If approved, Schweitzer's repeal of the so-called “water tax” would apply only to those 90,958 water users who paid less than $400 under the tax enacted last year. The first payments of $20 per water claim, up to a maximum of $400 for farmers and ranchers with multiple claims, were due in January.
Large corporations and state and local government agencies with a large number of water rights claims would continue to pay the tax under Schweitzer's plan.
By near-unanimous margins, the 2005 Legislature approved the water tax as a means to raise money to hire more staff to break up the logjam that's stalling the resolution of water rights claims in Montana.
Schweitzer's plan, costing $20 million, would use some money from the state's
$550 million general fund ending balance, or surplus, to replace some of the water tax revenue. The 90,858 water users who paid $400 or less in water taxes would get an average refund of $45 under his plan, probably in October 2007, said Mary Sexton, director of the state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation.
This was the second plank of what the Democratic governor is calling “Schweitzer's Square Deal for Montana,” borrowing the Square Deal term from Republican President Theodore Roosevelt. Last week, Schweitzer proposed giving each Montana household a one-time, $400 rebate at a cost of $100 million.
Republicans again Wednesday accused Schweitzer, a Democrat, of stealing their ideas, altering them somewhat and claiming them as his own for political purposes in an election year.
House Republican Whip Debby Barrett of Dillon said she believes Schweitzer poached the idea from the Republicans' “Handshake with Montana,” a list of proposals that includes the outright repeal of the water tax.
Barrett said she will introduce a bill to repeal the entire tax on all water users, which would take $31 million from the state surplus.
“I think imitation is the best form of flattery,” said Barrett, a rancher. “He must think our Handshake is right on course.”
Schweitzer denied swiping ideas from the Republican plan. He said he has opposed the water tax since the 2004 campaign, criticizing the idea in debates while his Republican opponent, Secretary of State Bob Brown, supported it.
“It's a function of government to take care of adjudication,” Schweitzer said in an interview.
Schweitzer said lobbyists for some agricultural groups claiming to represent farmers and ranchers told legislators last year that their members supported the passage of the water tax.
“I've been in all 56 counties and not found many that did,” he said.
Schweitzer said the version of the water tax that the Legislature placed on his desk in 2005 was “veto-proof” because it passed with only a few dissenting votes.
Barrett said she doesn't believe Schweitzer's proposal contains enough money to fund a speed-up of water rights adjudication. She said Schweitzer could have added the repeal to the agenda of the December 2005 special legislative session, which she requested, but he refused.
“So if he were concerned about the fee, he could have done something a long time ago,” Barrett said. “To say he's been opposed since 2004 is a lie.”
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)