KCC Legislative Update

HB 419, The Land stewardship bill, with an assist from committee chair and former chair of the Land Stewardship Task Force Brandon Smith (R-Hazard) made it’s way from the House A&R committee to the Senate Natural Resources and Energy committee. This is good news for the bill since Brandon has been active in land preservation issues and is knowledgeable about the goals of the Task Force. Now’s the time to email members of the committee and voice your support for this important legislation.

In other news, SB 105 which this bloggster has declared  a “fowl” piece of legislation mainly because of its ability to stifle local control of confined animal feeding operations, is sitting quietly in Rep McKee’s Agriculture Committee and hopefully will be for some time. While you’re flexing your email muscles, you may want to pop one to Rep McKee and other members of the Ag and Small Business Committee expressing your delight at its peaceful repose. It makes a difference, it really does.

HB 419, with Charlie Hoffman as the primary sponsor, sailed out of the full House Thursday on a 91-2 vote. The two nay votes were from Rep. Stan Lee from Lexington and Rep Mike Harmon from Danville. My only guess as to why they opposed it was a concern over funding. The bill carries no fiscal impact for this session,as the new Fund can only be activated when it receives some money from some source. That very problem is what your KCC will be addressing in the next session of the legislature. We are poised to make a push for a real land conservation program for this, one of America’s most beautiful states, in 2011. We will need the help of every individual and organization concerned with leaving a bit of this beautiful Commonwealth for future generations to enjoy. The strategizing for the big push will start very shortly after the end to this session. In the meantime, we still have the challenge of getting this bill through the Senate. I’ll be asking for every one’s support through emails and phone calls soon, so stay tuned.

P.S many thanks to the fine co-sponsors of HB 419 Eddie Ballard, Derrick Graham,Joni Jenkins, Mary Lou Marzian, Tom McKee.Reginald Meeks, Don Pasley, Jody Richards, Jim Wayne and Brent Yonts.

With Charlie Hoffman at the table, HB 419 easily passed out of the Appropriations and Revenue Committee and now makes its way to the House floor. The bill passed almost unanimously with one pass from Representative Jim Comer keeping it from being put on the “consent” calendar and thus guaranteeing a floor debate before the final vote. After the meeting I talked with Rep. Comer who explained that he had wanted to ask a few questions of the sponsor, but the speed of the vote prevented him from doing it. It is hoped that Rep. Hoffman will be able to answer any questions Rep. Comer may have and secure his vote on the floor. The fact that the bill would be beneficial to the PACE program and that Rep. Comer is a farmer should help.

In other news, Senate bill 105 which this writer has pronounced a “fowl” measure sits in the House Agriculture and Small Business Committee. Hopefully we can prevail upon the always fair and forthright Rep. Tom McKee to consider the protection of citizens effected by large confined animal feeding operations as well as the standards of care for the animals themselves, and not take away local’s ability to protect their constituents.

It looks as if HB 408, the alternate energy bill constructed by a consortium of groups interested in energy efficiency and the environment will go the way of the “stream Saver” bill of yesteryear and not get a hearing in Rep. Gooch’s Natural Resources Committee. There is some reason for optimism though as Rep. Rocky Adkins is poised to introduce his own energy bill which hopefully will contain some of the consortium’s recommendations, but predictably on a smaller scale for non-fossil fuels energy production. It is difficult in a “coal” state to get any serious commitment to other forms of energy even though most everyone acknowledges the need for them in the energy mix. We’ll keep plugging.

Representative Charlie Hoffman who served as the last chairman of the Land Stewardship Task Force has introduced HB 419, the first phase of the Task Forces’ legislative recommendation for a Land Stewardship program for the Commonwealth. This bill will create a Land Stewardship trust fund within the treasury to receive monies generated by the next, funding phase of the Task Forces’ recommendation. The monies will be automatically divided between the Purchase of Agricultural Easements (PACE)  program and the Kentucky Heritage Conservation Fund. The bill will also increase the membership of the Heritage Land Conservation Fund Board by two people, one being the director of the state Division of Forestry and the other a representative from a private land trust organization. This second appointment coincides with a change to the mandate of the Heritage Land Conservation Fund to accept grant applications from private, non-profit land trusts and conservation organizations. This expansion of the Boards’ mandate will allow for greater participation by the many private land trusts and PDR groups in Heritage Land fund projects. This is an important first step. Next session we will be seeking a long-term and significant source of funds for Land Conservation in the state and we will need everyone on board. It’s been a long process, but we are beginning to see increasing interest in a well funded program. HB 419 has been sent to the Appropriations and Revenue committee. Please leave an email message for Representative Rick Rand and ask him to hear this bill in committee and help move it through the process. {Rick.Rand@lrc.ky.gov}

Being a veteran of the “chicken” and “pig” wars of the 1990’s I think I know a “stinker” when I see one. This bill, which boasts 19 co-sponsors, looks like a good thing on the surface. I mean who wouldn’t want to see some basic standards of care imposed on the large confined animal feeding operations (cafo’s) that are cropping up like fetid blisters in the western part of the state. Seeing pork production facilities where the animal never sees the light of day, or sets foot on anything other than cold concrete or chicken houses that pack 100,000 chickens or more in cages with barely room to turn their heads will test the conscience of the most dedicated carnivore. Surely standards of care are needed. What is not needed in SB 105 is the prohibition put on local governments from setting standards of care for the people who have to endure these operations near their churches ,schools and neighborhoods. Local communities had protected themselves and their citizens from the worst abuses of stench, insects,noise and dust by passing nuisance ordinances requiring set-backs and other accommodations from the operators. This bill would declare any such ordinances unenforceable and prohibit the enactment of new ones.

I remember a representative of a large farm group back in the nineties telling a sympathetic agriculture committee that these “factory” farms were no different than any other farm. “Farmers are the original environmentalists,” he said. I got up to the table and asked for a show of hands of anyone who believed that 200 pigs on 200 acres was the same thing as 20,000 pigs on 200 acres. Not a hand went up. It’s ironic when I look at the names on this bill that so many of them have long been champions of the “home rule” concept, endorsing the power of local governments over the tyranny of big state and federal bureaucracies. I guess the message here is that home rule is O.K. for people but stops at pigs and chickens. Contact your legislator and tell them not to take the power of local rule away from the citizens and defeat SB 105.

It’s difficult to explain the need for travel restrictions on State Nature Preserves. Why protect a beautiful, pristine area of the state and then prohibit taxpayers from enjoying it? The fact is of the 54 preserves in the state, 31 of them are open to the public, and only three of the 31 require appointments. All, however, disallow pets and anything other than foot travel. They also don’t allow camping, picnicking, rock climbing, collecting of rocks or plants, straying off the trails or any activity that could be destructive to the natural areas. This is consistent with the State Nature Preserves’ fundamental legislative mandate “solely to protect and preserve rare species and natural environment … and to protect the natural integrity of the preserves so they may be passed on, unimpaired, to future generations.” Nature Preserves are just what they say they are – preserves. They are living museums of the topography and natural communities that existed when settlers first arrived in Kentucky and the only homes left for some of the state’s most treasured native plants and wildlife.

So, what does KCC believe?

We believe: A.) That outdoor recreation, including equine recreation is a good thing; B.) That Kentucky needs to do much more in acquiring land for adventure tourism including areas for horse trail riding as well as ATV’s and other off-road vehicles; C.) That the 99% of land in the state not being used for nature preserves or sensitive wildlife areas should be considered for multiple uses such as those listed; D.) that state officials should work with trail riders to increase access to state owned lands wherever feasible; and E.) that a significant source of state funds should be dedicated to the acquisition of horse trails and other recreational lands.

What don’t we believe? A.)We don’t believe that we should make up for a denial of trail riding activities in a few isolated areas by changing the basic mandate of all nature preserves across the state. The riders themselves have admitted that there are only a few areas they would like to access at this time; B.) We also don’t believe that state nature preserves should be used as a focus for the development of a recreational trails industry in the state. Several of the presenters at the legislative hearing had financial interests in the trail riding industry. State Nature Preserves were created over 30 years ago by people whose only interests were in the preservation of unique and irreplaceable lands, and not in creating engines for economic development.

What can we do?

The KCC has been working for several years now in conjunction with other environmental and conservation groups to push for the creation of a Land Stewardship program for Kentucky. The legislature created a Task Force to address the issue. The final recommendation of the taskforce was for the creation of a Land Stewardship Fund within the treasury and for a constitutional amendment to increase the state sales and use tax by 1/8 % with the proceeds put into that fund and dedicated solely to land conservation, recreation and conservation programs. We estimate that this increase would bring in around $60 million annually. That would purchase or lease a lot of miles of horse trails. We believe that the people of this state will support this effort. Minnesota just passed a 3/8% sales tax increase; Missouri and Arkansas have similar programs.

We would welcome the Horse Council, and any other non-profit recreation or adventure tourism groups to join the KCC, Sierra Club, Kentuckians for the Commonwealth, sportsman groups, farmers and conservation groups in getting this concept before the people. Representative Charlie Hoffman will be introducing a bill this week to accomplish the first part of this program. Hopefully next session we will be pushing the adoption of the constitutional amendment and we will let the people decide if they want more opportunities to enjoy the natural beauty of their state on lands designed for that purpose.

Letting people enjoy nature is a goal consistent with most Land Conservation programs. The Department of Fish and Wildlife is funded by outdoor recreators. Our Parks Department depends on visitors to pay the bills. But is recreation the only reason to preserve natural spaces. If you read the bodies of HBs 173 and 312 you would think so. Both of these bills make the main purpose of all state owned lands recreation and in the case of HB 173, economic development and tourism as well. Both bills require (in some form) land preservation agencies such as Forestry, or Kentucky Nature Preserves to defend any decision to prohibit recreational uses on their land. In HB 312 it’s equine recreation but in HB 173 it could also be ATV’s and other off-road vehicles.  The bills’ backers say that they won’t take away an agency’s ability to prohibit activities on sensitive lands but the onus is on the agencies to prove the need for restriction rather than on the recreators to request access to specific areas. The real problem with these bills is that they completely change the missions of programs like forestry,nature preserves and the Kentucky the Heritage Land Trust Fund. Both bills redefine all state owned lands as “State owned recreation lands”. By doing this they effectively redefine the missions of the above mentioned programs from protection of natural areas to economic development and tourism. These programs were created by the Legislature to protect unique and sensitive natural areas for future generations to enjoy. Many of these areas are already open to the public, some have restrictions, and some due to their delicate ecosystems are available only by request .  This is as it should be. The decision to alter access to these ares for recreational purposes should controlled by the agencies who hold title to the lands. If there are areas that are currently off-limits to equine trails then these should be discussed with The Department for Natural Resources and accommodations could be made, but don’t change the entire mission of land conservation and preservation programs across the state to accomplish it.Please contact members of the Tourism Development and Energy Committee ( Eddie Ballard chair) and opposes these bills as they are currently written.

A meeting was held last week with representatives of the major players in a push for a Land Stewardship program in Kentucky. Organized by Terry Cook of the State Nature Conservancy, attendees heard a presentation from the National Nature Conservancy’s senior campaign coordinator, Terry Bopp, on campaign strategies for the passage of a Land Conservation amendment to Kentucky’s constitution. Bopp outlined the role the Conservancy played in the recent passage of a constitutional amendment in Minnesota which resulted in a 3/8% increase in the sales tax. This increase was passed by the voters by over a (60%) sixty percent margin and will be dedicated to Land Conservation projects as well as increased funding for the arts. If they can pass a constitutional amendment to provide money for a Land Stewardship program in Minnesota, Arkansas and Missouri we can do it here. The Kentucky Conservation Committee has been in the thick of this process from the beginning, and has helped carry it through two versions of the Land Stewardship Task Force. The KCC is currently working with legislators to produce a bill that will create a Land stewardship Fund in anticipation of a campaign for and the passage of a constitutional amendment similar to Minnesota’s. This will only be accomplished with the help of all groups interested in preserving Kentucky’s natural beauty and willing to support the kind of campaign necessary to get it passed. The Nature Conservancy along with the National Trust for Public Lands can play a huge role in this effort and it is heartening that they are now considering providing funds and technical support to help in this important process. I would encourage any of you reading this to let the KCC know of your interest in joining a coalition to begin this important work and to write or call the Nature Conservancy and express your support for a Land stewardship program in Kentucky worthy of our beautiful state. You can reach the Nature Conservancy at 1-800-628-6860 you can contact the Kentucky Conservation Committee at our website kyconservation.org. It’s time to get down to business and provide the funds this state needs to preserve and protect its dwindling natural areas.

SB 26, Senator Bob Leeper’s nuclear power repeat bill from last session, passed out of the senate Ag and Natural resources Committee with only one dissenting vote. Ironically, the no vote came from a coal-field legislator who objected to placing nuclear power in competition with coal generated power. The bill authorizes new activity in the area of nuclear fueled electricity generation and fuel reprocessing without having to define a method of disposal of the dangerous waste products. The Obama administration has stopped the opening of the Yucca Mountain disposal facility in Nevada effectively putting a stop to the nuclear industry in the U.S. unless power generators are allowed to store spent fuel on-site. This bill would allow such storage. Tom Fitzgerald of the Kentucky Resources Council spoke in opposition to the bill, but Senator Leeper countered by having Len Peters, Secretary of the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet speak in favor of developing the nuclear option in Kentucky. This bill will certainly pick up a lot of opposition as it moves through the legislative process. KCC will continue to oppose this option for nuclear development, stressing the need for a long-term Federal solution to waste disposal before we try as a State to take the nuclear “great leap forward”  some would like.

The 2010 version of the Kentucky Legislature commenced at 12:00 Tuesday amid rumors of bad budgets and tax reform. The hot scuttlebutt floating around the halls of the annex was in regard to a new interest from many higher-ups for a comprehensive reform of the State’s tax system. Faced with ever-growing deficits and a reluctance on the part of the Senate to pass any big new gambling programs lawmakers have their backs against the proverbial fiscal wall. It is rumored that there might not even be a budget passed this session unless this systemic problem is addressed. Stay tuned for that.

As for the KCC, the big issues will be land conservation and energy. Following the lead of the Land Stewardship Task Force recommendations, the KCC will push for the creation of a Land Stewardship program: first through the creation of a Stewardship Trust Fund and a Board to administer it, and then by a Constitutional Amendment to increase the sales tax by 1/8% and dedicate the proceeds to the new program. The first part of this will obviously be easier than the second, but the KCC is currently out enlisting allies in this battle. The reasoning behind setting up the structure before the funding mechanism is in place is to allow for any other possible funding sources to be considered. With tax reform a possibility, opportunities could open up for us in this area, as well as in expanded gambling. It makes sense to explore all funding alternatives if we can finally get the Commonwealth to put real effort into protecting our natural areas.

As to energy, I hope those who are reading this have had the chance to read Bruce Scott’s excellent white paper on electric feed-in tariffs. It explains the complex issue very well. Trying to craft a viable energy policy must include significant incentives for alternative energy production. It is with this in mind that the KCC as a part of a new energy alliance will push for a greater role for renewables in any State-wide energy plan. Well, it’s off to the wars for me. Stay in touch through this blog and our KCC alerts or on-line at www.kycoservation.org.