Legislators eye Legacy Fund to balance budget

Posted at 2:32 PM on February 2, 2011 by David Cazares (3 Comments)
Filed under: Government

By Stephanie Hemphill

Facing a $6.2 billion budget gap, some state legislators are eyeing a tempting pot of money in the state's Legacy funding, the $548 million in sales tax money dedicated by a constitutional amendment to preserving Minnesota's natural resource and arts and cultural heritage.

But diverting some of the money to help balance the budget could be difficult. The language in the constitutional amendment clearly states that "the dedicated money under this section must supplement traditional sources of funding for these purposes and may not be used as a substitute."

The amendment's wording "ties the hands of the Legislature," said state Rep. Tom Rukavina, DFL-Virginia, who originally opposed it. He said the citizen committees that recommend projects for funding "have to understand that the bottom line decisions rest with the Legislature."

State Sen. Claire Robling, R, Jordan, has asked for a close study of the legal issues involved. As legislators make cuts in essential services like nursing homes, education, and the courts, Minnesotans may think differently about reserving money for clean water and the environment, said Robling, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

"I don't know if there will be reasonable, calm heads prevailing in understanding why we have to do what we do, or if there will be special interest groups that will be very defensive of their areas," Robling she said.

Robling said it's entirely possible backers of Legacy money will file a lawsuit, but she wants to avoid prompting a lawsuit the state would lose, so she intends to approach the issue very cautiously.

Legislators more directly involved in the Legacy funding process say they're confident the money will be spent strictly as required in the Constitution.

State Rep. Dean Urdahl, R-Grove City, expects some legislators will try to "blur the lines," by using Legacy arts money to fill holes in public school programs, for example. But Urdahl, chairman of the House Legacy Funding committee, said he intends to stick closely to the constitutional requirement that Legacy money cannot substitute for traditional sources of funding.

Urdahl predicts that -- just as in the two previous sessions -- the Legislature will make few if any changes in the recommendations of the Lessard-Sames Outdoor Heritage Council.

John Tuma, a lobbyist for Conservation Minnesota, one of the chief backers of the amendment campaign, is among those speaking in committee meetings and trying to educate new legislators about the amendment. He points out that Minnesota spends only 1 or 2 percent of its entire budget on natural resources.

Tuma said legislators are only beginning to realize the enormity of the budget shortfall problem.
"I think in the end they'll recognize that they'll be spending a lot of time trying to find a few pennies here in the couch, and that the fight isn't work it," he said. "They really have to focus on the bigger problems."

Reporter Stephanie Hemphill covers the environment for MPR News.

---

Comments (3)

What part of "may not be used" do these legislators not understand? The legacy amendment was very carefully worded to prevent this very exact dishonest move. If you are not willing to raise the funds (tax) to pay for the things you want to buy then you will have to cut some popular programs and suffer the consequences. The large majority of Minnesotans who voted for the Legacy Amendment knew this. They knew that (mostly conservative) legislators would try to find a way to have it both ways. This is not an acceptable option. I am willing to wait for the Governor to present his budget. I have more trust in a man who is at least willing to admit that maybe taxes can be part of the solution to the big deficit left to him by the previous governor, who was more interested in running for president than in governing responsibly for Minnesota.

Posted by Dave | February 2, 2011 10:50 PM

---

The Republicans view the Legacy funds as 'low hanging fruit". Sorry folks, this is forbidden fruit !
There are no easy answers to our budget deficit problem. These people were elected to deal with the tough problems, not to take the easy way out.
Anything the Republicans want done to suit their goals, they threaten to do by Constitutional Amendment (Photo ID being the current example). But anything that is already a Constitutional Amendment by the vote of the people, is fair game (like the Legacy Funds). This is distorted logic !
Let's call it for what it is : robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Posted by Catherine D. | February 4, 2011 12:35 AM

---

Sad to see that some Legislators think they know best. The people voted and supported the Legacy Funds, end of story.
As for lobbyist educating Legislators that is pathetic. We voted for Legislators to legislate and do their due deligence by reading and understanding what voters passed.
Virginia Hevern

Posted by Virginia Hevern | February 28, 2011 11:30 AM

---

Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.

Name*:

E-mail Address*:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments*:

Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.