Romney Holding Back F&W Funds Again

[Doublebait]

Date: 3/15/2005

Looks like its time to call our reps again

By BILL BISWANGER, Sun Outdoors Columnist

I love to get letters and I received another this week from Warren Winders. Warren is a sportsman who likes to mix it up in the political world, not because he wants to but because he is an activist who wants things done right.

He and I have conversed several times and I think his words speak volumes so I will share one of his letters with you.

“I'm writing to you because you were one who broke the story on the dedicated Inland Fish and Game Fund, and the move by our governor and our Legislature to eliminate the fund and take the money and run. Well, the problem didn't end when we got the fund back. The governor and the Legislature, ever protective of their power of appropriation (if nothing else) have been starving MassWildlife with inadequate appropriations these past years.

The governor's budget proposal for 06 has a $7.7 million appropriation
for MassWildlife. To give you an idea of how low this is, a few years ago they were getting by on $10.3 million, or about that. Meanwhile, hatcheries are crumbling and trucks are breaking down and MDFW is chronically undermanned. Right now about $11 million is sitting in the dedicated Inland Fish and Game Fund doing nothing and untouchable to everyone, MassWildlife included. If it doesn't get appropriated, it doesn't get used. If the Legislature accepts the governor's appropriation of $7.7 million, given $12.5 million in anticipated dedicated revenue -- from licenses ($7.5 million) and federal matching funds ($4.5 million) and motor boat gas tax ($180,000) -- another $4.8 million of ‘surplus' will land in the dedicated fund, for a total of $15.8 million wasted dollars. Sounds too absurd to be true doesn't it?

Well, maybe not here in good old Massachusetts. Most states supplement the dedicated revenue stream
of their wildlife agencies with tax revenue because they appreciate the contribution to the economy that the agency makes. Here in Mass., they just don't get it.”

To follow this letter up I have spoke with several people at Fisheries and Wildlife, including the director, Wayne MacCallum, who said that what Winders has stated is true. He also added that his staff of 146 has now been cut to 125, with only a few people replaced since the budget crunch.

This crunch had nothing at all to do with Massachusetts since the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife is self funded. MacCallum said the money is sitting in the reserve fund but the legislature has not appropriated a penny of it.

I also don't understand something. The governor has decided the Division should only have $7.7 million next year. Well, that might be his opinion but that will also mean he might again violate the law and the feds will not give the money to this state and they could ask for all funds over the past 50 years to be given back. Because any funds generated via license sales is matched by the Feds. He will again be jeopardizing funding for Mass. Wildlife.

Governor, let's be smart here and leave the best managed group of people in this state alone.

http://www.lowellsun.com/sports/ci_2606669

[Mark Cahill]

Are we going to go through this every year?

BTW, you really shouldn't copy in stuff out of newspapers. It violates their copyright. I posted this over the weekend on my FLog... http://reel-time.com/blogs/cahill/?p=96

It's best to summarize the story, and provide a link to it. Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention.

[BobG]

After reading this, does anyone still believe a salt water license would be a good idea?

[salter]

posted 03-18-2005 01:55 PM

It is time once again to go into action up on the Hill. The whole problem revolves around what the Governor requests in his budget and what is appropriated by our elected representatives.

People – we are being short changed, it is as simple as that. To the tune of $ 15.8 Million Dollars!

The Governor would rather use the dedicated funds to help balance the budget and increase the Commonwealth’s Bond rating, instead of giving the money to Mass Wildlife.
Even though the money is once again in a “dedicated fund” as apposed to the general fund any “surplus” is an asset of the Commonwealth’s and increases the bond rating for the state.

I am sick and tired of this shell game and will reluctantly put on my political hat on again. During the next week or so I will be posting a form letter with which, you will be able to let your elected representatives know how you feel about this issue. We need to make as much noise as possible, if we want to change all of this once and for all.

[SamRiley]

After reading this, does anyone still believe a salt water license would be a good idea?

Yes I do Bob. Romney is another issue.

Here is a letter I just sent off.

Governor Romney,
It has only been one year since you were pressured by sportsman to restore the dedicated DFW funding which you had cut. It now appears that you are once again jeopardizing the effectiveness of this self-sustaining division by withholding funds. According to my information, your 2006 budget only allocates $7.7 million of the anticipated $12.5 million in DWF revenue. Frankly, I can not see a justifiable reason for this given the task the DWF is charged with. We need more EPOs. We need better resource management. We need facilities maintenance. As I see it, your budget is standing in the way of this. These funds are dedicated and so can not be used for other purposes without loosing $4.8 million in federal matching funds. My assumption is that leaving these funds unspent serves some purpose for you, something other than what they were intended for.

I and the many thousands of politically active sportsman in Massachusetts would very much like to hear your justification for this budget proposal. We are researching and gathering support.


Sincerely,
Sam Riley
Boston, MA

[Redliner]

I will do whatever I can to help.

[Jed]

Oh yeah, I'm in favor of a Saltwater license. (#$119) Then we can fund Big Dig II or its equivalent. Just what sports fees should be used for. --126-3- I might support something like that if it would go towards shipping Romney back to Utah.

jed

[north coast]

I hate politics, politicians ,and hate having to become involved with crap! like this even more. but, the way I see it if we don't do something every time one of these morons does something like this we'll eventually end up with nothing. Sam ,where did you send your letter? (if you don't mind )

[SamRiley]

Sam ,where did you send your letter? (if you don't mind )

Emailed Romney and my local rep Walsh. Guys, we all need to get involved here. We have a significant amount of power if properly focused. Please write your local reps and the governor.

The saltwater license issue is worth discussing but in another thread. Lets keep this one focused on the funding issue and get the job done.

[bdowning]

Dealing with the state is like dealing with a problem child. Apparently, telling them once not to do something is not enough, you have to tell them over and over again. It's just too tempting to cut funding for "non mission-critical agencies" like DFW to balance the budget. The DCR, which runs the states parks and forests, is in the same boat. An article in today's Globe talks about the lack of monies for park maintenance and that private funding initiatives have sprung up out of frustration in relying on the state to provide the needed maintenance funding.

-bd

[salter]

Here is a summery of funding history provided by Warren Winders

In the early 1950's, a series of steps were taken to de politicize the Mass. Div. of Fisheries and Wildlife. It had become obvious to the Legislature and the Governor that the management of the state's wildlife resources was best left to the professionals - that the political process should be minimized and that decisions regarding wildlife should be left to biologists.

To this end, MDFW was given a dedicated fund. Revenues to the fund come from license fees, permits, federal matching funds from Pittman/Robertson and Dingle/Johnson (federal sales taxes levied on outdoor related equipment and clothing) and revenues from a gasoline tax levied on recreational motor boat gas.

In addition, the Mass. Fisheries and Wildlife Board was created to oversee MDFW's activities. The Board's duties include the creation and implementation of wildlife regulations based on recommendations from MDFW's biologists. Board members are appointed by the Governor to five year terms that are staggered. Board members represent the geographic breadth of the state as well as the different constituencies of the state's natural resource related community. For example: members represent the interests of endangered species, and agriculture interests as well as hunters and anglers.

Throughout most of its history, this arrangement has worked remarkably well in behalf of the Commonwealth and its wildlife resources. And during this time, past Legislatures and Governors - in recognition of MDFW as a self-funded and efficient state agency - have appropriated from MDFW's dedicated fund the amount of money that MDFW indicated that it needed to operate successfully. Often this amount did not include all of MDFW's incoming revenue for the year, and as a result, a small surplus existed in the dedicated fund. It serves us to keep in mind that this arrangement has worked well for a fifty year period that includes a number recessions and tight money situations for the state. The agency charged with managing, what many consider to be the state's most precious resource - its wildlife and the habitat that our wildlife depends on, has operated effectively for fifty years without money from the General Fund.

During the 1990's, rather than reduce the quality of its service, the MDFWand the Board, after exploring a variety of options in statewide hearings, increased license fees dramatically and created the $5 Land Stamp to be sold as part of each license. The Land Stamp program came about when it became obvious that more needed to be done to preserve open space within the Commonwealth. Since its inception in 1992, the Land Stamp program has generated an average of $1.4 million a year, and has been used to preserve a remarkable 21,000 acres of open space for use by all of the people of the Commonwealth.

Unfortunately, the past practice of allowing the MDFW to access its dedicated revenues - as needed - ended with the perception of a fiscal crises within the state, and the election of Governor Mitt Romney. As a result, MDFW is 20% understaffed and is suffering equipment failures at an increasing rate due to deferred maintenance necessitated by budget appropriations that have been well below what is required to operate MDFW efficiently. If the Governor's budget recommendation for MDFW is not increased, MDFW will be over a million dollars shy of what it operated with in 2002. There are also questions about whether MDFW will be allowed to use the Land Stamp revenues in the coming year.

The explanation most often given for the low appropriations for MDFW is concern for the state's bond rating (surplus revenues improve the state's financial picture). While this concern is understandable, under funding MDFW is actually fiscally counter-productive, and is a disservice, not just to the state's 350,000 license holders, but to all of the Commonwealth's citizens.

According to the American Sportfishing Association, $275 million is spent yearly on recreational freshwater fishing in Massachusetts. These expenditures generate over $26 million in sales tax revenue and created 5,636 jobs in Massachusetts. If we add in the income tax revenue from the 5 thousand plus jobs created by freshwater fishing, money spent by MDFW looks like a very good deal for the Commonwealth. And this is just from freshwater fishing.

The proper management of our wildlife resources obviously contributes money and jobs to our state's economy along with over $45 million a year to the General Fund, but it also does much more. The efforts of our wildlife managers have returned eagles and wild turkeys to our countryside. Our wildlife biologists are working to restore and preserve our watersheds and protect native species of fish, amphibians, plants, insects, and mammals. They are actively recording and mapping our eco-systems to better monitor changes caused by global warming or activities like development. They are involved in the creation of the state's first bio-reserve, and they are developing strategies to protect the Commonwealth's endangered species. All of these activities profoundly enhance and protect the quality of our life here in Massachusetts.

I feel fortunate to live in a state that offers so much both in terms of culture and natural resources. I am proud that the $45.50 that I spend each year for a sporting license has contributed to the accomplishment of so much good work. And along with the 350,000 other license holders here in Massachusetts, I want to see my money put to the best possible use - its intended use. Our MDFW deserves to be supported and fully funded, and the Commonwealth's people are entitled to the benefits that a fully funded MDFW can bestow.

Warren

There is now an effort being put forth by The House Minority Whip, George Peterson and State Representive Anne Paulsen to increase funding to $ 8,700,000. This increase in funding would allow Mass. F&W to be fully staffed.
See Mr. Peterson's letter below
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v220/Letort/MassFWApril132005.jpg

I urge every sportman in the Commonwealth to write a letter TODAY to Mr. Robert A. DeLeo, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and send a copy to your State Rep. and Gov. Romney. Keep the letter simple and streightforward, a 1 pager is all you need to write. This line item is now before the Ways & Means Comm. so please act today!

Here are your gov. links:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/member/rad1.htm
http://www.mass.gov/legis/member/gnp1.htm
http://www.mass.gov/legis/member/amp1.htm

Salter
AKA Michael Hopper

[Doublebait]

Nice work Salter...I commend you

[SamRiley]

All my contacts got another email too. Thanks for the heads up on the letter :)

[SamRiley]

Well my rep's office got back to me the same day:


Sam,
*
My name is Matt Fitzgerald and I am Rep. Rush's Legislative Aide. I just wanted to let you know that the rep signed onto the amendment regarding adequate funding of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Please feel free to contact the office anytime at (617)-722-2210 with any further cares or concerns.*
*
Take care.*
*
Matt *

[salter]

Thanks Sam,

It is my hope that all the board members will take a few minutes to write to their Rep's. to get this line item passed.

Michael

[SamRiley]

Scott,
I hear ya but respectfully, the MDFW is a different case. It's self sufficient and has no burden on the taxpayers.

Has anyone else written to their rep and the governor? If you really care about the MDFW programs then stop surfing RT for half a second and start typing.

[salter]

Sam I 100% agree....I know this is self sufficient but what i'm saying is the money is held for a reason, ie they need it somewhere else to pay for cops or firefighters etc.

Scott,

The funds are in a dedicated account, and cannot be used or appropriated for any other department other than Mass F&W. The only reason to not spend the money is to improve the State’s bond rating. By not spending the money, the funds become an asset of the Commonwealth and improve the state’s balance sheet and bond rating. Back in ’03 Romney tried to eliminate the dedicated fund, funneling the money raised through fishing and hunting license sales into the General Fund. This move jeopardized matching funds from the Fed’s. and the legislation was repealed.

Michael

[SamRiley]

Mitt may be slow but at least he reads his mail and doesn't just stamp his signature.

Write people...... write

[SamRiley]

Scott,
With all due respect, this thread is about a separate issue. School construction has nothing to do with the topic at hand or fishing. Please stay on point.

Also, I sent you a PM on another issue. If you could get back to me on it at some point it would be appreciated :)

[SamRiley]

ALL of these programs have one funding source, taxpayer dollars.

As I understand it Scott (please correct me if I an wrong), the Mass DFW is funded solely through:

1) Hunting and fishing license fees

2) Marine fuel taxes

3) Federal matching funds

Can you explain to me why these funds should go anywhere else other than the DFW? This may not be the norm but it could be the one area where "segmentation" works. If you want to talk about waste within the DFW then I would understand your contributing to this discussion. If you want to talk about waste outside of the DFW then I guess that I don't.