Don’t blame Gov. Tim Pawlenty for the failure of Minnesota school districts to benefit from wind energy revenues.

No, siree.

The Wind Power Production Tax Credit failed for other reasons and while it may sound like “political bickering” setting the record straight is important to one state senator caught in the middle of the controversy.

State Sen. Dave Senjem said blaming the governor is wrong.

“The WPTC was part of the Tax Bill and which was part of our Global Agreement and he clearly did not veto it,” Senjem said of the governor’s exclusion from blame-fixing. “The governor’s staff have further indicated that they would not have suggested removal of the WPTC from the Tax Bill.”

“Veto” may have been the wrong word to use in a recent Austin Daily Herald report of the WPTC’s failure to mass muster during the 2008 Minnesota legislative session, but it was used by upset school superintendents such as Joseph E. Brown, superintendent of Grand Meadow public schools.

Grand Meadow’s school district has become the “wind energy capital” — at least — of Mower County if not all of southeastern Minnesota.

When wind energy firms wanted to locate their turbines and other facilities, including electrical transmission lines in the school district, Mower County planning and zoning officials and then the entire county board did so, only with the understanding, the firms would share their profits with school districts, townships and the county and the Minnesota Legislature would support that.

When Grand Meadow first realized some wind energy profits, the state of Minnesota reduced its state aid to education by the same amount.

Brown said “I literally got sick to my stomach when I heard the news” of the failure of the WPTC legislation.

Brown estimated the revenue loss at $50,000 immediately for the Grand Meadow school district in 2008-09 and between $75,000 to $100,000 thereafter.

Sharing wind energy profits would have helped offset those revenue losses.

Brown and others — the local legislative delegation included — all blamed it on the governor. “I am extremely upset with the action of Governor Pawlenty,” Brown said.

The superintendent estimated the nominal increase the district will receive in state aid to education will “only cover the increase in gasoline it will cost to put our buses on the road.”

Frustration

Senjem acknowledged feeling frustration the WPTC legislation didn’t pass, but stopped short of blaming the Governor.

“I can tell you this. I carried the bill in the Senate to reinstate the WPTC after the DFL had taken it out of the Education Finance Bill last year,” he said in way of explanation. “I had a hearing before the Senate Education Finance Committee chaired by Sen. LeRoy Stumpf.”

Senjem continued, “To read that the DFL is blaming our Governor for the WPTC not becoming law is very disturbing. I can only hope, because I like Sen. Sparks and Rep. Poppe, that they have been misinformed and are not simply lying. I suppose I can write a guest editorial giving the public the truth but that is simply going to look like partisan bickering.”

Senjem is, of course, a Republican, Sparks and Poppe are DFLers and state Rep. Robin Brown, another DFLer, is the wife of the Grand Meadow superintendent.

But blame-fixing accusations along with shoddy journalism, an anticipated source of revenue expected by financially struggling school districts will not be theirs. Even Senjem agrees to that.

“No, they will not get the wind energy revenues,” he said.

And, the state senator advised, “Laying the blame for this at the foot of the governor is unfortunate and more importantly inaccurate.”

“The governor did not veto this measure. Neither he, nor was his staff, were even involved the removal of the provision from HF 3149, the Tax Conference Committee Report,” Senjem said.

The Rochester Republican also said, “I tried at least once in a committee, the Senate Education Finance Committee, and twice with floor amendments to get this wind power production tax revenues to school districts. Since I am a Republican I would have been far less energized to push this in the Senate and even risk a governor’s veto if he had concerns with it.”

“While I am willing to buck my governor and my party, I would not with a provision that I knew going in had limited DFL support and clearly the DFL votes were not there to help me override a

governor’s veto,” he explained.

Obviously, the state senator was incensed at the misinterpretation and criticism and that propelled Senjen’s offering the “back story” to the WPTC legislative battle.

“Going back is a provision itself, the DFL Education Finance Chair, Sen. (LeRoy) Stumpf, held the bill over for possible inclusion in the Senate Omnibus Education Finance Bill,” he said. “I understood that this was a polite way to kill

the measure as I also knew from his comments that day that he did not like this provision.”

“I also tried to get this passed on the floor by

amending the measure on two separate occasions bills coming to the floor to which this provision was germane,” he said. “The DFL majority killed my measure each time on the floor. The votes are in the Senate journal and can be researched if motivated.”

Enter Sparks

“Just before my third attempt to get it passed

with a floor amendment I decided to give the amendment to Sen. Sparks feeling that it may be a little harder for the DFL to defeat an amendment by one of their own,” Senjem said.

“As it turned out the amendment passed

31-30,” he said.

“There was a bit of legislative floor art to this in that I had

my floor whip, Sen. Limmer voting ‘no’ throughout the period of voting,” he recalled.

“Just before the voting board closed the vote was 30-31 to defeat the

Sparks amendment,” Senjem said.

Then, things changed dramatically.

“At the instant the Senate President announced his intent to close the board and lock the votes, Sen. Limmer flipped his vote and the Sparks amendment prevailed 31-30 much to the chagrin of DFL

leadership,” he said.

Key DFL leadership, like Majority Leader Sen. Pogemiller, Assistant Majority Taryl Clark and Tax Chair Sen. Bakk, voted against the provision.

Stumpf was among the six members absent for that vote, according to Senjem’s detailed account of the decline and fall of the wind energy revenue legislation

When all was said and done by Senjem, what remained the bottom line?

“The governor could not have vetoed a provision which was never sent to

him,” Senjem said in rebutting the critics’ observations and the reporter’s interpretations.

Bottom line, also, struggling rural Minnesota school districts did not get the financial boost they needed and expected.