magazine

NDAOGPC News
Regional Roundup
Why We Oppose the Proposed Conservation
Amendment
There are several reasons why the North Dakota Association of Oil & Gas Producing Counties
(NDAOGPC) has decided to oppose the proposed Clean Water, Wildlife and Parks Amendment
ballot measure. One of the most important is because it is a constitutional amendment that
mandates spending on conservation. This would be the first-ever spending measure enshrined
into our constitution. There is a reason we don’t dictate spending in the constitution; it would
require that funds be spent for a specified area, whether the need is there or not. We already have
a system in place to determine funding needs and levels, and that is our legislative process.
This measure would commit five percent of North Dakota’s oil extraction tax, conservatively
estimated at $300 to $400 million per biennium, to a massive new conservation fund. It also
dictates that anywhere from 75 to 90 percent of the fund must be spent each biennium. “The
money mandated for this fund is money that could otherwise be spent on schools, our children’s
education, infrastructure, emergency services, tax relief and more,” says Steve Holen, NDAOG-
PC president and McKenzie County Public School District superintendent.
“Our opposition to this measure has nothing to do with conservation. It is about the lack of
flexibility and the large amounts of money that will be required to be spent, whether there are
legitimate conservation needs or not.”
The spending requirement in this initiative means that whether or not there are conservation
needs, the group must spend over $3 million per week on average on projects. Spending by mandate
is not a North Dakota value. This type of earmark has no place in our state’s constitution.
As stated by Supt. Holen, the issue here isn’t about conservation. We all care about taking
care of our natural resources, environment and wildlife. However, this measure, which is
largely funded by out-of-state special interest groups, legally requires conservation to have funding
precedence over education, infrastructure, health and human services, water needs and other
important areas. And, any changes to this constitutional amendment could only be corrected by
another statewide vote.
Consider the consequences of signing onto a proposed 25-year government mandate to
spend billions of dollars. It is difficult to predict what our funding needs will be in 10 years,
much less 25 years.
We shouldn’t take away the Legislature’s ability to address the most urgent needs as they arise.
Funding priorities should be targeted toward immediate needs, not bound by constitutional
earmarks.
We are among more than 20 diverse groups that are part of the coalition backing the North
Dakotans for Common Sense Conservation. We support a common sense and smart approach
to conservation, where spending is not mandated through the constitution. North Dakota already
invests more than $130 million per biennium in conservation and related efforts across
the state. We don’t need a measure that mandates more spending in our constitution. We can’t
support a measure that doesn’t measure up.
Clean Water, Wildlife and Parks Amendment Funding 2015-2039
$5 Billion
$4 Billion
$3 Billion
$2 Billion
$1 Billion
$500 M
$400 M
$300 M
$200 M
$4.8 Billion
$2.7 $3.6 $4.3
Billion Billion Billion
$1.9 Billion
$1 Billion
$296 M
2015
$391 M $427 M $427 M $403 M $356 M
$142 M
2019 2023 2027 2031 2035 2039
LEGEND per biennium total-to-date
Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem shares
his support for the proposed drilling permit
review policy with Governor Dalrymple’s
amendments. The motion to pass the
amended policy was passed unanimously by
the Industrial Commission.
Policies on Drilling
Permit Review, Flaring
Reduction
The three-member North Dakota Industrial
Commission (NDIC), made up
of Governor Jack Dalrymple, Attorney
General Wayne Stenehjem and Agriculture
Commissioner Doug Goehring, met at
the Capitol in early March for its regular
monthly meeting. A packed house awaited
the NDIC, concerned with two main
topics: a proposed drilling permit review
policy and recommendations on policy
that the NDIC could implement to reduce
natural gas flaring in the state.
The drilling permit review policy,
which was originally proposed to require a
review process for all drilling permits near
listed “places of extraordinary significance,”
was noted by commission members to have
received a large amount of public comment
since first being introduced by Attorney
General Stenehjem.
Governor Dalrymple proposed an
amendment to the original policy proposal
that eliminated private lands from the
policy altogether. The governor indicated
that there is value to such a policy in assuring
the public that places of significance
would be protected over the long-term,
though he did not feel that private lands
should be included at this time. He added
that a potential policy dealing with those
private lands was better suited to be handled
by the North Dakota state legislature.
The NDIC voted and passed the policy
with the governor’s amendment. The commission
met again in April to discuss the
technical aspects of the policy, which will
go into effect on May 1, 2014.
BASIN BITS | Spring 2014 127