Urgent call to action: Sustainable funding

[J. Rosonke]

The sustainable funding amendment bill has unanimously passed the Senate
Natural Resources and Environment committee.

The next steps are the full Senate and the House Natural Resources Committee it must be passed out of the House Natural Resources Committee by the next funnel deadline, March 28


The bill dedicates of 3/8 cent of the next sales tax increase to Iowa's
natural resources in the Iowa Nature Resources and Outdoor Recreation
Trust Fund.

For many years, Iowa has failed to commit the funds necessary to protect
and enhance Iowa's natural resources and outdoor recreation opportunities.
There are serious unmet needs before Iowa will have healthy water, land
and wildlife. This bill would commit approximately $150 million in funding
to those serious needs.

This funding would be constitutionally protected in the Natural Resources
and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund, audited annually and cannot be spent
for any other purpose.

As soon as the bill is filed, it will be renumbered as a Senate Joint
Resolution (**should be available 3/11 or 3/12). When that happens, the
text of the bill should also be available electronically.


IT IS ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE that we band together and contact our senators
and representatives asking them to support sustainable funding for our
conservation priorities!

Time to get this accomplished this legislative session is short we MUST
act NOW.





You can find contact information for your legislator at:

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/aspx/Legislators/LegislatorInfo.aspx


The members of the House Natural resources committee are:

Paul Bell (D, District 41), Chair
Dick Taylor (D, District 33), Vice Chair
Henry Rayhons (R, District 11), Ranking Member
Rich Arnold (R, District 72)
McKinley Bailey (D, District 9)
Clel Baudler (R, District 58 )
Mark Davitt (D, District 74)
Dan Huseman (R, District 53)
Steven Lukan (R, District 32)
Jim Lykam (D, District 85)
Dolores Mertz (D, District 8 )
Dan Rasmussen (R, District 23)
Nathan Reichert (D, District 80)
Paul Shomshor (D, District 100)
Chuck Soderberg (R, District 3)
Todd Taylor (D, District 34)
Linda Upmeyer (R, District 12)
Jim Van Engelenhoven (R, District 71)
Andrew Wenthe (D, District 18 )
John Whitaker (D, District 90)
Wes Whitead (D, District 1)


Their e-mail addresses follow the format of :

[email protected]

All I ask is that you CC me on the e-mail so I can keep track of our
progress [email protected]


If you belong to multiple conservation organizations you can expect
similar calls to action from them all!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!!!

This will be the biggest piece of legislation in a generation for
conservation.



--
Jeremy Rosonke
Waterfowl Association of Iowa, Inc. NE regional director, Iowa Conservation Alliance Secretary
641-330-7486



Guys, I realize this might look a little fishy for a first post but I've been an occasional lurker here for a long time and this sustainable funding bill is just too important not to reach out to anyone I can. This will be the source of water quality and lake restoration dollars if it becomes law.

[toothfish]

the next sales tax increase to Iowa's.

I don't like the words "sales tax increase" unless it's followed by "lowered property taxes"

[Buck762]

Sweet first post man!

[1luckyguy]

the next sales tax increase to Iowa's.

I don't like the words "sales tax increase" unless it's followed by "lowered property taxes"

Toothfish, wouldn't you rather have your tax money going to natural resources instead of somewhere else? The state gov. is not raising our sales taxes strictly for natural resources, the bill just says that when they do raise it, some of the money goes to natural resources, and if you are a sportsman, I'd think you'd support that. (and I don't work for the Iowa DNR either)

[toothfish]

Toothfish, wouldn't you rather have your tax money going to natural resources instead of somewhere else?

With all due respect ...

Yes.... I would like to see some of my existing tax monies spent on natural resources.
IMO.. This bill has many grey areas in it. The money could be spent for bike trails. Enough of my taxes have been spent on this small percentage of the public.
This bill needs absolute specifics before I get behind it. We can't just HOPE the money is spent on our favorite "fish" or "waterfowl" related projects.

[1luckyguy]

You are right that some of the money could be allocated for bike trails, I won't argue that. I doubt if we'll be able to get anything passed in the legislature that just allocates our tax money to hunters and fishermen, that would be great, 'cause I could care less about bird watching and more hiking trails personally.

 SSB 3250 would amend Iowa's constitution to guarantee that revenue generated by the next 3/8 of one cent increase in Iowa's sales tax must be dedicated to protect and enhance:
o Water quality,
o Natural areas including parks and trails,
o Fish and wildlife habitat, and
o Soil conservation.

 This funding would be constitutionally protected in the Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund, audited annually and cannot be spent for any other purpose.
o The trust fund would protect natural resources and achieve conservation in partnership with state and local agencies as well as nonprofits.
o This constitutional amendment is our promise to Iowans of healthier water quality and wildlife and a topnotch system of parks and trails.
o It's our promise that Iowa's natural resources will be here for future generations.

 SSB 3250 is the result of two years of research and study led by bipartisan members of the Iowa legislature along with many of the state's leading conservation, environmental, sportsmen, and agriculture advocates.

 Iowans believe protecting and enhancing the condition of Iowa's land and water benefits everyone and they support dedicating additional funds for these critical natural resources.

 If SSB 3250 is adopted and our constitution is amended, Iowa would join many of its neighboring states in dedicating funds to enhance our natural resources
o Missouri currently dedicates a share of state sales tax revenues to enhancing natural resources and outdoor recreation opportunities
o Minnesota voters will consider a similar proposal this fall.


 It is important to understand what this legislation does and what it doesn't do
What it does It ensures that IF the legislature raises the sales tax, 3/8 of a cent must be dedicated to enhancing our state's natural resources
o What it doesn't do
 This bill does not raise taxes, nor does it give voters the ability to raise the sales tax—only the legislature can do that.
 Even if this constitutional amendment is adopted, only the legislature can approve the sales tax increase that would be needed to provide funding

[toothfish]

Good info ! Thanks!
I guess what is being said is ..."This the best they could come up with , so we should get behind it"
Maybe that's right ...I personally can't get on board with a constitutional change like this. 

[J. Rosonke]

The Sustainable funding amendment is now known as:

SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION (SJR) 2002



This is the result of the vote in the Senate Natural Resources and Environment committee:
Ayes, 14: Black, Hancock, Behn, Bolkcom, Dearden, Hogg, Johnson, Kettering, Lundby, Noble, Ragan, Schoenjahn, Seng, and Wood. Nays, none. Absent, 1: Gaskill.


Next step: SJR 2002 goes to the Senate floor.

It is extremely important that the Senate pass SJR 2002 with an overwhelming majority in order to send a message to the House Natural Resource Committee and the full House that this piece of legislation is very important to Iowans.

Emails are fast and easy to use, please take the time to send them. The next step up is a personal touch, a phone call, or better yet many legislators have meetings in their districts when they are home for the weekend, attend those meetings and voice your support for SJR 2002. Please be polite and respectful.


This amendment creates a Natural Resources and
  Outdoor Recreation Trust fund within the treasury
  for the purposes of protecting and enhancing water quality and   natural areas in this State including parks, trails, and fish
  and wildlife habitat, and conserving agricultural soils in
  this State. Money in the fund shall be exclusively appropriated by law for these purposes.

This constitutional amendment is our promise to future Iowans that Iowa’s natural resources will be here for them with healthier water quality, wildlife habitat, and a top-notch system of parks and trails.



This bill goes to the full Senate SOON, please make your calls or emails this week.

[J. Rosonke]

I guess what is being said is ..."This the best they could come up with , so we should get behind it"

It's more like this is the best compromise between what the legislature will pass in our lifetime and what the people of Iowa will approve in a general election.

I'm not a fan of taxes either but you and I both know Water quality and outdoor recreation will NEVER be properly funded with out this kind of constitutional protection.

Sure some of this will go to trails and parks, and just think of all those voters who bird watch and ride or walk those trails who will be happy to vote for this amendment.

This is the specific bill language:

for the purposes of protecting and enhancing water quality and
   natural areas in this State including parks, trails, and fish
   and wildlife habitat, and conserving agricultural soils in
   this State.

As you can see the vast majority of this is of direct benefit to hunters and fishermen, if I have to pave a path to a tree for a bicycling bird watcher in order to clean up the water in this state I'll do it gladly. It's more than a fair trade.




 

[toothfish]

Quote
for the purposes of protecting and enhancing water quality and
   natural areas in this State including parks, trails, and fish
   and wildlife habitat, and conserving agricultural soils in
   this State.

As you can see the vast majority of this is of direct benefit to hunters and fishermen, if I have to pave a path to a tree for a bicycling bird watcher in order to clean up the water in this state I'll do it gladly. It's more than a fair trade.

I don't read "vast " into this  ,but ...You are probably right. 

As far as "water Quality" ....shouldn't the industry that pollutes our streams and lakes be the one footing the bill for "water Quality" clean up / conservation ?

[CrappieBuster]

Start with the rivers....Theyre kinda skanky around my parts

[J. Rosonke]

As I see it, anything that promotes soil conservation and water quality is a direct benefit to hunters and fishermen.

The most major issue with our surface waters is sediment (soil) and worse yet phosphorus laden sediment (soil) if we keep that soil in the fields and out of the water we have jumped major hurdle #1 Plus the most cost effective way to do that in an Ag land setting is grass waterways (not mown, the point is to SLOOOW the water down) and riparian buffers (habitat).

Water quality hurdle #2 is nitrogen, solution= wetlands. (Habitat) Not only do they absorb alot of Nitrogen (and phosphorus) they help soak up large rain events and recharge the shallow ground water which leads to less severe floods and higher base stream flow, both good for fishing.

As far as "water Quality" ....shouldn't the industry that pollutes our streams and lakes be the one footing the bill for "water Quality" clean up / conservation ?

That depends on if you're content to be "right" but never get the actual water quality improvement done or if you want the water actually cleaned up. There are certain political realities in the State. (I was a member of the Watershed Quality planning task force set up by the legislature, I think I can speak to the political realities of that particular subject pretty well.     )

By the way when you're contacting your legislators you might add that the "Surface Water Protection Act" is also a good piece of legislation. It has already passed out of committee in both houses.

[toothfish]

That depends on if you're content to be "right" but never get the actual water quality improvement done or if you want the water actually cleaned up. There are certain political realities in the State. (I was a member of the Watershed Quality planning task force set up by the legislature, I think I can speak to the political realities of that particular subject pretty well. 

I understand. Thanks for the insight. It appears that an industry has grown to the the size that allows it to do what ever.
Water quality will be brought up again when we realize what corn on corn on corn production does to our surface water.

[J. Rosonke]

SJR 2002 is scheduled for debate in the senate early next week.

The following Senators need additional e-mails, calls, and face to face this weekend because they are undeceided on this issue.

Jeff Angelo---------Creston
Jerry Behn-----------Boone
Nancy Boettger----Harlan
David Hartsuch-----Bettendorf
Herman Quirmbach---Ames
Jim Seymour--------Woodbine
Brad Zaun--------Urbandale
Gene Fraise-----Ft. Madison
_________________
--
Jeremy Rosonke
Waterfowl Association of Iowa, Inc.
NE regional director
641-330-7486

[c.r.rick]

hey toothfish im with you on this one why should i back a bill that will probally get all sucked up by bike trails and hiking trails.  we as iowans put so much money each year clearing and cleaning the existing trails.  now im not saying i dont want the trails cuz they get used alot in this state and i do think they are important.  what gets me is im fisherman and a hunter now i pay a habitat fee for both license.  i hate the fact that that money gets spent on bike trails and hiking trails.  as a hunter i support wildlife as much as i can im a member of whitetails unlimited ducks unlimited delta waterfowl and the national wild turkey federation cuz i know where and why that money is used.  but the habitat fees i pay are used to much on trails.  thats my 2 cents on this.  id love to hear what others think.

[J. Rosonke]

what gets me is im fisherman and a hunter now i pay a habitat fee for both license.  i hate the fact that that money gets spent on bike trails and hiking trails.  as a hunter i support wildlife as much as i can im a member of whitetails unlimited ducks unlimited delta waterfowl and the national wild turkey federation cuz i know where and why that money is used.  but the habitat fees i pay are used to much on trails.  thats my 2 cents on this.  id love to hear what others think.

 The truth is your hunting and fishing license money (and habitat fees) DO NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM GET USED TO FUND BIKE OR HIKING TRAILS.

That money is already CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED in the Fish and Wildlife Trust fund. and is the primary funding mechanism (along with the 2 federal excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment) of the Wildlife, Fisheries, and Law Enforcement Bureaus of the DNR.

Those 3 Bureaus also DO NOT get state general fund money for operations. The only general fund money they get is in the form of REAP dollars or State budget line items like the specific lake dredging projects.


Trails money is generally either REAP dollars (which have specific percentages devoted to specific uses) or state general fund dollars.

[c.r.rick]

ive been told by other dnr officers whos name i wont mention that that is also true and yet it still happens.  one such officer in the area i use to live says that the system isnt perfect and it is to be specifically used in the way you mentioned j rosonke but it happens.  that loop hole in this matter is the trails around the lakes or to the lakes shore is counted as fishing improvment.  now to me paving a trail to a lake does not help fishermen when the grass around the lake is 4 feet tall!!!  if the paths as the goverment call them is to help out shore access then why doesnt the grass along them get cut down near the banks???  in a perfect world i would agree but we do not live in a perfect world it is full of loop holes that politicians abuse as do tree huggers. 

[toothfish]

I'm sure "things happen" and rules are bent and.... The true intent of this bill is honorable. And while this bill does not call for a increase in taxes, it is a constitutional change that will be with us for all time. I'm not saying it's a bad bill ...it just makes me nervous when we talk about increasing a tax of any kind. I guess something (this bill) is better than nothing.

The heart of the matter for me is.... If sales tax was generated at it's lawful fullness, we would wouldn't have to talk about "sale tax increases" !           Here is how I get there:
There is an "industry" out there that does not pay their fair share of sales tax . Many years ago they were given a classification of tax exempt on certain purchases. This industry have unlawfully bent and twisted this exemption to cover everything they buy , from toilet paper to Cadillacs. The law clearly reads ...and I quote "To be exempt, more than half the use of the item must be for livestock or agricultural production. Certain purchases are exempt from Iowa sales tax if they are used directly and primarily in agricultural."
 There is a list of exempt and a list of taxable. I sell to these people on a retail level and for years have unsuccessfully battled to stay with-in the letter of the law. Many "other" ag retailers use it as a selling tool and promote  "NO SALES TAX" purchases with no regard for the true intent of this law. I have complained to state politicians and the state sales tax dept. with absolutely no response. So...now I have to follow the rest of the illegals in order to stay in business.
 It seems ironic that the industry that creates "water quality" problems in our state will not be paying any of their fair share to rectify the problem.

[CrappieBuster]

You know what D.N.R stands for?  Darn Near Russians

[c.r.rick]

i like that buster good one    but we cant put the blame on the officers cuz they have no control its the darn politicians in the state house who mess with the money and fundings.  to many tree huggers out there have tarnished a good thing.  we as sportsmen are conservationalist who do our part in controling animal populations.  now i know there are some yahoos out there that give us a bad name but as a majority we do a pretty good job not over doing it.  deer numbers are up, duck counts are up, geese are over populating and rabbits and squirels are thriving too so i know we arent hurting things there.  and as for fish bass pops and walleyes pops are up in most areas as are cats craps and gills.  sorry but i just had to vent cuz i cant stand tree huggers!!!!!!! 

[toothfish]

 Most DNR officers I have met are great people that are charged with maintaining and protecting our nutural resources.
For the most part ,they are doing a GREAT job !

Too many politicians are driven by special interest groups and lobbyists and then give us lip service to make it sound good for us.

[c.r.rick]

amen toothfish.  could agree more!!!

[J. Rosonke]

SJR 2002 passed the Senate this afternoon by a vote of 47 to 2!!!

Please thank your Senators for supporting the future of Natural resources and outdoor recreation in Iowa!

Now on to the House.


On the question “Shall the resolution be adopted?” (S.J.R. 2002), the vote was:
Yeas, 47:
Angelo, Fraise, Kettering, Ragan,
Appel, Gaskill, Kibbie, Schmitz,
Beall, Gronstal, Kreiman, Schoenjahn,
Behn, Hahn, Lundby, Seng,
Black, Hancock, McCoy, Seymour,
Boettger, Hartsuch, McKibben, Stewart,
Bolkcom, Hatch, McKinley, Warnstadt,
Connolly, Heckroth, Mulder, Wieck,
Danielson, Hogg, Noble, Wood,
Dearden, Horn, Olive, Zaun,
Dotzler, Houser, Putney, Zieman,
Dvorsky, Johnson, Quirmbach

Nays, 2:
Courtney, Rielly

[CrappieBuster]

Invest in America.
Buy a politician.

[KrappieSlayer]

If ice fishing is wrong.... I DONT WANNA BE RIGHT!

[J. Rosonke]

After Passing the Senate 47-2 last week,The Sustainable Funding Bill
SJR 2002 has been assigned to a subcommittee within the House Natural Resources Committee. Both the subcommittee and the full House Natural Resources Committee MUST pass SJR 2002 THIS WEEK or it's dead for the year. So contacting those on the House Natural Resources Committee and particularly the sub committee is very important.

The subcommittee includes:

Paul Bell (D, District 41), Chair
[email protected]


McKinley Bailey (D, District 9)
[email protected]


Dan Rasmussen (R, District 23)
Capitol Telephone: 515-281-3221


Henry Rayhons (R, District 11)
Capitol Telephone: 515-281-3221


John Whitaker (D, District 90)
[email protected]


The rest of the members of the House Natural resources committee are:

Dick Taylor (D, District 33), Vice Chair  [email protected]
Rich Arnold (R, District 72)  [email protected]
Clel Baudler (R, District 58 ) [email protected]
Mark Davitt (D, District 74)  [email protected]
Dan Huseman (R, District 53)  [email protected]
Steven Lukan (R, District 32) [email protected]
Jim Lykam (D, District 85)    [email protected]
Dolores Mertz (D, District 8 ) [email protected]
Paul Shomshor (D, District 100) [email protected]
Chuck Soderberg (R, District 3) [email protected]
Todd Taylor (D, District 34) [email protected]
Linda Upmeyer (R, District 12) [email protected]

Jim Van Engelenhoven (R, District 71) [email protected]

Andrew Wenthe (D, District 18 ) [email protected]
Wes Whitead (D, District 1) [email protected]



You will notice I removed
Nathan Reichert (D, District 80) from the contact list, he has stated that he is 100% in support!

[J. Rosonke]

Here is the list of Reps. that need additional contacts. This list is very important !

Christopher Rants--Sioux City
[email protected]

Kraig Paulsen--------Hiawatha
[email protected]

Jeff Kaufmann---------Tipton, West Liberty Area
[email protected]

Rod Roberts-----------Carroll
[email protected]

Doug Struyk------------Council Bluffs
[email protected]

Linda Upmeyer---------Garner
[email protected]

Get the word out and turn up the volume!

[J. Rosonke]

The meeting minutes just went up.

SJR 2002: A Joint Resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
State of Iowa to dedicate a portion of state revenue from the tax imposed on
certain retail sales of tangible personal property and services for the
benefit of the state's natural resources. Opening remarks were made and there
were no amendments. There were questions from Representatives Upmeyer,
Baudler, Bailey, Lukan, Whitaker, Rasmussen and Rayhons. Representative Bell
moved for passage of SJR 2002. A record roll call was taken and SJR 2002
passed with 20 Ayes, 1 Absent, and 0 Nays. Representative Mertz was excused
from the meeting, and would have also voted Aye for the Resolution.
Representative Taylor, D. recognized the passage of SJR 2002 and referred the
bill to the floor of the House as a Senate Joint Resolution.   


--------------------

There is also 1 more I would add to the contact list simply because I know he is currently against the Constitutional amendment.

David Jacoby House District 30 Coralville
[email protected]

His position is that we shouldn't amend the constitution but that we should fund these needs through the Iowa code.

I'm not sure he fully understands the history of Natural resources and outdoor recreation being constantly underfunded by the legislature and being the first thing cut when dollars get tight.

I also don't know if he knows that constitutionally protecting this funding stream was the recommendation of the legislators on the sustainable funding task force. (from both sides of the aisle)

What I do know is that I and several of you will now try to explain it to him.   8)