Legislators in the Minnesota House and Senate are proposing a repeal of a decades-old program to protect the Mississippi River. HF95/SF39 would eliminate the Mississippi River Critical Area (MRCA), a program that since the 1970s has provided planning and management for the 72-mile stretch of the Mississippi from Ramsey in northern Anoka County to Hastings in southern Dakota County. River advocates say the repeal of the program could have significant impacts on the environmental and aesthetic benefits of the river.

The bill itself is very simple — “Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 116G.15, is repealed” — but the consequences will be serious if the bill is signed into law, according to Whitney Clark of the Friends of the Mississippi River.

“It would be a huge blow to the long-standing state commitment to protecting the river,” Clark told the Minnesota Independent. “It’s something that has had bipartisan support since the 1970s, and it would eliminate protections that the river has enjoyed for years.”

The MRCA was created in 1976 by DFL Gov. Wendell Anderson, continued by Republican Gov. Al Quie, and made permanent by the Metropolitan Council and the Legislature in 1991. The program has five purposes: to protect a valuable state resource, prevent damage to the river, enhance its public use, protect it as a transportation system and preserve the biology and ecology of the river.

Most of the legislators who have introduced the bill are from the northern part of the MRCA zone:  It was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Benjamin Kruse (R-Brooklyn Park), Michele Benson (R-Ham Lake), Roger Chamberlain (R-Lino Lakes), Mike Jungbauer (R-Anoka), and Bill Ingebrigtsen (R-Alexandria), and in the House by Reps. Melissa Hortman (DFL-Brooklyn Park), Peggy Scott (R-Andover), Denise Dittrich (DFL-Champlin), Brandon Petersen (R-Andover), and Jim Abeler (R-Anoka). A group of property owners from that area have recently launched a petition drive to get the MRCA repealed.

The Mississippi River Stewards, which says the MRCA infringes on members’ property rights, are circulating a petition urging “the Governor and the Minnesota Legislature to repeal Minnesota Statutes Section 116G.15 that grants [Department of Natural Resources] authority to generate the Critical Corridor rules.”

The DNR is wrapping up a process of making new rules for the MRCA under the direction of the Minnesota Legislature. In 2009, lawmakers said that the DNR needed to reevaluate the program. The proposal the DNR came up with, after weighing the needs of many stakeholders from industry, homeowners and city administrators to biologists, sportsmen and environmental groups, seems to have angered just about everyone.

The DNR doesn’t have any law enforcement authority over those rules, however. It merely sets standards, leaving riverfront communities to propose, pass and enforce ordinances related to building height, recreation areas and riverbank stabilization.

But, the Mississippi River Stewards and area legislators are saying they want to scrap the program altogether over disagreements about the rule-making process.

“We feel that there are aesthetic motivations behind [the rules] that go above and beyond an environmental or preservation benefit, and that these aesthetic goals should not supercede property owners’ rights to use their property in a reasonable manner that was lawful when they acquired the property,” the Stewards note. “Though this may seem at first to only affect a small group, once put in place, it threatens the rights of all Minnesota citizens, by setting a precedent that demotes property owners to mere inhabitants of government-controlled lands which are subject to de facto confiscation at any time via zoning and use regulations.”

Whitney at the Friends of the Mississippi River said his group is not happy with everything about the rule-making process either, but that is an issue when dealing with a diversity of stakeholders.

Still, he contends the MRCA remains important.

“It’s the first line of defense in protecting the river corridor,” said Clark. A repeal of the program “would eliminate the potential for the state to update common sense rules.”

He added, “What we want is a river that is as healthy or even healthier than it is today so that people eat the fish they catch or enjoy the scenery.”

The state so far has spent $500,000 in evaluating the program and the rule-making process.

On Monday Kelliher earned the support of former Gov. Wendell Anderson (presumably no relation), whose endorsement lingo was less redolent of a Volkswagen slogan: “Margaret Anderson Kelliher is a proven leader, ready to guide our state toward long-term solutions.”

[Via tomscheck]

Alaska’s result has reverberations in Minnesota mostly because both states have yet-undecided races on which Democrats’ chances for a 60-vote filibuster-proof bloc in the Senate depend.

But another echo between Minnesota and Alaska has been sounding this year, as Stevens’ trial and conviction increased the likelihood that his colleagues might soon bounce him from his seat should he win it again. And that would leave Gov. Sarah Palin in a situation somewhat akin to Wendell Anderson’s when he was governor of Minnesota and U.S. Sen. Walter Mondale was elected vice president in 1976.

Anderson resigned and was appointed to replace Mondale in the Senate by his own replacement in the governor’s mansion, Rudy Perpich. Voters punished both men two years later, denying them re-election. Alaska law seems to allow Palin to appoint a temporary replacement but requires a special election within three months.

If Stevens is the winner after the last Alaska vote is counted tomorrow, what advice would Anderson have for Palin? Reached at his office today, Anderson asked to be reminded about the scenarios in the Far North, then demurred for the time being. “Let’s wait and see what happens,” he said.

More intriguing to Anderson at the moment is the possibility of a victory for Stevens’ Democratic rival, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, who is a relative of the politically active Begich clan of northern Minnesota. His uncle, Joe Begich, was mayor of his hometown of Eveleth, Minn., before nine terms representing District 6A in the Minnesota Legislature. (Joe continues to serve the area as a member of the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board.)

Gov. Wendell Anderson was on what became an iconic Time cover Aug. 13, 1973, illustrating the story, "Minnesota: A State That Works."

But the idea that Palin would be wise to study Anderson’s precedent has been rampant on the Internet at least since her star began its rapid rise in August — and to a surprising degree for what some might consider a significant footnote on the national political scene. And Palin has apparently done that homework, or has at least considered the choices that Providence might put before her: whether to appoint herself to the Senate (temporarily) or run in a special election. Last week she told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer the latter option was a possibility, but not the former (video, Senate discussion at 6:00 mark).

The high cost Anderson paid for his two years in the Senate can’t be his favorite topic of discussion. But he agreed to talk again after the dust has settled in Alaska.