For Good Legislative Update Information, check out:

Minnesota Environmental Partnership.org

From last year's legislative session:

Minnesota Waters: Legislature Alert    5/2/2006

Gary Botzek, Capitol Connections, Minnesota Waters Lobbyist

The following is a summary and status report for the major issues on Minnesota Waters 2006 legislative agenda and other legislation of special interest to Minnesota Waters members.

Clean Water Legacy

HF826 (Ozment) SF762 (Frederickson)

Of the only 10 percent of rivers and 16 percent of lakes in Minnesota adequately tested, more than 2,200 water bodies violate federal clean water standards for mercury, phosphorus, bacteria, and other pollutants. Per the federal Clean Water Act, the state of Minnesota must develop a clean-up plan for each contaminant, but the state has only completed five plans, 50 are in progress, and 150 are on a waiting list.  Approximately $80 million per year for at least 10 years is needed to accomplish this task. The Clean Water Legacy Bill, not passed last year, was designed to provide the needed funds to clean up Minnesota’s impaired waters.

The 2006 version of the Clean Water Legacy (CWL) bill proposed to jump start the clean up program with $40 million from state general revenue funds. Last years funding proposal of a “user fee” on households and businesses was abandoned since it was rejected by the legislature. The Governor announced support for the plan by placing $20 million for CWL in his supplemental budget; and encouraged $20 million in a bonding package before the legislature. Portions of the general fund dollars would pass through the Department of Natural Resources, Board of Water and Soil Resources, and the Pollution Control Agency for testing and monitoring of our lakes and streams, establishment of plans (TMDLs) to clean up impaired waters, and protection and preservation of lakes and streams. Also contained in the CWL legislation is language that would establish a Clean Water Legacy Council of around 20 affected and interested parities. A seat is designated for a group like Minnesota Waters that represents lakes and streams.

Status 5/1/2006: The House, through HF 826 and the bonding bill, HF 2959,  have committed $30 million in general funds and bonding dollars to get the CWL program started. The Senate through its supplemental budget bill, SF378, and in its bonding bill, SF3475, has committed $25 million. Both efforts are short of the $40 million that the G-16 management team has suggested and is lobbying for. The G-16 is the group of business, agriculture, local government and environmental organizations (including Minnesota Waters) that has been working on this issue for the last three years. HF 826/SF762 contains the policy language needed to get the new CWL program started including the establishment of a Clean Water Council that continue to provide direction to the legislature and the state agencies in the implementation of the program needs to pass this session, as well. However, there is growing concern and opposition from conservative members of the House regarding growing government and protection of property rights. This concern surfaced a number of years ago when the legislature passed the first citizens monitoring bill. Some legislators were concerned that members of environmental groups were going to be allowed to come on private property, test the water in a lake, wetland, holding pond, stream, or river, and get the government to shut down a business! These concerns have not gone away. The House is expected to take up their bill yet this week. The Senate, which passed SF762 last year, could either accept the new House language and funding, or go to conference on this bill.

Dedicated Funding For Clean Water, Conservation, & Environment

HF1909 (Hackbarth) SF2734 (Sams)

Constitutionally dedicating a portion of the sales tax is being proposed as a way to fund long-term support for the Clean Water Legacy effort to clean up Minnesota’s impaired waters, along with fish and wildlife habitat protection; parks, trails, and zoos; and arts and humanities. If the legislature passes a dedicated funding bill this session, the voters would decide at the polls in November on the constitutional amendment.

Status May1, 2006: SF2734 (Sams) proposing a constitutional amendment dedicating three-eighths of one percent of new sales tax would break down the revenue earned as follows: 34% percent for improvement, enhancement, and protection of the state’s fish, wildlife, habitat, and fish and wildlife tourism; 22% percent for parks, trails and zoos; 22 % percent for protection and restoration of lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands and groundwater; 22% percent in cultural allocations for the arts, humanities, museum and public broadcasting fund. HF 1909 (Hackbarth) would ask the voters to dedicate 3/16 of the current sales tax to the same four program areas listed above. However, the percentages are different. HF 1909 would commit 60% of the dedicated funds to hunting and fishing efforts, 30% to CWL, 5% to parks and trails, and 5% to arts and humanities.

Both bills contain language that would guard against the new dedicated funds being used to displace current general fund monies. That has happened in the past with new bonding dollars as well as when the lottery proceeds dedicated to the environment started to fund through the legislative process.

Both bills have passed and are in conference committee. The strong differences in approaches to funding dedicated funds for conservation, clean water, parks and trails, and arts and humanities will be difficult to overcome in the next 2-3 weeks of session. Strong leadership by the Governor will be needed to put together a deal! The Minnesota Environmental Partnership (MEP) position on dedicated funds supports ½ of one cent of new sales tax with at least $80 million committed to CWL. MN Waters members are urged to contact their legislator and support dedicated funds for clean water!

Aquatic Nonnative Invasive Species (AIS) Control

HF1457 (Urdahl) SF1434 (Olson) 

Last year the Minnesota Lakes Association introduced a bill to bolster revenues to the DNR’s Invasive Species Program through the establishment of an annual $10 boat decal sticker program that would raise an additional $5 million per year, of which about 80 percent would be passed through to lake associations, other citizen groups, and local governments to take the lead in management and prevention of AIS locally.  While the legislation did not get a hearing in the House last year, did receive strong support in the Senate, and while not passed, it assisted in the appropriation of an additional $308,000 to the DNR for aquatic invasive species and is being used for an expanded grant program to lake associations for lakewide treatments of Eurasian watermilfoil and Curlyleaf pondweed.

This year Minnesota Waters decided to change strategies and drop the annual decal idea in favor of raising the current invasive species surcharge on boat licenses paid every three years from $5 dollars to $15 dollars. This would raise an additional $2.5 million per year towards prevention and management of aquatic invasive species. We were promised a hearing in a House Committee but that did not happen.

Status 5/1/2006: MN Waters sent a letter to the Governor urging support of Minnesota Waters bill and increased funding for AIS. The Governor’s supplemental budget bill recommendation, also prompted by DNR requests, included an additional $975,000 for invasive species appropriations. The proposed funding would have doubled the grants program that Minnesota Waters worked on with the DNR, but also proposed a significant allocation towards terrestrial invasive species and invasive species introduced through the water gardening industry. Minnesota Waters was prepared to offer an amendment to the bills to redirect the additional money toward prevention and management of aquatic invasive species. Both the Senate and House reduced the amount provided by the Governor. The Senate bill reduced the new money to $550,000 and remarked $150,000 for the current grants program, including the Lake Osakis Curley-leaf pondweed effort. The House bill reduced the effort to $261,000. These requests are now part of the supplemental budget bill that has yet to pass the House or the Senate.  The DNR has also included provisions in HF 3200 and SF2973 for language change in the state aquatic invasive species laws to officially stipulate in state law that Curlyleaf pondweed is an aquatic invasive species. Both bills are moving.

Reform for Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR)

HF 2972 (Tingelstad) SF 2814 (Sams)

The Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCMR) is the legislative body that allocates the distribution of interest earned on the principle of Minnesota’s Environmental Trust Fund, which is funded by the state lottery. The Governor’s proposed reform last year suggested an all-citizen’s committee make funding decisions. The opposition at the legislation resulted in the establishment of an LCMR Task Force that is charged with providing recommendations for reform that must be submitted to the Legislature for consideration in 2006. The amount distributed by LCMR bi-annually was $32 million for the next two years. That dollar amount is projected to grow rapidly as the principle of the fund continues to grow; the fund will be an important source of future environmental program funding.  Minnesota Waters’ Citizen Monitoring Program is funded with LCMR funds. The 2006 bills are based on recommendations from the Task Force proposed to replace the current LCMR with citizens (7) and legislators (10).

            Status 5/1/2006:  Both bills are awaiting final action on the House and Senate floors. These changes will add direct citizen impute and voting power on the new                 Legislative & Citizen Commission on            Minnesota Resources (LCCMR).

MEP Protect Our Waters Package:

Minnesota Waters is one of 45 environmental and conservation group members of the Minnesota Environmental Partnership (MEP) that is providing lobbying supporting for MEP’s Protect Our Waters legislative package.  Minnesota Water’s lobbyist Gary Botzek is chair of MEP’s Government Relations Committee and serves on the MEP board.

Bonding Investments in the environment

SF 3475 (Langseth) HF2959 (Dorman)

MN Waters, through MEP, supports a package of long-term bonding projects that invest in clean water, protected lands, and wastewater treatment improvements. The Governor’s bonding proposal included 60 percent of what was asked for in MEP’s Protect Our Waters proposal, but did not include the $5 million for streambank restorations that MEP and Minnesota Waters recommended.

Status May 1, 2006: Both bills have passed on are currently in conference committee. The Senate bill seeks to borrow $990 million, which is $145 million more than the Governor requested in his capital improvements budget. The Senate did not include funding for the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), thus putting in jeopardy over $100 million in federal matching dollars for this popular agriculture set-aside program that protects water quality by reducing agricultural runoff. The Senate was also below the Governor’s recommendations for Wildlife Management Areas (Gov- $15 million/Senate $10 million), Forest Legacy (Gov- $10 million/Senate $6 million) and Stream Restoration (Gov- $2 million/Senate $1 million).  The Senate did do better than the Governor on parks and trails and transit funding. The House bill passed with $945 million in new bonds. It is a better bill in terms of CREP, wildlife management areas, forest land conservation easements, streambank and lakeshore erosion, local community park grants, fisheries, water accesses, and stream restoration.

Mercury Reduction Efforts

HF3712 (Hackbarth) SF3470 (Dibble)

Mercury has contaminated Minnesota's lakes, rivers, and fish and is a potent neurotoxin that can cause learning and developmental disabilities in children. The sources of mercury reaching Minnesota waters include coal-burning power plants and taconite processing plants, as well as natural sources. Mercury is the major pollutant in two-thirds of Minnesota’s impaired waters. The Minnesota Department of Health has issued general fish consumption guidelines for fish consumed from all lakes in Minnesota, with special precautions for children, pregnant women and women of child bearing age. HF3712 and SF3470 started off as two difference approaches to mercury emissions reductions in Minnesota.

Status 5/1/2006: On April 27 the Governor announced an agreement on mercury reduction. The Mercury Free Minnesota, representing the environmental community, worked hard with business/utilities, and the MPCA to negotiate the agreement. The agreement calls for a 90% reduction—1,200 pounds per year—in mercury production at the three largest Minnesota coal-burning power plants by 2015. This is a more aggressive than the federal timetable of a 70% reduction by 2018. Minnesota’s Mercury Reductions Act of 2006 targets Xcel Energy's Sherco power plant in Becker, Xcel's Allen S. King plant in Oak Park Heights and Minnesota Power's Clay Boswell plant near Grand Rapids. Mercury-control technologies would be phased in at those three plants between 2009 and 2014. It is hoped that the legislature will pass the agreement without amendments in the next couple of weeks. This is a big victory for Minnesota’s lakes and rivers, for safer fish, and healthy kids.  The leadership of those involved in the negotiations and the technology being developed to remove mercury from emissions – even as the bill was  being negotiated – will be shared with others states and countries to reduce their emissions as well.

OHV (Off Highway Vehicles)

Off-highway vehicle riding has increased tremendously in the last ten years, creating user conflicts and putting stress on publicly-owned natural resources. The 2003 Legislature instructed the DNR to limit motorized recreation to designated trails in state forests. Prior to this law change, ATV riders could ride on nearly any trail in state forests. The controversy around the legislation closing trails resulted in a reversal of the 2003 legislation by the 2005 legislature, and as a result, all trails in state forests north of U.S. Highway 2 (from Duluth to East Grand Forks) now remain open to off-highway vehicle traffic unless specifically posted closed. The 2005 legislature also required the DNR to study the current gas tax formula, which siphons funds to special accounts to build and maintain ATV trails, and to study expanding the North Shore State Trail to ATV use, which is opposed by conservationists because the trail crosses sensitive trout streams nearly 100 times. MEP is seeking to: 1) repeal the “North of Highway 2” policy change; 2) ensure that the recalculation of the apportionment of gas taxes related to ATVs and OHVs is equitable based upon several considerations, including the nature and type of use; and 3) defeating proposed bonding bills seeking funds to develop an ATV trail on approximately one-third of the North Shore State Trail. 

Status 5/1/2006: SF 3378-Marty sought to repeal many of the unfavorable 2005 ATV policy changes but was defeated in committee.  There is no companion bill in the House. SF 3462- Marty sought to reduce the current allocation of gas taxes dedicated to ATV’s, but that effort was defeated, as well. There is companion bill in the House. HF 3482-Hackbarth and SF3455-Bakk seek to increase allocation of ATV gas taxes dedicated to trail development and maintenance based on a study done this past year is still pending in the omnibus transportation policy and funding bills or a tax bill is one is passed.  HF2897-Hackbarth and SF2595-Bakk were introduced to include $300,000 in state funds to develop trails on approximately one-third of the North Shore Trail. No bonding dollars were included in either the House or Senate bonding bill for the North Shore Tail. It is the strong belief of the environmental community that if funded and built the trail would result in significant filling of wetlands and crossing of hundreds of streams causing damage to wildlife habitat and irreversible alteration of this pristine trail.

Other Legislation of Minnesota Waters Interest:

Aquatic Plant Management Rules

HF 3372 (Sykora) SF 3323 (Olson)

Minnesotans for Healthy Lakes (MHL) introduced legislation that would have allowed more local control of submerged aquatic plants, both native and aquatic invasive species, than is being proposed in the DNR’s aquatic plant management rule revisions in progress. The legislation also defined conditions in which automated unintended aquatic plant control devices (a.k.a. weed rollers) could be used without seeking a DNR permit, and established an appeal process for aquatic plant management permits denied by the DNR.

Status 5/1/2006: The legislation received a hearing in a House committee, but due to concerns raised by the DNR and others, the bill was laid over for future work and hearings.  Minnesota Waters will be part of those discussions. Minnesota Water’s position is the APM program needs to provide a delicate balance between lake access and lake protection with strong protection for native plant communities through aggressive management and prevention of aquatic invasive plants, which displace native plant communities. 

Straight Pipe Sewage Disposal

HF 2839 (Tingelstad) SF 2437(Jungbauer))

This legislation requires the replacement of straight-pipe systems for sewage disposal. A straight-pipe system is a sewage disposal system that transports raw or partially settled sewage directly to a lake, stream, drainage system, or ground surface. They have been illegal for a long time. The bills increase the use of administrative penalty orders (APO) by the state as requested by local governments to move in and enforce against these systems as discovered.

Status 5/1/2006: SF 2437 passed the Senate on April 27. The House bill, which has tougher enforcement language, is awaiting full House actions.  Minnesota Waters supports the House version. 

Replacement and Repair of Watercraft Storage Structures:

HF2994 (Dill) SF 2736 (Bakk)

This bill provides guidelines for restoring watercraft storage facilities to better-than-new or total replacement passed the House. Since the 1979 boat house moratorium on boathouse construction, owners of boathouses built prior to that year have been allowed to maintain only 50 percent of the structure in any given year. While the bill does not allow owners to increase the area of the boathouse, they could extend the height by one foot to accommodate taller boats. They could also replace the foundational structure as long as they use only materials nontoxic to aquatic life below the high water mark. The bill also allows existing boathouses to be consolidated or moved off the water onto the owner’s property. Boathouse owners would apply to the DNR for a permit to renovate, which would also require the approval of the local government unit and proof that the boathouse existed prior to 1997.

            Status 5/1/2006: Both the House and Senate passed the bills and the Governor signed HF 2994 into law on April 20, 2006. The new law went into effect on                     April 21, 2006.

Eminent Domain Bill:

HF2846 (Johnson, J.)  SF2750 (Bakk)

These bills are attempting to limit, narrow, and/or clarify the use of eminent domain for economic development. MN Waters supports those types of changes. However, MN Waters opposes an amendment that was added to the House version that deals with nonconforming shoreland lots. The House language would prohibit counties or cities from stopping the sale or denying a building permit for a single-family residence based upon the common ownership of a contiguous lot or parcel, provided that contiguous nonconforming lots or parcels under the same ownership contain no more than three residential structures. 

            Status 5/1/2006: Minnesota Waters, the Association of Minnesota Counties, and DNR are lobbying against this nonconforming lot provision in this bill, as well as,             in other bills where this amendment has been added.

Legislative Resources:

Minnesota Legislature Home Page: http://www.leg.state.mn.us   

Minnesota House of Representatives: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us

Constitution Ave, St. Paul, MN 55155

Minnesota Senate:  http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us

75 Constitution Ave, St. Paul, MN 55155

The house and senate web sites contain information on bill status and bill text, conference committee activity, floor amendments, bill introductions, committee information and member contact information, member email addresses, daily journals of activity and more.

Legislation and Bill Tracking: http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/legis.asp

View Senate Weekly at:  (A weekly report on Senate legislative activity)

http://www.senate.mn/briefly/2006/brief0331.pdf

View House Session Weekly (A weekly report on House legislative activity)

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hinfo/SWKLY/2005-06/sw506.pdf

Contacting Your Legislator

Who is Your Legislator?  See http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/Districtfinder.asp

Tips and Tactics for Contacting Legislators: http://www.mncn.org/doc/tipstactics.pdf

Senate email:

[first name].[last name]@senate.leg.state.mn.us

Check Senate email addresses:

http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/members/info/alpha.htm#header

House email:

[first name].[last name]@house.leg.state.mn.us

Check House email addresses:

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/members/housemembers.asp