ST. PAUL, MN—Representative Sarah Anderson, R-Plymouth, Chair of the House State Government Finance Committee and author of legislation to reform the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority, released the following statement regarding Governor Dayton's comments about the MSFA reform conference committee report at this morning's press conference. The conference committee report was passed out of conference committee on May 19, 2017, signed by all three conferees in the House (GOP Reps. Sarah Anderson and Bob Vogel, and DFL Rep. Julie Sandstede) and two of three conferees in the Senate (GOP Sens. Rosen and Jasinski signed the conference report; DFL Sen. Champion declined).
"If Governor Dayton supported changes to the MSFA, he should not have sent Commissioner Frans—who personally benefited from the use of stadium suites and parking spots—to the MSFA conference committee to voice strong opposition to the compromise bill between the House and the Senate," Rep. Anderson said. "It's puzzling why the Governor would suggest he supported changes to the MSFA, but sent his commissioner to testify against the conference report in the closing days of session. Minnesotans expect accountability, and the legislature will work to deliver it next session to ensure taxpayers are reimbursed for the inappropriate use of these suites and that this never happens again. We hope the governor will join us."
Commissioner Frans testified in the conference committee about the administration's extensive opposition and concerns with the MSFA reform conference committee report that had been agreed upon by House and Senate conferees. Transcripts and timestamps of his testimony can be found below. You can download audio from the May 19, 2017 conference committee by clicking here. All transcriptions are quotes from Commissioner Frans unless otherwise noted.
[38:33] “I just have a couple of concerns I wanted to raise, as we go through this bill, I've had an opportunity to speak with you Chair Anderson, and you Chair Rosen before, I know you’ve also talked with the Governor about the bill and his concerns about the bill.”
[41:28] "To be frank the amount of money that might be saved or redirected here is in several millions of dollars which is not insignificant but really in our view doesn’t warrant the process going through here to go through that process to set aside this money for that special purpose. So we have concerns about the prepayment of bonds from a practical point of view, being able to do it in a way that we make sure that we dot all our I’s and cross all of our T’s. So that’s a problem we still have. I know there’s been some changes to this language but we still have some concerns about that process. "
[44:32] "I’m really concerned about the compensation level, both for the executive director and for the chair. The executive director provision […] should not exceed $135,000. We think that is too low. Don’t have a specific amount in mind, but think that we need to have a higher salary for that position going forward. We don’t think $135,000 is consistent with the sophistication and level of expertise we would hope to attract."
[46:04] "And one of the arrangements in the original deal in 2012 certainly was the two suites and certainly I wouldn’t quarrel necessarily with the legal authority to make these changes, I question whether it’s the right public policy. And I question whether it’s the right time to do it. One of the things that...I’m questioning whether we should make these changes on a Friday night before the end of session when we can look to the new authority or the current authority to come up with some suggestions about how to do this going forward, give them an opportunity to negotiate or come up with some proposals with the work of the Vikings, which I know they’ll be able to work with on something like this."
[55:44] "It’s the idea of setting it up, managing, making those cost payments that just are an added burden that, we feel, is not justified by the amount of money here. I certainly agree with you here, Chair Anderson, that there’s no one that wants to manage this asset or these assets more carefully than you do than the governor. You’re both right on the same mark in the regard. We do, too. We just, we’re just concerned this particular provision is not ready yet. I’m not suggesting this is not even the right thing to do eventually. I’m just concerned this is not the right thing to do right now and we’d like to have more time to work on a mechanism to make sure that whatever we decide to do with that extra suite is THE right thing to do and we make the best movement and make the best decision on that in consultation with the Vikings and in consultation with the Legislature. This is a really important thing to get right, and I couldn’t agree with you more that this is the kind of thing we need to do to make sure that we’re, we get the confidence of the Minnesota public and the confidence of the Legislature back as we should, but I’m just concerned that this is not the right time to do it."
[1:09:04] "The point being is that the current Authority could adopt, take this bill, and adopt most of what’s in the bill and go forward. We do not need a bill to accomplish the reforms. I’m not saying we don’t want a bill, a bill could be really very effective but I do have to say that my recommendation to the governor is that if we are going to get involved in a situation with the suites that is not going to get resolved, that’s gonna take an extended negotiations and a problem, I don’t even know whether we could get this implemented by the next season anyway. So I don’t think we are losing a season, I don’t think we’re gonna get this done in time for the next football season anyway. So the concern is getting it done, you’re right, we’re happy to support that, but we want to make sure it’s done right so we don’t want to add problems to the situation that is working itself out in many ways already. Agreeing that more needs to be done, I couldn’t agree more and the governor could not agree more. There is a limit to what we need to do here, and I just need to bring that up to be clear about that."
[1:12:12] "I mentioned some other concerns we had but those were concerns I've talked about with Chair Rosen and Chair Anderson before. They are issues I think we can talk about and deal with but really concerned about that new provision and getting that understood in a way of getting it implemented. That’s my primary concern. I think that to try to get that implemented right now is a concern."
[1:13:40] Sen. Champion: "Commissioner, you mentioned to a very good question that you had concerns about Section 14. Do you also have concerns about Section 16 and Section 18? Or is Section 16 the only one?"
Frans: "I just mentioned some concerns. Part of, Madam Chair and Senator, I mentioned is that it is all related in terms of the pre-payment of bonds in section 2, with section 16. But also had concerns about the compensation in section 6, section 9, the employee contract for services note, partisan activity in section – what is that – 12, and then the effective date. We need to work on the effective date because we need to have this effective -- the new appointments not, we don’t think we can get that done until July 31st probably because of where we’re at…"
Sen. Champion: "Thank you Madam Chair I just wanted to ask the Commissioner that question because I didn't want to leave the conference committee with the impression that only Section 14 was the only one and I can understand the way it all pulls together and that embodies our concern."
The conference committee report remains at the House desk. The bill can be taken up at any time by the House once session resumes in 2018.
###