Not So Green Cost-Cutting
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SESSION WEEKLY A NONPARTISAN PUBLICATION MINNESOTA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES • PUBLIC INFORMATION SERVICES VOLUME 26, NUMBER 3 • JANUARY 23, 2009 NEW MEMBER PROFILES GREE N ACRES — N OT SO G REE N COST -CUTTI ng — BI G an D SM A LL IDE A S HOUSI ng TRE N DS P A I N T TROUBLI ng PICTURE HF157 - HF263 SESSION WEEKLY Session Weekly is a nonpartisan publication of Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. During the 2009-2010 Legislative Session, each issue reports House action between Thursdays of each week, lists bill introductions and provides other information. No fee. To subscribe, contact: Minnesota House of Representatives CO N TE N TS Public Information Services 175 State Office Building 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. HIGHLIGHTS St. Paul, MN 55155-1298 Bonding • 5 Environment • 6 Recreation • 9 651-296-2146 or 800-657-3550 or the Minnesota Relay service at 711 or Business • 5 Family • 7 Taxes • 9 800-627-3529 (TTY) Consumers • 5 Government • 7 Transportation • 9 www.house.mn/hinfo/subscribesw.asp Crime • 5 Human Services • 8 Director Barry LaGrave Editor/Assistant Director Lee Ann Schutz BILL INTRODUCTIONS (HF157-HF263) • 20-22 Assistant Editor Mike Cook Art & Production Coordinator Paul Battaglia FEATURES Writers Kris Berggren, Nick Busse, Susan Hegarty, FIRST READING : Green Acres provision becomes problematic • 3-4 Sonja Hegman, Patty Ostberg AT ISSUE : Housing trends paint a troubling picture • 10 Chief Photographer Tom Olmscheid AT ISSUE : Education reform ideas can cross the partisan divide • 11 Photographers RESOURCES : How a bill become a law in Minnesota • 12-13 Nicki Gordon, Andrew VonBank PEO P LE : New member profiles • 14-17 Staff Assistants Christy Novak, Joan Bosard AT ISSUE : At their own ‘House,’ legislators take cost-saving measures to heart • 18-19 MINNESOTA INDEX : Giving time • 24 Session Weekly (ISSN 1049-8176) is published weekly during the legislative session by Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services, 175 State Office Building, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55155-1298. Periodicals postage paid at Minneapolis, Minn. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Session Weekly, House Public Information Services, 175 State Office Building, 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55155-1298. Printed on recycled paper which is 50% recycled, 30% post-consumer content. On the cover: Mnwabisi Mbangata, a junior at Roseville Area High School taking part in the High School Page Program, watches a television panel on one side of a House hearing room Jan. 20 as Barack Obama gives his inaugural address after being sworn-in as the 44th President of the United States of America. — Photo by: Tom Olmscheid FIRST READING P HOTO BY ANDREW VONBANK Deb and Neil Krueger, who run a Christmas tree farm in Lake Elmo, testified Jan. 21 before the House Agriculture, Rural Economies and Veterans Affairs Finance Division during discussion of the problematic Green Acres legislation. Maybe not the place for me Green Acres provision in the 2008 tax law becomes problematic BY SONJA HEG M AN a “complete ecosystem of marshes, wetlands, eil and Deb Krueger raise Christmas trees on land streams and woods. It is a complete ag unit and it is not non-productive land.” She said it in Lake Elmo that’s been in their family for more takes 10 to 15 years to grow an average sized than 50 years. But because their land is considered Christmas tree, and for every tree that is cut N down, two or three are planted to replace it. non-agriculture land, or non-productive land, they could “Everything is equal part in our farm to the face penalties down the road when they transfer it to their whole system. Sometimes fields will sit idle for a while to give the soil a chance to rest. children, under changes to the Green Acres program. We choose to keep our farm open, green and complete.” According to the 2008 changes, any “We’ve taken the steps and have a plan in children penalized. I think the transferring land considered “non-productive” will face place to pass our farm onto our children,” process in place needs to change.” penalties of up to seven years of back taxes Neil Krueger told the House Agriculture, The division heard testimony from several once that “non-productive” land is transferred Rural Economies and Veterans Affairs people on the Green Acres program because of or sold to someone else. The changes do not Finance Division Jan. 21. “We have always changes made to the law in 2008, changing the apply to “productive” land, or land considered run an environmentally friendly, sustainable definition of land allowed in the program. Christmas tree farm. We don’t want our Deb Krueger described their tree farm as First Reading continued on page 4 January 23, 2009 Session Weekly 3 First Reading continued from page 3 2008 Legislative changes to tillable. So any land currently enrolled, productive or not, is grandfathered in and Green Acres … in a nutshell taxes will remain at the Green Acres value. • A new class of property was created called The only way penalties will arise is if the non- “rural vacant land.” This is defined as rural productive land is transferred or sold. undeveloped land not being used for agri- “I believe there is a synergistic relationship cultural production. Rural vacant land has between the acres where crops might actually the same class rates as agricultural land so it should not result in any changes to tax bur- be planted and the surrounding landscape dens. It will just be categorized and tracked in that unit,” said Rep. Al Juhnke (DFL- separately for valuation purposes. Willmar), division chairman. “It doesn’t • Land in the new rural vacant land classification matter if you’re housing bugs and bees to help will no longer be allowed into the Green pollinate or whether you’re preventing soil Acres program for future enrollments. This is also true for land in government-sponsored and other things from eroding off into the conservation programs, such as Reinvest wetlands. I think we have to recognize that a in Minnesota and Conservation Reserve farm unit or a production unit isn’t necessarily Program. just the tillable acres.” • All land currently enrolled in the Green Acres Juhnke said the division will hear several program was “grandfathered in” to the pro- bills on the Green Acres issue the week of Jan. gram for as long as it stays under its current ownership, with two provisons: 26, which will then be combined and sent on • when land classified as rural vacant land to the House Taxes Committee. is removed from the program, it will be subject to a seven-year back tax payment compared to the three-year payment What happened? under the old law; and At the beginning of the 2008 legislative • in the future, landowners will not be session, the Office of the Legislative Auditor permitted to withdraw small tracts of presented its audit of the more than 40-year- rural vacant land from the program in a old Green Acres program to the House Tax P HOTO BY ANDREW VONBANK piecemeal fashion. If any rural vacant land John Kaproth, who farms near Foley, testifies is withdrawn, all of it will have to be with- Relief and Local Sales Tax Division. The drawn at that time and will be subject to report found several problems with the before the House Agriculture, Rural Economies and Veterans Affairs Finance Division Jan. 21 in the seven-year back tax payment. program, said Rep. Paul Marquart (DFL- support of repealing the Green Acres legisla- • A provision was also adopted that allows Dilworth), division chairman. “They found tion that was included in last year’s omnibus taxpayers to remove some or all of their rural it wasn’t doing what it was supposed to do,” tax law. vacant land from the Green Acres program in 2009, before the major components of the he said. “Somehow we allowed the program reform are fully implemented, and subject to change into something it was not intended Controversy to the three-year payback under the old law for.” rather than the seven-year payback under According to some legislators, controversies In a lot of instances this property tax benefit the new law. This was to allow owners who over the 2008 changes arose after being was benefitting wetlands and hunting and anticipated selling or transferring their rural signed into law, though there were ample recreation land, which it was never intended vacant land in the relatively near future to opportunities to voice concern before that. do so under the old rules and avoid the to do, he said. Also, not all counties were using Nine public hearings on the program’s higher payback. the program when they had land that could proposed changes were held during the 2008 • Landowners had to state only their intent be enrolled. to withdraw their land from the program session. After the property tax division heard the by Jan. 2, 2009, in order to take advantage Rep. Ann Lenczewski (DFL-Bloomington), report, Marquart directed Rep. Lyle Koenen of the three-year payback under the old House Taxes Committee chairwoman, said a law. County assessors have until sometime (DFL-Clara City) and Rep. Randy Demmer lot of people misunderstood what happened this summer to estimate the amount of (R-Hayfield) to work on the issue. Their from the beginning. She said some of the issue back taxes due and notify taxpayers of that recommendations were a part of the property amount. If the taxpayer decides to withdraw is that many legislators don’t understand that tax division report, which then became a part their land after receiving the estimate, they the state doesn’t pay for Green Acres — other of the omnibus tax bill that left the House have until Nov.