First, something I may post more about at some point, federal lobbyist Ken Butler, running an operation he founded in the DC beltway area, "Capital Partnerships, Inc.," is a lobbyist Anoka County used to a six-figure tune if not seven, when all the accounts are scrutinized. Six-figure, I know that from online county records.
Diana informs me Ramsey has done no business nor paid anything to lobbyist Ken Butler, or his firm, Capital Partnerships, Inc.
Lobbyist Butler is a contributor to the Tinklenberg campaign.
Second, the email I sent, with interlineated responses of Ms. Lund, my text in regular font, hers in italics (with the bottom line being no news is still news -- from City records she cannot say how much of lobbyist Elwyn Tinklenberg's billing the City has been for lobbying for Ramsey, who to, or for what specific purpose[s] -- she cannot say; and he won't, giving platitudes instead):
Mar. 6, 2008 -- Eric,
See responses below. They are probably not the answers you are looking for, but it is the best that I can supply based on the billings.
-----Original Message-----
From: eric zaetsch [mailto:... .com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:32 PM
To: Diana Lund
Subject: Thank you for the spreadsheet - but I am unclear on detail
Diana-
I want to understand the spreadsheet, so bear with me on these
questions:
I am unaware what your project-by-project designation entails. I expect much more information would be needed to inform me of details. To attempt to short circuit that burden on your time - is the following a correct reading:
[1] Reimburseable by other Agencies - Grand total $519,351.00
This means Tinklenberg Group billings in such a total amount were covered by grants, programs, etc., without any indication from the spreadsheet of what activities, billable or non-billable, if any, Tinklenberg Group made on behalf of securing such funding, from federal, state or local sources - and that I would have to look elsewhere or ask further questions to pin that down? Yes/no? What's happening?
The Reimbursable costs by other agencies were as such:
Access Mgmt Grant: SEH Engineering supplied the engineer data related to the Study of Highway 10 and Tinklenberg Coordinated report. SEH was paid via Tinklenberg and we reimbursed Tinklenberg. Access Mgmt Grant only covered costs associated with the actual work to complete report, not funding of securing grant. So the costs listed of $251,243.61 was totally paid by the grant.
[ed. note: SEH = Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc., has been reported as one of the key no-bid contract recipients to a total seven-figure amount during Tinklenberg's heading MnDOT and this was something that Tinklenberg took a lot heat over while head highwayman at MnDOT.]
Private Escrow Billings & RTC Marketing-Tinklenberg attended these meetings and private escrow accounts were charged for their time. $7,000 and 17,531.74 respectively.
RALF projects-Revolving Acquisition Loan Fund-The amount shown presents appraisals of Highway 10 properties paid by Tinklenberg and Jodi Ruehle's time for negotiating with parties ready to sell on 10 for the future highway. All costs are reimbursed by RALF funds. Individual budget is established for each property purchased. Jodi was used as no in-house staff person for negotiating. $269,819.26.
[2] Non-Reimburseable Expenses - Grand total $323,963.46
This means grants or outside was not attained and it was a city paid amount? Correct
[3] Total Reimb. + Non-Reimb. = Grand total $843,314.46
This is the grand total the city disbursed over the timeframe to Tinklenberg Group? Yes. But this included invoices Tinklenberg paid directly to individual vendors such as appraisers on the City's behalf and then reimbursed back in their billing.
[4] This one is the most confusing to me:
"Federal Project Coordination" Grand total $35,000.00 Amount is $3,500
I do not know what your accounting "Federal Project Coordination" means. Bottom line, are you saying that this was the only part of the $843,314.46 Ramsey paid which covered Tinklenberg Group contact with federal officials; or does it mean something else; and if it means something else then am I correct in presuming the federal contact billings is in some indeterminate amount at least less than $843,314.46 but otherwise indeterminate in amount without detailed examination of Tinklenberg Group time-and-billing records [something public data disclosure law does not give me access to]? Generally the federal project coordination and the General Consulting service line could include work pertaining to coordinating the grants for the parking ramp and Sunwood Blvd. The General Consulting portion does not break out information you requested.
The last item, [4], is the core of my concern - and if the "Federal Project Coordination" breakout of only $35,000 is something you can say, with reasonable certainty, was the only Tinklenberg Group billed federal government contact activity, please say so; and if not, please say that. The amount was $3,500 and as listed above the general consulting portion of their bill does not breakout in the form that you have requested.
[5] If you have a way of telling me from city records how much was paid Tinklenberg Group, total over that timespan, for its personnel making travel to DC etc., to contact federal officials on behalf of Ramsey or any of its actions, time billed as spent contacting federal officials; etc., than would you please give me the bottom line lump sum amount you can, with reasonable certainty and within what you regard as generally accepted accounting methods, etc.
Conversely, if you cannot from your records identify such earmarking of Tinklenberg Group activity, please let me know that. The only amount that I can breakout regarding travel to Washington is in the amount of $8,678 for years 2004 and 2005.
[6] Likewise to item [5], can you give me reliable breakouts for Tinklenberg Group activity contacting state officials, on behalf of Ramsey or any of its actions? No, billings do not differentiate.
[7] If you can in response to items [5] and [6] give me bottom line grand total amounts for the entire timeframe, federal lobbying-like activity amounts billed, and state lobbying-like activity amounts billed; please do so. No, billings do not differentiate.
I am satisfied I have gotten a proper good faith reply. And it was more prompt than I was in getting the information posted.
Wouldn't it be nice for Tink to give numbers?
Something beyond putting a dismissive spin-doctor out-front, saying, "No problem. Trust me." And then circulating something that GOP blogger Triple-A publicizes more than Tinklenberg did, and which begs the entire question of how much he has been lobbying, and what's it been for and what's it gotten him to aid his lifestyle needs and preferences. And who has he lobbied? And who has paid him to lobby?
"Trust me," he says.
Bottom line: I don't.
__________UPDATE_____________
The Residual Forces posting of a generally unsubstantiated Tinklenberg blanket claim of non-lobbyist status is noteworthy, particularly when the books and records and numbers constituting proof one way or the other are held in Tinklenberg's hands but withheld from disclosure to the voting public, by Elwyn Tinklenberg, and by his advisors who are making the unsubstantiated claims.
I try to post evidence. I track down online records, as do other bloggers, that show cities in their meeting minutes discussing the buying what they believed and published online to be lobbying effort from Tinklenberg Group.
Who do you figure led those city officials to think that buying into the Tink was buying influential lobbying? Santa Claus? The Easter Bunny? James Oberstar, himself? Is Oberstar going to these cities saying he is philosophically close to Tinklenberg and they regularly have discussions? I doubt that. So who is "selling" these people on there being wisdom in giving tax dollars to Elwyn?
Not me. I see absolutely no justification for it.
It sure looks as if those Tinklenberg people simply hide from such obvious questions and truthful underlying disclosure of books and records, and instead spin-doctor their time away.
It is disconcerting to see that avoidance behavior in someone who wants the public trust of being elected to Congress. It shows, I suggest, a disrespect for Congress and what it means to serve there.
Such a disrespect is nowhere shown by Tinklenberg's DFL opponent, Bob Olson, who would serve well and honorably, if elected. And he would do so without any evidence indicating he might wish to become a lobbyist after serving, using the chance to serve as a springboard to making very substantial amounts of money later, out of that opportunity. Nowhere is there any hint that would be a problem with Bob Olson.
Tinklenberg, on the other hand? What's the track record? Do leopards change their spots?
TODAY'S UPDATE BIG QUESTION: Besides calling people who blog and post back-up documents untruthful, will the Tinklenberg campaign folks now disclaim as false the above numbers Diana Lund, Ramsey city official, provided in a lawful and proper and honest way in response to a public data inquiry?
It appears to me that while unfortunately not definitive on the "extent of lobbying" question that Lund gave me sound data. I have no grounds to doubt that at all.
And it seems Lund provides the voting public a truth that Elwyn Tinklenberg cannot hide from or disprove.
Elwyn Tinklenberg took down City of Ramsey for over eight-hundred-forty thousand dollars, and no matter what he says about it, that number speaks for itself. Will he deny the amount? Will he deny that such a large amount of money would not have been disbursed without billings he and Tinklenberg Group prepared and submitted? Will he make public his billing and contract solicitation records for Ramsey, Elk River, Albertville, and East Bethel? Will he disclose the actual data, and not release only lengthy summary or conclusory statements that boil down to "Trust me?" We have to wait and see.