ed031409

On the homepage

Crimefighting

Video advances are a big crime-solving aid

Out There

Mental health

A 'national crisis' of student suicide

Health care

Health care bill stuck on Democrats' infighting

Home | Opinion Exchange | Editorials

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

Heritage Council rightly made conservation its funding priority.

Last update: March 13, 2009 - 6:56 PM

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

TWO VIEWS

"We need to protect the land where there's growing population.''

State Sen. Ellen Anderson, DFL-St. Paul

•••

"When people were going to the ballot booth, they were expecting that this money would be used to address these great needs in conservation.''

Mike Kilgore, chairman, Lessard Outdoor Heritage Council

More from Editorials

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.

•••

Editor's note: For more information on the Lessard Outdoor Heritage Council, including a current list of recommendations, go to www.lohc.state.mn.us.

Recent Editorials stories

Editorial: Stimulus helped state - March 13, 2009

Editorial: Stimulus helped state - A 'rough ride,' but federal money helped cushion the blow. More

Comment on this story | Read all 1 comments | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS