Outdoor heritage bill gets a bump from increased sales tax revenues

Technically, the House Legacy Finance Committee only has to pass one bill this session. That would be the annual outlay for the Outdoor Heritage Fund.

The committee is also responsible for recommending how to divvy up the state’s other funds that fall under the “Legacy Amendment” passed by Minnesota voters in 2008: Clean Water Fund, Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund, and Parks and Trails Fund. But those are already spoken for, having had their biennial budgets approved during a special session last June.

Only Outdoor Heritage Fund monies are debated and approved on an annual basis. And the committee had this year’s bill before it on Wednesday, HF3726, sponsored by Rep. Rob Ecklund (DFL-International Falls). It was laid over for possible inclusion in an omnibus legacy finance bill.

Why? Well, perhaps for the same reason that a sponsor’s amendment increased funding for every project mentioned in the bill: The February budget forecast made clear that much more money was available than expected.

So it seems likely there will be new supplemental bills for the three other Legacy funds on the way, as well. And when it arrives on the House floor, the Outdoor Heritage Fund recommendations will have smaller totals attached for clean water, arts and cultural heritage, and parks and trails.

To be clear, this money is not part of the projected budget surplus that has the governor and legislative leaders currently negotiating uses for General Fund dollars. The Legacy funds are the result of a constitutional amendment that Minnesota voters approved in 2008, dedicating 0.375% of the proceeds from the state’s sales tax. Since more sales taxes were collected in 2021 than expected, the four funds have grown.

How much?

Well, the bill signed into law last summer contained $127.8 million for the Outdoor Heritage Fund. The bill laid over on Wednesday, as amended, would appropriate a total of $159 million for habitat, prairies, wetland and forests. With the approval of Ecklund’s amendment, the total has increased by $3.7 million over what had been approved by the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee March 1.

To explain the Outdoor Heritage Fund: It receives 33% of those sales tax receipts and the money may be spent only “to restore, protect, and enhance wetlands, prairies, forests, and habitat for fish, game, and wildlife.” So the bill contains a list of specific projects and appropriations for each. Over half of the bill’s total funding would go toward habitat projects and the Conservation Partners Legacy grant program. About 22% would go to prairies, 17% to wetlands, and 8% to forests.

Who’s responsible for overseeing these projects? Among the 26 organizations receiving funding under the bill, the largest outlays would be:

• $32.6 million to the Department of Natural Resources;
• $18.2 million to Pheasants Forever;
• $17 million to the Board of Water and Soil Resources;
• $9.9 million to Ducks Unlimited;
• $8.4 million to the Nature Conservancy;
• $8.2 million to the Minnesota Valley Trust; and
• $6.7 million to the Minnesota Land Trust.

Projects were vetted and approved by the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, which reported that 80,929 acres of wildlife habitat would be restored, protected or enhanced under the bill’s proposed appropriation, including 127 miles of shoreline.

Rep. Steve Green (R-Fosston) unsuccessfully offered two amendments. One would have banned the use of Legacy funds to acquire land through eminent domain; the other would have required all applicants to submit cash-benefit analyses on proposed projects.  

“We don’t know where this money is going,” Green said. “And I don’t think this is going through the Senate anyway.”

“The real benefits of this work are almost too vast to measure,” Ecklund said. “You can think about our pollinators, our bumblebees and monarchs that are needed to grow our food finding a place to nest and feed in our lush prairie flowers. You can think about a thriving and healthy forest providing thousands of good paying jobs and sequestering millions of tons of carbon. We can think about taking our kids fishing along the banks of a restored trout stream. Without the Legacy amendment, these treasured places and all that they give us would be lost forever.”