Coon Rapids Herald Voter's Guide 2004

1. Biographical information.

I was born in Fridley and raised in Spring Lake Park and Andover. My earliest work experience was at our family business, John’s Auto Parts, in Blaine – where I learned to inventory radiators at a very young age! I graduated from Blaine High School in 1988, Boston University in 1991 and the University of Minnesota Law School in 1995. After earning my undergraduate degree, I worked in Washington D.C. on the staff of Senator John Kerry, tracking education and transportation issues. Following law school, I practiced in the areas of housing, employment and commercial law. I now work with my parents, Harry and Linda Haluptzok, and my husband, Mark, at our family’s business, John’s Auto Parts. I serve as General Counsel and Vice President. My primary job responsibility is to oversee the sale of our new parts lines. I have been proud to see a 30% jump in revenue in my division since the start of my tenure. I have two wonderful children and one very friendly dog, and we’ve owned a home in Brooklyn Park for the past 12 years. I’ve been involved in community service as long as I can remember – my parents led the way for me as volunteers at our church, St. Timothy’s in Blaine. They taught me that, “To whom much is given, much is expected,” and that our family has always been blessed. After working with my mom and dad at St. Tim’s, I headed up a community service organization at college called CHAMPIONS. We painted houses for Habitat for Humanity, worked as candy stripers, recycled paper at our college, and sent Books to South Africa, which was then still under apartheid. When I lived and worked in Washington D.C., I tutored elementary school children – and that’s where I met my husband Mark, a fellow volunteer. Since becoming an attorney and a mom, I have continued to volunteer by working on pro bono (for free) cases, serving as a Sunday school teacher and Girl Scout leader, being a Coon Rapids Lion, volunteering at my children’s school and teaching about the MN and federal Constitutions, law and government to middle and high school age students. I have worked hard with a lot of great parents on the Anoka Hennepin Parent Legislative Team, which was able to secure millions of dollars in funding for our school district by making sure the Legislature knew that Anoka Hennepin was not getting its fair share of state education funding. I worked with many residents of Coon Rapids as the co-chair of Coon Rapids All Aboard! to try to make Northstar Commuter Rail a reality. Finally, I serve on the Board of Directors of Free2B!, an Anoka County charity that accepts donated vehicles, fixes them, and makes them available to families who need them. I hope to continue to serve my community by representing us at the Minnesota House of Representatives.

2. Should the Legislature increase funding for K-12 education in the 2005-2007 biennium? If so, in which areas? If not, why not?

I support an increase in state funding for K-12 education for a few reasons. One is so that MN schools have the tools they need to comply with the new unfunded mandates issued by the federal government in the No Child Left Behind law. The goals of No Child Left Behind are laudable, we should close the achievement gap and make sure that all kids are meeting minimum standards, but our schools need resources to succeed. During the 2003-2004 biennium, we saw the Minnesota Legislature cut $185 million in education funding, cutting Early Childhood Family Education (ECFE), Head Start, K-12, special education, after school programs and school nutrition. These huge cuts came after the Legislature promised to “hold education harmless” from budget cuts. The Legislature broke that promise. One of the biggest reasons I am running is that the incumbent Rep. Olsen voted along party lines with her Republican colleagues for these deep cuts to our schools. These cuts were harsh, and I oppose them because they are harmful to our kids in Anoka-Hennepin. As our economy improves, we should rededicate ourselves to investing in our schools. Investing in our schools over the past 30 years has made Minnesota’s economy strong and buffered us from suffering more from the nationwide recessions. Prior to the Legislature’s harsh cuts in 2003 and 2004, our schools already were cutting back – on after school activities such as sports, on bus transportation to bring kids to school, on gifted and talented programs and on reading specialists, among other areas. These cuts are hitting families’ pocketbooks – it’s very hard for families to have to pay for the bus to take their kids to school and pay again for sports and other activities. It is important for us, as a community, to support our schools enough so that all kids who want to can ride the bus, for a safe trip to school, and so that all kids who want to can participate in after school activities, which will keep them safe and help them stay out of trouble. These investments benefit all of us.

3. Is MN best served by adhering to a “no new taxes” pledge as subscribed to by the governor? Do you support an increase/expansion in taxes? If so, be specific.

The “no new taxes” pledge has fostered a lot of deception in state government and, because of that, its effect has been harmful. The first deception was that the Governor and Legislature said they did not raise taxes but they did – they just called them fees. The second deception was that the Legislature claimed to have “balanced the budget” – which they did not do. Instead, the Legislature merely used one-time money, including the tobacco endowment and rainy day funds, and shifted payments for this year’s expenses into next year’s budget, to make the budget look balanced for a moment in time. In addition, we issued 20-year bonds to pay for one year of road improvements. The Legislature has us spending one million more dollars per day than we take in. That is not a balanced budget. As a result of these deceptions, shifts and gimmicks, we lost our AAA bond rating and so it is now more expensive for MN to borrow money. I believe we have an obligation to leave our state to our children in better condition than how it was given to us. Instead of improving our state, we are leaving our kids with a giant bill for short-term fixes. The budget decisions made by the Legislature in the last two years will leave us with greater expenses in the future – not only will our kids be paying for what they need in the future, but they will be paying interest on money we already spent. The no new taxes pledge would have been good if the Legislature would have used it as an opportunity to spend smarter and to level with Minnesota taxpayers about the fact that we all want more than we can afford to have. A real balanced budget would have forced all of us to face important questions about our priorities – do we want road improvements enough to pay for them? Do we want a strong state college and university system enough to pay for it? Also, we have to ask would we rather all contribute a little now for the greater good, or pay more on our own later – we can improve our roads or watch them take a toll on our cars and steal precious time from our jobs and families. We can invest in our colleges or pay high tuition. I stand with the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce in calling for an increase in Minnesota’s gas tax because I want road improvements enough to want to pay for them. I calculated that a nickel increase in the gas tax would cost me about $50.00 per year – it’s worth it if I can get through Highway 10, 252 or 169 faster, so I can spend more time with my family. It’s also worth it if I can prevent a broken axle on my vehicle or if I can pay less in day care because I can get home to my kids faster or if I can get in more hours at work, instead of spending that time in traffic. We need legislators who have the political courage to tell voters not only that they support transportation, but that they support a revenue increase that will allow us to actually make progress on it. A common “solution” thrown around by incumbent legislators is that we need to dedicate 100% of the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) to transportation – currently 32% goes to the general fund. Bringing that 32% to our transportation budget adds only $170 million annually – and we have $785 million in annual unmet needs right now. Clearly, 100% dedication of the MVST will not be enough to solve congestion. Given our current state budget, with one million dollars a day in deficit spending already, a candidate cannot truly be for improvements in transportation unless that candidate also supports finding a realistic way to pay for it. I am straightforward with the voters on this issue: we need improvements and we need additional revenue to pay for them. That is the unvarnished truth of the matter.

4. Do you support state funding for the Northstar Corridor commuter rail project as proposed by the governor? If not, why not, and what initiatives would you propose to ease congestion on north metro highways?

I have consistently supported funding for Northstar Commuter Rail. I co-chaired a citizen group called Coon Rapids All Aboard! which pushed for passage of Northstar in the last legislative session. North metro communities have had less state transportation investment than the communities of the south and west metro over the past 30 years. The Northstar Commuter Rail project is an important way to fight congestion in the Highway 10 corridor, which is one of the fastest growing areas in the state. While not all commuters will switch from driving to taking the train, Northstar will help to take some traffic off the road – leaving more room for the commuters who choose to drive and for the commercial traffic in our area. This is the second big reason I am challenging the incumbent legislator. While Rep. Olsen failed to take a position on Northstar for two years, Minnesota saw the federal government yank its support for a train station at the Foley Park and Ride and the federal government yanked its support for having the line go all the way to St. Cloud. Now federal money is only available to help MN with Northstar from Minneapolis to Big Lake. In 2004, Rep. Olsen voted both for and against Northstar -- on the same day! If the Minnesota Legislature passes $37.5 million in funding for Northstar, the federal government may provide as much as $130 million to help us. Northstar is a good investment for the north metro area. We also need to look at expanding Highway 10 to three lanes from the Foley/Egret area to Round Lake Boulevard; finishing 610; eventually rerouting 169 to a different bridge crossing the Mississippi (as the Champlin/Anoka bridge cannot handle the capacity we need); and improving 252.

5. Three stadium proposals are before the Legislature – Twins, Vikings and University of Minnesota. Do you support public funding for any or all of these stadiums? Why or why not?

The most important part of a Representative’s job is to represent the views of the people in her district at the Minnesota Legislature. I have been doorknocking throughout our district and talking to people about their views on the stadium proposals, and have found no real clear consensus on the stadiums. If elected, immediately following the election I would host a series of town meetings, one in each of the 15 neighborhoods (precincts) in 47B, to gather opinions about issues facing the upcoming Legislature. I think it is important for a legislator to ask the constituents their opinions before, not after, important legislation is passed, and I think a legislator should host meetings within each neighborhood to make it easier for residents to participate. At this point in time, I know much more about the Vikings proposal than the other two stadium proposals. My highest priority is to insure that the north metro area schools have fair funding – and one of the reasons our funding is so much lower than the funding for schools in south and west metro areas is because the south and west metro areas have a lot more commercial property than the north metro area. We have tended to be bedroom communities, with smaller value tax bases made up of houses. This has meant low school funding and higher homeowner property taxes for us. The Anoka County Vikings stadium could be a good investment for the taxpayers of Anoka County because it would allow us to grow our commercial/industrial tax base. The current proposal would not provide tax-increment financing (TIF) for the project, so it would immediately bring property tax revenue into Anoka County, which would relieve the property tax burden for homeowners. In addition, the proposal is not just for a sports stadium, but for a convention center and housing as well, which would bring additional property tax revenue to Anoka County, further reducing the property tax burden on homeowners.

If I had to choose between spending money for stadiums or using the same money for education, transportation, or healthcare, there’s no doubt that I would choose the latter. Unfortunately, those are not the choices available because there are local and private contributions that only become available as part of stadium packages that include some state financing. I do not think we should build a stadium for billionaire owners and millionaire players and hand the keys over to them. We should only build a stadium if it provides a significant return on our investment and adds to the quality of life in Minnesota.

The Legislature did pass a bill to build a Twins Stadium two years ago. Nothing has happened because the law was so convoluted and onerous. We need to straighten that out and make it possible for Minneapolis and Saint Paul to make realistic proposals for outdoor stadiums. The Twins have been playoff contenders for three straight years, yet the attendance at the Metrodome is terrible because baseball fans simply do not want to see games there. A new baseball stadium would be a boon for the economy of whichever city hosts it.

The Metrodome was built for the Vikings, and their lease expires in 2010. They are free to leave Minnesota and go wherever they want to after that. And we would pay dearly to get a new NFL team. That’s what happened when NFL teams left Baltimore, Cleveland, Saint Louis, and Houston. So far, only Anoka County has made a proposal for a Vikings stadium. Their proposal is part of a larger economic development in eastern Blaine, which would include a major hotel, medical facilities, specialty stores, and much more. The land will be developed with or without a stadium, but time is running out on options for that land. The Anoka County proposal would include an increase in the local sales tax, comparable to many local sales taxes around the state. Anoka County projects that it would take in far more money than the sales tax would cost, which would reduce Anoka County property taxes. The local sales tax is quite controversial, and people I have met have very mixed feelings on it. I’d like to work with the County and with my constituents on this issue.

The University of Minnesota Gophers cannot leave the state, but I believe most Minnesotans think that the Gophers should be back on campus. Their stadium does not have to be large or fancy. If we work with the University administration and private donors, I think we can find a way to bring the Gopher football games back to the campus.