According to the Minnesota Secretary of State website, there will be one proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot in Minnesota this year.  Are you prepared to know which way you want to vote?

In a very unofficial poll over the past week, I asked nearly 20 voters about their knowledge on this issue and not a single one was aware of the inclusion of this question on this year’s ballot.

Here’s some information. According to language from the Secretary of State website:

• Failure to vote on a constitutional amendment will have the same effect as voting “no” on the amendment;

• Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Renewal - Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to protect drinking water sources and the water quality of lakes, rivers, and streams; conserve wildlife habitat and natural areas; improve air quality; and expand access to parks and trails by extending the transfer of proceeds from the state-operated lottery to the environment and natural resources trust fund, and to dedicate the proceeds for these purposes?  Vote yes or no.

While it is true that the amendment would extend something that has been happening for many years, it is important to note that this proposed language also includes a new provision that would reserve 1.5 percent of the lottery funds for projects in underserved communities.

In an effort to share some common arguments for or against the amendment, here is some additional information.

Some information to support voting “yes” on the amendment (taken from the MN DFL Senate District 50 website): “This fund, in place for over 30 years, dedicates funding from the Minnesota Lottery to our great outdoors. We have an amazing opportunity to extend this fund for another 25 years. It won’t cost you anything additional through your state or local taxes. The Minnesota Lottery funds the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (ENRTF) which has grown to provide $80 million per year in projects.”

Here is some information to consider that supports voting “no” on the amendment (taken from a variety of online comments and statements): people are encouraged to vote “no” on this amendment because the MN Constitution charges the state legislature with appropriating state funding and the current system co-opts that power and places it in the hands of unelected individuals who could be subject to special interest influence.  It replaces legislative authority for appropriations and gives it to the executive branch, including appointed and unelected commissioners. It’s not a matter of how the money is spent, it is about being able to hold people accountable for how and where it will be spent.

According to the MN Legislative Reference Library, in our state’s history, 213 proposed constitutional amendments have been voted on by the electorate and 120 of them have been adopted.  That’s an approximately 56% success rate in Minnesota for constitutional amendments in the 166 years since we became a state.  Now’s the time to do your research.