Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ponyroper" data-source="post: 245457" data-attributes="member: 423">State trust lands can only be posted with permission from the Trust Lands Department and the postee must use posters printed by the Department that specify the length of time that livestock will be on the unit.  The unit can not be posted if there are no livestock actually on it and the posters must be taken down immediately when the livestock are removed and can not be put up before the livestock are put on  the unit.  If you see a state tract with official or unofficial posters on it and there are no livestock on it make a call to the State Department of Trust Lands and I guarantee the posters will come down very quickly as it is a serious violation of the lease agreement.  As to the article about the proposed new law, it tries to draw false conclusions about the current laws by quoting selected tracts of the state constitution out of context in order to support its opinion.  The writer states:[FONT=&quot]There’s little question that serious changes are needed when it comes to education in North Dakota. I’d love to strip control of it away from the state. But that’s a tall order when we’re talking about changing the State Constitution. And besides, we must take one step at a time. Having said that, the very least we can do under the current circumstances is to remove this unfair and unnecessary burden from the backs of property owners.Who does he want to control PUBLIC education instead of people elected by the public, some sort of corporation?  Without a doubt no government does a perfect job, they are just like us, not perfect, but no government can please every individual with a different opinion.  To try to do that would cause anarchy and paralyze the state government and we would end up in the same situation the federal government is in.Also, the article writer makes it sound like there will be no more property taxes because the state will have to pay all school expenses but Section Three of the proposed bill states:[/FONT]The governing body of any school district shall/may levy taxes annually for a schoolbuilding fund, not in excess of twenty mills, which levy is in addition to and notrestricted by the levy limitations prescribed by law, when authorized to do so by sixtypercent of the qualified electors voting upon the question at a regular or specialelection in any school district.Unless I'm interpreting it wrong that means the school district can still levy property taxes so what burden does this legislation remove from the backs of property owners.  If I'm interpreting something wrong here please enlighten me.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA