Minnesota Fishing Communities and the Legacy Fund | Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies

Fishing Reports Banner

Posts 1 through 10 for Minnesota Fishing Communities and the Legacy Fund

     

New? - Register Here!

No Obligations - Click Here for more information. Login

Main Forum Page     |     Fishing Blogs     |     Find a Fishing Partner     |     My Fishing Pals Home     |     To The Top - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies
You Are Currently Viewing - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies  
Minnesota Fishing Communities and the Legacy Fund - - - 76 messages. Showing 1 through 10. Go to page: 1   2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
nofishfisherman
Moderator
Joined 06/30/2005
Posts:2401

nofishfisherman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 1 Posted: 01:32 PM 02/14/08 (CST)
An article from the Star Tribune.
What do you think? Do you want a sales tax hike to pay for the outdoors and the arts?

I support it becuase I personally benefit from such spending becuase I enjoy the outdoors and would like to see it better protected. I also frequnet theatre and differnt performances with my wife so we both benefit from increased funding there as well. What do the rest of you think?

I think there will be an issue with linking the arts and the outdoors in a bill like this becuase the people that support one may not typically support the other.

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

State House passes outdoors/arts bill
By MARK BRUNSWICK, Star Tribune

February 14, 2008

A bill to let voters to decide whether to increase the state’s sales tax for outdoors, the arts, and the environment sailed through the Minnesota House this morning and was headed to almost-certain approval in the Senate.

It passed 85-46 after just over an hour of debate.

The measure would appear on the November ballot and ask voters whether the state Constitution should be amended to raise the sales tax by 3/8ths of 1 percent and dedicate the money, estimated at $276 million a year.

If approved, the increase would go into effect July 1, 2009, and end 25 years later.

Despite the overwhelming bipartisan vote, debate against the measure focused on the problematic nature of dedicating funding through the Constitution and concern that voters would be too burdened to raise the sales tax.

"It's making sure we have a long-term 25-year plan to make sure we have the resources in place, not just for our quality of life but for our kids and grandkids," said House Majority Leader Tony Sertich, DFL-Chisholm, the author of the bill.

Rep. Tom Hackbarth, R-Cedar, an early supporter of one of the first versions of the measure, said he opposed the amendment now because it had morphed into something that hunters, anglers and trappers would not support.

"This conglomeration of other groups that claim they have to be on this bill to get it passed. That's a bunch of baloney," Hackbarth said. He predicted the measure would fail, setting back efforts to protect the outdoors.

If voters approve, it would dedicate $54.5 million a year to the arts, $91.1 million a year to the outdoors, $39.3 million to parks and trails, $91.1 million to a clean water fund, and $4.5 million to sustainable drinking water programs



PierBridge
Moderator
Joined 02/14/2005
Posts:1767

PierBridge's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 2 Posted: 03:37 PM 02/14/08 (CST)
When is the actuall vote?

I'm not getting my hopes up like in years past, this has been long over due and very frustrating to say the least.

Thanks Nofish!


Photobucket


My Fishing Pals
nofishfisherman
Moderator
Joined 06/30/2005
Posts:2401

nofishfisherman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 3 Posted: 04:15 PM 02/14/08 (CST)
It would be on the ballot in November.

It has large quality of life implications for everyone in the state.


Logan
Full Member
Joined 10/09/2007
Posts:560

Logan's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 4 Posted: 04:32 PM 02/14/08 (CST)
I'm not against arts but I don't understand why they wouldn't fund themselves. If it's good stuff that the people want to see then it should be able to produce its own revenue. To attach funding of the arts to this bill seems to be a scam in my opinion.. They obviously have an agenda else they would introduce these as seperate bills. Right?







Iceman
Moderator
Joined 12/09/2004
Posts:2717

Iceman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 5 Posted: 11:39 PM 02/14/08 (CST)
Question is ..
Where is this money going to come from ?
Minnesota is already in a depression
i did not get no raise the last 3 years
to help pay for any thing like the arts
i'm thinking they could fund them selves
with out any more tax on the great outdoors..

Minnesota is not land of 10,000 lakes any
more it's the land of 10,000 taxes..
The Fisher
Moderator
Joined 12/13/2004
Posts:1116

The Fisher's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 6 Posted: 06:47 AM 02/15/08 (CST)
Hey Iceman,

The bill states, "The measure would appear on the November ballot and ask voters whether the state Constitution should be amended to raise the sales tax by 3/8ths of 1 percent and dedicate the money, estimated at $276 million a year.

If approved, the increase would go into effect July 1, 2009, and end 25 years later".

So every time a sale is made...car, grocery store, guns, whatever, then 3/8ths of a percent is added to the sales tax total and that extra 3/8ths percent amount all goes into the kitty.

At least that is how I read it. Therefore, everone shares equally. you may help pay for arts.. that may not really interest you. However, someone else is also helping pay for outdoor issues that may not be especially interested in them. Everyone pays! I guess that's nothing new though!

Jason "The Fisher" Pence
nofishfisherman
Moderator
Joined 06/30/2005
Posts:2401

nofishfisherman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 7 Posted: 08:56 AM 02/15/08 (CST)
To answer the question "Why don't the arts fund themselves?"

I think you guys are thinking mainly of the big theaters like the Guthrie or the museums like the Walker or the Minneapolis Institute of Art (MIA).

Those places are mainly self funding, except the MIA that is funded largely through private donations. The other large theaters and museums can fund themselves but I think this bill is much more wide spread. The money set aside for the arts will be able to go to local community arts programs which can not be funded by themselves. Arts on the community level are great for kids and families. I feel pretty strongly that kids should be exposed to the arts and I think this bill would help. The kids aren't getting art and music in school as much any more with budget cuts so I think its up to us to find other ways to keep the arts alive.

On a side note I am not sure how many of you have visited the MIA in Minneapolis but it is a much over looked prize of Minnesota. I have been in art museums all over the US and in several other countries and the MIA is one of the best I have ever seen, and its the only one that I have ever been to that is 100% totally free to the public thanks to private donations that keep it that way. I would encourage people to go check it out and give it a chance before you disregard the arts.


Tomcat41
New User
Joined 12/12/2007
Posts:15

Tomcat41's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 8 Posted: 09:39 AM 02/15/08 (CST)
I thought the state gambling was going to the outdoors/environment. Not that I am complaining about more funding for it, I guess I would like to see a more detail and a better description of where the gambling money goes before someone starts digging in my pockets for another nickel.

Admittingly the commercials are funny, but there isn't much in the way of an explanation as to where the money actually goes. I would be peeved if they show something like:
75% - administration costs
15% - prizes/payout
5% - outdoors/environment
5% - misc. costs

nofishfisherman
Moderator
Joined 06/30/2005
Posts:2401

nofishfisherman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 9 Posted: 10:47 AM 02/15/08 (CST)
i don't recall the source but I read somewhere that the lottery profits that have gone to the Outdoors/Enoviroment have equaled around $270 million since the lottery began

That is the same amount that one years worth of dedicated funding would provide. So that $270 million from the lottery is nice but that is over the last how many decades, each each its really not that much money going to the outdoors when you break it all down.

I'll have to take a look to see if I can find some actual hard data to support those numbers.


nofishfisherman
Moderator
Joined 06/30/2005
Posts:2401

nofishfisherman's blogs, pictures and recent posts
Daily Subscription Msg 10 Posted: 10:58 AM 02/15/08 (CST)
Here is what I found on where the lottery money goes.

Minnesota Lottery

Just under $30 million went to the environment trust fund in 2007, thats 7 cents for each dollar brought in by the lottery.

The dedicated funding bill would provide more then 9 times that amount each year. With 80% going to outdoors/environmental projects and 20% going to the arts.



Minnesota Fishing Communities and the Legacy Fund - - - 76 messages. Showing 1 through 10. Go to page: 1   2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
You Are Currently Viewing - Minnesota Fishing Forum - Controversies  

New? - Register Here

No Obligations - Click Here for more information. Login

Main Forum Page     |     Top of This Forum     |     My Fishing Pals Home
Members Browsing
the Forums:
    dittohead     fishfry     freebyL     GoofFishing     HellYa     John H.     LimeGreen     mork     SS    
Users Online:9
Guests Online:39
Total Online: 48


Terms and Conditions