Grand Forks GOP Sen. Ray Holmberg, who heads the committee of lawmakers that oversees the Republican-led Legislature's business between sessions, said he didn't expect the lawsuit to be filed for "months."

The dispute centers on Burgum's use of his line-item veto d to change parts of several spending bills. Legislators contend he violated his veto powers by deleting words or phrases that would have
 changed the intent. He used his veto powers a week after the Legislature adjourned on April 27.

Burgum, who is also a Republican, said a lawsuit would be a waste of money. He said his office will "respond accordingly to any legal action that attempts to infringe on executive branch authority."

The decision to sue came after the committee met for about an hour behind closed doors with private attorneys to talk about litigation strategy.
It likely was the first time that North Dakota lawmakers have closed a public meeting to discuss any issue.

"We are making history today," Holmberg said.

Burgum signed 440 bills in the session. He vetoed three bills entirely and made line-item vetoes in 10.

The nonpartisan Legislative Council, which is the Legislature's research arm, has said Burgum altered legislation on spending bills at least four times,
including a three-word phrase forbidding a university from cutting "any portion of" a nursing program.

In his veto message, Burgum called the phrase ambiguous.

"This is all about protecting the legislative branch of government," said Republican House Majority Leader Al Carlson of Fargo, the vice chairman of the committee.

North Dakotan's have benefited greatly over the last decade by the world class oil play in the Bakken.
 As revenues began rolling in from oil taxes, the Republican led legislature, along with the voters, put various funds into place to make sure that the money was both spent
responsibly  and saved for future generations. This careful planning has led, in part, to several funds, or “buckets,” established by the legislature to distribute spending on a priority
basis, starting with the General Fund and ending with the Strategic  Investment and Infrastructure Fund (SIIF). This SIIF fund has filled even when oil revenues were at their lowest.
In 2015, the legislature passed the “Surge Bill,” which  distributed  $1.3 billion SIIF dollars for essential infrastructure funding to communities across the state.
Because of the oil boom, much of the Surge funding was allocated in  western counties to deal with community impacts associated with rapid growth.
 It was the right thing to do for western North Dakota. But now it’s time to refocus our attention to  non-oil counties.
 The package rolled out last week would provide $280 million in funding for critically needed infrastructure improvements in non-oil producing cities and counties.
While funding to oil and gas producing counties and hub cities will continue, the new package specifically targets these non-oil areas. This package takes an innovative approach
 to funding these essential state-wide infrastructure projects and is not solely based on oil price and oil production. Here’s how the new package would look:

2015 - $1.3 Billion, went to the Oil Producing Counties, 2018 - $280 Million for the rest of the State to catch up, "Big Ideas Big Results".
With $40 Million going directly to Cass County - Home of Carlson.
The whole $280 million breaks down to $1 dollar a day for a year, for every person in ND. - 280 million divided by 735,000 people is $1.04 a day.
North Dakota operates on a two year Biennium budget so make it $.50 cents a day, so every three days you might afford a Candy bar.
"Big Ideas Big Results".

Creates three new “buckets” above the SIIF in the state funding mechanism from oil taxes

— $115 million County/Township Infrastructure Fund

— $115 million Municipal Infrastructure Fund

— $50 million Airport Infrastructure Fund

The Municipal Fund and the County/Township Fund “buckets” fill simultaneously. The Airport Infrastructure funding would only begin once the aforementioned buckets have filled.
 Here’s how the funds would get allocated to communities:

County/Township Fund ($115 million):

— Excludes the 9 largest oil and gas producing counties (their previous funding stays in place)

— Provides $10,000 per township outside of the nine oil counties (capped at $15 million)

— Remaining $100 million distributed to remaining counties based on needs determined by the Upper Great Plans Transportation Institute

— Municipal Infrastructure Fund ($115 million)

— Provides $30 million in base funding to communities with a population over 1,000 to be paid out once $30 million is reached.

Remaining $85 million will be paid when filled once based on:

— A funding formula based on a previous year’s census, a 3-year average of population growth and a 3-year average of taxable valuation change

— Airport Infrastructure Fund ($50 million)

— Awards grants to be administered by the North Dakota Aeronautics Commission

Most importantly, this new package will focus on reducing the local tax burden for these non-oil counties and cities.
For example, Fargo, West Fargo, and Cass County will see an additional $40 million in infrastructure dollars for roads, sewer, water and other essential infrastructure needs.
A dollar through this program to Fargo, is one less the city has to tax its citizens for these projects.

We want to make sure we have a stable formula for our community leaders to plan now and in the future.
We are proud of the hard work we’ve done to put this proposal in place.
Having big ideas and following through on them is why we’re elected, and we will continue to do that as your leaders.

The whole $280 million breaks down to $1 dollar a day for a year, for every person in ND. - 280 million divided by 735,000 people is $1.04 a day.
North Dakota operates on a two year Biennium budget so make it $.50 cents a day, so every three days you might afford a Candy bar.
"Big Ideas Big Results".

"buckets" Full Of Cash

The "Big Idea"
Is to spend $280 Million, which would be 3.2% of whats in the $8.7 Billion dollar bucket!
 Laughable is the "Big Result"
 ND Funds - Balances
How Have All North Dakotan's Benefited From the World Class Oil Play?
At least they call it what it is, a Oil Play not a Oil Field, a Oil Play is about speculation, massive debt, drill the sweet spots and short term,
A Oil Field is established by drilling from the outside boundaries and in filled long term.

 Billion's In The Bucket - "Big Idea - Big Result"

Republicans gave away too much oil revenue
Kenton Onstad Parshall

"North Dakotan's have benefited greatly over the last decade by the world class oil play in the Bakken."
Wardner & Carlson said those words, think about it as you read this letter. Oil Play - Oil Field
At least they call it what it is, a Oil Play not a Oil Field, a Oil Play is about speculation, massive debt, drill the sweet spots and short term,
A Oil Field is established by drilling from the outside boundaries and in filled long term.

In response to the recent article by Sen. Rich Wardner and Rep. Al Carlson ” Big Ideas, big results” they make what could have been
“So Simple” very complicated. You cannot deny the Bakken oil play has been a huge benefit to the entire state of North Dakota.
 At the beginning, our money coffers were very low and the development of our oil resources provided an opportunity to help many North Dakotan's.
 We did that, but along the way, we helped a lot of non-North Dakotan's as well.

The huge impact to western North Dakota could have been prevented by not allowing an open door to oil permitting and still receive the benefits.
 That decision alone by the Republican-controlled Industrial Commission gave oil companies a 5-year window to secure hundreds of thousands of leases.

“Drill Baby Drill” was the word and former governors John Hoeven and Jack Dalrymple both took credit for a booming economy and discovery of a natural
resource that was there long before statehood. The “Drill Baby Drill” open door policy alone created turmoil amongst communities in Western North Dakota.

The Republican controlled Legislature wants to take credit for futuristic planning but in reality, as the sessions plugged away, it was mostly reactive
rather than proactive. The State of North Dakota could have easily adopted the funding formula so that 40% would go back to western oil producing counties
 like our counterparts in adjoining oil producing states have adopted. Oil producing counties along with cities and counties would not have had to go begging
 each session and tell the same story; how the state needs to address the impact to cities, counties, townships and schools in western North Dakota, and the need for
increased funding. Remember the actions to lower other revenue streams put a certain restraint on the growing state’s economy and very needy programs.

They would not have had to go around the entire state promoting a surge bill and fill it full of trinkets to entice eastern legislators for their vote.
 The need for the hub city concept would not have been necessary to address impacts on infrastructure. Sending small bits back to cities and
 counties in western North Dakota and praising the delivery as a huge investment by the Republican Legislature was misleading and inadequate.

It could have been so simple but we grew government and made it very complicated.
There would have been plenty to improve infrastructure, support schools, counties and cities all across the state but remember the
 Republican controlled Legislature had to lower income and corporate taxes that went to a majority of entities outside the state of North Dakota.
A Oil Field Would Not Display This Type Of Financial Chart - A Oil Play Would - Where Is The Green?

Have the taxpayers pay interest on loans to borrow money from the Tax Revenue (Legacy Fund) to pay for taxpayer project's.
That is a Ponzi Scheme that Escapes the Imagination - Next they will want you to pay Income Tax on your Taxes!
Stockpiling Taxes
Since when in the Hell should Taxpayers pay Interest on Tax Revenue that was supposed to be used for the Taxpayer?
Since when did the Taxpayers Tax Revenue become a Bank? With the Taxpayer paying Interest to have Their taxes used for the Taxpayer.

Ask Yourself ?
Does the Fed or State pay you Interest when you have been over paying Taxes for the year?
Does the Fed or State pay you Interest on your paid Taxes until they are spent?
Does the Fed or State pay you a dividend or portion of Interest on Taxes they have Stockpiled?

Does the Fed or State charge you Interest when you haven't paid enough Taxes or pay your Taxes late?

What Was It Doug Burgum Said They Are To Get Elected? - Money Squanders, Career Politicians & Good Old Boys
Yep, "New Bold Leadership" - Burgum Doesn't Say Or Do A Thing Since He Became One Of Them

The Inflatable Baby Trump Is Available At

Mad Dog Pac .com
It will take a lot of straws to suck up all that debt.

I would also recommend checking the five charts on her website explaining the oil tax distribution system we have patched together since oil was discovered in 1951.
The only thing we lack is a “go-fund-me” fund.

This house of fiscal cards has been created and compounded by a part-time Legislature that doesn’t have time to organize a rational funding system based on sound tax principles.
 Every session seems to create more funds in response to the whims of interest groups and other beneficiaries.

Toward the end of the last legislative session, in an unusual burst of generosity, the Legislature appropriated over $10 million to give every one of our 1,100 townships $10K each.

It wasn’t even Christmas but every township was going to get money even though the population and need varied widely from county to county.
 The taxpayers were saved when Governor Doug Burgum vetoed the measure.

According to the media, we now have a group of eastern legislators planning to get some of that western oil money for infrastructure.

Now they have reason to be envious. To accommodate the development of the Bakken, the state was overly generous with local communities –
new schools, new highways and new county and community staffing. The west needed help and got it.

After 10 years of this, some eastern legislators are wondering whether or not the rest of the state ought to share the spoils, raising the issue of equity in the entire state budget.

The state tax and spend system is a royal mess. The helter-skelter cramming of a burgeoning budget into an 80-day biennial legislative session is futile.
When we keep managing fiscal affairs without the availability of thoughtful study, decisions are made on the basis of politics.

Take the Legacy Fund being fed millions of dedicated oil dollars every month. The fund boasts over $5 billion and is still growing.
Was there any rational discussion preceding the dedication of this money? Were there alternatives proposed and evaluated?

No, the Legislature put it on the ballot as a constitutional amendment. Why a constitutional amendment?
 So that future legislatures couldn’t spend it – an assumption that future legislatures would not be responsible or frugal.

Sponsors and defenders of the Legacy Fund will justify it by arguing that the people voted for it. No, the people voted for “Legacy” because all legacies are good.
 Attach “legacy” to a steamboat on Lake Sakakawea and the people will vote for it. However, all legacies are not equal.

There was too little research at the legislative level. What were the principles of taxation considered? Who has a legitimate claim to the oil money?
 The folks in the western part of the state? All citizens of the state? The present generation or future generations?

On the whole, the North Dakota tax system is regressive, meaning that the lower income people pay for more than their fair share for
governmental services because the progressivity of the income tax is more than offset by the regressivity of the sales tax.

Our response is that the lower-income people require more than their share of governmental services therefore they ought to pay more than their share of taxes.
 But this blanket generalization does not result in equity.
All low-income people do not use governmental services equally so we end up with a system that benefits some and punishes others.

Cleaning up this 200-year-old pile of incoherent fiscal legislation will not be easy. But we could apply better equity tests to new proposals.