« MDE EXCLUSIVE: DID DENISE DITTRICH FAIL TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST? #7 | Home | MDE EXCLUSIVE: DID DENISE DITTRICH FAIL TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST? #9 »
MDE EXCLUSIVE: DID DENISE DITTRICH FAIL TO DISCLOSE CONFLICT OF INTEREST? #8
By Michael B. Brodkorb | August 23, 2006
This post should bring you up to date on Representative Denise Dittrich's conflict of interest. I'll have another bombshell about Dittrich tomorrow.
##
Representative Denise Dittrich is a freshman DFL legislator from Champlin - HD 47A. Dittrich spent over $90,000 in personal money in 2004 to beat Representative Bill Haas.
Haas was an outspoken critic of the Northstar Commuter Rail line - Dittrich campaigned as a supporter of Northstar. Dittrich once distributed campaign literature FOR Hass. Source: Coon Rapids Herald website, August 16, 2004
I haven't been presented with any evidence that Dittrich disclosed her conflict of interest while campaigning against Haas.
It is the responsibility of a candidate and a public official to disclose a potential conflict of interest. Representative Abler notified Speaker Sviggum about his potential conflict of interest. I haven't been presented with any evidence of Dittrich notifying the Sviggum, as she was required to do:
"A public official who in the course of official duties would be required to take an action or make a decision that would substantially affect the official's financial interest or those of an associated business must take certain actions. The official must provide a written statement describing the potential conflict or fill out a Potential Conflict of Interest form. The written document must be given to the official's immediate superior. If the conflict involves a member of the legislature or the governing body of a metropolitan governmental unit, the document must be given to the presiding officer of the body of service. If there is insufficient time to comply with the written requirement, the official must give oral notice to their immediate supervisor of the possible conflict." Source: Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board
After spending almost $100,000 to defeat Hass, Dittrich is placed on the House Transportation Committee.
Keeping her campaign promise to be an advocate for Northstar, Dittrich authors legislation for funding. On April 12, 2006, Dittrich votes for the bonding bill that gives the Northstar project $60 million dollars.
Should Dittrich have authored a bill for Northstar funding? NO! Should she have even voted for the funding in the bonding bill ? NO!
According to Representative Denise Dittrich's Statement of Economic Interest, she owns property at 333 N Washington Avenue in Minneapolis. Public records available at Hennepin County show the property owner is Duddy Limited Partnership.
The property owned by Dittrich is very close to where the new Twins stadium will be built. Dittrich abstained from voting on the Twins stadium because of her conflict of interest. The property owned by Dittrich will rise in value because of its proximity to the new stadium.
In KSTP's story on Dittrich's conflict of interest, Tom Hauser read a statement from Dittrich claiming she owns 1% of a partnership that owns 333 N Washington Avenue.
If this "partnership" is Duddy Limited Partnership, then Dittrich should have disclosed her ownership on her Statement of Economic Interest.
Click here and review this document. It shows (pg. 2) that Duddy Limited Partnership owns the property adjacent to 333 N Washington Avenue. The address is 328 4th Street N.
Does Representative Dittrich also own a portion of this land (see pg. 4)? If so, why did she not disclose it on her Statement of Economic Interest (pg. 1)?
Topics: Denise Dittrich |
August 23rd, 2006 at 9:39 pm
Wow, Michael. Three more posts on this topic and you will best your personal record for hyping a dead horse.
August 24th, 2006 at 12:52 am
So, if this turns out to be dismissed, I’ll buy Ron Carey and Jeff Johnson a dilly bar each and present it to them on the steps of the Capital Building.
Sound fair enough?
August 24th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Normally, a general partner in a limited partnership has a 1% interest, with limited partners holding the other 99%. In closely held limited partnerships, it is very common for the 99% limited partners to be family memembers or trusts for the benefit of family members. You should try and find out who the limiteds are.
August 24th, 2006 at 4:41 pm
As a land investor, 1% is unheard of in a partnership. $20k on $4.5 million. Foolish lie. How much of her investment was sold just prior to the vote? DittRICH’s have a load of cash. $20k is a weekend in the Hamptons for them.
August 29th, 2006 at 9:15 am
The real question–Why does SHE consider it a conflict for one vote and not the other? My thoughts: She only disagreed with Haas on one major issue–Northstar (because she has a financial interest). She spends $90K of her own money because she knows she’ll see the return (by the way, who else is in Duddy?). She can’t vote for Northstar due her “moral dilemma” (her words) but it has no problem passing. Then the political hot potato comes up that will cost her votes–the Twins stadium–and she grows a conscience. The simple question that needs to be posed to her is “Why a moral dilemma when you are going to make money on Northstar but not the Twins?” Oh–I’m also sick and tired of people comparing a fourth generation farmer voting on ethanol with a financially independent person who spends $90K for a $40k/year job!!
September 14th, 2006 at 11:39 pm
One more crooked politician. The key her is SHE AUTHORED legislation, then voted on it, then made money based on her vote. I’m sick and tired of political gamesmanship and I don’t care if she made $10, $10,000 or $100,000. Obviously rules mean nothing to her. I would like to give her a list of my investments and a list of laws to author that would help me out a bit. If she can do it we should all be able to. Makes me sick.
September 24th, 2006 at 9:59 pm
Denise Dittrich was recently cleared of all wrongdoing.