Public land purchases HF542

Discussion in 'Legislative Forum' started by Fishbonker, Feb 27, 2019.

  1. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
  2. AdBot Guest Advertisement

  3. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,138
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Farm Bureau wants to prohibit state purchase of land because that takes it away from ag practices. Did I get it right?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  4. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    Reminds me of trying to get by on cliff's notes.

    There is a subtle difference in this bill. I would be interested to see if you (or anyone) have the same take away and see the twist as I did. I'm looking for affirmation.
     
  5. mplane72

    mplane72 Active Member

    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Even looking to restrict gifts to counties unless it comes with enough money to fund maintenance for 10 years. Sons of biscuits!!!!!!
     
  6. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    That's one of the take aways. There is an even bigger twist, if I'm correct.
     
  7. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,138
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Redirects funds (principal and interest) from the blufflands protection to the soil and water quality division. I also saw some “non point” water quality wording that might protect farmers from down stream water liability.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  8. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,138
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Playing some shell game between county conservation commissions and the board of supervisors.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    The bluff lands part. So who can farm river bluffs? This is a new low. FB already wants to keep the public from acquiring poor farm ground for recreational use now it wants to keep non farm ground out of the public domain.

    I don't know what the rules are on what is and what isn't bluff ground but I just can't see an s790 with a 16 row corn head making it up some of those bluffs.
     
  10. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,138
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Opposition to taking land off the tax rolls, as like forest reserve?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  11. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    I don't know, but the DNR pays property tax on their ground. I'll see if I can dig up the amount of money they paid.
     
  12. JNRBRONC

    JNRBRONC Moderator

    Messages:
    8,138
    Likes Received:
    275
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Hmm... BOR institutions are exempt, I thought. Figured it applied to all state agencies.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  13. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    I'm pretty sure just the DNR pays property tax.
     
  14. bigbuckhunter88

    bigbuckhunter88 PMA Member

    Messages:
    2,745
    Likes Received:
    353
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NE Iowa
    Bonker I have no clue how declarations work and all but any idea why the Iowa DNR is undecided when this seems like a no brainer for them
     
  15. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    The DNR legislative liaisons (they don't call them lobbyists but a spades a spade) have been instructed (and not by the DNR) to declare undecided on everything. I think I saw once, maybe twice where they declared in favor of something. The only reason they declare on anything is so they can legally speak with the legislators on the bill. And officially they only give information not opinions.

    The way it is supposed to work, to the best of my understanding, a lobbyist must register on a bill so they can speak to legislators on a bill. "Undecided" means the lobbyist can ask the legislator the premise of the bill or just get background information. The lobbyist then relays the information to the group they are registered to represent who then evaluate the information and then ask the lobbyist to declare either for or against the bill.

    In reality there is so much uhhh, unofficial information passed in the hallways that a group really doesn't need to declare and if they do 99.9% of the time it will be undecided. That doesn't mean they are undecided it just means they are playing the game to stay within the rules. So when folks see the DNR or even the IBA as undecided on a bill it doesn't mean we are undecided it just means we are playing the game.

    I hope this helps. I'm not sure I made it any clearer because in reality it is murky at best.
     
    bigbuckhunter88 likes this.
  16. Fishbonker

    Fishbonker Life Member

    Messages:
    6,397
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Padded Room
    In FY 18 the DNR paid $1,009,469.15 in property taxes and in FY 19 they will pay $1,072,689.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice