Dear Neighbor,
I hope you are enjoying the glorious weather as we near the weekend. Here is a quick update from this week's work at the Capitol.
Many of the session's most significant bills are in their final stages of preparation so they can come to the floor for votes. One issue we are working on is not necessarily a new one, rather a revisiting of the buffer strip law which passed last year.
A couple of issues need to be resolved, including language that explicitly excludes private ditches from buffer designation. The legislative intent never was to include private ditches in the buffer law, but clarification is necessary to remove any doubt in interpretation.
Another aspect of the buffer strips that is being examined pertains to property taxes. The Property Tax Division, on which I serve, heard testimony explaining how idling previously productive ag. land can be harmful in regard to local property taxes. Officials indicate it would cost the state $15 million biennially to cover the property tax on land that would be converted into buffer strips.
From a philosophical standpoint I feel there is a strong argument to be made that if a farmer owns land, and the state stipulates it must be used for public good, then we probably all need to share the tax burden, rather than making the land owner who is now restricted from using land they have purchased and paid tax on over the years suffer the loss of income.
A similar issue arose when I was on the Vermillion River Watershed board. Warm surface water was filtering into the DNR designated cold-water trout stream reaches of the river and causing potential harm to the brown trout population. So the question I brought to the board was that if you are looking to limit the amount of warm surface water entering these cold-water streams (from farmland, manufacturing businesses, or the homes in the watershed) how far do we go in mandates, and who should pay?
That meant talking about the impact of farming in all of Eureka Township rather than just those who had land boarding the streams, as well as all the employers and residents of the watershed who were also contributors to runoff. Going one step further the discussion also needed to address whether the people fishing trout in the Vermillion should also participate in payment support since they were the main beneficiaries of having a cold water stream. That discussion may still be going on, but in the meantime some people have been impacted more than others when it comes to solving the problem because the larger discussion was most likely never completed.
This example illustrates the point that it's much more simple to tell someone what they need to do to correct a problem, however very difficult to come up with a global solution that addresses all the issue in a fair and equitable manner. In the case of buffers and farmland, we all eat food and benefit from using farmland as a productive resource to provide it, so it prompts two questions. First, should the farmer/producer bear the total cost of the lost production ground? Or secondly, do we all enjoy a benefit and therefore have statewide taxpayers pick up the cost through various means which might include not collecting property tax on the acres taken out of production?
My limited knowledge and experience does not equip me with the wisdom to have all the answers, so all I can do is promise I will do my best as the debate and legislation proceeds to come up with the best solution possible.
As always responses to issues like this are always appreciated, and since this is such an important subject I will circle back soon with more details on how House legislation would improve the situation.
In other news, a hearing is taking place today to receive the first bits of information regarding Real ID. We recently repealed the state's gag order on investigating compliance with increased ID standards the federal government is implementing for, among other things, boarding domestic, commercial flights.
Look for more on this subject as details emerge and, as always, your continued correspondence is welcome.
Sincerely,
Bob