Must it be tuxes vs. duck calls again?

01/05/2007

A bill to bump up the state sales tax and split the proceeds among outdoor sporting and arts groups threatens to renew a cultural divide.


By Mark Brunswick, Star Tribune
Last update: January 04, 2007 – 8:32 PM


After years of pursuing their quarry in crowded committee hearings, wearing blaze orange hats and vests bearing obscure buttons with fractions on them, outdoor-sports enthusiasts are expressing renewed optimism that the Legislature will give them what they have long sought: dedicated funding to protect natural resources for hunting and fishing.

But dogging the debate, as before, will be the question of who gets how much of the money.

Arts and humanities groups have been included in some early proposals, part of what is being billed as an overall state "legacy" package.

A Senate bill that proposes a constitutional amendment to increase the state's sales tax by three-eighths of 1 percent and dedicate the money for water, wildlife preservation, arts and the humanities was introduced on Thursday and fast-tracked for its first committee hearing.

Whether the bullets-vs.-ballet debate will again scuttle the initiative, leaving hunters and anglers empty-handed again, will be one of the closely watched questions of the 2007 legislative session.

Some outdoor sporting groups are joining with environmental groups to push for a different plan. They say that a one-fourth of 1 percent increase in the sales tax will generate $187 million a year for their causes.

Noticeably absent from the proposal are the arts groups. Outdoors advocates are conducting polls for an indication of whether funding for the arts on the ballot will help or hurt, particularly with voters in rural Minnesota.

If proposed by the Legislature, a constitutional amendment would be put before voters in 2008.

"The regular guy on the street doesn't see the correlation between conservation and clean water and public radio, for example. He just doesn't get it. It is frustrating when other groups pile on," said Lance Ness, head of the Fish and Wildlife Legislative Alliance.

The Senate bill, which includes arts and humanities, museums and public broadcasting, is largely the same as the one that passed last year. If approved by voters, the amendment it proposes would generate $279 million a year.

The Senate majority leader and one of the bill's chief authors, DFLer Larry Pogemiller, said the package reflects an overall effort to protect the state's legacy, both environmental and cultural. He said he is confident that all groups will be included in a final package, regardless of the desires of advocates.

"Legislators vote on legislation -- special-interest groups don't vote on legislation," he said.

The election's effect

The Senate approach failed by only two votes in the House last session, and arts advocacy groups say DFL gains in November's elections strengthen their position.

"Many new freshmen are very strong arts people. I'm guardedly optimistic about the bill's prospects this year," said Larry Redmund, a lobbyist for Minnesota Citizens for the Arts.

But some outdoors groups are balking at what they fear will be a ballot question so crowded with beneficiaries that it might confuse or anger voters.

And the election may have sent more than one message.

One group that wants dedicated funding only for game and fish habitat and for clean water is Sportsmen for Change. When the effort to resolve the arts-outdoors impasse failed last year, that group and others warned of consequences at the voting booth. Sportsmen For Change registered as a political action committee and worked aggressively against former Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson, who was defeated in November after criticism for, among other things, adding to the outdoor amendment.

"We're running out of wetlands, not art work," said one anti-Johnson ad.

"We want a clean ballot that is reasonable, doable and passable in a simple ballot question," said Gary Leef, a spokesman for Sportsmen For Change.

Time needed for campaign

A constitutional amendment to increase the sales tax would not require the governor's signature, meaning that it wouldn't be threatened by Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty's resistance to tax increases. Many supporters are eager to get a proposal passed, giving advocates of the measure time to market the plan to voters for the 2008 ballot.

"The governor hasn't done anything on it in four years. It's time to move on it now," Pogemiller said.

The state's procedures on constitutional amendments would require an aggressive campaign, supporters believe. In Minnesota, voters who do not cast a vote on a constitutional ballot initiative are counted as "no" votes.

"To do all this work for several years now and have it fail at the polling place would be devastating," said Ness of the Fish and Wildlife Legislative Alliance.