Should Minnesota continue to invest lottery money into environmental causes? – Austin Daily Herald

Dan Kracker

There is an issue on the ballot in this election in Minnesota that is flying under the radar but has important implications for the state’s treasured nature.

Voters will decide whether to extend for another 25 years a constitutional amendment first approved in 1988 that allocates 40 percent of the state’s lottery revenue to a trust fund aimed at protecting the state’s environment and natural resources.

In 1988, more than 70 percent of Minnesotans voted for a constitutional amendment that created the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. 10 years later they expanded it again, even more.

Since then, more than $1 billion in lottery revenue has gone to more than 1,700 projects across the state. The funding supports scientific research that collects fundamental data about the state’s natural resources and explores strategies for protecting water and controlling invasive species.

They are also used for land acquisition, habitat protection and restoration, trail construction and park improvements, and to pay for environmental education and outreach.

In recent years, funding has laid the groundwork for the new National Loon Center in Crosslake, Minnesota, which has helped uncover new mysteries about the wolves living in northern Minnesota; contributed to efforts to save the state’s endangered freshwater mussels; save rare plants and discover new species of bees.

The lottery money also funded years of research into some of Minnesota’s most challenging environmental issues, including so-called “forever chemicals” such as PFAS, chronic wasting disease, invasive species and the decline of pollinators in the state.

“The basic research we fund has long-term benefits not only for the entire state, but for the entire country,” said state DFL Rep. Rick Hansen of South St. Paul. Hansen also serves as vice chair of the Legislative Citizens Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR), which makes funding recommendations to the state Legislature.

“Things like this wouldn’t happen anywhere else if we didn’t have the dollars dedicated to it,” Hansen added.

Voters will now decide whether to continue setting aside a significant portion of lottery proceeds for another 25 years “for the public purposes of protecting, preserving, preserving and improving the air, water, land, fish, wildlife and other natural resources of the state.” .

To pass an amendment, a majority of voters must approve the amendment. Leaving a blank ballot means voting “no.”

The amendment would also increase the amount of money that can be spent from the fund each year by another 1.5 percent. An additional $20 million to $25 million annually would fund a new community grants program aimed at small organizations serving underserved communities.

A new 11-member advisory board would be created to recommend which projects to fund, which would include at least four tribal members and four members of communities of color.

The funding would be signed off by the commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, not the Legislature, which approves projects recommended by the LCCMR.

“It essentially takes it out of the hands of the legislature. I don’t like that it takes away people’s voices,” said state Sen. Steve Green of Fosston, co-vice chairman of the LCCMR and one of several Republican lawmakers who opposed the proposal.

Green said that while he has issues with how much of the funding is currently allocated, he said he would support simply extending the existing lottery amendment.

“While this initiative has been popular in the past, the situation has gotten out of hand,” Greene wrote in a letter to constituents. “This ballot question goes far beyond its original scope.”

Underserved Communities

Proponents of the ballot measure argue that small organizations serving rural and tribal communities and communities of color have historically been left out of lottery funding.

A significant portion of the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund is typically allocated to researchers at the University of Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and other large institutions with grant writing staff and other specialists.

They say the new community grants program will give smaller groups greater access to these funds in the future, including organizations in rural areas.

“I think a lot of people don’t realize that the majority of low-income communities are actually in rural Minnesota,” said state DFL Rep. Athena Hollins of St. Paul, who is sponsoring a bill to put the amendment extension question on the ballot. this year.

“We definitely just need to do a better job of distributing the funds to the communities that need them, because all Minnesota communities benefit from them,” Hollins said.

But some Republicans and conservative groups, including the Center for the American Experiment, question the requirement that the new advisory group tasked with recommending grant recipients must include a certain number of tribal members and people of color.

“The environment is for everyone,” said Carrie Ruud, a former Republican senator from the Brainerd area who has served in leadership roles on several legislative environmental committees.

“Environmental justice and all that… that doesn’t belong here. This is for everyone. We all contributed to this. This should be for everyone.”

More than 150 organizations lined up in support of the constitutional amendment, including city and county governments, traditional conservation groups such as Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited and The Nature Conservancy, and groups such as Hospitality Minnesota, which represents resorts, campgrounds and other organizations. Industries dependent on tourism.

They formed a coalition called Minnesotans for Our Greater Nature, which raised more than $700,000 to support the amendment. There is no official group that opposes this proposal.

“Regardless of who you vote for at the top of the ticket, with this amendment we have a lot of compromises and a lot of shared ideology,” said Marcus Starr, campaign director for Conservation Minnesota, which is leading the coalition. Starr noted that the ballot amendment bill received strong bipartisan support in the Legislature.

Minnesota is unique in that it has two constitutional sources of environmental funding: a trust fund supported by a lottery and a heritage amendment that directs a portion of the state sales tax to projects supporting clean water, nature, parks and trails, and the arts and culture.

A stable source of funding has been critical to the Minnesota Aquatic Invasive Species Research Center, which has received more than $24 million in lottery funding through the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund since its founding in 2012.

“If it weren’t for ENRFT, I can confidently say that MAISRC would not be here,” said Nick Phelps, who directs the center at the University of Minnesota.

He said some research might be funded by the federal government. But he said the science would then not be focused on Minnesota’s problems.

“We will not be working on zebra mussels in Minnesota lakes or the new star drupe infestation in Cross Lake,” Phelps said. “We are here to help Minnesotans because Minnesota is investing in this issue.”

LCCMR has been criticized over the years for spending too much trust fund money on research and not enough on “on the ground” projects.

The dispute came to a head in 2018 when the state legislature redirected trust fund funding to pay for wastewater treatment plants across the state. Environmental groups sued to block the transfer.

A provision in this year’s ballot amendment would prohibit such spending in the future.

“I would like to see those dollars go to projects that actually help clean up water, rather than just another study,” Green said. “They have an office for studying tree crevices, for studying flying squirrels. How will this clean our water?”

Nick Phelps said it was fair to question the amount of money spent on research. He admits that a lot of money is spent on this.

But they argue that to address serious problems like invasive species, the state needs to find serious solutions. And this is possible, he said, only if research is carried out year after year, from one project to another.

For example, Phelps said the U Center he directs has made significant strides in research on chemical control of zebra mussels in Minnesota lakes, funded in large part by lottery proceeds.

“Over the last 10 years, we’ve been able to move research from mason jars to some of the largest lake trials ever done,” Phelps said. “And it’s because of this funding.”

There is currently approximately $1.9 billion in the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund. If the amendment is not adopted, the remaining funds will continue to be allocated to environmental projects.

But in the future, all lottery proceeds will go into the state’s general fund.