_____________UPDATE_____________
One person emailed, 1 min 13 sec. I made it further, but then I ran it with no sound, making it closer to another epic, Birth of a Nation. For those unsure, in these days of tough government budgets, and hard times for all, the how/who of how this epic got funded, this image, Citizen-Sentinel Look, a careful shepherd of public money, watchful to avoid unneeded waste. Recall he's repeatedly told us finance only needs, not wants:
 |
| This link. From there, this link-over. |
Did City of Ramsey pick up any part of the production tab?
If so, how much of it - how many city taxpayer dollars were spent that way?
If not, how much did the county pay to produce a video that amounts to little but politician ego trips?
____________FURTHER UPDATE____________
In response to an email, Ramsey City Administrator Kurt Ulrich explained that the production of that video was "not something we participated in as a City." With the item being posted as an Anoka County production, and absent evidence to the contrary, one assumes full cost of production came from County funds. I have not searched county online records to see how video productions are handled - whether a staff skill set, by consultancy, or by contract with QCTV. In any event, it cost, and the cost had to be borne by County taxpayers to memorialize the event, such as it was, such as it was memorialized. Surely larger expenditures exist. But for something having so clear a cost-benefit balance as this hummer, waste is waste, with debate only as to relative magnitude. Benefit is marginal, at best.
___________FURTHER UPDATE_________
One comment made to me, this should go to the Campaign Finance Board as the County giving two politicians in kind contributions, is something I would not dispute. Somehow, I have a gut feeling it was more the brainchild of one of the two, the other going along for the ride. Both are up for reelection.
______________FURTHER UPDATE_____________
A person I respect emailed saying the last above update
[...] is actually kind of silly. So you do realize how many politicians could get whacked if they somehow violated Campaign Finance by bloviating over their publicly funded projects, right?
"Bloviating" is different from inducing a government to pay for audio-visual material at taxpayer expense with an intent to later use it on a campaigning website, or inducing it with innocent intent but then later deciding to use it as campaign material.
The point is where do you draw the line. Should the County pay for Matt Look printing himself a batch of lawn and highway signs touting his reelection? Clearly not, so, then, where do you draw the line? I would cut the slack of saying the dog-pony video was done, and exists, without harm or error but if it is downloaded to or linked later in a reelection campaign of either of the gentlemen featured; it would be and should be treated as a CFB violation.
If it sits as being offensive to some, perhaps less so to others, but as a county thing not used in any fashion to tout a reelection, there's no harm, no foul. Clearly, anybody can "bloviate" over "I caused this, or I caused that" to happen while in office - Look touted the City of Ramsey buying the distressed Town Center as somehow "fixing" the city last election - but he did that in authoring a Facebook entry - not in utilizing a personally aimed audio-visual prop that at the time of its production was little but a tout-piece for a pair of politicians, but paid for from public money.