Beartooth83
Member
I'm all about conservation in the right time and place. But measure 5 being passed would be a foolish move. To all of us DIY public land sportsman, it looks good on paper. There is an ENORMOUS amount of money involved in this (money that HAS to be spent each year). I grew up on a farm in ND and am loyal to my ag roots. I've seen first hand the harassment that DU puts on local farmers. Now if these monstrous funds become available to some of these groups, it is going to be quite tempting for some landowners to sell out for a big payday. Then what was once producing farmland becomes a public ground for sportsman to hunt the living daylights out of.
Let's me honest. This is North Dakota we are talking about. We have the badlands, some national grasslands, and a handful of rivers and lakes that flood every other year. In other western states where cropland isn't the majority of the ag industry, I could see this money being much more useful. The conservation efforts currently in place are sufficient for what ND has to offer. This would be like an 18 year old high school dropout methhead winning the lottery. He would have high hopes, but he's still a methead.
Constitutional Measure #5
This measure would divert 5 percent of North Dakota’s oil and gas extraction taxes into a fund managed by an appointed advisory board. The fund would be used for conservation purposes, which would include the option to buy land with the money. Based on oil production forecasts this measure would divert as much as $150 million a year into this new constitutional fund. This measure also requires that at least 75 percent of those dollars be spent every year.
This initiated measure would add a new section to Article X of the North Dakota Constitution creating the Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Trust (the “Trust”) and the Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Fund (the “Fund”) to be financed by five percent of the revenues from the State’s share of oil extraction taxes. Ten percent of that amount of annual revenues would be deposited in the Trust with the principal invested by the State Investment Board; the earnings from the Trust would be transferred to the Fund to be spent on programs after January 1, 2019. Ninety percent of the annual revenues would be deposited into the Fund to be used to make grants to public and private groups to aid water quality, natural flood control, fish and wildlife habitat, parks and outdoor recreation areas, access for hunting and fishing, the acquisition of land for parks, and outdoor education for children.
The Fund would be governed by a Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Commission comprised of the governor, attorney general, and agriculture commissioner. A thirteen member Citizen Accountability Board would be appointed for three-year terms to review grant applications and make recommendations to the Commission. Every twenty-five years, the people would vote on the question of whether to continue the financing from the oil extraction taxes.
Yes: Allows out of state control over North Dakota tax dollars and for the first time, mandates annual spending on a specific issue in the Constitution.
No: Keeps control of spending at the discretion of locally elected, North Dakota legislators.
Let's me honest. This is North Dakota we are talking about. We have the badlands, some national grasslands, and a handful of rivers and lakes that flood every other year. In other western states where cropland isn't the majority of the ag industry, I could see this money being much more useful. The conservation efforts currently in place are sufficient for what ND has to offer. This would be like an 18 year old high school dropout methhead winning the lottery. He would have high hopes, but he's still a methead.
Constitutional Measure #5
This measure would divert 5 percent of North Dakota’s oil and gas extraction taxes into a fund managed by an appointed advisory board. The fund would be used for conservation purposes, which would include the option to buy land with the money. Based on oil production forecasts this measure would divert as much as $150 million a year into this new constitutional fund. This measure also requires that at least 75 percent of those dollars be spent every year.
This initiated measure would add a new section to Article X of the North Dakota Constitution creating the Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Trust (the “Trust”) and the Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Fund (the “Fund”) to be financed by five percent of the revenues from the State’s share of oil extraction taxes. Ten percent of that amount of annual revenues would be deposited in the Trust with the principal invested by the State Investment Board; the earnings from the Trust would be transferred to the Fund to be spent on programs after January 1, 2019. Ninety percent of the annual revenues would be deposited into the Fund to be used to make grants to public and private groups to aid water quality, natural flood control, fish and wildlife habitat, parks and outdoor recreation areas, access for hunting and fishing, the acquisition of land for parks, and outdoor education for children.
The Fund would be governed by a Clean Water, Wildlife, and Parks Commission comprised of the governor, attorney general, and agriculture commissioner. A thirteen member Citizen Accountability Board would be appointed for three-year terms to review grant applications and make recommendations to the Commission. Every twenty-five years, the people would vote on the question of whether to continue the financing from the oil extraction taxes.
Yes: Allows out of state control over North Dakota tax dollars and for the first time, mandates annual spending on a specific issue in the Constitution.
No: Keeps control of spending at the discretion of locally elected, North Dakota legislators.
