I think the operative here is that we expect our government to open and transparent. We expect our representatives to NOT use their position to unfairly profit from their decisions. But then unlike our Republican friends, I believe in good government.

It would be a scandal if she bought the land while the negotiations were going on. To be fair to Carol Molnau everybody and their brother knew that her family owned land in that area.

I agree with DTM.

“Her own family benefited from real estate transactions concerning the family farm adjacent to the right of way of the new Highway 212 in Chaska.”

http://northstar.sierraclubaction.org/showalert.asp?aaid=171

Since it references governor-elect, its from a /long/ time ago. I think this is just the strib dusting off the old stories they didn’t publish or were thinking of publishing and finding it more relevant today than it was when it was first known.

Minnesota Daily published an excerpt of the Sierra Club notice in 2003: http://www.mndaily.com/articles/2003/03/14/38286

However — there /has/ been major armtwisting about who could/couldn’t vote on Northstar due to ‘conflict of intetrest’. Rep Abeler (R-Anoka) and Rep. Dittrich (D-Champlin) have been beaten about the head and shoulders on this issue.

My feeling is that those who do vote anyways do disclose interests and if it becomes an issue next election it becomes an issue. Many politicians do have major land interests in their home communities and should their constituents be hamstrung for choosing someone with those accomplishments? I like to gauge these sorts of issues against the goal of having more non-conventional politicians, in the hope that getting away from the all-lawyers-all-the-time (yes, I do still like lawyers, but that shouldn’t exclude non-lawyers from politics) will bring better representation (or at least a less ultra-partisan diversity of opinion) in the end.

Give me a break.

Yeah, she should have disclosed. This is a HUGE ethical lapse.

I love the republican appologistia who habitually pop up here.

I can just see the follow-up stories:
MOLNAU OWNS CAR, DRIVES ON HIGHWAYS
or
MOLNAU COULD TAKE BUS TO WORK, BUT DOESN’T

The Star Tribune has lied about its ciculation numbers, hired a publishr who stole documents from the Pioneer Press, stole an editorial from the NY Times, and has seen a consistent decline in readership. They’ve had it in for Molnau for a long time, and this story is weak.

Pathetic really.

My point is that the Molnau land was going to sell for $3.3M whether a road was there or not, and whether Ms. Molnau was ever a member of the state house or not.

Seriously, did Hwy. 212 need to be upgraded, yes. Like many other roads that lead to outer ring suburbs it was over capacity, There certainly was a lot of pressure from Republican constituencies to make the improvements. But to say you didn’t think it would add to the value of the land you were negotiating to sell to one the countries largest home builders is ludicrous.

Yet another example of why Carol Molnau must go, NOW. Her department is in shambles, morale has tanked, the OLA report is damning in it’s assessment of how maintenance has bee put aside to build suburban freeway lanes. In reality she has only pursued the policies of her boss TPaw, but we can’t get rid of him for 3 more years.

That is the exact area of Molnau’s farm. That land was like gold before the highway was built. Maybe the highway added a slight premium, but it is not like those people were going to be driving on gravel roads to to 494…. It was being heavily developed long before this occurred.

The Molnaus did what every other farmer in the path of urban sprawl has done, road or not: Sold, because you cannot generate a farming profit when you are saddled with developer-driven property taxes.

I’m not Molnau fan. I wasn’t when Pawlenty picked her and I’m not today. But this story is nothing short of tabloid journalism.