A glaring contradiction worthy of prompt attention appears in "Bird flu found at 2 new farms" (April 7). The article's last paragraph reports that back-yard turkey flocks in our state (presumably this means domestic turkeys raised in small flocks in a free-range manner with outdoor access and organic principles) "haven't been hit hard by the disease so far." Yet they are described as having an assumed "greater risk" by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources wildlife health supervisor.
Being relatively free of the virus does not sound like "greater risk" to me. For the good of all the turkeys, we'd better focus on the very last sentence, which states that, unlike commercial birds, the disease-resistant birds "don't spend their whole life in barns." Read that again; it is teaching us what's best for all poultry.
Christine Lewis, Minneapolis
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
An elected body would better serve the interests of all citizens
As a Minneapolis citizen, I join with the 42 percent of metro-area population outside of Hennepin and Ramsey counties who feel they are not represented by the Metropolitan Council ("4 counties aim at Met Council," April 7). Gov. Mark Dayton should not be surprised that citizens feel so desperate for representation that they are working directly with Washington for change. Dayton has just not listened to years of complaints about the governor-appointed Met Council's decisions fully controlled by him.
If council members were instead elected, they would be able to make decisions independent of the governor, actually representing the best interest of all citizens.
Unfortunately, while the current, appointed council can agree on most issues, an elected council may not agree on anything. Gubernatorial leadership and compromise would be needed to produce more acceptable solutions to all metro citizens, compatible with the overall needs of the state.
Michael Tillemans, Minneapolis
STATE BUDGET
To have a legislative forecasting office would not be unusual
An April 6 editorial claimed there is "No strong case for new state budget office," advising we "[l]ead legislators not into fiscal temptation." The editorial suggested potential duplication of work done by the executive branch's Minnesota Management and Budget office and warned of legislators being tempted to "bend those numbers." And this claim: "[F]ans of governmental checks and balances should be on alert." Really? The governor's budget should be presented as he sees fit. But the Legislature controls the purse. Shouldn't it have checks and balances on the governor's budget process?
Consider other states in the region. Wisconsin's Legislative Fiscal Bureau is "a nonpartisan service agency of the Wisconsin Legislature [that] provides fiscal and program information and analyses to the Wisconsin Legislature." Illinois has its Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, which "provides the Legislature with research and information regarding state and national economies, revenue projections and operations of Illinois Government." Iowa's Legislative Services Agency, Fiscal Services Division "provides analysis and evaluation of expenditures, revenues and operations of state government and the potential impact of legislative proposals to state and local government." North Dakota has similar dedicated staff in its legislature.
If Minnesota creates a similar office, it would be in pretty good company.