|
|
|
|
| B- | Minnesota |
• Population (rank): 5,167,101 (21)
• Average per capita income (rank): $27,591 (9)
• Total state spending (rank): $30,988,533,000 (15)
• Spending per capita (rank): $5,997 (12)
• Governor: Tim Pawlenty (R)
• First elected: 11/2002
• Senate: 67 members: 45 D, 22 R
• Term limits: None
• House: 134 members: 85 D, 48 R, 1 I
• Term limits: None
In the wake of the Mississippi River bridge collapse in Minnesota last summer, a harsh light was cast on the way the state had been treating its infrastructure — more like a political football than a vital asset. Just a few months earlier, for example, a bipartisan group of legislators had passed a 10-cents per-gallon increase in the gas tax, in part to help with maintenance, but Governor Tim Pawlenty vetoed it. A couple of years ago, it was the governor who proposed to issue $4.5 billion in bonds for infrastructure needs, but the legislature didn't act.
Many observers thought that last summer's tragic incident, now believed to have been caused by a design flaw in the 1960s-era bridge, would be a wake-up call to state leaders. But after an immediate spate of commentary, little has happened to address Minnesota's sizeable backlog in road and bridge repairs. Both the governor and legislature proposed solutions that the other side then rejected. The state may get back on track this year. In January, Pawlenty proposed a $1 billion bonding bill that reserves more than $400 million for transportation projects, including more than $200 million for bridges. But that still leaves lots to do.
It's been discouraging for the Pawlenty administration, which has done some very good work on other fronts. Dane Smith, the president of Growth & Justice, a liberal activist group, strongly opposes Pawlenty on most issues, but gives the governor credit for paying attention to the day-to-day aspects of state management. The governor has made efficiency a hallmark of his administration, most prominently through his Drive to Excellence, a series of 11 projects that have run the gamut from new workforce planning to building a centralized property management system.
To take one example, Minnesota is now a national leader in negotiating better prices for goods and services. "Many agencies were not aware they could negotiate with a vendor," says Kent Allin, the governor's chief procurement officer. He cites the experience of the state's Pollution Control Agency, which knocked thousands of dollars off the price of a single small contract just by asking for more documentation. Historically, Allin says, "some contractors probably thought we were suckers."
Progress also has been made on the technology front. Minnesota established a cabinet-level IT department that put together the state's first information technology master plan in January 2007. Many of Minnesota's smaller agencies are still laboring with antique technology, and the new department has successfully pressed to get them funding necessary for upgrades.
Last spring, Pawlenty announced plans to merge the state's central human resources office into the Department of Finance. To the governor's credit, he turned to the legislature for approval, even though he could legally have made the move on his own. In the end, the decision turned out to be uncontroversial. The state also is putting finishing touches on a new statewide workforce plan, due for release in June.
Minnesota appears to be at a crossroads when it comes to performance measurement. In the 1990s, the state was a pioneer in this field. Since then, the effort has had its ups and downs. Some of the downs are attributable to an overload of measures on the legislature, as well as an over-politicization of the process.
Now, the governor has asked all agencies to come up with no more than three new performance measures. It's an experiment in simplification. "In the past, agencies were just told to do it," says James Nobles, the state's legislative auditor, "rather than allowing them time to build infrastructure and training" necessary to put the measures to constructive use.
For the time being, one benefit appears clear: When the measures are designed by the people who actually do the work, they tend not to get distorted by political infighting. And that's a good thing.
For additional data and analysis, go to pewcenteronthestates.org/gpp.