BigBendFishing.Net

If you love the real Florida, like many on this forum, chances are one of the main reasons is because water is never far away and it's always rich with fish. The state is fortunate to have unique outdoor places like the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, St. Marks, Wakulla and Aucilla Rivers, and St. George Island and St. Joe state parks, with an abundance of wildlife and endless fishing opportunities.

What can you do to conserve Florida's natural heritage? VOTE YES on Amendment 1.

Amendment 1, also known as the Water and Land Legacy Amendment, is a constitutional amendment on Florida's ballot next Tuesday, November 4. It would dedicate funding to conserve and restore Florida's waterways and natural areas using existing state revenues generated by real estate transactions. Since 2009, these fees have been diverted to the state's general revenues while funding for water and land conservation projects has been slashed by more than 95 percent. Amendment 1 would provide $10 billion over the 20-year life of the measure, all without any tax increase.

Please help ensure our natural resources are conserved for the enjoyment of current and future generations by voting YES FOR Amendment One. And urge your family and friends to do the same.

Thanks very much!

I for one will be voting no on this amendment. Amending the FL Constitution to address a budget item is a terrible idea. The idea that the state will be forced to spend money for the environment even on poor budget years, ahead of education, public safety etc. is fiscally irresponsible. If it passes, by next session the legislature will defund all other environmental programs. Kiss Florida Forever program good bye. Lastly, the documentary stamp tax the revenue stream for this amendment is already committed to other important programs such as affordable housing. You are basically taking money from these programs to fund another.

Squirm88 wrote:I for one will be voting no on this amendment. Amending the FL Constitution to address a budget item is a terrible idea. The idea that the state will be forced to spend money for the environment even on poor budget years, ahead of education, public safety etc. is fiscally irresponsible. If it passes, by next session the legislature will defund all other environmental programs. Kiss Florida Forever program good bye. Lastly, the documentary stamp tax the revenue stream for this amendment is already committed to other important programs such as affordable housing. You are basically taking money from these programs to fund another.

The idea that the state will be forced to spend money for the environment even on poor budget years, ahead of education, public safety etc. is fiscally irresponsible.
THIS IS WHAT EVERY VOTER SHOULD BE THINKING
Well said my man

Protecting water sources that we need to survive is not a luxury. It will also be difficult to maintain current education funding and social services if the state's tourism economy collapses by failing to protect our natural resources.

Amendment 1 represents approximately one percent of the state budget for conservation land and water funding. Recent legislative bills called for $300 million in expenditures to protect springs, another $275 million to protect Indian River Lagoon and hundreds of millions more to acquire key parcels to protect the Everglades and other sensitive lands that often serve as filters for public drinking water and storm surge protection. So if anything, Amendment One will guarantee a funding floor for conservation and save tax dollars in the long run.

Sound fiscal policy entails wise, calculated investments, not knee-jerk reactions and pork barrel spending. At least that's what my economics professors and financial planners always told me.

Recent legislative bills called for $300 million in expenditures to protect springs, another $275 million to protect Indian River Lagoon and hundreds of millions more to acquire key parcels to protect the Everglades and other sensitive lands that often serve as filters for public drinking water and storm surge protection.

This is exactly the way it should be done, not by a constitutional amendment Thank you for making that point SK

Fresh clean water is becoming the number one resource of this country. I'm not for directed funds, except for user fees associated with the use of a resource, but it would be prudent for Florida to make clean water a high priority due to the continuing increase in population density. Either that or refuse to let anymore yankees come to Florida for more than a month a year.

We need the amendment to keep the funds away from profiteering politicians...of which Florida seems to have an abundance of.

Mister Mullet wrote:We need the amendment to keep the funds away from profiteering politicians...of which Florida seems to have an abundance of.

Don't be naive enough to think there are not Profiteers behind amendment 1
Big Land owners stand to profit and groups like the Nature conservancy will grab all the land they can.

My Biggest issue - NO GUARANTEE OF ACCESS TO LANDS PURCHASED WITH THESE FUNDS FOR HUNTING AND FISHING.
Imagine Conservation easements that could be off limits to the taxpayers that payed for it as conservation easements.

As Weavens said another issue is mandated funding.
A friend Chuck wrote:

The funds allocated for the Water and Land Legacy CAN NOT BE COMMINGLED. That means that once it's allocated for the program (33% of the doc stamp revenues by law) they can not take any portion of those funds and put them back into other programs, no matter how essential they are to maintaining the public welfare.
THAT, my friends, is fiscally irresponsible.

A link to Chucks article:
http://proprights.com/wp-content/upl...and-legacy.pdf

bman wrote:

Mister Mullet wrote:We need the amendment to keep the funds away from profiteering politicians...of which Florida seems to have an abundance of.

Don't be naive enough to think there are not Profiteers behind amendment 1
Big Land owners stand to profit and groups like the Nature conservancy will grab all the land they can.

My Biggest issue - NO GUARANTEE OF ACCESS TO LANDS PURCHASED WITH THESE FUNDS FOR HUNTING AND FISHING.
Imagine Conservation easements that could be off limits to the taxpayers that payed for it as conservation easements.

As Weavens said another issue is mandated funding.
A friend Chuck wrote:

The funds allocated for the Water and Land Legacy CAN NOT BE COMMINGLED. That means that once it's allocated for the program (33% of the doc stamp revenues by law) they can not take any portion of those funds and put them back into other programs, no matter how essential they are to maintaining the public welfare.
THAT, my friends, is fiscally irresponsible.

A link to Chucks article:
http://proprights.com/wp-content/upl...and-legacy.pdf

Right. So it means that some amount of funds each year collected from doc stamps has to go towards conservation purposes. Well, that is exactly what the doc stamp program was designed to do when it was enacted. Our Legislature forgets the promises they make to pass a bill or tax when later they want to divert the funds to something else. Yes, it does limit the legislature, a little. They find ways around most things when necessary, as they have done with numerous trust funds enacted to fund a specific purpose, then later diverted to what ever the bully boys wanted.

This amendment will help a little, and a little is better than nothing. But, as long as we elect the people we (as a state, I don't vote for these guys) do, we get what we elect.

EJ

Clean water and land conservation trump politics as usual, by an overwhelming margin. Except in Wakulla County.

The people of Wakulla county actually educate themselves about subjects, not just listen to all the for/against propaganda

This should get bumped to the top every few days.

I don't agree with all of Hiassen's views, but he nailed this one. Those legislators are whores who have nothing in common with folks who choose to live in Florida because of its unique and precious natural environment. We should vote them so far out of office that they leave our state.

I am certainly not going to defend politicians, however, you are naive if you think you can pull this revenue stream out of the general revenue with the thought that the legislature isn't going to increase taxes somewhere else to make up the difference.

I guess the legislature can boast that they're staving off a tax increase by ignoring the results of the vote on this one.