Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Opinion & Editorial

by Rep. Bob Lake, HD 88, Hamilton, Chairman, House Taxation Committee

The public is being bombarded with statements by the Administration and Democratic legislators about the efforts and hard work that they performed, in gaining property tax relief for Montana residents with the $400 rebate checks.

Just to set the record straight, a onetime payment is not tax relief, it is a refund of taxes already paid that contributed to the $1.4 billion excess collections that taxpayers in the state of Montana have made. The collections from property taxes were not responsible for the massive flow of revenue into our treasury, it was, and still is, the major improvement in personal income, a significant improvement in capital gains, and as the result of our strong economy, a large increase in the corporate license (income) taxes. These areas of our economy are doing well, we believe, because of the tax rate reductions made during the 2003 session when our state's economy was languishing and we were faced with a $300 million shortfall.

Please do not think for one minute that I do not believe that the taxpayers in the state of Montana shouldn't be able to keep more of the money they earn. They do, but we should be touting the permanent reduction of property taxes and not just a one time, taxable, $400 check which takes an additional 58 employees in the Department of Revenue and over $1 million per year to administer. The economy of the State of Montana responds well to lower taxes. It has been proven, the stronger our economy, the greater the flow of tax revenue we have. The greater the flow of revenue, the better the funding is for schools and other needed programs.

The $400 check is nice, but will be spent quickly and we all will receive our next tax bill and wonder why it is so high. I believe that if you are going to "work hard" on something, make that something really meaningful, and that it will do the right thing for Montana taxpayers.

Special Session recap

Dear Editor,

During the Special Session on September 5, three bills were passed. HB1 as passed by the Legislature provides $39 million to DNRC for wildfire costs for fiscal year ending June 30, 2008. It also appropriated $3 million to the Department of Military Affairs to fund that agency's firefighting costs for FY-08. A provision to form an Interim Study was amended into the bill. The committee is to study the costs of suppression of wildfires and is to complete its study by September 15, 2008, and submit its findings to the 2009 Legislature. The study must include: an investigation of firefighting operations in Montana including operations on private, state, federal, and tribal lands; the management policies affecting the efficient use of fire suppression resources including the use of private resources. The committee is to meet in Miles City, Lewistown, Libby, Thompson Falls, and Hamilton. The schedule for these hearings has yet to be determined. HB1 also contained a provision that DNRC submit a report to the Governor and the 2009 Legislature on its progress in implementing 27 findings of a 2004 Legislative Audit Division audit; none of which have been implemented to date. HB1, as introduced, contained a provision removing the time limits on state of emergency and state of disaster declarations by the Governor. In these cases the Governor can waive almost all statutory limitations of his powers, for limited periods of time. Removing these limits was considered too large a policy decision for a Special Session, and so it was amended out.

HB3 appropriates $40 million into a new account in DNRC to pay for next fire season, if it is necessary. Money in this account may not be used until July 1, 2008, and the Act terminates June 30, 2009. This should eliminate the need to call a special session next year, should we have another bad fire season. This is the first time money has been specifically appropriated to DNRC for fire fighting. In the past, fire costs have been paid for in the following budget year. The bill had been introduced during the 2007 regular session by Rep. Ray Hawk (R-Florence), but failed to pass the House.

HB4 is commonly referred to as "the feed bill" and appropriates the funds necessary to pay for the Special Session. The amount was $132,000, enough to cover two days, but the session only lasted one day. The balance simply stays in the bank.

Perhaps the biggest story of the session was not in the bills passed or killed, but in what happened in the leadership offices. The Senate President approached the House Speaker with a proposal to reach a compromise on removing the time restrictions on the Governor, and a termination date for HB3. After a meeting with the majority and minority leadership of each chamber a compromise was reached, and the legislation moved forward. This was a display of compromise and cooperation not seen during the regular session or the Special Session in May. Hopefully, this will set the stage for bipartisan cooperation in future sessions.

Rep. Gary MacLaren
HD 89, Victor

Response to Commissioner Thompson

Dear Editor,

The letter Alan Thompson wrote in the newspaper compelled me to write and try to answer his question, "What has happened to our valley?" Many people in the valley are fed up with the lack of good public policy. We are suffering from no planning, no quality of life protection and ineffective laws that do not protect the public interest. All these years Thompson has been in office, he has done next to nothing to help guide responsible growth. He allowed the growth policy to be rendered meaningless. He voted to allow big developments to circumvent our county zoning referendum without due public process. And he and Chilcott make deals with developers outside of public hearings and the list goes on and on.

He said in his letter that he "wants citizens to respect others with differing viewpoints." This is all well and good but how about him doing the same? In many public hearings I have witnessed him and Chilcott disregard public comment and vote in direct opposite of the will of the people, yet he was elected to serve the public. Sometimes while people are making public comments Thompson and Chilcott giggle at each other like two school boys with frogs in their pockets. Now, how's that for respect?

And my last point has to do with the statement he wrote about being "disappointed that Democrats and Republicans on a national level seem to put party interests before what is good for the country." Well, it is very obvious to me and many others that this is exactly what Thompson and Chilcott do. Their Republican party is full of realtors and developers and they have had way too much influence. His decision making directly reflects their wishes and that's the root of the whole problem in the Bitterroot. So what's happened to our valley, Thompson asks? It's two Republican Commissioners that do not serve the best interest of the public and now, the public is not going to stand for it. Thank goodness we have three new commissioners that are making better public policy and there would have been five new commissioners if Thompson and Chilcott hadn't gone whining to a judge that we the people did not know what we were voting for. And Thompson wants respect? He hasn't earned it.

Phyllis Bookbinder
Corvallis

Response to FOB

Dear Editor,

The tragedy of an out of state and ignorant "hunter" wasting a prime male grizzly bear did not go un-noticed as the editorial suggests. The reason for this mistaken identity act on this nimrod's part has nothing to do with Idaho's legal bear baiting practices. It has to do with this person's ignorance in bear identity and Idaho's foot dragging to set up a program such as that set up by MT FWP to educate those hunters wishing to pursue bears in one of the few places left in the lower 48 with the magnificent animal, Ursus horribilis. Bait hunting may well have to be outlawed in this region because of grizzly habitation. That would seem logical.

I am not a member of your organization, but have been and am a contributing member of the Alliance for Wild Rockies and write frequently on their behalf to politicians that make the decisions that affect all of us and that which we care deeply about. I have no axe to grind with The FOB. In fact, I support and appreciate your efforts to keep the Forest Service doing what they should be doing... for all of us... not just the whining special interests.

However, I take great exception to the inflammatory rhetoric about "bait hunting." This is an ethical issue and likely divides even hunters, some of whom probably share the president's views on this matter. But like the Tennessee hunter who never had seen a grizzly before and could not identify one right in front of him, I am willing to bet the president has never sat hours in a tree stand with a bow and arrow watching a bait for a legal black bear in Idaho. Both lack knowledge and experience. This is a legal activity with regulations in place as to where and how and what one is allowed to do when baiting for black bears in Idaho. He mentions a carcass of a black bear used as bait. This is illegal under Idaho Game Laws. Baiting is about the only way one has a chance to take a black bear in heavily forested mountain regions. For the president's information, it IS NOT a guarantee to hanging a tag on a black bear. The animal has exceptionally keen olfactory senses, better hearing than most people think, and where hunted almost a sixth sense to tell him when danger may be present. I personally hunted Idaho in the Clearwater NF this past spring, hiked many miles, carried heavy loads of bait (legal bait), spent many pleasurable hours in a tree stand attempting and hoping my efforts might pay off in getting an ethical, lethal shot at the vitals of a prime bruin with a razor sharp broadhead. This didn't happen for me but none-the-less I enjoyed all of it. Most bears I saw would not even come in when I was present. They fed at night.

Idaho F & G is currently attempting to reduce the population of black bears in some regions. It's called "management." It is done at the recommendations of biologists who study the populations and the dynamics and interactions with other species. The black bear is thriving in the Clearwater NF, in spite of bait hunting. In fact, studies have found that those states with a spring bear season have a higher survival rate for cubs than those that do not. The reason is that the males often kill cubs of the year.

The Prez's editorial reminds me of the coalition in Maine back in the 90's to outlaw running bears with hounds. As one outfitter put it, if any of the anti's had ever tried to follow hounds through the dense Maine pine thickets, across streams and boulders and up steep inclines, they probably would understand the bear has more than a slight chance of escape and survival. And they probably would never want to take part in such a physically demanding activity again! It's one's personal choice to the legal mode of pursuit of a game animal. It's a personal decision. Ethics are personal. A rifle hunter spotting and stalking can make an un-ethical decision to shoot at a black bear which is out of realistic range and cripple it. It's not against the law, but the ethical decision is questionable. My point is that because the president doesn't know much about bait hunting except what he imagines it to be, doesn't make all hunters who hunt with bait slobs who seek an easy mark. It's not fish in a barrel, Mr. President.

The FOB hopefully recognizes that it is the hunter and fisherman in this country that pay for wildlife conservation. Rhetoric to alienate hunters is not serving the FOB's interest. Many of us are your allies in the battle to conserve what we have left. Many of us have a deep respect and love for the game animals we pursue, no matter what weapon is chosen or manner of pursuit. Let us not divide, but unite in our efforts to protect and conserve that which we care so deeply for, for ourselves and our children.

Mike Henry
Florence

Dear Editor,

The Friends of the North Valley Public Library would like to congratulate the library for the successful installation of its shared computer catalog. This is the first catalog that the library has ever had and will offer unlimited advantages to the library patrons. There are still many more books to be cataloged, but the staff and invaluable volunteers are working diligently to complete the task.

Be sure to visit the library to exchange your old blue paper library card for the sleek computer card featuring our new logo. Speaking of logos, the last name of the talented young artist who inspired the logo, now being used by the library, was misspelled in a recent article in the Star. His name is Chad Mallow, and Chad, we certainly know who you are and hope you'll forgive the typographical error.

The shared catalog is only the beginning of ongoing, varied improvements to the library which will eventually provide the very best services possible to all of its loyal, valued patrons.

Beverly Helrich, President
Friends of North Valley Public Library

©2006 Bitterroot Star
This site was Done By Dooney