Minnesota Network for Progressive Action

About Comments
The mnpACT! blog welcomes all comments from visitors, which are immediately posted, but we also filter for spammers:
  • No active URLs or web links are allowed (use www.yourweb.com).
  • No drug or pharma- ceutical names are allowed.
  • Your comment "Name" must be one word with no spaces and cannot be an email address.
You should also note that a few IP addresses and homepage URLs have been banned from posting comments because they have posted multiple spam messages.

Please be aware we monitor ALL comments and reserve the right to delete obvious spam comments.



 
Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Listed on BlogShares

 
site search

Site Meter
 
  Progressive Political Blog

Progressive Politics in Minnesota, the Nation, and the World

Horner Case In Point: I-35 Bridge/FlatIron

Category: Tom Horner
Posted: 09/18/10 20:21

by Dave Mindeman

With all the talk about Tom Horner over the last week there seems to be something missing. A look at his record.

Although Horner has never been a legislator, he has had dealings with state government....and as an example of that I want to go back to the I-35 Bridge project. There are questions there that need to be asked.

After the bridge went down, the focus was on the why it happened and about getting the new bridge built. Federal money was quickly forthcoming and our Fed fund shy governor was all too willing to take it.

But to award the new contract, MnDOT had to make the decision. Under Minnesota law they were to make that decision under a Design/Build selection process.

This process turned into a very technical oriented system in this case. The bidding process had some twists and turns.

For instance, here are the 4 bids that were considered:

McCrossan......$176,938,000
Ames/Lunda...$178,489,561
Walsh............$219,000,000
FlatIron..........$233,763,000

Since the project needed to be done quickly, estimated completion time was a factor as well:

McCrossan......367 Days
Ames/Lunda...392 Days
Walsh............437 Days
FlatIron..........437 Days

Now one would think that these two elements would be pretty important. After all this is a bidding process and money and time matter a great deal.

However, in the end, it was FlatIron, the bidder with the costliest bid and the longest build time that won the contract.

To determine why, you have to understand that two other criteria were weighted in importance.

Aesthetics: The bridge appearance in the end was also considered heavily. This structure would be with Minnesota a long time and it needed to be both structurally sound and pleasing to the eye.

Public Relations: MnDOT was very sensitive about their image after the August, 2007 disaster. They wanted the bridge builders to be part of the image making process.

And who was the public relations firm that represented FlatIron, an out of state company? Himlie HORNER.

Somehow, FlatIron got this very public bridge contract with a bid that would cost the state of Minnesota an additional $57 million. A state that had massive transportation needs and deficits.

It raises some questions.

The scoring process was very subjective and the lower bidders were questioning how these numbers were arrived at:

The Flatiron team was able to win the bidding process Wednesday because of its high technical score of 91.47. The technical score was based on design elements, bridge aesthetics, site improvements, quality assurance, safety, public relations efforts and other factors.

The two regional teams filing the protest, C.S. McCrossan and Ames/Lunda, say the Minnesota Department of Transportation "misdirected" them about what the state wanted to replace the bridge, which collapsed on Aug. 1. Each had offered to build the bridge for $50 million less than Flatiron-Manson.

Even though Flatiron had a the highest bid and the longest build process they ran away with the technical scores. A process that MnDOT had not emphasized as much with other bidding processes.

Flatiron, a Colorado based company, seemed to "know" that PR and aesthetics would be counted on heavily. How could their submission have hit all the right areas that MnDOT wanted?

In the summary of findings for each bidder, there were some interesting quotes:

Under Public Relations: (FlatIron)

Strengths: -- The Resources of Himlie-Horner are brought to the project.

-- The target audience is defined very broadly and they appear to have a well thought-out public relations program.

--The Technical Subcommittee highly recommended this team for their approach to Public Relations. There is a high likelihood of success for this project.

--The team has won Public Relations awards as depicted in their proposal.


Under Public Relations: (C.S. McCrossan)

Weaknesses:-- The Public Relations efforts appear to be similar to other standard transportation projects.

--The targeted audience appears to be local.


Himlie-Horner was known to have close ties to the Pawlenty administration before Horner's epiphany with the IP.

These are quotes from a Star Tribune article from March 16, 2008 (archived):

The communications strategy of Himle Horner, which has close ties to Gov. Tim Pawlenty, went beyond the particulars of building a new bridge with a promise to resurrect MnDOT's image.

Was the hiring of Himlie-Horner, by Flatiron, a way to curry favor?

Ever since the bridge's contract was awarded, critics -- including those who did not win the contract -- have complained that MnDOT has seemed overly concerned with PR.

Did Horner Himlie know about or push for, MnDOT's newfound obsession with improving their public relations image?

Points awarded for public relations counted for 15 percent of the technical scoring that determined which company was chosen -- a percentage that was almost four times higher than MnDOT had used on most of the projects where a similar bidding process was in play.

Four times higher? Yet, FlatIron seemed to have the bid that had the most emphasis on PR.

Charles McCrossan, the president of C.S. McCrossan Inc., one of the unsuccessful bidders, said taxpayers are now paying for a string of Himle Horner-inspired events that focus media attention on the bridge's predictable progress. "Gosh, they poured 100 yards of concrete, isn't that something?" he said. "It's no more tricky than having breakfast."

But Himlie-Horner was paid over a half million dollars for those little tidbits.

But in addition, the ties of Himlie-Horner to the GOP are strong....

A former Republican assistant majority leader in the Legislature, Himle (Horner's partner) is a campaign contributor to Pawlenty who said he and others on his staff know the state's top leaders from both major political parties.

Himle was appointed by then-Republican Gov. Arne Carlson to the Metropolitan Airports Commission, and a senior account executive at the company formerly worked for Pawlenty's office and produced the governor's weekly radio show.


Horner's company did business with the state of Minnesota. In the past few years, they had a well known reputation that businesses who wanted to contract with the state seek out. If you were seeking a contract with the Pawlenty administration you hired Himlie Horner.

But now, only a few years later and with Horner's ties only recently severed with his own company, we are supposed to believe that this kind of influence on state government, that Horner's "former" client list (which he will not divulge) counted on, will simply end?

Do you believe it?
comments (0) permalink

Re: Tom Horner: Would You Buy A Used Car From This Guy?

Category: Tom Horner
Posted: 09/16/10 13:54, Edited: 09/16/10 20:11

by Dave Mindeman

The 2010 Governor race is the biggest public relations coup of Tom Horner's career, and the Independence Party has become the unwitting vehicle to bring it to fruition.

Can anyone, anyone at all, point to anything in the career of Tom Horner, prior to 2009 that would remotely resemble a centrist politcal stance. Anything, anywhere, anytime.

I can't.

Although I can't say I have been a fan or a member of the IP, I have followed with genuine interest the Independence Party's evolution...and it has indeed been an evolution....for a decade now. And frankly, the party has sold out.

The 1998 Jesse Ventura win was a true grass roots, groundswell effort. It was fueled by the personality of Ventura himself but it created an opportunity for the emergence of a full fledged third party alternative. But during the Ventura tenure, no efforts were made to build any party infrastructure beyond that opening salvo. And in the decade since, the IP has struggled to match that early success. They have plodded along with the likes of Dean Barkley and Jack Uldrich, but the local organization needed to really create a party mechanism, but it never happened.

Enter Tom Horner.

When Horner announced his quest for the IP nomination, he said:

"I've stayed right here. ... It is the Republican party that has moved way out there," Horner said, gesticulating his right hand fully to his right.

So, Mr. Horner, the Republicans moved away from you, but does that really mean that the IP entered your own personal political place? The aide to Sen. Dave Durenberger place? The GOP commentator on MPR place?

The Independence Party was supposed to be a true alternative choice. They adopted the no holds barred Ventura attitude. They wanted to rock the boat. But as time went by and the ability to spoil but not win became their trademark, the Party began to lose its appeal.

Horner saw opportunity. With Horner's public relations strategy in tow coupled with a party desperate to latch onto someone viable, the two entities have merged into a Republican hybrid. It replaced the boa's and the braided beards with 3 piece suits and expensive haircuts. The "beholden to nobody" mantra turns into the ultimate business friend.

The IP has turned into a corporate tool.

It was interesting to note a small paragraph in a Star Tribune article about a Chamber of Commerce debate:

After a Chamber of Commerce debate in Nisswa a few weeks ago, Horner was the last candidate to leave. As staff noisily disassembled tables, he stayed to huddle with clusters of business leaders, listening to concerns and sharing ideas.

Horner has had relationships with businesses all of his professional life. He is the consummate corporate guy. They have been his clients with the Himlie-Horner PR firm. He won't divulge the specifics of course, although he has been asked to do so. Rather than name names, he divested his interest in his own firm. Does Horner have some chips to play with the names he protected? It is hard to believe that they won't have some influence in a potential Horner administration.

Now there is nothing wrong with that by itself, but when it starts to affect policy...well, that's another matter. Is it any accident that under the guise of "Community Revitalization", Horner puts a plan on his website that heavily favors corporate business.

He has a number of programs listed which will cost money but with no method of payment. The emphasis is on eventual elimination of the corporate income tax, funding for research and innovation, sales tax exemption for capital equipment, and streamlining regulations. In addition he suggests bonding for broadband, supporting vocational training, and some infrastructure. Borrowed money for some decent programs, but all with the corporate mindset behind it. He labels it Community Revitalization.... it amounts to a corporate giveaway.

Horner gets a lot of mileage out of the "partisan gridlock". In the truest PR sense of the word, he claims the centrist mantle and criticizes the party conflicts that he was so much a part of when he was an analyst with MPR.

I will go into the details of Horner policy ideas in another post, but let's just say that Horner is pulling the ultimate public relations game on the citizens of Minnesota.

Don't buy what he's selling.
comments (0) permalink

The Carlson Endorsement of Horner..What Does It Mean?

Category: Tom Horner
Posted: 09/14/10 04:45

by Dave Mindeman

On a day when Mark Dayton was giving an extraordinarily detailed defense of his tax plan at the Humphrey Institute, the headlines centered around former Gov. Arne Carlson's endorsement of IP candidate Tom Horner.

Is that a big deal?

Depends.....on who you talk to.

The Horner campaign wants everyone to think it is. They are taking Arne with them on their political rounds. And I think former Gov. Carlson loves the attention. After all, the Minnesota GOP has been trying to portray Carlson as a Republican pariah for some time now.

Yet, the most interesting reaction came from the GOP themselves. They attacked the endorsement immediately with a desperate attempt to link Carlson as a supporter of Democrats; they quickly pointed to Carlson's endorsement of Obama during the 2008 cycle.

All of this seems to be leading to an internal GOP fight. The "new" Republican party of Emmer, Sutton, and Brodkorb have nearly ignored the moderate wing of the state GOP. It is as if that wing no longer exists. However, the official state party response would seem to indicate that they are, indeed, worried about losing something with this Carlson endorsement of Horner.

So....maybe they do exist after all?

Dayton was asked about the endorsement during his talk at the Institute, and his response was perfect:

"They're all Republicans."

Right now, Horner has benefitted most from a restless independent voter (small i) who has a natural distrust of both parties. Gov. Carlson has some pull with that group but they clearly still recognize Carlson as a Republican.

If the interest in Horner does increase, as it probably will temporarily, independents looking into the details of Tom Horner will also find a heavily Republican background. From his days as a GOP MPR consultant to his business support of Republicans, Horner has clearly been, (at least up till his sudden IP gubernatorial interest), a Republican.

Mark Dayton can stay out of that squabble. He has more important things to do......like winning an election.
comments (0) permalink

Calendar

« November 2017 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30


Latest posts


Archive

(one year)

Categories


Comments



Links


RSS Feeds

RSS 0.91
RSS 2.0

 
 
 
Powered by
Powered by SBlog
 
Copyright © Minnesota Network for Progressive Action. All rights reserved. Legal. Privacy Policy. Sitemap.