EDITORIAL: It's rural vs. metro in outdoors debate

Mar 14, 2009 (Star Tribune - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) -- XEL | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating -- It's a wonderful tradition in high school sports. The state hockey tournament in St. Paul often features great outstate teams competing against the best of the metro.

Another traditional rural-urban rivalry regularly heats up a few miles away from Xcel Energy Center under the Capitol dome. And it seems to be surfacing again as the Lessard Outdoor Heritage Council puts the finishing touches on recommendations to the Legislature for spending under the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment.

This editorial page opposed the amendment, arguing that dedicated funding subverts good governance via representative democracy. We wrote that moving Minnesota toward a system of constitutional amendments to dedicate funding would lock legislators and the governor into budgetary inflexibility. In the case of the Legacy Amendment -- regardless of economic conditions or other state needs -- the money raised by a sales tax increase of three-eighths of 1 percent will be locked in for the next 25 years.

The voters had their own priorities on Election Day, and the amendment received more statewide support than President Obama. The message was clear: Minnesotans no longer trusted elected leaders to take care of some of the state's most valuable assets -- the outdoors, parks, trails, water and the arts.

The tax revenue raised each year will be split four ways: The Clean Water Fund and Outdoor Heritage Fund will each receive one-third. The Parks and Trails Fund is targeted for 14.25 percent, and the remaining 19.75 percent will go to the Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund. The tax is expected to raise more than $230 million in 2010.

The Legislature created the Heritage Council to recommend how the Outdoor Heritage Fund money should be spent. Since December, the 12-member council has sifted through more than 80 proposals worth more than $250 million, and last week it narrowed its list to 19 projects totaling $69 million -- the amount projected for the first fiscal year after the fund establishes a reserve.

By law, the money will be used "only to restore, protect and enhance wetlands, prairies, forests, and habitat for fish, game and wildlife." The amendment does not specify a geographic mix for the spending, which is where the urban-rural legislative divide comes into play.

The current list of proposals is too heavily weighted toward outstate projects, according to state Sen. Ellen Anderson, DFL-St. Paul, who serves on the council. She contends that there is plenty of habitat worth preserving in the metro, with direct impact on the majority of the state's population. Anderson and another metro-area council member, Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-St. Paul, predict tough going in the Legislature if the council sticks with its current project mix.

Here's some advice for legislators: Tread lightly on the fine work of the Heritage Council. Led by Chairman Mike Kilgore, an associate professor of natural resource economics at the University of Minnesota, the volunteer group has done exactly what voters expected. Its members have made high-impact conservation the priority instead of legislative earmarks.

That's just what more than 60 percent of voters signed up for when they voted for the Legacy Amendment. In a contest pitting science vs. politics, the state wins if science comes out on top.

To see more of the Star Tribune or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to
http://www.startribune.co.il. Copyright (c) 2009, Star Tribune, Minneapolis
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For reprints, email
tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax
to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave.,
Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.

More News:   Market Updates | Stock Alerts | All Trading News | Stock Index