One good thing about winter

Apparently it means my water will be drinkable again.

Burnsville spokesman Jim Skelly said residents should start tasting the difference in their water because of the [$174,000 granulated activated carbon] filtration system around the holidays.

Skelly said that nature is taking care of part of the problem with the water.

"Because it's cold outside, some of the algae issues are taking care of themselves," he said.

Am I the only person in Burnsville who would love to know how the algae issues will be dealt with once it's warm again?!?

A huge indictment on Burnsville's public water works

It doesn't get much more indicting than this.

City temporarily shuts down water interconnect from Burnsville

The city of Savage temporarily shut down its water interconnect with the city of Burnsville last week.

Savage Public Works Director John Powell said the decision to close the interconnect was made so that the city can measure the “before” and “after” quality of the city’s water supply. Residents in Savage have complained about odor and taste since the interconnect with Burnsville was opened in August and also about a film being deposited on dishes after they are run through the dishwasher. Powell said the city has received about 70 calls from residents.

If Savage doesn't want to drink our water, why would we?!?

I've noticed a distinct difference since the change. When I lived in Oakdale the water was as bad as a bathtub. We couldn't wash our dishes in the dishwasher because of the film that was left on them. If we filled the bathtub, gritty residue was left behind. Serious filtration was the only option for using our water.

I sure hope Burnsville isn't headed down that path. We loved the water here when we moved and haven't used our filter since moving. The price I pay for water has increased roughly 25% in the last 2 years here and the quality has decreased. Does that make sense to you?

Villainization of homeowner associations can stop now

I read two stories today critical of homeowner associations that really ticked me off.

The first complains that a 90-year-old decorated veteran is being prohibited from having a flagpole in the front yard of his Virginia townhouse.

The second whines about a Minnesota association that won't permit solar panels on the roofs of residents' homes.

Both cases take a decidedly anti-homeowner association stance, particularly the first.

This baffles me. When you move into an association-governed home, you assume the rules and restrictions that come with that association. Rules and regulations are what make an association an association. Without rules governing architectural changes, appearances, snow removal, lawn care, property presentation, etc., there would be no difference between an association property and any other property.

In the first case, the veteran asked to be permitted to put up a flagpole when he moved in. The board told him this wasn't acceptable, though mounting a flag on his home would be fine. The lawn was community property though and therefore a flagpole couldn't be installed. He installed it anyway. HE IS WRONG!! I don't care what kind of flag he's flying or what country it represents, the flag is not the issue! His status as a war hero is not the issue either, despite the fact that Fox News would like to make it an issue. His violation of a regulation that was clearly stated to him is the issue. Of course, the title of the article, "Decorated Veteran, 90, Fights to Raise Flag in His Yard", is enough to tell you the slant Fox News took on the story.

In the second case, again, the association is restricting solar panels because their residents have decided that they don't like the look and want to maintain uniformity among their homes. That's their decision as an association. It's not the job of the state to interfere with that.

In both cases, the rules and regulations could be changed through the association itself. Board members come up for election every few years. Residents can be mobilized. These are the appropriate channels for changing the rules.

Whining to the media or higher governments isn't the way to handle disagreements with association rules. Most Americans don't live in associations though and don't relate to these stories. And so the homeowner is portrayed as a defenseless victim to the big, scary association.

It's ridiculous.

Burnsville shorts a few residents

So our city government fails to send a public hearing notice on a new assessment to some homeowners - a notice that is required by state law - and then decides that we're going to go ahead and assess those homeowners anyway without a new public hearing (this time accompanied by a notice).

How is that supposed to work?

Well, it's not. The city is now getting sued.

Claiming Burnsville city officials acted unfairly, and, in two instances unlawfully, in issuing a special assessment for road reconstruction, a group of residents has filed a lawsuit against the city.

Karen Marty, a Bloomington attorney specializing in land use, municipal law and real estate, filed the suit on Monday in Dakota County District Court on behalf of 10 landowners from rural southwest Burnsville who were charged special assessments to help pay for a $625,000 road reconstruction project along Judicial Road and 155th Street.

City staff members acknowledged at a City Council meeting in October that seven property owners did not receive notice of the public hearing regarding the assessment, which is in violation of the process required by state law. Attorney Soren Mattick, who sat in at the meeting for Burnsville's regular attorney Joel Jamnik, called the lack of notice "troubling."

And yes, the homeowners are willing to pay their fair share.

The suit asks that the special assessments be set aside and a new formula put into place to more fairly assess the land owners.

Yet while the city acknowledges the mistake, we're still moving forward with the assessments?!?

Let's see how many ways we can throw Burnsville residents' money down the drain...

Attorney's fees, check.

Clueless

This seems to define the word.



I don't know what's better, his failure to move or the name Zebrie Sanders.

Mayor Kautz's global priorities

I'm having a really hard time understanding why my mayor is spending her time jumping on the global warming bandwagon and stumping for a global climate change agreement.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- Representing mayors in the United States, U.S. Conference of Mayors Vice President Burnsville (MN) Mayor Elizabeth Kautz today joined with mayors of the largest cities in Europe to present a mutual appeal to the international community on climate change.
...
"We thank Conference President Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels for his leadership on this issue. The nation's mayors know that a successful plan in this country for reducing our energy consumption and promoting greater energy independence begins in cities and other local communities, and we are leading by example in the fight against global warming," said Mayor Kautz.

Don't get me wrong, protecting our environment is critical.

But I can think of numerous other issues that are far more important to the city of Burnsville than climate change. How about the dismal mess that is the PAC? What about the empty storefronts popping up all over the place? How about our major budget shortfall? Or maybe the dangerous CR-5/Hwy 13 intersection? Does she need a few more suggestions?

With a last name like Brueske...

...I suppose you're bound to get a little carried away with the brewskis. (Yes, I know, that was bad...)

Man charged with fourth DWI after driving nearly 100 mph

A 40-year-old Burnsville man was arrested for his fourth DWI in nine years after police clocked him traveling 98 mph while driving his landlord’s minivan on Highway 13 near Louisiana Avenue on Nov. 9.
...
Brueske has three previous DWI convictions which occurred in July of 2000, February of 2008 and March of 2009, according to court records.

According to the criminal complaint:

An officer observed Brueske traveling 98 mph in a 55 mph zone on Highway 13 near Louisiana Avenue at about 11:56 p.m. on Nov. 9. The officer caught up to the vehicle Brueske was driving and observed him swerve across the highway and cross the centerline several times.

After activating the squad’s emergency lights, Brueske traveled about half a mile before stopping, the complaint stated.

When the officer approached the vehicle and asked for a license and proof of insurance, Brueske told the officer, “Take me to jail. I am drunk.” Brueske also stated he did not have a license because it had been canceled.
...
When the officer asked Brueske if he had been drinking, he replied, “Yes, way too much.” Brueske refused to take a field-sobriety test and further stated to the officer, “Just take me to jail and let’s get this over with. You and I both know that I’m drunk.”

A preliminary breath test resulted in a failed reading of .25, according to the complaint.

Brueske was then placed under arrest. After being taken to the holding cell at the Savage Police Department, Brueske vomited in the cell twice and was transported to St. Francis Regional Medical Center for treatment.

After being seen by medics for his illness, Brueske was cleared to be booked into the Scott County jail.

If convicted, Brueske faces a maximum of seven years in prison, a $14,000 fine or both for each of the first-degree DWI charges. He also faces a maximum of five years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine for the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle charge.

In all seriousness, it's really sad but you also hope that this one wakes him up. And you've got to appreciate his honesty with the officer.

Seriously, best quote: "Just take me to jail and let’s get this over with. You and I both know that I’m drunk."

Too bad not everyone is so cooperative.

Burnsville is short on funds

But then, who isn't?

Burnsville City Council learns parks fund is short

A week after accepting a probable tax increase for 2011, the Burnsville City Council heard that another of its funds would need additional money after a lean 2010.

The city's parks fund, which is not currently balanced, will need an additional $130,000 a year starting in 2011 to pay for basic capital maintenance in the parks, city staff members told the council Monday during its second budget work session.

The council has already done most of the work to balance its 2010 budget, in which property taxes did not increase. The city cut $3.5 million from its 2010 budget, and the council said last week that it would not seek similar cuts in 2011.

"(The parks are) an asset of the community, and we need to make sure we are good stewards of this asset," Burnsville Mayor Elizabeth Kautz said.

Other council members agreed, saying they would rather not cut the parks budget any further.

The extra money, which would amount to about a 0.5 percent levy increase, was not included in last week's 2011 budget estimate. Staff members said then that the city could face up to an 8.4 percent increase in its tax levy. Council members emphasized Monday that the number was just an estimate that did not take into account any increase in revenue.

So, our parks fund already isn't balanced. Awesome.

And now we're looking at a 0.5% increase that will likely be necessary.

I'm not the CFO of Burnsville or anything, but I have a hypothesis for why budgets aren't met and taxes go up: cities don't save.

When my car breaks down and I need what amounts to "capital maintenance," I draw from savings to pay for it. I continue working and building that savings account for capital expenses. If a capital expense comes along that I haven't saved for, I have to sacrifice somewhere.

The government has a luxury that I don't have though: they can raise the funds they need anytime they want to. I can't tell my boss to give me a raise whenever I want.

Of course, at the end of the day, the government is us. We're responsible for our own mess. We elect the politicians who serve and we pay for the services we get. We need to do a better job of making sure they're spending that money wisely. I'd say by the looks of it, we're doing a pretty poor job of that.

More Craigslist success

We tried giving our old dishwasher away to a few people but were unsuccessful in finding anyone.

So, my wife took pictures and we posted it on Craigslist. She wanted $50 for it. I looked to see what others were charging. It worked fine and we had the manual and instructions, but didn't know how old it was since it came with our house.

I posted it for $70 and got 5 responses the first day.

The guy who took it asked if I'd go $60 on it. I think he knew he was stretching it to ask me to go any lower. But, let's just say he looked like he needed the extra $10 more than I did so I went with it.

Hey, it was $60 more than I was planning to get for it!

Consider this inspiration for those of you tempted to throw out old appliances or furniture...it doesn't get greener than passing it on to someone else!

Why I buy from Amazon.com

I ordered a wireless adapter for my desktop computer so I could connect to the internet via USB without running a wire through half of my house.

A wireless adapter costs at least $40 at Best Buy (the Linksys model I wanted cost $50 $40 refurbished through their website).

I found the refurbished version of the Linksys model on Amazon.com for $16.99.

I ordered it on 11/4 and it arrived - with free shipping - 2 days later on 11/6.

There are very few reasons I can think of NOT to buy online for most items and services and Amazon is about as good as it gets.