Michigan Senator Patty Birkholz and state Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema proposing a "multi-state compact" to combat invasive species. (Photo courtesy of Senate Photowire)
A Michigan lawmaker is urging other states in the region to enter into a multi-state compact aimed at limiting the influx of invasive species into the Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:
Transcript
A Michigan lawmaker is urging other states in the region to enter into a
multi-state compact aimed at limiting the influx of invasive species into
the Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:
Federal regulations require ocean-going ships to exchange their ballast
water in the open ocean before they enter the Saint Lawrence Seaway. The
idea is to flush out any plants or animals that might have hitched a ride
from foreign ports. But Michigan state Senator Patty Birkholz says that
system isn’t working, because organisms can remain in the sludge at the
bottom of ships’ ballast tanks.
Birkholz is the co-chair of the Great Lakes legislative caucus. She wants
the eight states that surround the lakes to use their water pollution laws
to crack down on ships that release ballast water into the lakes.
“So it would require, first of all, them to get a permit to prove that
they’ve treated their ballast water, and then to treat their ballast water
in order to enter the Great Lakes basin.”
Birkholz hopes to have a multi-state compact in place by 2007.
Because mobile homes can be transported they're not taxed the way permanent homes are. They're taxed like vehicles (when they're bought and sold). Mobile home owners pay a small tax for the small plot of land they sit on. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
Some officials are saying mobile home owners don't pay their fair share of taxes. Mobile home advocates disagree. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
Mobile home parks like this one in mid-Michigan offer a housing option for low income families. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
People who live in mobile homes might be seeing their property taxes going up. Some government officials say it’s an attempt to tax for the services used and to discourage mobile home parks from sprawling across former farm fields. But others wonder if higher taxes aren’t a form of discrimination against this kind of affordable housing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
Transcript
People who live in mobile homes might be seeing their property taxes going up. Some government officials say it’s an attempt to tax for the services used and to discourage mobile home parks from sprawling across former farm fields. But others wonder if higher taxes aren’t a form of discrimination against this kind of affordable housing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
(sound of expressway traffic)
The Capital Crossings mobile home park sits on rolling farmland near an Interstate highway. The residents of the 15 homes have moved here either to retire or to make the 30 minute daily commute to nearby Lansing, Michigan. And more mobile homes are being pulled in.
(sound of construction)
Workers are building porches and attaching the skirting between the ground and the house. It’s supposed to show permanence, like a foundation. But mobile homes are not permanent. And mobile homes are not taxed the same way as other houses. They’re taxed like vehicles. Taxed when they’re purchased. Taxed when they’re sold. Still there are no property taxes on the homes. Only on the tiny lots on which they sit.
Some government officials say the $3 a month that these park residents have been paying for property taxes don’t cover the costs of police and fire protection or other government services. They want a tax hike to give local governments more money. Dave Morris is a farmer and the local township supervisor.
“We all have to pay our fair share for services such as sheriff, ambulance, fire department as well as schools. Schools is a big issue of course. And they aren’t paying their share. That’s all.”
But advocates for affordable housing say hiking taxes on mobile home residents is more likely just an attempt to discourage that kind of housing. They say zoning mobile homes out of existence has been tried, but taxing them out is a new idea. Higher taxes will likely lead to mobile home parks closing.”
John McIlwain is with the Urban Land Institute. He says as mobile home parks become more expensive to operate, their owners will sell off to subdivision or big box store developers.
“The numbers are going to be so attractive that the people who own mobile home parks are going to be much more interested in selling the land to a housing developer than in continuing to run the mobile home park. So in time the parks are probably going to disappear on their own anyway and trying to raise the taxes on them specifically is simply going to make that day come earlier.”
In Michigan there is a proposal to raise the taxes on mobile home sites four times higher. State Senator Valde Garcia says the $3 a month that mobile home park owners pay for each home site is not nearly enough.
“What we are trying to do is really change the tax structure so it’s fair to everyone. The system hasn’t changed in 45 years. It’s time we do so but we need to do it in a gradual manner.”
Senator Garcia’s colleagues in the state house have voted to raise the tax to $12 a month. He’d like to raise it to at least $40 a month. The mobile home park industry has hired a public relations firm to produce a video criticizing the tax increase.
“Site built homes pay sales tax only the materials used in their homes and don’t pay tax on resale. Manufactured home owners pay sales tax on materials, labor, transportation profit of a home and they pay sales tax every time a home is resold. ”
The two sides don’t agree on the math. Tim Dewitt of the Michigan Manufactured Housing Association says $3 a month sounds low because it doesn’t show hidden costs. The biggest cost comes when park owners have to pay the higher commercial property tax instead of the lower homestead tax. Dewitt says the park owners then pass the tax to the home owners whose average family income is only about $28,000 a year.
“That’s our worst fear. It could put people who could least afford any type of tax increase into a tough position.”
15 million people live in mobile home parks around the country. And different local governments have tried to find ways to increase taxes on mobile home parks. But Michigan is one of the first states to propose hiking taxes this much. State Senator Garcia says he is not trying to hurt the mobile home industry or make life harder for mobile home park residents. He dismisses the idea that he’s being pressured by wealthier constituents who don’t like to see the mobile home parks being developed.
John McIlwain of the Urban Land Institute says a bias against mobile home parks is part of the mentality that leads to sprawl. When people from the city and the suburbs move a little further into rural areas they want the look and feel of suburbia.
“The mobile home parks are no longer things that they want to see. And so they find ways to discourage those mobile home parks. The ones that are there try to see if they can be purchased, turned into stick built housing or otherwise discourage them and encourage them to move on elsewhere.”
But often the people who move in also want the shopping centers, restaurants and conveniences they once had instead of the mobile home parks.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chris McCarus.
As Kerry and Bush battle it out, different groups examine the candidates' views on the environment. (Photo by Sharon Farmer courtesy of johnkerry.com)
The candidates for president and vice president have spent a lot of time talking about security, the economy, and health care. They have not spent much time talking about the environment. As part of a series on the records of the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry:
Transcript
The candidates for president and vice president have spent a lot of time talking about security, the economy, and health care. They have not spent much time talking about the environment. As part of a series on the records of the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry:
Senator Kerry considers himself an environmentalist. Kerry’s Senate office website indicates that
30 years ago, he spoke at his home state of Massachusetts’ first Earth Day. The Senator says he
called for “fundamental protections that became the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking
Water Act, Endangered Species Act and Superfund.” However, he doesn’t often talk about how he
would handle the environment. Early in the campaign in this speech in Minnesota, he promised to
be a guardian of the environment and he briefly outlined his energy plan…
“I will set a goal as president that 20 percent of all of our electricity will be provided from
alternatives and renewables by the year 2020. And I will set this country on the course by creating a hydrogen institute, by putting a billion dollars into the effort of conversion of our autos, by moving to a 20 billion dollar support for the conversion of our industry, we are going to guarantee that never will young American men and women in uniform be held hostage to our dependency on Mideast oil. We’re going to give our children the independence they deserve.”
When the topic of the environment came up during the second presidential candidates’ debate,
Senator Kerry didn’t outline his own plans, but instead responded to President George Bush’s
claims that the environment was cleaner and better under the Bush administration.
“They’re going backwards on the definition for wetlands. They’re going backwards on water
quality. They pulled out of the global warming. They declared it ‘dead.’ Didn’t even accept the
science. I’m going to be a president who believes in science.”
During the negotiations on the Kyoto global warming treaty Senator Kerry went to Kyoto and
worked to craft a plan to reduce greenhouse gases that could pass political hurdles in the U.S. He
was a leader in the effort to stop a Bush proposal to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.
Environmental groups like what they see and have been enthusiastic about their support for the
candidate. Betsey Loyless is with the League of Conservation Voters…
“Senator Kerry, who has, by the way, a 92 percent lifetime LCV score, has quite a remarkable
overall consistent record of voting to protect clean air, clean water and protect our natural
resources.”
But while the environmentalists like John Kerry, some business and industry groups that feel the
federal government’s environmental protection efforts have become burdensome and ineffective
aren’t that impressed…
“Well, John Kerry – yeah, he got a stronger LCV rating than even Al Gore. Now, pause and think
about that, okay?”
Chris Horner is a Senior Fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market think tank. Horner says he doesn’t like many of Kerry’s positions, but adds he doesn’t think Senator Kerry’s environmental record is as strong as the support from environmental groups might indicate…
“Let’s just say that a lot of the support that comes for Kerry is not through leadership he’s shown in the Congress because he really hasn’t. It’s that he says the right things and that his wife certainly puts the money in the right place.”
Horner suggests that Teresa Heinz Kerry has given large sums of money to environmental
groups… and Horner thinks that’s helped her husband’s political career. Whether you give
credence to those kind of conspiracy theories or not… it’s clear that the environmental groups
prefer Kerry over Bush. The Kerry campaign’s Environmental and Energy Policy Director,
Heather Zichal, says the environmentalists like him… because of his record.
“He’s been called an environmental – dubbed an “environmental champion” and has received the
endorsements of everybody from the Sierra Club to Friends of the Earth. And for him, you know,
environmental protection is not only a matter of what’s in the best interest of public health, but it also is what’s in the best interest of our economy going forward. George Bush has given us the
wrong choices when he says you have to have either the environment or a strong economy. John Kerry believes we can have both.”
But the environment has not been a major issue in the campaign. Conventional wisdom seems to
indicate those who are prone to support pro-environment candidates are already on-board with
Kerry… and the undecided voters have weightier issues on their minds.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A group called Scientists and Engineers for Change is touring battleground states, campaigning against the Bush Administration.
(Photo by Emanuel Lobeck)
A group of prominent American scientists, including 10 Nobel prize-winners, will bring a campaign against the Bush Administration to key battleground states in the region. The group says the President has misused and marginalized scientific research. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:
Transcript
A group of prominent American scientists, including 10 Nobel prize-winners,
will bring a campaign against the Bush Administration to key battleground states
in the Great Lakes. The group says the President has misused and marginalized
scientific research. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:
The political advocacy group formed last week is called Scientists and Engineers for
Change. Stanford University professor Douglas Osheroff is a member. He won the Nobel
Prize for physics in 1996. He says the Bush Administration is compromising scientific integrity.
“Having scientists reporting to middle-level bureaucrats who simply don’t have the background
to assess what the scientists are saying and he, of course, has essentially put a gag order
on scientists that are paid by the government directly. They are really not free to say what
they want.”
Osheroff also says President Bush and Vice President Cheney’s ties to the oil industry have
led them to minimize evidence of climate change.
Members of the Scientists and Engineers for Change will speak in Battleground states
like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania this month.
The group has no direct ties to Senator John Kerry’s campaign. The Bush campaign hasn’t
responded to the group’s claims.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.
President Bush’s nomination to lead a Great Lakes governing council has been held up in the U.S. Senate for 15 months. But there are signals that interim International Joint Commission Chairman Dennis Schornack might soon win confirmation. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta has more:
Transcript
President Bush’s nomination to lead a Great Lakes governing council has been held up in the U.S.
Senate for 15 months. But there are signals that interim International Joint Commission Chairman
Dennis Schornack might soon win confirmation. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta
has more:
Dennis Schornack is President Bush’s nominee to be the U.S. chair of the International Joint
Commission. The IJC resolves disputes over the use of the Great Lakes.
Senator Debbie Stabenow is using a prerogative of her office to hold up his confirmation. The
two are long-time political adversaries. And Stabenow says she has questions over Schornack’s
positions on Great Lakes drilling, and water diversion. But she’s willing to give his record a
second look.
Schornack says he expects she’ll find they agree on a lot – especially the position that Congress
should not have the final word on Great Lakes decisions.
“States and provinces should be in charge. They’re the people with the resources, they’re the
people with the real stake in the Great Lakes.”
Stabenow says she’ll make a decision by September. Schornack’s appointment expires at the end
of the year if the Senate does not act on it.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Rick Pluta.
The federal government could soon promise a lot more money to help clean up the Great Lakes. Lawmakers from several states in the region are proposing a multi-billion dollar cleanup fund. More from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland:
Transcript
The federal government could soon promise a lot more money to help clean up
the Great Lakes. Lawmakers from several states in the region are proposing a
multi-billion dollar cleanup fund. More from the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Michael Leland:
Lawmakers from states bordering the Great Lakes say previous cleanup efforts have been
uncoordinated and under-funded. The region’s U.S. Senators are sponsoring
a bill that would give Great Lakes states six-billion dollars in grants during the
next ten years. A similar bill in the House offers four billion over five years.
Andy Buchsbaum heads the National Wildlife Federation office in Ann Arbor. He says the
proposals are groundbreaking.
“Until now, all too often the approach has been to slow or, if we are very lucky, to stop the
degradation of the Great Lakes. But these bills really break the mold. They give the lakes a
chance to improve, to heal, to recover.”
The Senate bill would create a regional advisory board to recommend which projects should
receive federal money. Buchsbaum predicts presidential candidates hoping to win support in the
region will back the bills. Both measures are only authorization bills. Lawmakers in future years
would have to vote to actually spend the money.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Michael Leland.
Some Great Lakes states are considering a ban on hunting fenced-in animals. Many of these hunting reserves stock their land with popular game such as elk. (Photo courtesy of the USFWS)
An animal rights group wants to ban so-called “canned hunts” in which animals are hunted in fenced-in areas. In one state… a proposed law might accomplish that… but critics say it goes too far. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson reports:
Transcript
An animal rights group wants to ban so-called “canned hunts” in which animals are
hunted in fenced-in areas. In one state, a proposed law might accomplish that but
critics say it goes too far. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson
reports:
(sound of truck driving over gravel roads)
At the bottom of steep hills covered by a tall canopy of trees, herds of elk gather
around feed troughs on the Pea Ridge Elk Ranch. In the distance, others forage over
dry winter grass in a clearing. Most glance up when the truck driven by ranch
manager Doug Pennock idles by. Pennock’s voice, along with the crackling of his tires
over chunks of gravel, stand out in an area that’s otherwise serene.
Pennock manages about 300 elk on this ranch 80 miles north of St. Louis. Some are
sent out west to rejuvenate elk populations. Others are slaughtered for meat. And each
year, about 10 to 15 are moved from this pasture to an adjacent deer and elk
preserve where they’re killed by hunters. An eight-foot tall fence surrounds that
300-acre preserve. Pennock says that although the animals are confined, their
environment is about as close to wilderness as you can get.
“We’ve had a lot of customers through who have hunted in different settings…
and certainly feel like ours is as challenging as any other.”
But under legislation being proposed in Illinois… preserves like Pennock’s
would be off limits to hunters. That’s because critics say there’s no sport in a
confined hunt… and that in some cases it’s essentially like shooting fish in a barrel.
The measure’s sponsor… Chicago Democratic Senator John Cullerton… says the
hunts also go after animals that are tame.
“What you see is that this is really not hunting. I mean this is these small relatively
confined areas for animals that have been raised by human beings.”
Cullerton’s proposal applies not only to elk but also to animals such as lions or
bears. Don Rolla is the Executive Director for the Illinois Humane Political
Action Committee. He says confined, or canned, hunts of exotic animals are a growing
problem in other Midwest states… including Indiana and Michigan.
But Rollah says eleven states, including Wisconsin and Minnesota, have already
banned confined hunts. He says that could mean the people who used to hunt there
will now come to Illinois for canned hunts. Rolla says that makes it all the more
important for Illinois to pass its own ban. He says everyone, even hunters, should
support this measure.
“It’s not an anti-hunting bill. It’s a bill that promotes ethics and takes a step
toward solving a problem that Illinois is going to have to deal with very shortly
if they’re going to continue to have a viable hunting activity in the
state.”
It’s difficult to determine which animals ought to be protected under a ban on canned
hunting. Rolla says he’d like it to cover all wildlife. But deer hunting is allowed on
about 500 confined hunting operations in Illinois alone. It’s unlikely that a ban on that
many game farms will pass in the state.
As it’s proposed right now, the measure would protect exotic species. but that means
as it’s written, you couldn’t slaughter livestock raised in a confined area. Tim
Schweizer is with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
“Livestock certainly of some kinds… swine and cattle… are not animals that were
indigenous to Illinois. They were imported here many, many years ago. so they might fall
inappropriately under the definition as it was originally outlined in this bill.”
Other species further complicate the proposal. The elk on Doug Pennock’s ranch,
for example, are no longer found in the wild in Illinois… although they were at one
time indigenous. Also, because elk are considered livestock in Illinois, Pennock can
technically let paying hunters shoot them whenever… and wherever they want.
Pennock says his business never uses that freedom… voluntarily enforcing hunting
rules similar to Illinois deer hunting laws. And he says the fences around his property
serve only to help him manage an effective herd.
“I think that most folks like myself that come from a hunting background obviously want
everything to be as close to what we would term fair chase as possible.”
The question for lawmakers will be whether *close* to a fair chase is good enough.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Shawn Johnson.
Congress is considering legislation that would create national standards for fighting invasive species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
Transcript
Congress is considering legislation that would create national standards for fighting invasive species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
Two Republican house members and a Democratic Senator are sponsoring the legislation. If the bill passes, it would create nationwide standards designed to keep foreign species from overrunning native plants and animals.
The legislation would extend the ballast water exchange standards currently in effect in the Great Lakes to the entire country. It would also improve screening protocols for importing plants and animals.
The bill also includes some funding to test new technologies. They include using chlorine, filters, and ultraviolet lights to kill off foreign species at some entry points to U.S. waterways.
A staff member for Michigan Senator Carl Levin says the bill is intended to be a first step toward developing international rules to stop the spread of invasive species. The lawmakers plan to introduce the bill when they return from their August recess.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.
A controversial former Ohio EPA official has become the top navy official in charge of environmental clean up. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston has details:
President Bush’s pick to fill a top enforcement job with the U-S Environmental Protection Agency has withdrawn his name from consideration. Donald Schregardus faced tough criticism from environmentalists and Democratic senators for his record while he was Director of the Ohio EPA. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston has this report:
Transcript
President Bush’s pick to fill a top enforcement job with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has withdrawn his name from consideration. Donald Schregardus faced tough criticism from environmentalists and democratic senators for his record while he was director of the Ohio EPA. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Natalie Walston reports.
In withdrawing his name from consideration, Donald Schregardus wrote to President Bush that it’s clear the U.S. Senate won’t consider his nomination in a timely manner. Democratic senators Barbara Boxer of California and Chuck Schumer of New York delayed a senate vote on his nomination. The senators and environmentalists say Schregardus failed to enforce clean air and clean water laws while he was head of the Ohio EPA from 1991 to 1999. Schregardus defended his record in the letter to Bush. He says because of his leadership, Ohio is cleaner, and regulatory programs are stronger.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Natalie Walston.
Michigan Senator Patty Birkholz and state Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema proposing a "multi-state compact" to combat invasive species. (Photo courtesy of Senate Photowire)
