Growing up, I always admired the wisdom and counsel of my grandfather. He once offered the same sage advice I heard later in life: "Never get in a st(ink)ing match with a skunk, unless you’ve got more st(ink)."I’ve tried to follow that advice in my career; but, last week’s column by Ms. Ehde is so blatantly devoid of facts that it requires an answer. In addition, Ehde’s obvious personal attack on current city council members demands a response. Ehde claims that in the 10 months since I became city administrator, the city has saved no money. How would Ehde know? She’s never been in city hall since I’ve been city administrator, she’s not attended even a single city meeting that I’m aware of and her total lack of financial facts is obvious. For example, consider the following items:oThe city obtained a $500,000 grant to pay for a portion of the water, sewer and street projects associated with the new hospital.oThe reorganization of city staff that included the reduction of two management and three staff positions. Annual savings to city taxpayers and utility customers totals more than $200,000 in the first 10 months. oThe city’s contract with Missouri River Energy Services for operation of the city’s electric utility will save electric customers $25,000 - $50,000 per year. oThe reorganization at the Community Pool & Fitness Center saved $40,000 per year. oTCI will eventually employ more than 150 people with an economic impact that totals millions of dollars each year. oThe city’s bond rating was recently upgraded to the "A" category as a result of our effort to improve and enhance the management of city finances. Interest savings associated with the recent bond sale are estimated at $25,000 - $35,000. oThe city council approved our recommendations regarding the prosecution of non-sufficient funds checks. Annual savings to city taxpayers totals $5,000.These are just a few of the cost savings implemented. But Ehde opposes the review of current contracts and agreements between the city and Rock County which may actually result in changes which would be beneficial to city taxpayers. The relevant question is: Why do city of Luverne taxpayers pay for 60 percent of dispatch and jail expenses through a "special premium tax" which is part of the current agreement?The reaction of Ms. Ehde and her cohorts to the city council’s directive to review all contracts and agreements which affect the city seems to be "if you don’t like the message, shoot the messenger." In other words, let’s simply launch a campaign of personal attacks designed to get rid of the city administrator.As city administrator, I represent the interests of city taxpayers and residents … and that means all city taxpayers and residents from the banker on Main Street to the high school teacher to the local barber and to the retired widow who’s trying to make ends meet and stay in her home and community. Frankly, I didn’t come to Luverne to sit on my backside and do little or nothing. I didn’t come to Luverne to be part of the "good old boys" or the local "political clique." I came to Luverne to do a job, to improve city programs and services, to enhance the city’s financial status and operations and to protect city taxpayers. The changes happening in Luverne are long overdue. Finally, allow me to say a word or two about the current city council. People may tend to disagree with policy decisions made by this, or any, city council. But make no mistake about the level of effort of this council, their commitment to continuing the outstanding level of programs and services provided to the citizens of Luverne, their dedication to "fair and equitable" contracts and agreements, and their unending pledge to protect city taxpayers. I also remember another piece of advice from my grandfather regarding skunks. He said: "Left to their own devices, many a skunk has been known to drown in their own st(ink).Sage advice grandpa … sage advice.Greg LaFondCity Administrator
