ND editorial roundup
Print- •
-
Share
- Share this item
-
Grab the link
Copy and paste the link:
- Blog about it
- Close
- •
-
Post a Comment
- •
Favorite- •
___
Excerpts from editorials in North Dakota daily newspapers over the past week:
___
The boom echoing across western North Dakota is like nothing the state has ever seen. Grand Forks and the Red River Valley stand to benefit as well, as oil-tax revenues enrich the state's General Fund, local contractors profit from their western operations and UND helps train the region's petroleum engineers.
All of which suggests that the valley should do what it can to help the boom resound. And what the valley can do is a lot.
Last week, The Chamber's Business News Advisory Board talked about western North Dakota's growth and how the valley can help that growth along. The first thing valley residents can do is learn more about what's happening, participants agreed.
Consider:
— North Dakota now is the fourth-leading oil producing state, having surpassed Oklahoma some months ago and Louisiana more recently. To move past No. 3, California, North Dakota's production will have to triple; but industry insiders say that's likely to happen.
After all, production has more than doubled just since 2005, going from 2.8 million barrels a month to more than 7 million barrels a month today.
"California, here we come," the Minot Daily News editorialized.
— Pipeline capacity having already been exceeded, oil producers are shipping oil via railroad cars. Several multimillion-dollar rail terminals already have opened to make the transfers.
— In August, Halliburton broke ground on a $20 million expansion of its oil-industry support facility in Williston, N.D. Williston, for its part, remains critically short of housing and is engaged in a number of home-construction initiatives.
It's hard to overstate the stress this growth is putting on the infrastructure of the western part of the state. Consider that it takes about 800 to 1,000 truck visits to open a new well; that the number of truck movements around the oil-producing counties now numbers into the tens of thousands a year; and that a lot of this traffic takes place on dirt roads, and you can start to see the problems.
Dust, roads, housing and water — oil wells measure their demand for water in the millions of gallons — all remain critical needs.
Valley business owners and other leaders should go see the growth and the challenges for themselves, the Business News Advisory Board suggested. A series of charter bus tours might be one way of making that happen.
Then when western North Dakota lawmakers present their legitimate needs to the Legislature, valley leaders and lawmakers should listen with a sympathetic ear.
After all, all of North Dakota benefits when a key region such as the west prospers. And when the time comes for eastern communities to make their needs known, western-area lawmakers will remember favorably the valley's outreach, support and goodwill.
The president of North Dakota's Board of Higher Education was being kind when he said a judge's edict regarding the University of North Dakota Sioux logo was "bizarre." Richie Smith was reacting to a temporary injunction granted by Northeast District Judge Michael G. Sturdevant of Bottineau. The judge acted as part of a lawsuit brought by a group of nickname/logo supporters from the Spirit Lake tribe.
The ruling is more than bizarre. It seems just plain silly. It prevents the higher ed board from retiring the logo until a Dec. 9 hearing in front of the judge. The board had planned to discuss the logo at its Nov. 19 meeting.
Want more bizarre? According to The Associated Press, the Grand Forks attorney representing the Spirit Lake group, Pat Morley, has done legal work for the Engelstad Arena. The Engelstad family has been among the most vocal supporters of the Fighting Sioux logo and nickname. The arena is festooned with thousands of logos. Not to worry, said Morley. There is no financial link between his work for the tribal group and the arena folks.
Still more bizarre? It's curious the judge would even grant the Spirit Lake supporters' standing to seek an injunction. The logo and nickname in all their versions are owned by UND. North Dakota Sioux tribes, which certainly have a place in the logo discussion, have no legal legs on which to stand when it comes to the ultimate fate of the logo. The university and higher ed board have extended the necessary courtesy of including tribes in the debates, but when push comes to shove, the higher ed board must make the call.
In the less bizarre realm, a little honesty might be in order. Despite all the hand-wringing and politically correct pontificating about the use or misuse of the Sioux image and name, the real drivers behind dumping the logo are the NCAA and the Summit League athletic conference. The NCAA said UND will not be able to participate in postseason play if the school clings to the logo. The league said UND will not be admitted until the dispute is settled. In other words, UND will not become a fully participating Division I school until the logo is history.
The higher ed board has not covered itself with glory in this mess. Weak and vacillating, the board has made a bad situation worse. In attempting to accommodate tribes by delaying a decision, the board has learned that tribal leaders have their own agendas and timetables. In effect, the higher ed board has been jerked around.
The board should shift from accommodation (pandering?) to action. Quickly appeal Judge Sturdevant's curious edict. It's hard to imagine so foggy a ruling can survive clear-eyed legal scrutiny. Then finish the business that should have been finished months ago: Vote the logo into the history books.
The government cannot protect us against all hazards — and the H1N1 virus is one of them. Private sector health care providers, along with prudent safeguards by individuals and families, are much more effective than the government against disease.
Concern about the H1N1 virus — or swine flu — seems to be building. President Barack Obama's recent declaration that the H1N1 outbreak is a national emergency certainly will ratchet up the level of worry for many people.
It needs to be remembered, however, that the president's declaration was a bureaucratic technicality. Declaring a health problem to be a national emergency simply frees federal agencies and health care providers to adapt existing rules to meet new, temporary needs.
One recent statement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention made it clear that the H1N1 virus is a serious problem. The CDC monitors all forms of flu, as well as other diseases. Statistics on the numbers of cases of widespread illnesses, along with fatalities, are posted on the agency's Web site.
The CDC noted that, "Almost all of the influenza viruses identified so far (this fall) are 2009 H1N1 influenza A viruses." In other words, "regular" flu does not appear to be much of a problem yet - though other strains of flu are likely to become more prevalent later in the year.
Only 50 million doses of the H1N1 vaccine are expected to be available by mid-November, with another 100 million produced by mid-December.
What does this mean to Americans worried about our own health and that of loved ones and friends? It means that we need to kick common sense into high gear. Advice about preventing the spread of disease through measures such as covering our noses and mouths when we sneeze needs to be heeded. Anger about vaccine shortages should be tempered by the knowledge that health care professionals are working to ensure that those most vulnerable receive the protection first.
What's the bottom line on the flu?
Simple: Follow the doctor's orders. Do what health care professionals suggest — so that any strain of the flu does not become a personal emergency for you.
The first stirrings of property tax reform, aimed at the North Dakota Legislature's 2011 session, were heard during a meeting of the state lawmakers' interim Taxation Committee during the last week of October. Despite a $395 million tax-reduction package approved by the Legislature in May, the job isn't done. An anti-tax mood prevails in the land, and for good reason.
North Dakota does need tax reform. The moves made so far come under the category of relief, which, although greatly needed, did little to reform a system that's out of balance and, in the case of property tax, an unwelcome burden for many homeowners. Fixing the system will not be simple, and will give as much pain as pleasure to a wide range of interest groups. Now, however, is the time to start the discussion and begin to move to a level of comfort with, if not a concession on, on tax reform.
It may take an effort like the education roundtable that addressed the University System or the North Dakota Education Improvement Commission that tackled work in primary and secondary classrooms. And it could well take more than one session.
Interim committee Chairman Sen. Dwight Cook, R-Mandan, suggested a starting point for the discussion. He proposed expanding homestead tax credits for all primary dwellings and limiting homeowners' property tax bills to 1.5 percent of the market value of their homes.
Although the discussion has just began, and few numbers have been crunched, the homestead credit would be on the primary dwelling, and there would be a limit to how much tax credit was awarded. The state would cover the value of the tax credit, sending checks to affected cities, counties, schools and others depending upon property tax. This would give property tax relief to homeowners, with a greater impact on the owners of homes of lower value, without capping the budgets of local government.
The proposal for limiting property tax bills is a different beast. It's a tame child of California's Prop. 13, which limited property taxes to 1 percent of the market value of homes in that state. Cook suggests a 1.5 percent limit for North Dakota, where the statewide average is 1.9 percent. The numbers might seem small, but the results could be very difficult for local government to absorb without checking services. And it would mean giving up a degree of local control to the Legislature. These are good starting points.
Without some kind of reform, the state is on its way to picking up more and more of the cost of local government as it provides expanded property tax relief. When there's a strong budget surplus, that might be doable. But when money gets tight, watch out. Better to provide some reform now: slowing the growth of the budgets of local government bodies, pushing for accurate and timely appraisal of property, evaluating the range of services that government provides and a review of the balance of income, sales and property tax in the state.
Doing nothing, or providing continued relief without reform, postpones a painful reckoning. It will take a lot of hard work and time to get things right, so it would be best to start now. It will be a test of the Legislature's ability.
