Here’s a roundup of Range stories from this morning.
State Sen. Tom Bakk offers a tepid endorsement of Al Franken for U.S. Senate in today’s Mesabi Daily News. Bakk is one of a small cadre of Minnesota officials who were shocked, shocked!, to learn that Franken had once made a living as a late night comedian telling blue-toned jokes. But at least he didn’t endorse Coleman. I had wondered if some of the Range DFLers wouldn’t do that. Some of them basically fueled Coleman’s entire 8th District strategy by feeding the Mesaba Energy Project boondoggle that centers Norm’s oil and coal-based energy strategy. But we now seem to have unity, such as unity appears within Minnesota’s DFL party.
Meantime, me and Bill Hanna over at the Mesabi Daily News agree about KSTP’s hit job on Ironworld, Iron Range Resources and the Iron Range in general. Hey, KSTP … when you get me and Bill Hanna singing the same song in the same key you have really, really screwed up.
The Grand Rapids Herald-Review has a very confusing story about the DNR’s efforts to mitigate the flood threat at the Canisteo Mine Pit near Bovey. At least, I think that’s what it’s about. It would appear that the DNR has no real idea how to handle the problem and local leaders won’t take action without direction from the DNR. The problem is, the legislature allocated money to solve the problem and if the Range can’t figure out how to solve the problem this year we’ll lose the money. Really, the argument is whether the pit walls will deteriorate and flood Bovey in the next few years or the next few years after that. Apparently they’re trying to find a way to fix the problem at the last possible moment, because that’s more exciting.
Meantime, in my home paper the Hibbing Daily Tribune, we learn that the Iron Range is becoming a top educational destination for social studies teachers looking to show how history has an impact on the world. I’ve always maintained that the Iron Range is a truly special place when you take time to learn about our past and the prospects of our future. Add three beers and it’s freaking awesome.
While the hit piece that KSTP did on Ironworld was extremely unfair, I personally think that Ironworld is a huge waste of money. I haven’t been there in a number of years, but not very many people actually go there and that it brings very little benefit to the area economically or otherwise.
How about taking the money from Ironworld and instead use it to give anybody with an Iron Range address half off the fee for golfing or skiing at Giants Ridge? How about the using the Ironworld money for the previously discussed high speed internet project?
Todd, a few years ago I would have agreed about Ironworld. But what’s really riled me about this story is that Ironworld just recently reorganized into a nonprofit management system that is finally paying for itself. Yes, millions were likely wasted getting to this point, but we’re here and should embrace the change. I think Ironworld has intrisic value to the Range and, since it’s finally solvent, I think we should leave it alone.
I’ll go a step farther. Sometimes, the decisions that have been made at IRR have been so bad that they’d have been better off just writing checks to random Iron Rangers … but again, that doesn’t apply to all decisions and doesn’t mean better choices can’t be made. (Yes, high speed internet among them)
Half off golf is still paying money to feel better than others.
Oops. I’m not supposed to say that. 🙂
I’m too clumsy to ski, so I’ll take the fast internet, thanks.
Thanks for the comments, Todd. I’d be curious what else you think about these issues.
Todd,
1) Go to Ironworld, preferably while a visiting exhibit is in town. Then feel free to criticize.
2) Well over 20,000 people went to Ironworld last year. I would not qualify that as “not very many”.
3) Ironworld was not meant to be an economic development tool (it would be a rather silly way to do economic development, wouldn’t it?). Yet there are those that find it brings a great deal of benefit to the area (when you visit, stop by the Research Center and ask the staff how they benefit the area, ask to see their archives and ponder how much it would cost local and state governments to take over that service if Ironworld wasn’t there).
4) Why is subsidizing skiing or golf better than subsidizing a cultural experience like a museum?
I’ll try and make a trip to Ironworld next time I’m home. You probably know a lot more than I do about the numbers, so I’ll take your word for it.
As far as golf and skiing, those are just two suggestions that I have. While different people will have different ideas on what “benefits” the area more, the problem I have with the museum (when it was losing money) was that once you see it the first time, it is pretty much useless to the residents of the region.
As far as golf and skiing are concerned, they are activities you can do over and over again and provide benefit to people of the region. I played golf at Giants Ridge a few weeks ago while home and it was something like $82 per round. I was thinking to myself that Giants Ridge is a publicly managed facility and 75% of the regional population could never (or would never) afford to play a round there. Why not use some of the extra taconite money so the people from the region can actually afford to play a golf course that is owned by a regional government agency?