Agents Get Your Listings Registered!
NMRA, REALTORS® and the City of Coon Rapids are teaming up to help move housing inventory! The Community Opens initiative will help spur buying activity! We are encouraging all brokers and agents to hold their Coon Rapids real estate listings open all on the same day, allowing homebuyers to walk through a variety of homes!
•Listing Agents: Get your listings registered for showings and stop by NMRA to pick up your free custom Community Wide Open House sign.
•Buyers Agents: Promote Coon Rapids and take your buyers out to multiple homes.
Why Should You Participate?
•Agents will have access to lots of potential buyers, a.k.a. LEADS!!
•Your sellers will be excited about the extra marketing and possible increased traffic that this event will bring to their property.
•Agent will be assisting in promoting the community AND in moving the non-foreclosure and foreclosure inventory through the system - thus gaining positive publicity for their personal business, their company and Realtors in general.
Coon Rapids is OPEN!
Sunday, June 28, 2009
1:00-4:00pm
Please register your listings by filling out this form.
Click here to download a flyer for this event.
Inform your buyers of this event. Flyer for your buyers available here.
Thank you to Deesign Company for sponsoring the signs and sign riders!
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Anti-Bullying Veto is Perfect Example of Wedge Issues
Pawlenty simply vetoed the bill because he didn’t want to give out new “special protected class” status. He is not pro-bullying. He simply doesn’t want to construct additional protected classes. There is an argument to be made that a special class protection undermines attempts to actually combat bullying. Schools already have anti-bullying policies.
If Safe Schools for All Coalition was truly interested in a meaningful and effective piece of anti-bullying legislation they would have left the politics (both sides) of “special protected classes” out of the equation.
Feel free to blame Pawlenty for pandering to the Right but make sure you ignore the construction of this type a legislation as a willful ‘wedge issue’ designed solely to attack and discredit.
If Safe Schools for All Coalition was truly interested in a meaningful and effective piece of anti-bullying legislation they would have left the politics (both sides) of “special protected classes” out of the equation.
Feel free to blame Pawlenty for pandering to the Right but make sure you ignore the construction of this type a legislation as a willful ‘wedge issue’ designed solely to attack and discredit.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Political End Game--High Stakes Poker
OPINION
(05/01/2009) Minnesota House and Senate Democrats lose bargaining chip points everyday between May 1, 2009 and May 18,2009 that they delay finalizing the Tax Bill Conference Committee report, passing both bodies, and an actual presentment to Governor Tim Pawlenty. My theory is they loose bargaining chip points because everyday that goes by will diminish the number of days remaining for true negotiation between the legislature and the Governor.
Quite honestly both the Minnesota House and Minnesota Senate moved quickly to pass Tax Bills that they knew would be largely unacceptable to the Governor. What is likely to emerge from conference committee will be a hybrid of the two bills which will still be--unacceptable!
Leaving very few days left for negotiation might be a risky strategy. Facing a certain veto and very little chance at a House Majority for override (never say never), the DFL is attempting to force the Governor into a corner faced with the choice between his political ambitions (approval rating), a timely end to session (not likely), and tax increases (Taxpayers League Pledge).
However, while the House and Senate DFL have no political downside to forcing a "extra innings," because they are not up for election this year, the Governor presumably does have some downsides to such an occurrence. Yet, the relationship is not completely 1:1. That is a Governor's action to defeat anything is a strong Chief Executive action and it only bolsters his case and his ability to step up on to a political soapbox no matter what the issues let alone tax increases on all Minnesotans!
Yet after May 18, 2009. Should a special session be called, every day that passes could be dangerous for the Governor. Nobody wants an extended session. Plus it will be easier to blame the Governor (one person) than the entire legislature (spread the blame around). So Pawlenty's approval rating could get a positive bump out a Tax Increase Veto but it will fade relatively quickly as quick end to special session cannot be reached. Remember people have became saturated (fed up) with the extend Norm Coleman v. Franken debacle and have no further appetite for further ineptitude from elected officials including an extended Special Session with no end in sight.
Of course, the Governor does not need to call a special session and the legislature itself does not have the authority to convene themselves. The Governor reserves the ability to use unallotment as he did in previous budget years and most recently during December 2008 to balance out the previous budget years. Being forced to dismantle state government agencies budgets by himself could damaging as well.
The DFL will not come unscathed either. Governor Pawlenty is a skilled political tactitioner and should he be forced to unallot he has total control over which agencies take the biggest whack. Two prime targets would be K-12 and HHS. Less likely to whack k-12, since he proposed 2% increases, he would likely go after HHS and would draw 'all the usual suspects' in their outrage and complaint (Sen. Berglin) and the HHS pro-entitlement program communities. However, this plays well to his conservative base, who already believe government is 'bloated' in this area.
Moreover, House and Senate Omnibus bills, 13 or so, have all set their funding to targets achieved only by filling $1.5 and $2 Billion gaps 'new revenue' gaps. So if they are not successful in securing that funding in the tax bill then all the other omnibus (program) bills will suffer.
Conclusion, the Minnesota House,Senate, and Governor are engaged in a high stakes game of poker where political showmanship, political will, scoring points with the electorate is just as much a goal as balancing the budget.
My prediction. No side will come out unscathed and odds at State Level Tax increases are at less than 25% likely. Sin taxes are running well above average and non-tax revenue (fees), where available, whoa...look out!
(05/01/2009) Minnesota House and Senate Democrats lose bargaining chip points everyday between May 1, 2009 and May 18,2009 that they delay finalizing the Tax Bill Conference Committee report, passing both bodies, and an actual presentment to Governor Tim Pawlenty. My theory is they loose bargaining chip points because everyday that goes by will diminish the number of days remaining for true negotiation between the legislature and the Governor.
Quite honestly both the Minnesota House and Minnesota Senate moved quickly to pass Tax Bills that they knew would be largely unacceptable to the Governor. What is likely to emerge from conference committee will be a hybrid of the two bills which will still be--unacceptable!
Leaving very few days left for negotiation might be a risky strategy. Facing a certain veto and very little chance at a House Majority for override (never say never), the DFL is attempting to force the Governor into a corner faced with the choice between his political ambitions (approval rating), a timely end to session (not likely), and tax increases (Taxpayers League Pledge).
However, while the House and Senate DFL have no political downside to forcing a "extra innings," because they are not up for election this year, the Governor presumably does have some downsides to such an occurrence. Yet, the relationship is not completely 1:1. That is a Governor's action to defeat anything is a strong Chief Executive action and it only bolsters his case and his ability to step up on to a political soapbox no matter what the issues let alone tax increases on all Minnesotans!
Yet after May 18, 2009. Should a special session be called, every day that passes could be dangerous for the Governor. Nobody wants an extended session. Plus it will be easier to blame the Governor (one person) than the entire legislature (spread the blame around). So Pawlenty's approval rating could get a positive bump out a Tax Increase Veto but it will fade relatively quickly as quick end to special session cannot be reached. Remember people have became saturated (fed up) with the extend Norm Coleman v. Franken debacle and have no further appetite for further ineptitude from elected officials including an extended Special Session with no end in sight.
Of course, the Governor does not need to call a special session and the legislature itself does not have the authority to convene themselves. The Governor reserves the ability to use unallotment as he did in previous budget years and most recently during December 2008 to balance out the previous budget years. Being forced to dismantle state government agencies budgets by himself could damaging as well.
The DFL will not come unscathed either. Governor Pawlenty is a skilled political tactitioner and should he be forced to unallot he has total control over which agencies take the biggest whack. Two prime targets would be K-12 and HHS. Less likely to whack k-12, since he proposed 2% increases, he would likely go after HHS and would draw 'all the usual suspects' in their outrage and complaint (Sen. Berglin) and the HHS pro-entitlement program communities. However, this plays well to his conservative base, who already believe government is 'bloated' in this area.
Moreover, House and Senate Omnibus bills, 13 or so, have all set their funding to targets achieved only by filling $1.5 and $2 Billion gaps 'new revenue' gaps. So if they are not successful in securing that funding in the tax bill then all the other omnibus (program) bills will suffer.
Conclusion, the Minnesota House,Senate, and Governor are engaged in a high stakes game of poker where political showmanship, political will, scoring points with the electorate is just as much a goal as balancing the budget.
My prediction. No side will come out unscathed and odds at State Level Tax increases are at less than 25% likely. Sin taxes are running well above average and non-tax revenue (fees), where available, whoa...look out!
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Complete Lack of Respect
The Obama Administration, the F.A.A., Gibbs, anyone who knew about the flight owes approximately 20 million people an apology.
Can anyone fathom that not one single person involved in or who had knowledge of the "joy ride" around New York City had even an inkling that it might not be such a good idea. I am all for following orders but someone should have questioned it and the answer should have been 'are you frickin' kidding me?'
All I can say, is whoever authorized and or had knowledge of the flight is guilty of a complete lack of respect if not more!
Minnesota Senate Passes Income Tax Increase
Minnesota Senate Passes Income Tax Increase
How Did Your Senator Vote?
(April 24, 2009) St. Paul--The Minnesota Senate passed a bill on that would, among a myriad of other tax changes, increase all state income tax brackets, although somewhat temporarily. The new rates are for tax years 2009 through 2013, with a return to current rates in the expiration year. The current rates are changed as follows:
Current/New Tax Rate Income
5.35% to 6.00% $0- $31,860
7.05% to 7.70% $31,860 - $126,580
7.85% to 8.50% $126,580 -$250,000
New fourth tier rate is 9.25 percent
o $250,000 for married individuals filing joint returns
o $212,500 for unmarried individuals qualifying as head of household
o $141,250 for unmarried individuals
o $125,000 for married filing separately
These income tax increase do expire beginning after a February forecast with a positive general fund balance projection for that year that exceeds or equals the projected amount of tax revenue produced by the increased tax rates. Who really knows when that will be? The bill is now headed to conference committee where the House and Senate will negotiate a final tax bill; both have to vote to re-pass it before it can be presented to the Governor.
Note: Astute political observers will note the DFL Caucus did intentionally attempt to protect some suburban/vulnerable/swing district DFL members by letting them vote against the taxes increases.
The roll was called, and there were yeas 35 and nays 31, as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anderson –St. Paul (DFL)
Bakk –Cook (DFL)
Berglin—Mpls.(DFL)
Betzold—Fridley (DFL)
Chaudhary—Fridley (DFL)
Clark—St. Cloud (DFL)
Cohen—St. Paul (DFL)
Dibble—Mpls (DFL)
Foley—Coon Rapids (DFL)
Higgins—Mpls. (DFL)
Johnson—Ham Lake (R)
Kelash—Mpls. (DFL)
Kubly—Granite Falls (DFL)
Langseth—Glyndon (DFL)
Latz—St. Louis Park (DFL)
Lourey—Kerrick (DFL)
Marty—Roseville (DFL)
Metzen—South St. Paul (DFL)
Moua—St. Paul (DFL)
Murphy—Red Wing (DFL)
Pappas—St. Paul (DFL)
Pogemiller—Mpls (DFL)
Prettner Solon—Duluth (DFL)
Rest—New Hope (DFL)
Saxhaug—Grand Rapids (DFL)
Scheid—Brooklyn P. (DFL)
Sheran—Mankato (DFL)
Sieben—Newport (DFL)
Skoe—Clearbrook (DFL)
Sparks—Austin (DFL)
Stumpf –Plummer (DFL)
Tomassoni—Chisholm (DFL)
Torres Ray—Mpls. (DFL)
Vickerman—Tracy (DFL)
Wiger—Maplewood (DFL)
Those who voted in the negative were:
Carlson—Eagan (DFL)
Dahle—Northfield (DFL)
Day—Owatonna (R)
Dille—Dassel (R)
Doll—Burnsville (DFL)
Erickson Ropes—Winona (DFL)
Fischbach—Paynesville (R)
Fobbe—Zimmerman (DFL)
Frederickson—New Ulm (R)
Gerlach—Apple Valley (R)
Gimse—Willmar (R)
Hann—Eden Prairie (R)
Ingebrigtsen—Alexandria (R)
Jungbauer-- East Bethel (R)
Koch—Buffalo (R)
Koering—Fort Ripley (R)
Limmer—Maple Grove (R)
Lynch—Rochester (DFL)
Michel—Edina (R)
Olseen—Harris (DFL)
Olson, G. –Minnetrista (R)
Olson, M.—Bemidji (DFL)
Ortman—Chanhassen (R)
Pariseau—Farmington (R)
Robling—Jordan (R)
Rosen—Fairmont (R)
Rummel—White Bear Lake (DFL)
Saltzman—Woodbury (DFL)
Senjem—Rochester (R)
Skogen—Hewitt (DFL)
Vandeveer—Forest Lake (R)
How Did Your Senator Vote?
(April 24, 2009) St. Paul--The Minnesota Senate passed a bill on that would, among a myriad of other tax changes, increase all state income tax brackets, although somewhat temporarily. The new rates are for tax years 2009 through 2013, with a return to current rates in the expiration year. The current rates are changed as follows:
Current/New Tax Rate Income
5.35% to 6.00% $0- $31,860
7.05% to 7.70% $31,860 - $126,580
7.85% to 8.50% $126,580 -$250,000
New fourth tier rate is 9.25 percent
o $250,000 for married individuals filing joint returns
o $212,500 for unmarried individuals qualifying as head of household
o $141,250 for unmarried individuals
o $125,000 for married filing separately
These income tax increase do expire beginning after a February forecast with a positive general fund balance projection for that year that exceeds or equals the projected amount of tax revenue produced by the increased tax rates. Who really knows when that will be? The bill is now headed to conference committee where the House and Senate will negotiate a final tax bill; both have to vote to re-pass it before it can be presented to the Governor.
Note: Astute political observers will note the DFL Caucus did intentionally attempt to protect some suburban/vulnerable/swing district DFL members by letting them vote against the taxes increases.
The roll was called, and there were yeas 35 and nays 31, as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anderson –St. Paul (DFL)
Bakk –Cook (DFL)
Berglin—Mpls.(DFL)
Betzold—Fridley (DFL)
Chaudhary—Fridley (DFL)
Clark—St. Cloud (DFL)
Cohen—St. Paul (DFL)
Dibble—Mpls (DFL)
Foley—Coon Rapids (DFL)
Higgins—Mpls. (DFL)
Johnson—Ham Lake (R)
Kelash—Mpls. (DFL)
Kubly—Granite Falls (DFL)
Langseth—Glyndon (DFL)
Latz—St. Louis Park (DFL)
Lourey—Kerrick (DFL)
Marty—Roseville (DFL)
Metzen—South St. Paul (DFL)
Moua—St. Paul (DFL)
Murphy—Red Wing (DFL)
Pappas—St. Paul (DFL)
Pogemiller—Mpls (DFL)
Prettner Solon—Duluth (DFL)
Rest—New Hope (DFL)
Saxhaug—Grand Rapids (DFL)
Scheid—Brooklyn P. (DFL)
Sheran—Mankato (DFL)
Sieben—Newport (DFL)
Skoe—Clearbrook (DFL)
Sparks—Austin (DFL)
Stumpf –Plummer (DFL)
Tomassoni—Chisholm (DFL)
Torres Ray—Mpls. (DFL)
Vickerman—Tracy (DFL)
Wiger—Maplewood (DFL)
Those who voted in the negative were:
Carlson—Eagan (DFL)
Dahle—Northfield (DFL)
Day—Owatonna (R)
Dille—Dassel (R)
Doll—Burnsville (DFL)
Erickson Ropes—Winona (DFL)
Fischbach—Paynesville (R)
Fobbe—Zimmerman (DFL)
Frederickson—New Ulm (R)
Gerlach—Apple Valley (R)
Gimse—Willmar (R)
Hann—Eden Prairie (R)
Ingebrigtsen—Alexandria (R)
Jungbauer-- East Bethel (R)
Koch—Buffalo (R)
Koering—Fort Ripley (R)
Limmer—Maple Grove (R)
Lynch—Rochester (DFL)
Michel—Edina (R)
Olseen—Harris (DFL)
Olson, G. –Minnetrista (R)
Olson, M.—Bemidji (DFL)
Ortman—Chanhassen (R)
Pariseau—Farmington (R)
Robling—Jordan (R)
Rosen—Fairmont (R)
Rummel—White Bear Lake (DFL)
Saltzman—Woodbury (DFL)
Senjem—Rochester (R)
Skogen—Hewitt (DFL)
Vandeveer—Forest Lake (R)
House Tax Bill Blasts Homeowners Narrowly Passes
How Did Your Representative Vote?
(April 25, 2009) St. Paul--One day after the Minnesota Senate voted to raise income taxes on all Minnesotan’s, the Minnesota House Tax bill that increases income tax on top income earners to 9 percent, eliminates the mortgage interest deduction (replacing with a credit worth half as much), removes the deductibility of property taxes, eliminates the relative homestead market value credit (MVC), increases cigarette taxes by 54 cents, increases drink taxes by 3 to 5 cents, and caps the child care tax credit at $200, narrowly passed the House Floor.
Again, Democrat Farmer Labor caucus leaders allowed (18) suburban, vulnerable, or swing district legislators to vote against the tax increases but insured they had just enough votes to pass the bill. Headed to conference committee REALTORS® and the general public are urged to pay extra special attention to the process, negotiations, and resulting language changes from here on out. Of course, whatever comes out of conference committee will likely still have a number of provisions the Governor still finds unreasonable. Suffice to say legislators and the Governor still have their work cut out for them. While one can only speculate as to the intricacies of the final package, glimpses at what is to come for the end game have certainly started to emerge.
Note: Bold below are ‘crossover DFLers’ (DFLers who voted no).
Who Represents You?
How Did Your Representative Vote?
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anzelc
Atkins
Bigham
Bly
Brown
Brynaert
Carlson
Champion
Clark
Davnie
Dill
Eken
Falk
Faust
Fritz
Greiling
Hansen
Hausman
Haws
Hayden
Hilstrom
Hilty
Hornstein
Hortman
Hosch
Huntley
Johnson
Juhnke
Kahn
Kalin
Kelliher
Knuth
Koenen
Laine
Lenczewski
Liebling
Lieder
Lillie
Loeffler
Mahoney
Mariani
Marquart
Morrow
Mullery
Murphy, E.
Murphy, M.
Nelson
Newton
Norton
Olin
Paymar
Persell
Peterson
Reinert
Rukavina
Sailer
Sertich
Simon
Slawik
Slocum
Solberg
Thao
Thissen
Tillberry
Wagenius
Ward
Welti
Winkler
Those who voted in the negative were:
Abeler
Anderson, B.
Anderson, P.
Anderson, S.
Beard
Benson
Brod
Buesgens
Bunn
Cornish
Davids
Dean
Demmer
Dettmer
Dittrich
Doepke
Doty
Downey
Drazkowski
Eastlund
Emmer
Gardner
Garofalo
Gottwalt
Gunther
Hackbarth
Hamilton
Holberg
Hoppe
Howes
Jackson
Kath
Kelly
Kiffmeyer
Kohls
Lanning
Loon
Mack
Magnus
Masin
McFarlane
McNamara
Morgan
Murdock
Nornes
Obermueller
Otremba
Pelowski
Peppin
Poppe
Rosenthal
Ruud
Sanders
Scalze
Scott
Seifert
Severson
Shimanski
Smith
Sterner
Swails
Torkelson
Urdahl
Westrom
Zellers
How Did Your Representative Vote?
(April 25, 2009) St. Paul--One day after the Minnesota Senate voted to raise income taxes on all Minnesotan’s, the Minnesota House Tax bill that increases income tax on top income earners to 9 percent, eliminates the mortgage interest deduction (replacing with a credit worth half as much), removes the deductibility of property taxes, eliminates the relative homestead market value credit (MVC), increases cigarette taxes by 54 cents, increases drink taxes by 3 to 5 cents, and caps the child care tax credit at $200, narrowly passed the House Floor.
Again, Democrat Farmer Labor caucus leaders allowed (18) suburban, vulnerable, or swing district legislators to vote against the tax increases but insured they had just enough votes to pass the bill. Headed to conference committee REALTORS® and the general public are urged to pay extra special attention to the process, negotiations, and resulting language changes from here on out. Of course, whatever comes out of conference committee will likely still have a number of provisions the Governor still finds unreasonable. Suffice to say legislators and the Governor still have their work cut out for them. While one can only speculate as to the intricacies of the final package, glimpses at what is to come for the end game have certainly started to emerge.
Note: Bold below are ‘crossover DFLers’ (DFLers who voted no).
Who Represents You?
How Did Your Representative Vote?
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anzelc
Atkins
Bigham
Bly
Brown
Brynaert
Carlson
Champion
Clark
Davnie
Dill
Eken
Falk
Faust
Fritz
Greiling
Hansen
Hausman
Haws
Hayden
Hilstrom
Hilty
Hornstein
Hortman
Hosch
Huntley
Johnson
Juhnke
Kahn
Kalin
Kelliher
Knuth
Koenen
Laine
Lenczewski
Liebling
Lieder
Lillie
Loeffler
Mahoney
Mariani
Marquart
Morrow
Mullery
Murphy, E.
Murphy, M.
Nelson
Newton
Norton
Olin
Paymar
Persell
Peterson
Reinert
Rukavina
Sailer
Sertich
Simon
Slawik
Slocum
Solberg
Thao
Thissen
Tillberry
Wagenius
Ward
Welti
Winkler
Those who voted in the negative were:
Abeler
Anderson, B.
Anderson, P.
Anderson, S.
Beard
Benson
Brod
Buesgens
Bunn
Cornish
Davids
Dean
Demmer
Dettmer
Dittrich
Doepke
Doty
Downey
Drazkowski
Eastlund
Emmer
Gardner
Garofalo
Gottwalt
Gunther
Hackbarth
Hamilton
Holberg
Hoppe
Howes
Jackson
Kath
Kelly
Kiffmeyer
Kohls
Lanning
Loon
Mack
Magnus
Masin
McFarlane
McNamara
Morgan
Murdock
Nornes
Obermueller
Otremba
Pelowski
Peppin
Poppe
Rosenthal
Ruud
Sanders
Scalze
Scott
Seifert
Severson
Shimanski
Smith
Sterner
Swails
Torkelson
Urdahl
Westrom
Zellers
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Senate Tax Plan = Tax Everyone!
The Minnesota Senate Tax plan is even worse than one might imagine. It plans to raise $2.2 Billion in taxes. Mostly, by raising income taxes on everyone! That's right...everyone!
Income Current Rate Proposed Rate
0- 31,860 5.35 6.0
31,860 - 126,580 7.05 7.7
126,580 - 250,000 7.85 8.5
Creating a new 4th tier
141,250 Single
212,500 Head of Household
250,000 Jointly
would all pay 9.25% amongst the highest income tax rate in the country! Only California and Rhode Island have higher income taxes on the wealthy. Even if we, for the sake of argument, don't even consider the evils of a proposed tax increase on the wealthy, this plan is extends to every taxpayer! Everyone who pays taxes will pay more. Where does it end?
Now I know there are those out there that are going to make excuses for it and try to explain it away, usually by say "if it means better schools, roads, etc then I am all for it." That's fine to say once. It's just not reality. Reality is that Minnesota's GF sepnding has doubled in the last 10 years from 18 B to 38 B. I don't know business or individual who's budget doubles every ten years. So you say we can't do it with cuts alone and I say 'yes we can!'
Income Current Rate Proposed Rate
0- 31,860 5.35 6.0
31,860 - 126,580 7.05 7.7
126,580 - 250,000 7.85 8.5
Creating a new 4th tier
141,250 Single
212,500 Head of Household
250,000 Jointly
would all pay 9.25% amongst the highest income tax rate in the country! Only California and Rhode Island have higher income taxes on the wealthy. Even if we, for the sake of argument, don't even consider the evils of a proposed tax increase on the wealthy, this plan is extends to every taxpayer! Everyone who pays taxes will pay more. Where does it end?
Now I know there are those out there that are going to make excuses for it and try to explain it away, usually by say "if it means better schools, roads, etc then I am all for it." That's fine to say once. It's just not reality. Reality is that Minnesota's GF sepnding has doubled in the last 10 years from 18 B to 38 B. I don't know business or individual who's budget doubles every ten years. So you say we can't do it with cuts alone and I say 'yes we can!'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)