…is not about me as a candidate.

I am not and will not be a candidate for Mayor.

Nobody has asked me to be one.

I don’t desire to be one.

I would be a horrible candidate.

And, I would lose.

I don’t care to lose.

I do care, though, deeply about St. Paul and its future.

In my career I have been honored and privileged to serve two of St. Paul’s most recent Mayors.

While I have not had the honor and privilege to serve our current Mayor, he is someone I consider a friend.

While I did not support his initial election, I have cast votes for his re-election.

If memory serves me correctly, I may have contributed to his re-election campaign.

If someone bothers to look that up and I have not, then let me at least live by the caveat that I shared in writing “…if memory serves me correctly…”

Mayor Chris Coleman is a good person.  I say this as someone who worked alongside him on issues of importance to St. Paul’s future.  We didn’t always agree or see eye-to-eye but he operated with integrity and class.

I have been on the opposite side of him on some issues during his tenure as Mayor.  But, I will never forget his kindness and courage in standing up for me at times when other colleagues of his on the City Council were focused on knocking me down.

I think he has done a good job as Mayor.  I disagree with any number of his initiatives, his policies and how those policies have been promoted, pursued and enacted.

There has never been a doubt for a minute about Chris Coleman loving St. Paul in a way that would be difficult to compare with any other former St. Paul Mayor.  It is in his veins and in his heart and his DNA.

The upcoming race to replace him is not about Chris Coleman, however.

Unfortunately, given what we have heard so far – and largely not heard – from the currently announced candidates for Mayor one could be forgiven for believing they intend to be Chris Coleman’s 4^th term of Mayor.

Which, at this stage of the game, means they are likely to pursue the same policies with regard to taxes and spending, business regulation, the development of the Ford Plant, the approach to enforcing quality of life crimes, any number of major development projects currently pending before the City and countless other issues.

St. Paul’s next Mayor can’t simply be a carbon copy of Chris Coleman.

Nor can she or he be clones of Norm Coleman of 1993 or Randy Kelly of 2001.

Times change.  Times have changed.

While at the core the issues of keeping safe, clean and affordable have remained remarkably consistent the approach to how to do these things successfully have changed in many ways.

As I scan the current field for Mayor of St. Paul I see four men who are accomplished, have given back to the community, are successful in their own way and each loves St. Paul deeply.

But, truth be told, those are the minimum qualifications for any candidate for Mayor of St. Paul.

Representative Tim Mahoney, in a commentary published recently in the Pioneer Press, articulated a critical point:  Any candidate for Mayor of St. Paul must be willing and prepared to state their positions on every critical issue facing the City publicly and on the record.

So, as I consider my campaign for Mayor of St. Paul it has absolutely nothing to do with me being a candidate.

Or, me actually having a candidate in, or out, of the race for Mayor.

It’s about me finding a candidate that I can support for the next Mayor of St. Paul.

Someone who isn’t afraid to take public stands on controversial issues.  Who is prepared to tell me where he or she stands on the City’s role in public education.  Whether the City should take a breath with respect to the development of the Ford Plant site to ensure that 22^nd Century thinking – not 21^st Century thinking – is guiding that development.

I want to know where she or he stands on enforcing the laws of the City, to be sure.

I also want to know where they stand in support of the men and women of our St. Paul Police Department.

What are they going to do to address the great disparity in pay and benefits between St. Paul Police and their suburban counterparts?

What is their strategy for recruitment and retention to continue to City’s strong tradition of putting the best and brightest on our city streets?

How will they make it clear to officers that their Mayor has their back when it comes to enforcing the law on the small things, as well as the big things?

I want to know, publicly, where candidates stand with respect to the myriad of regulations the City has, and will have, imposed on small, medium and large business in St. Paul.

I want to understand their plans for making downtown as safe and clean and affordable as possible for everyone, including what is their plan for upgrading the City skyway system and making it a safe and enjoyable experience for employees, visitors and residents.

What are their ideas for riverfront development where we actually have restaurants and nightlife and activity that honors our riverfront heritage and encourages engagement by tourists and visitors on both sides of the downtown riverfront.

I want to know what their strategy is for supporting minority business development and growth in the City, including along the Mississippi Riverfront.  What resources, both public and private, will they harness to encourage minority business start-ups – and their success—throughout the City.

I want to know what they believe is the appropriate role of government when it comes to engagement with the private sector and what are their strategies and tactics as it relates to taxes and spending.

I want to know specifically ideas about where they would reorganize and reengineer and reimagine St. Paul City government for the 22^nd Century.

And, I want to know what bold ideas, strategies and tactics they intend to develop and deploy to address the divide St. Paul, and other American cities, continue to face on a myriad of social and cultural issues.

My campaign for Mayor isn’t about my candidacy.

It is about finding candidates who understand that putting forward a vision of where they intend to lead the City is the first step towards informing us of what they believe the role of the Mayor is in the 21^st Century.

As they help lead the City forward towards the 22^nd Century.

Elections have consequences.  We all have an obligation to ask the questions we have of the candidates running for Mayor of St. Paul.

They all have an obligation of actually responding to those questions – and also, of sharing with us something more than a campaign slogan or their commitment to plow the snow or fill the potholes.

If we are unwilling to do our part in democracy before an election to get engaged, ask the questions and see the answers we have nobody to blame for our dissatisfaction with the results other than ourselves.

While nobody currently running for Mayor, or likely any of those seriously contemplating running for Mayor, could care less about what I think about their candidacy or who I will support for Mayor — it is important to me.

I am a taxpayer.  I have been involved in this community.  I have children who were born in this City and have grown up in this City.

I have a stake in St. Paul’s future.

It is that stake which grounds me and demands I continue to seek answers to where current candidates stand on the issues and, if left wanting, seek out others who may have the interest and potential to lead the City forward with a vision they will share and stand upon.

In the end, none of this may matter as my concerns and my issues could very well be nothing more than a footnote in the campaign to replace Chris Coleman as Mayor.

But, it matters to me.

And, as I tell my kids as often as I can, if it matters to them they have an obligation to take a stand.

This is my stand.

 

 

 

By the time I am finished completing this blog post Donald Trump will have been America’s Mayor for a little over nine days.

During that time he has embarked upon a plan of action with Executive Orders that mirrors nearly everything he said he would do while he was out on the campaign trail.

This past week I have had numerous conversations with friends on the left, those on the right and, for sanity and balance sake, my own two children.

Those who supported Trump are pleased as punch that he is doing exactly what he promised he would do.

From the perspective of voters who cast their vote based upon those promises I imagine they are pretty pleased that a politician is doing exactly what he said he would do.

Those who opposed Trump are, predictably, angry and outraged and a number of other words that ultimately morph into the word “apoplectic.”

Thankfully my 16 year old son and my 14 year old daughter pushed the discussion further than soundbites.

They asked me if I read the Executive Order:  I had not.

They asked me if I agreed with it:  I had to be honest that from what I heard I disagreed with much of its substance.

They asked what I was going to do about it:  Sometimes my kids can make me feel like I don’t do enough to change the world they live in for the better.

While I really don’t feel compelled to write this disclaimer I find that by doing so the people who read these posts may approach them with a bit more open-mindedness if I don’t.

I did not vote for Donald Trump.

Nor did I vote for Hillary Clinton.

My candidate for President lost by roughly 134.5 million votes.

Now, the fact that my candidate lost so badly doesn’t upset me all that much.  Candidly, I am a big fan of American democracy.  I think that whoever wins the presidential race generally ends up not being nearly as good as we hoped they would be nor as bad as we hoped they would be.

I am okay with that happy medium.  In the end, it is the system of American governance that ensures that no President, regardless of how much – or little – they won by can ever singlehandedly create catastrophe in America.

What I am not okay with, I admit, are stupid policy decisions that are not just proposed – but implemented.

Case in point is President Trumps recent Executive Order related to immigration.

Now, I had thought I might offer a studied and sober analysis of his Executive Order.  But, then I rejected that notion because like most things on the internet of things nobody really wants to pay attention to facts.

In a world where outrage is spread with 140 letters on what is an estimated 317 million Twitter accounts I already ran out of letters in this sentence alone.

Instead, I’d like to offer this perspective.

Among the myriad of problems with Trump’s Executive Order the most egregious is drafting it with the input of guys who are political hacks and ideological activists rather than people who America has entrusted to protect and preserve our nation.

Furthermore, signing an Executive Order that has such impact on American life – inside and outside of our borders – without some public vetting is simply, in a word, dumb.

Bigly dumb, I might add.

U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsay Graham have issued a statement that I believe, most significantly, addresses the most troubling aspect of Trump’s Executive Order.

“Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all that is decent and exceptional about our nation. 

“It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security. 

“Such a hasty process risks harmful results. We should not stop green-card holders from returning to the country they call home. We should not stop those who have served as interpreters for our military and diplomats from seeking refuge in the country they risked their lives to help. And we should not turn our backs on those refugees who have been shown through extensive vetting to pose no demonstrable threat to our nation, and who have suffered unspeakable horrors, most of them women and children.

“Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. At this very moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security.”

I suspect in the hours and days ahead the Trump Administration will ultimately walk back various elements of its Executive Order.  I suspect they will do so quietly and move onto the next of his campaign promises.

In the meantime, those who despise him and those who adore him will rage the night fantastic on social media, airport protests and the like.

As I shared with my children, and those who are among the 134.5 million people who did not vote for my candidate for President, this is the messy work of democracy in America.

Democracy wasn’t intended to be easy or pretty or capable of solving problems with a swipe of a pen or the insert of a ballot into a machine.

It is, and was and will be the use of all of the tools of the arsenal of democracy to continue to move America forward into a next decade and new century and beyond.

Trumps immigration order?

It is, as I often referred to laws that were drafted during my time in government, written with a crayon.

It’s time to get the serious voices into the room with the order and fashion something that upholds American values and ideals and accomplishes the task of protecting and preserving our country.

And, to ask my kid’s question about what I am going to do about it, here is my answer:

I am going to learn everything I can about it.  I am going to get the facts from as many sources as possible.  And, I am going to encourage them to do the same and we will gather around the kitchen table and talk about what we believe we have learned.

We will talk about what we think we should do.

Then, we will do it.

For as long as there have been Mayors there have been projects to complete and build before they leave City Hall.

Saint Paul and its current Mayor are no different.

Yet, there are three specific projects that ought to be have the “pause” button pressed to permit his successor, whoever he or she may be, to re-evaluate the opportunity before the taxpayers of St. Paul.

The first is the St. Paul Ford Plant property.

From 1925 to 2011 the Ford Plant was as much of the fabric of the City of St. Paul as any icon it has had since being incorporated in 1854.

While the City had known for several years that the plant was in trouble few could have envisioned that it would cease to exist completely as a manufacturer of Ford Trucks.

Fewer still would have imagined the complete removal of all of its structures and in its place a blank canvas of 135 acres of land.

To City planners the idea of reengineering 135 acres of land in an urban community is like sending a kid into a candy store without a spending limit.

Which, unfortunately, is exactly where the process of visualizing the future of the St. Paul Ford Plant has ended up.

It’s not that City planners, prodded on my politicians eager to put their imprimatur on the vast swath of land, have done anything wrong.

It’s that the process they have used, once again, was created to achieve their pre-determined vision.

On a City website where information about the planning process of the Ford Plant has been housed there is this paragraph:

“As Ford’s former Twin Cities Assembly Plant is redeveloped in the coming years, a 21^st Century Community will emerge on the 135 acres of land situated along the Mississippi River. Saint Paul residents have spoken loud and clear: this site will be a livable, mixed use neighborhood that looks to the future with clean technologies and high quality design for energy, buildings and infrastructure. This site will support walking, biking and transit, and provide services, jobs and activities that every generation can enjoy. A 21st Century Community is about to unfold.”

The sentence that stands out is this one:  “Saint Paul residents have spoken loud and clear: this site will be a livable, mixed use neighborhood that looks to the future with clean technologies and high quality design for energy, buildings and infrastructure.”

Whether written by a planner – or a politician – the sentence oversells the participation of St. Paul residents in the process and undersells the significant impact any development will have on existing residents that surround the property.

So much so that if one were to poll St. Paul residents about anything other than the name of the former automaker it would likely not register a blip on the radar screen.

However, the impact on City residents, particularly those that live within its radius in St. Paul, and those who will live within its radius in Minneapolis, has had virtually no public discussion.

The second is the current bid to construct a luxury hotel on the site of the former West Publishing building on the banks of the Mississippi River.

Long considered the most desirable piece of developable property along the Mississippi River

Now, after resisting calls for decades to raze the property it is virtually complete.

Not, however, without Ramsey County officials underestimating the cost of demolition by nearly $6 million.

Technically, the City of St. Paul doesn’t own the property.   Ramsey County owns the property.

But, technically, and accurately, St. Paul taxpayers are the ones most directly impacted by the property.

One could be excused for wondering why, after decades of anticipation that only one developer – and one outside of the State of Minnesota – has presented a proposal for development.

And that the proposal is, per published media reports, something along these lines:

“Ramsey County property management director Bruce Thompson has said the proposal includes commercial office space, a five-star hotel, housing units, hospitality and event space as well as retail and restaurant space and supporting parking, according to county spokesman John Siqveland.”

Heather Worthington, deputy county manager and co-chair of the task-force assigned to guide the process had this to say about what guidelines were issued to prospective developers:

“In our request for proposals, we called for a ‘bold and architecturally significant redevelopment’ and that’s what we are looking forward to for this iconic and vital site.”

Remarkably wrong with all of this is the notion that downtown St. Paul, already seeing a growing level of commercial vacancies, should now add additional commercial office space to its inventory.

That, along with the fact that only one developer has submitted a proposal to develop this one-third mile of scenic real estate, calls for an immediate re-evaluation of the process.

And, telling the current developers and their proposal that the process is going to start all over again.

The third is the vacant lot that sits directly west of the Xcel Energy Center.

In 2014 the Pioneer Press reported on the City’s selection of a developer for city-owned 2.4-acre site.

“Opus Development Co., partnering with the Greco property management company, will develop the city-owned, 2.4-acre parking lot on West Seventh Street, pending approval from the city council. Its mixed-use development plan will also include a public plaza.”

That same story offered the following paragraph to describe the site:

“The site is bounded by Smith Avenue, Kellogg Boulevard and West Seventh and Fifth streets. It sits at the gateway to both downtown St. Paul and the West Seventh Street business corridor.”

In 2014 the vision that Opus and Greco presented, and that City officials seized upon, may have made some sense.

A new hotel and a vision to behold when visitors drove into the City from the West seems bold.

Perhaps not as bold as the decision that City officials had when they decided that the structure in front of the 2.4-acre site should be an ugly parking ramp.

But, that’s for a different post.

What has changed that should cause the City to tear up its existing development agreement with Opus Development?

It’s called the RiverCentre Parking ramp.

A May 2016 story in the Pioneer Press stated:

“A study found the nearly 50-year-old ramp on Kellogg Boulevard has about five years before it should be replaced. Visit St. Paul, the convention authority that owns the roughly 1,500-stall ramp, is asking the Legislature for $1.9 million to plan a replacement ramp, which would cost about $50 million, and a potential expansion of the Roy Wilkins Auditorium. The new ramp could prove key if a convention center hotel ever comes to town.”

I am not, I admit an architect.

But, even someone who is not an architect can tell you that replacing the RiverCentre ramp is not a $50 million project.

Perhaps it is closer to $80 to $100 million.

What is of concern to me, however, isn’t that the ramp needs to be torn down and replaced.

It’s where it should be rebuilt.

The place it should be rebuilt is not on a glorious piece of property overlooking the Mississippi River.

On the contrary.

The development envisioned for the 2.4-acre piece of vacant land across from the Xcel Energy Center should be relocated to the site of the current RiverCentre Parking Ramp.

And, the RiverCentre Parking Ramp should be built on the site of the 2.4-acre piece of vacant land across from the Xcel Energy Center.

Both projects are needed and necessary.

Unfortunately, the City has their proposed locations reversed.

It’s time to reverse them to what makes sense.

A parking ramp across the street from Xcel Energy Center.

A hotel development on the banks of the Mississippi River where a parking ramp has stood for 50 years.

Each of these development projects are going to impact the City of St. Paul and regional residents and taxpayers well past the 21^st Century.

Which is exactly how we ought to be planning each of them.

Not for the 21^st Century – but for the 22^nd Century.

All too often Americans are criticized for their concept of “placemaking” being based on short-term vision.

Honestly, in the world of city building, 80 years is short-term vision.

Long-term vision is looking at the assets we have and asking ourselves will it sustain the vision of our City 180 years from now.

In each case with the currently proposed concepts for the Ford Plant – for the old West Publishing site – and for the 2.4 acres of vacant land across from the Xcel Energy Center – the answer is a resounding “We don’t know.”

Because we don’t know we shouldn’t allow either of these projects to proceed forward with any amount of haste and urgency.

St. Paul has taken over 160 years to get to the point of where it is today with 53 Mayors – countless City Councilmembers and City Planners – and the idea we need to shove all these projects out the door before January 2018 makes absolutely no sense.

Each of these projects are important to future generations beyond those that currently live in the 21^st Century.

Let’s start talking about building a City for the 22^nd Century.

“If I was old enough, I would run for Mayor.”

– Maisie Mische, Age 14

This past weekend, hours after the crowd of 100,000 had dispersed from the grounds of the State Capitol, my 14 year old Daughter and I were out walking the dog.

As often happens during our walks we get to talking about the world around us.

On this particular walk my Daughter raised with me her frustration with a series of Tweets she had read from people, mostly men, who were mocking the efforts and actions of those who were involved in the many Women’s March events throughout the country.

In particular she was frustrated and upset that the actions of millions of women (and, to be fair, a lot of men) who came together for many different reasons would be so mockingly dismissed because it didn’t fit someone’s particular political or philosophical ideology.

Somewhere between the dog completing her required #1 and # 2 bathroom obligations the conversation continued about the value and importance of getting involved in the world around us.

I suggested to the Daughter that as important as marches, demonstrations and protests were and are in the exercise of free speech and democracy they were only one part of the platform of civic duty and responsibility.

I offered up that my experience and career led me to believe that without political power there is little that can be done to affect real, long-term change.

And, that real political power in America requires holding the levels of power of elective office.

I expressed my amazement and awe that 100,000 people had gathered on the Capitol mall of the Capitol City of St. Paul, Minnesota to give raw power and voice to women.

I then asked her, “Maisie, do you know how many candidates there are for Mayor in St. Paul that are women?”

Her response was, “I think two.”

My response, “I think none.”

She pondered that for a while as the dog continued to believe that each tree along our route was likely the home of a squirrel that needed to be eaten or, at the very least, barked at.

She finally said, not so much to me, as she said to herself:

“If I was old enough, I would run for Mayor.”

I’ve spent the better part of my life in and around government and politics.  From a ragged college activist to a city councilmember to a Chief of Staff in the United States Senate and a lot of other things in between I have always believed in the power of political activism to change the world.

But, I have never believed that activism without access to the levers of power in government would ever, by itself, lead to sustainable, structural change in America.

I think history supports my belief.

I am struck by the fact that the City of St. Paul has an open Mayoral seat for the first time in 12 years and there is not a single publicly announced female candidate for Mayor.

I know it isn’t because there is a lack of incredible, qualified, accomplished and powerful women in St. Paul.

They are Democrats and Republicans and Independents and liberals and conservatives and moderates.

And, they are everywhere.

Owning and leading business.  Heading up our colleges and universities.  Serving in leadership roles in law enforcement and public safety.  Serving in elective office at every level in St. Paul.

Yet, among a city of nearly 300,000 there is not a single candidate for Mayor who is a woman.

Which I find both frustrating and appalling.

There was immense political potential this past weekend when 100,000 gathered in St. Paul.

I say political potential and not political power because I am not sure that the one-day activism of a hundred thousand is sustainable over the next four years.

There are four men running for Mayor.  Accomplished men, to be sure.

But, in the 163 years since St. Paul was incorporated there has not been a single woman who has served as the Mayor of the City.

During that time there have been 53 Mayors.

All men.

No women.

In a city where women make up over 51% of the population that simply makes no sense.

So, here’s my offer to any woman who is considering running for Mayor of St. Paul:

• I don’t care whether you are a Democrat or Republican. After all, the race for Mayor is non-partisan.
• I don’t care whether you are a Liberal or Conservative or a Moderate.
• I don’t care whether you have ever run for anything in your life.

What I care about is that you are interested in considering running for Mayor.  If you are let me know.

I may no longer know anything about politics in St. Paul.  Time has likely passed me by.  My days of being somebody that anybody cared about are long past me.

But, I know something about trying to make a difference.

I might have some thoughts and ideas about how to raise money – put together a campaign organization – create a platform – develop a message – and run a competitive campaign.

If you choose to run I may or may not decide to support you for Mayor.

But, you can be sure that I will do all I can to help you make a decision about whether a campaign for Mayor is the right choice for you.

Maybe at the end of the day there are no women willing to run for Mayor of St. Paul because too many people say that the field is set.

Or, there are no women who wish to run because they believe that the process and system is stacked against them.

The former should not be the case even if the latter is true.

And, to make sure the former is not the case the only way to make the latter false is for men – and women – to step up to encourage and support women who believe they have something to offer as a candidate for Mayor of St. Paul.

My 14 year old Daughter is ready to be the first volunteer for your campaign.

St. Paul taxpayers recently received 80,000 new blue recycling bins from Eureka Recycling.

While that seems like a nice thing to do I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that those same taxpayers footed the bill for those new bins to the tune of nearly $4 million.

I like recycling.  I think it’s a worthy thing to do.  I could be better at it.  I suspect most of us could be better at it.

I do appreciate the idea that we don’t need to separate items any longer for recycling.  I never did think that made much sense.

Now, sadly, the new contract that the City has with Eureka Recycling isn’t exactly something that makes sense, either.

For example, the new system requires homeowners to have these fancy new blue recycling bins in exactly the right spot, at exactly the right angle at exactly the right time for Eureka trucks to actually be able to use their automatic truck systems to pick them up.

If they aren’t in exactly the right spot, at exactly the right angle and at exactly the right time they cannot be picked up based on the contract that Eureka Recycling has with the City of St. Paul.

I swear to the God of Recycling I did not make this up!

And, to prove it, here is a quote from an official from Eureka Recycling from a recent story in the Pioneer Press:

“We’re noticing that a really high percentage of carts aren’t in the right placement for the automated trucks to service them,” said Lynn Hoffman, a co-president at Eureka Recycling. “The carts need to be at the alley line, and they need to be away from garages — about an arm’s length, or two feet — and away from cars and garbage cans, so the little grabber hands can get around the carts and not damage (anything).”

So, you see, the “little grabber hands” aren’t the problem here.

It’s the 80,000 households in St. Paul that need a crash course in knowing exactly where their alley line is…that the can has to be exactly “about an arm’s length, or two feet” …and wait…wait…it also must be “away from cars and garbage cans.”

You got that?

Seriously, let’s help those “little grabber hands” so they can pick up your recycling bin.

The one, by the way, that has a radio frequency identification device in it.

Or, as the cool kids call it…RFID.

Didn’t know you had one of those in your blue recycling bin?

Don’t worry.

Neither did 79,999 of your neighbors throughout St. Paul.

But, you are now the proud owner of that chip and the blue recycling bin it comes in thanks to the $4 million of our money that city and county government paid to have planted in your yard.

Don’t care about whether the RFID chip can track details of your recycling habits?  Or lack of them?

Okay, great.  Good for you.

Maybe not so good for you when the City Council ultimately passes an ordinance that will begin creating an entire series of laws for recycling that can, and will, utilize the technology that will enable that RFID to see if you are following that ordinance.

And, if you aren’t, cite you for failing to abide by said ordinance.

Think they won’t do that?

Well, okay, then wonder why they would need to have such a chip in a recycling bin?

To keep someone from stealing the bin?

I guess that could be the reason.

But, after living in St. Paul for more than 20 years I have had my garage broken into and stuff stolen from my car parked in the front of my house and stuff even stolen from my yard in the middle of the day.

None of the things that were ever stolen had the word “garbage” or “recycling” or “bin” in them.

In response to people who have been asking why the City or Eureka Recycling wouldn’t have bothered to communicate that such a tracking device is actually in the bin here’s the response from the City:

“The microchip actually isn’t being used,” said Joe Ellickson, a spokesman for Public Works. “We don’t actually have any plans to utilize this, and if we did, we’d go through a public process.”

Now I am not sure that the words “public process” means what the Public Works spokesman thinks they mean.

Because I think they mean that the public would have been told about a tracking chip being put into a recycling bin that someday is going to be used to track.

And, the phrase “We don’t actually have any plans to utilize this…” are reminiscent of my days when I was involved with the Nuclear Freeze Movement.

It was the government’s response about why we needed to have so many nuclear weapons.

It wasn’t that we actually had any plans to use them we just needed them in case we needed to use them.

So, what the Public Works spokesman is saying is that they will only use the RFID chip when they need them.

You know, like as a deterrent against people not recycling the right way.

Or, maybe when they aren’t putting their bins “about an arm’s length, or two feet – and away from cars and garbage cans, so the little grabber hands can get around the carts…”

Kind of Mutually Assured Destruction in the fight against recycling scofflaws.

If you don’t recycle right the RFID chip is going to have your exact geographic location to hold you accountable.

So, am I losing sleep about the RFID tracking my movements?

Nope.  Not really.

I do lose sleep about government that feels it can withhold information from taxpayers about technology that does have the potential to track their personal information.

Maybe you don’t care.  Great.  Good for you.

But, maybe there are people who do care.  Maybe even people that don’t want government to be able to track our movements.

Maybe who don’t want a private entity like Eureka Recycling to have that private information about our movements and be able to profit from it — and share it with others.

Like the government. Or another private entity.

Or track what we recycle.  Or don’t.

Or how far away the recycling bin is in order for those little grabber hands to be able to pick up the cart.

I also lose sleep about government claiming it has no “current plans” to use something when it obviously must have some thoughts about “future plans” or why buy the bins with the chip in it in the first place?

And, in the meantime can Eureka Recycling be using this technology?  Are they using it?

Are they allowed to collect it without our individual consent and permission?

How would we know?  How can we know?

The City isn’t answering that question. Nor is Eureka Recycling.

Like many Americans I have been deeply troubled by reports that foreign governments hacked into public and private accounts in an attempt to have influence over our most recent election.

The idea that a foreign government would not just attack our government and its systems, but also attempt to track and monitor private American citizens is chilling.

Shouldn’t it be just as chilling when city government invests in a technology that pure and simple allows it to spy on its own citizens?

And, shouldn’t it be even more chilling to know they and the company they contracted with made no effort to let 80,000 St. Paul households know they are going to do it?

Spare Key, www.sparekey.org, celebrates its 20^th Anniversary this year of serving families with critically ill and seriously injured children by providing housing grants on their behalf.

In the 20 years since Robb and Patsy Keech began the organization as a living tribute to their son, Derian, who earned his Angel Wings at 2 ½ years old, Spare Key has served over 3,100 families with almost $3.2 million in housing grants.

Since 2012 our motto has been we help families “Bounce and not Break.”

The motto came from the comments of a Spare Key family recipient during a radio interview in St. Cloud, Minnesota who, when responding to the importance of the support she received from Spare Key.

What she meant by the phrase was that in the period of the worst crisis a family can experience – the serious illness, critical injury or death of a child – Spare Key provided the family with support at time when the family was on the verge of falling apart.

Breaking.

Thanks to Spare Key her family, and thousands of others, have not broken.

They have bounced.

Bounced back from crisis.

Financial and emotional crisis, to be sure.

But also, crisis of spirt.  Of hope.  Of the future.

Spare Key can’t fix the broken body, or the failing heart or the passing life, but we are a source of support a time when a family desperately needs a partner to “Bounce and not Break.”

It is this mission and purpose and motto that finds me attracted to the passion and energy of the University of Minnesota’s new football coach, P.J. Fleck.

In an interview, I have read where Coach Fleck explains the story behind his own personal motto, “Row the Boat”, I find similarity of purpose behind his life – and the mission of Spare Key.

According to Fleck, “Row The Boat first came to the forefront when my wife and I lost our second child…We had a second son after Carter, we had a second son name Colt. And Colton had a heart condition and we lost him shortly after birth. We knew toward the end of the pregnancy that we were going to lose him, it was just a matter of how long he’d be with us. We got to spend time with him, be with him, hold him. But to watch your son pass away in your wife’s arms is an amazing experience in terms of the amount of sorrow and the amount of frustration, questions.”

Heartbreaking in its own right, Fleck and his wife could have turned to the darkness in their despair.

Instead, they turned to the light and hope.

Fleck goes on to say “Hey, no matter what happens, no matter what we’re going to do here, we’re just going to keep rowing. Whatever turns out, however it turns out, we’re just going to keep rowing. Then when it does turn out, good or bad, we’re just going to keep rowing, keep rowing and keep rowing. So, it was able to, at least, help my method to get through some type of adversity.”

Coach Fleck channels the mission of Spare Key in so many ways.

Not because of a simple slogan or motto.

But, because of the way he has lived his life and given purpose to a tragedy.

Robb and Patsy Keech did the same thing 20 years ago.

I have no doubt that Robb and Patsy would have much rather had a son who lived longer than Spare Key has been in service to families like their own.

I do know that they see Spare Key as the living, beating heart of a boy named Derian who, in his short life, lead a parade of kindness while his heart slowly but surely wore out.

In the midst of tragedy and suffering Coach Fleck and Robb and Patsy Keech did not dwell in their loss.

They sought to celebrate the life of their sons by living a life of purpose.

For Coach Fleck, it has been a life of purpose and passion for a sport he loves and the community he has served within and outside that sport.

For Robb and Patsy Keech it has been an organization that embraces the next 20 years as more than a tribute to their son, but as his life’s continued purpose here on Earth.

Row the Boat.  Bounce and not Break.

Whatever your motto, slogan or mantra is not what will define you.

It is what you do with it that matters.

The following was written by 14 year old Maisie Mische for her Writer’s Club at Nativity School in St. Paul, Minnesota. 

Self-esteem is something that only we can define. Self-image is something that others can affect. Self-worth is something that we cannot let the world change.

We all have these thoughts, don’t we? We all think that we aren’t good enough for others. “I’m not tall enough,” “I don’t have enough fancy clothes,” “I’m not skinny enough.”

Enough is a dangerous word, isn’t it?

We hear it almost every day, and we say we can tune it out, but can we?

Do we let “enough” change us? If we aren’t “enough” for others, do we let it twist us? Mold us? Hide us?

Do we hide behind a mask of a fake personality because we are scared of not being “enough?”

Have you ever thought, even for a second, that you aren’t “enough” or that you won’t ever be “enough?”

Because if you have, don’t.

And if you haven’t, don’t start.

If you ever let “enough” destroy you, what will “better,” what will “worse,” what will “never” do to you?

What will you let them do to you?

Will you let them push you down?

Will you try to evade them?

Or will you let them make you stronger?

Will you take them and let them build a path for you?

Will you let them make you better? Worse?

This is for you to choose and you alone.

But never, never, never let them change you because you are the only person that can define who you are.

Not enough. You are not enough.

You are beyond enough.

Enough cannot even begin to describe you because when you let it describe you, you let it hurt you and you let it weaken you.

So, think, are you enough?

Or will you be above enough?

That is for you to choose.

 

On June 17^th, 2015 Evil walked into the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church and murdered nine African American parishioners.

On June 12^th, 2016 Evil walked into the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida and murdered 49 men and women, and injured more than 50 others.

On December 14, 2012 Evil walked into the Sandy Hook Elementary School and wiped out the lives of 20 first-graders and six educators.

This past weekend Evil walked into a McDonalds, took an 18-year old man with special needs and tied him up, kicked him, beat him, yelled at him, slashed him and forced him to drink toilet water while streaming it live on Facebook.

CNN host Don Lemon in discussing the Evil that took a young man with special needs and brutalized him had this to say:

“I don’t think it’s evil. I don’t think it’s evil…I think these are young people, and I think they have bad home training.”

While “…bad home training.” may be an apt way to describe the failure of four young people to have the empathy necessary to grasp the pain and suffering they were inflicting on another human being, it was Evil that committed their acts of violence.

Evil is their name.

Evil isn’t new.  It’s been with us since the beginning of humanity.

The loss of one Evil man or woman has never been the end of Evil in the world.

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro and countless more before them, and countless more after them are evidence that the death of one does not result in the end of evil.

David Wong writes in John Dies in the End that “Son, the greatest trick the Devil pulled was convincing the world there was only one of him.”

To call Evil by its name doesn’t require one to believe in God, or the Devil or whatever iteration of both one might find compelled to embrace or reject.

It does require one to take a position that despite the reasons behind the heinous acts one commits against another human being there must be a name for those acts.

This isn’t an ideology.  It’s not a philosophy.  Nor is it a measure of relative horror committed against one or more than one human being.

I don’t care about the name of the person who commits an act, or acts, of Evil.  It makes no difference to me that his or her name has been printed in the newspaper, heard on the radio or seen on the television.

Whether it is the dramatic photo of a single gunman taking the life of a Russian Ambassador or a terrorist wiping out the lives of innocent people in Paris or Istanbul or the deliberate murder of the people of Syria by that nation’s own President – there is Evil in the world.

Misunderstood youth.  Aggrieved employee.  Angry motorist.  Jealous husband.  Petty tyrant.

Whatever narrative one wants to create to explain the “trigger” that took the life and lives of human beings long before their time can never justify a conspiracy of silence that refuses to call Evil by its name.

Don Lemon is not alone in his broken radar that is incapable of identifying Evil.

Evil is Evil.

Can one commit an act more Evil than another Evil act?

Of this, I am not certain.

But, I am certain that one can commit multiple acts of Evil.

Evil inflicted on one or one hundred or one hundred thousand will never be Evil if no one act of Evil cannot be called out for what it is.

Failing to call Evil by its name brings political correctness in our world into focus when each expanding act of horror begins to numb our outrage, our fear, our disgust – our courage.

The world needs more people to have the courage to call Evil by its name.

Not because Evil is the greatest threat to humanity.

The failure of Good to call Evil by its name is humanity’s greatest threat.

There is Evil in the world.

Call it by its name.

“In my life, I keep track of the worst years on record on the wrinkles on my face. 

The same face where I keep track of the best years on record of my life.

My face, as you can imagine, is getting pretty darn wrinkly!”

Oh, I know so many of us want to believe it to be true.  But, it is far from true.

2016 may have been a lot of things but it isn’t and, for those in my time zone, won’t be the worst year on record.

Sure, I imagine it can feel like it.  After all, Carrie Fisher did die, as did her Mom.  So, too, did the creator of the red solo cup

That people die at some point in their lives is not a phenomenon unique to 2016.  Maybe it feels like it is.

It’s not.

We had an election in 2016.  Again, not a new thing.

Now, if you believe the victory of Donald Trump or the defeat of Hillary Clinton is the worst thing to ever happen in the history of the world – I am here to tell you:  It’s not.

From the beginning of this year to the end of this year I have heard a constant stream of “This is the worst year…ever!”

Nope.  Not true.  Not even close.

Are there things that are likely the worst on record in 2016?  Absolutely.

So, let me just state, without equivocation that 2016 was not, and will not be, the worst year on record.

I could spend hours finding examples of how it is not true on internet search engines.

Yes, those same search engines that we all go to for our proof that 2016 was the worst year on record.

The same search engines on the same internet that allows so much information to flow – both true and false – that it has become virtually impossible to parse the good from the bad.

I know it suits our own individual narratives to find the years which are the worst years on record.  To be honest, in my 53 years on this planet I can’t remember what I would consider to be my worst year on record.

I insist on telling my children to remember that the moment in time they, and I, live in is not profoundly different in many ways than the times their grandparents – and their grandparents – and those before them – lived in.

I don’t want my kids to not think they are unique and different. They most certainly are.

Nor do I want to give off the impression that the time and era they live in and will continue to live in will not be unique and different.

It is and most certainly will be.

However, if we allow things not true to be seen as true there is nothing to be gained from the past that will help our future.

The past though isn’t a year ago.  Or five years ago.

The past isn’t what happened from the day you were born until the day you are spent reading this sentence.

The past took place a long, long time ago in a galaxy…. well, you get my point.

2016 will end and, God willing, another year will begin.

I don’t plan on reliving 2016 in 2017.

There’s too much to do and experience in the year ahead.

Dwelling on 2016 as a year that never was what so many people are trying to tell me it is serves no useful purpose.

It won’t help me try to find ways to help more families with sick and injured kids in the hospital with housing grants.

It won’t give me the incentive I need to get myself back on my fitness track.

It won’t give my kids the perspective they need on how to live and make a difference in the world they will live in tomorrow and every day after that.

Celebrate the end of 2016, I say.

But, embrace the beginning of 2017.

Find a way to give back.  Volunteer for something.

Pick up the phone and call somebody you haven’t talk to for longer than you can remember.

Repair a broken friendship.  Get to the dentist.  Run for office.

Take a risk.

Fail.

Succeed.

If you want to revel in 2016 as a time and place that the world began to unravel at its seams that’s your right.  Just do me a favor and don’t spend any time trying to convince me that it is and it was.

As for me, rather than lament that 2016 was the worst year on record I intend to do everything I can to make 2017 the best year ever.

 

As a Catholic I spent six years as an Altar Boy in a small town in North Dakota.

I imagine I helped to buy and marry a fair number of people throughout those years.  I also played a lot of chess with the parish priest, Father Myron Schuh.

Father Schuh, if my memory doesn’t fail me, was a Polish priest.

For more Saturday’s than my memory can recall I would go over to his house and play chess with him.

Father Schuh was not a particularly good chess player.

He was good at cheating at chess.

He would make moves in chess that even as a kid who was barely a teenager could understand did not exist in any rule book in any nation in the world.

Well, except maybe in Russia.

Which, surprisingly, at the time, was still the Soviet Union.

Sigh, I am old!

But I digress.

Besides the terrible moral failing he exhibited in chess I think what I found more troubling was the choice of candy he had on hand that he would share with me.

Horehound.

Yes, the name itself screams, “Dear God, Erich, do not put that in your mouth!”

But, I did.

Far too many times I must admit.

It tasted just as bad as it sounds.

Horehound.

I did go online to find out who sells this “candy.”

Yes, you guessed it.

Fleet Farm.

In its description of this vile construction attempting to disguise itself as candy by simply calling itself candy, the Fleet Farm page says it is made with “…100% natural horehound herb tea.” and “Brewed & steeped in copper kettles to enhance the horehound flavor”

I nearly laughed out loud.

To “…enhance the horehound flavor?”

Why would one want to enhance the flavor of something that tastes like pure evil?

Horehound just sounds dirty and inappropriate.

When I first told my kids about the candy they told their Mom I was saying bad things.

My wife has heard me say worse things over the years.

However, because I love her, I never asked her to have a Horehound candy.

The word itself doesn’t roll of your tongue, either.

Your mouth wants to say “Horeshound.”

If you did you would be saying it wrong.

I remember odd things in my life like a chess cheating polish priest giving me crappy candy behind a smile that said, “Yes, of course the pawn can make several moves at once when confronted by your next move being checkmate.”

I recall the sad masses when the old and young were laid to their rest and the joy and celebration of those who came together in the small little steeple of St. Anthony Catholic Church in Fairmount, North Dakota.

I share with my kids the stories of my brother and I eating the unconsecrated hosts in the sacristy out of bags.

I am certain that act alone preordains my destiny at the time of my demise.

My kids are pretty sure I am doomed, as well, as they look at me and shake their heads with sadness that their Dad would do such things.

Perhaps the thing that makes my kids – and my wife – shake their head the most is when I tell them how much it annoyed Father Schuh when I would not push the three doorbell buttons at the same time during mass.

Much to the dismay and annoyance of Father Schuh, instead of one lovely sound of three bells coming together at once it would sound like three different houses having their door bells rung seconds apart.

My Daughter simply asks, “Why would you do that?”

Forty years later I don’t have a good answer.

This morning I woke up to the sound of that same Daughter hacking up a lung.  Across the room, I saw the Dude sleeping contentedly.  Somewhere in the living room of my Sister-in-Law’s home my wife was fitfully sleeping in between the hacks of my Daughter.

I slid out of bed and gave my Daughter some cough medicine and pulled her alongside me on the couch to help her get back to sleep.

She is, of course, “Not tired.” and refused to fall back asleep.

My Daughter is now next to my feet, my son on the mattress in front of me, and my wife not far away hoping to catch a couple more winks before we get up and go to the Packers vs. Vikings game at Lambeau Field.

I don’t know why these moments arise that bring me from this moment back to moments 40 years ago, and back again.

Maybe it’s because in this journey I have been on everything happened so something else could happen.

It is the ordinariness of this morning’s moment that causes me to close my eyes a little bit and smile and remember faraway places and faraway times.

I like taking these trips back to my life past from time to time.  It reminds me to embrace every moment of the good, the bad and the ugly that makes up the very essence of my time here on Earth.

But, I like to come back to where I am.  Right at this moment.  With these people I love in the time I want to be in.

Merry Christmas.

(P.S. – Horehound is not candy.  Don’t eat it.  Even if Santa leaves you some.  If he did, you obviously did something bad this year!)