Irony reared its head Monday when Minnesota Lottery officials issued a brag sheet extolling the many good deeds citizens have funded while trying to hit the jackpot. Since 1990, the notice said, the lottery has raised more than $3 billion, with about $1.2 billion assigned to protect the state's environment.
You might recall the lottery was first approved in Minnesota on Nov. 8, 1988, as a constitutional amendment favored by 58% of voters. It's no accident the lottery's logo is a loon, because the public was told the state's entry into the gaming business would help protect their cherished lakes, rivers, forests, fields and wildlife.
Yet if that's the case, why did Monday's announcement also state that a considerably larger sum, about $1.7 billion of lottery money, has ended up in the state's general fund?
In part, that fund's lopsided winnings can be traced to a sleight of hand the Legislature pulled not long after voters approved the lottery — a switcheroo that resulted in a larger share of betting proceeds funding the state's ongoing operations than was originally presented to voters.
Now the public is again at risk of being shortchanged, because the Republican-controlled Senate is attempting to circumvent the project- recommendation processes of the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (LCCMR), a 17-member group of legislators and citizens that advises the Legislature on expenditures from the lottery's Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund.
Recall last year that the Republican-controlled Legislature approved in its last hours and without public input a bill allowing the state to use about $8 million annually in lottery money from the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund to pay interest on appropriations bonds to fund wastewater treatment plants and other infrastructure projects.
Over the bonds' 20-year lifetime, the state would pay $66 million in interest from the trust fund.
Much-less-expensive general obligation bonds typically fund projects such as these. But Republicans wanted to stay within their comparatively tight budget targets while also delivering projects they — and most everyone — deemed necessary, and one way to do it was to rob the trust fund.