VERMILION PARK

In these tough times, it's not an essential

The Star Tribune editorial "Don't abandon plan for Vermilion park" (April 19) strikes at the heart of the dilemma facing our nation today: the inability to determine a want from a need.

We are experiencing record deficits in all levels of government. The Vermilion park plan would take 2,500 acres of additional land off the tax rolls, eliminate future use of this land for all but limited recreation, increase government bureaucracy to maintain the proposed park in perpetuity and, by the way, pay more than the assessed value of the land!

This is where we collectively slap our foreheads. Even the $14 million assessed value of the land to be purchased would go a long way to providing for health care needs of disabled and impoverished children and adults. It would pay for about 291 teachers to help Minnesota schools meet their goal of providing world-class education to every child. It could provide $14 million in restored, perhaps even increased, Local Government Aid to cities that provide basic safety, infrastructure maintenance and repair, and sanitation services to local residents without increasing their property taxes.

We have to ask: Is this a pressing need in challenging times, or simply a desire?

CANDACE OATHOUT, CRYSTAL

At the start of the 2009 legislative session, I received Sen. Ann Rest's Weekly Update e-mail. At the time, the projected state deficit was $4 billion. Today, it's $7 billion. Herein are my deficit reduction ideas.

FIFO: First In, First Out - an accounting term to quantify inventory control, whether finished goods or raw materials. This accounting protocol has a cousin named LIFO: Last In, First Out.

I believe the Legislature needs to employ this technique - LIFO - whereby all increased spending over the last three years needs to experience a line item veto by either the Legislature or the governor.

We had a $2.2 billion budget surplus at the start of last year's session, but due to the recession and the Legislature's insistence to spend money, we are now faced with a $7 billion deficit.

First, all new spending programs instituted during the past three years need to be eliminated. We can no longer afford them. Those programs that were last added in the budget need to be the programs first cut out of the budget. Second, simply employ an across the board spending cut of 10 percent.

This will achieve a balanced budget very quickly. If help is needed in identifying which programs to eliminate, I will be happy to serve. Then, once fiscal stability is reached, we need to ensure that future spending generates a return on investment; if not, then that expenditure needs to be eliminated.

Election 2010 is right around the corner.