• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Another SD Bill KILLED

P Joe

Well-known member
http://legis.state.sd.us/sessions/2009/Bill.aspx?File=HB1005P.htm

Ya know, I for one am sick of seeing crap like this waste valuable time, money, and resources in our capital.

Please tell me LB, whe are you so hell bent on dipping into GF&P's monies?? OR Micro-Management!! Has you name ever been on a bill that has passed the house??
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
well if I'm reading it right, all the bill said was that all major land purchases had to be approved by elected representatives NOT appointed
or hired persons of SD fw&p

What's wrong with we the people having a little say so??



or did I read this wrong??
 

P Joe

Well-known member
Lonecowboy said:
well if I'm reading it right, all the bill said was that all major land purchases had to be approved by elected representatives NOT appointed
or hired persons of SD fw&p

What's wrong with we the people having a little say so??



or did I read this wrong??

Nothing, except the money that funds GF&P in our state is entirly generated from the licenses and taxes on hunting goods paid for by hunters.

As far as I can understand, their is no budget line from the state for the office of our GF&P or the land they purchased. So my question is why do we need to hassel the house and the senate, for something like this? If the hunters don't like how they are spending their money, let them take care of it. Why should the house or senate have something to say about it when the "people" have nothing invested??

And on another note, wouldn't you think that they would have more important things to worry about, like maybe a 134 million budget shortfall, or school funding to take up their time. Worring about what GF&P is doing with their money seems kind of petty don't you think??
 

Mike

Well-known member
I see nothing at all wrong with oversight on the spending of the public's money.

In fact, I would have thought that these revenues would go into the general fund of the state and the GF&P must apply for funds to be appropriated accordingly to their specifiic needs.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Why should the house or senate have something to say about it when the "people" have nothing invested??

traditionally when a state or federal department buys land, the land and improvements become non taxed... so the additional burden is placed on the communities, the state and the federal government to "replace" that lost property tax revenue..

and that is not even counting the income tax and capital gains lost in the non taxable government entities..

so if the hunters, and GF&P's monies, start paying taxes on the income and purchases of land, they could do as they please, but until then most communities that are impacted by the policy would like some oversight of the government department..
 

P Joe

Well-known member
Mike said:
I see nothing at all wrong with oversight on the spending of the public's money.

In fact, I would have thought that these revenues would go into the general fund of the state and the GF&P must apply for funds to be appropriated accordingly to their specifiic needs.

How is it the "public's" money??

And why would you expect the funds go to the state to let the state do with it as it pleases? My license and tire tax goes to pay for the roads. The federal gas tax goes to pay for federal highways and the state tax gas goes to fix state roads. Our county or township doesn't get any money from this for there budget. Why should hunting licenses be treated any different?
 

P Joe

Well-known member
Steve said:
Why should the house or senate have something to say about it when the "people" have nothing invested??

traditionally when a state or federal department buys land, the land and improvements become non taxed... so the additional burden is placed on the communities, the state and the federal government to "replace" that lost property tax revenue..

and that is not even counting the income tax and capital gains lost in the non taxable government entities..

so if the hunters, and GF&P's monies, start paying taxes on the income and purchases of land, they could do as they please, but until then most communities that are impacted by the policy would like some oversight of the government department..

GF&P does pay taxes every year on the land they own. So really the only thing you can argue is competition. But I have never seen the GF&P offer more than market value for land. Usually GF&P only buys land if the farmer/rancher offeres it to them first.
 
Top