milkman, City University of New York sociologist, who noted in a keynote that immigration reform and improved labor standards must be linked, and both must be focused on equality. A report on her remarks can be found here.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Business Growth Immigration Minority Issues Working / Middle Class Issues
SNAP/EBT: What a Mouthfull
Our abnormally warm weather has made us forget that it is still only the beginning of April. One of the greatest spring traditions in Minnesota, the opening of the farmers markets, is still a few weeks away. The number of farmers markets in Minnesota is increasing, as well as the availability of healthy locally grown food to a wider population of Minnesotans.
This year, 24 of our 141 farmers markets around the state are accepting the government-funded Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Electronic Benefit Transfers (EBT) cards as payment options. This encourages and helps low-income customers have more access to better nutritious foods. Research studies have shown that obesity/overweight rates are highest among: “Hispanics, non-Hispanic Blacks, Native Americans, and individuals in low socio-economic groups.” Obesity not only creates chronic health problems, but also impacts economic productivity in Minnesota’s workforce. In the United States, obesity-related work absenteeism costs $4.3 billion per year.
Improving “food literacy” and increasing promotional incentives for individuals on SNAP are a few ways that Minnesota is attempting to combat the obesity epidemic. “Market Bucks” have been very successful since their introduction into use in farmers markets in 2010. “Six of ten repeat customers reported that the Market Bucks program positively affected the amount of fruit and vegetables they ate-with 46 percent eating ‘a little more’ and 13 percent eating ‘a lot more.’”
The success of implementing SNAP/EBT payment options at Farmers Markets in Minnesota is evident in the statistics. 95 percent of SNAP customers say that they “shop at farmers markets more often because they can use EBT.” Eighty-eight percent say that they “eat more fruits and vegetables because they can use EBT at the markets.”
If we continue to increase accessibility to farmers markets in food deserts around the state, these successful food aid programs can help us to combat obesity in Minnesota.
Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Social Services Poverty Nutrition