MN Nano has supported and advocated at the Minnesota Legislature for the creation of the North Star Rising (NSR), the progress and outcome of which resulted in the formation of what is called the State Science and Technology Strategy Committee. What follows is a recap of MN Nano's 2009 Legislative Session efforts and where things are now in terms of the "S&T Strategy Committee."

 

State Science & Technology Strategy Committee

What do you do if people come to you year after year with somewhat related ideas, approaches, suggestions, solutions, mechanisms, opinions, concepts, rationales, objectives and the like? Sometimes, paralysis occurs. Actually, it's human nature. When faced with a myriad of ideas to the point where it feels like, "Well, we've got to do something, so let's do this...," you toss a dart toward the awaiting board, a dart that in its wisdom is about to select out of the seemingly hundreds of ideas, a dart that lands on: Number 69 on the Priority List. But in the absence of a priority list, we go with the random choice our dart has selected for us.

 

In the case of tech-based economic development, however, a state can't be competitive by throwing darts at a board to see what sticks. In the case of tech-based economic development, Minnesota cannot be competitive without a priority list. The problem is, Minnesota cannot even agree as to how the priority list should be made in the first place. Rather, we've grown accustomed to the annual pilgrimage to the Minnesota Legislature and Governor Pawlenty for the past eight years, asking them to throw the darts to whittle down the options and then with sometimes arguably little regard to long-term viability or lasting impact (think "bio-zones"), something might get passed. 

 

The Priority List

The absence of a priority list - so ideas can be evaluated and ranked as they are pulled out of the Suggestion Box - has plagued our state long enough. At least that is what a collection of people from the science & technology community believe. In 2008, two reports* were commissioned which, upon release, had a number of findings in common. A major conclusion from both indicated that Minnesota's lack of a tech-based economic development strategy had become a liability to the state's competitive ability. When compared to where other states (& countries) are likely to be even a mere 10 years from now, by leveraging their respective long-term plans, the studies predict, Minnesota is going to be lagging far behind.

 

The science and technology community proposed the creation of the NSR, a statewide commission-of sorts, that would have the responsibility for creating a visionary, comprehensive, attainable and measurable tech-based economic development strategy for the North Star State. NSR objectives would include:

• Establish the tech-based economic development strategy against which the aforementioned annual myriad of Suggestion-Box approaches would be evaluated.
  
• Benchmarking and evaluation responsibilities to be sure goals & objectives were actually achieved, results measured and shared.
• Assist the legislature, the governor, the state employees working with economic development programs, municipalities and regions in determining, implementing and evaluating priority programs and activities in light of the over-arching tech-based economic development strategy.

Like all good tales of the twists and turns seemingly brilliant legislative proposals have in their wake, the NSR proposal had a couple things going against it by the time the 2009 Legislature convened in January.  First, the NSR proposal was not in full bill form for legislative introduction and committee discussion at the outset of the 2009 Session. Second, due to the first, there was no public discussion about the absence of a Priority List, so the Annual Pilgrimage to St. Paul with a myriad of ideas out of the Suggestion Box was in Full Swing by the time the NSR concept was on the table (with some of the ideas building up steam and burning political capital, an irrefutable repercussion).

 

The net outcome of the original NSR legislation was the creation of a public-private project, with the underlying hope the said group would eventually recommend a structure to be given the responsibility and accountability for all of the deliverables previously noted for the NSR entity. The legislation passed in May 2009 stated the Commissioner of the Department of Employment shall lead a public-private project to advise state agency collaboration to design, coordinate, and administer a strategic science and technology program for the state designed to promote the welfare of the people of the state, maximize the economic growth of the state, and create and retain jobs in the state's industrial base and [report back to the Legislature] by January 15, 2010 on the activities of the project and must recommend changes or additions to its organization, including specific recommendations for necessary legislation.**

 

Coined by DEED Commissioner Dan McElroy the "Science and Technology Strategy Committee"(STSC), the group first convened on October 6 and has two other meetings scheduled before the end of the year. Since the group has met only once, it might seem premature to predict an outcome.

 

Prediction: The outcome of the STSC will be:

As opposed to accomplishing:

The fun thing about predictions is they can be hilariously, or fortuitously, incorrect. For the sake of Minnesota's science & technology future ability to compete, let's hope this prediction is 100% WRONG. 

 

* Bio Business Alliance of Minnesota (BBAM Destination 2025) & MN Nano reports on Economic Impact Analysis (EIA)
To receive a copy of the MN Nano EIA, contact Lynne Osterman

(Note: technically, neither report will characterize the 10-year timeframe outcomes using the same verbage as noted above)
** HF2088, Sect. 16 (42.29-43.22)

An Amazing History but the Hard Disk Drive Industry is Just Getting Warmed Up