Tuolumne County Superintendent Joe Silva will in September repeat what has become a familiar pilgrimage: He will fly to Washington, D.C. to lobby for renewal of the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, which expires next year.
Behind the act's euphemistic, bureaucratic name is hard, cold cash.
If extension of the act becomes part of the federal budget for the next
decade, as backers hope, Tuolumne County will get $2 million a year and
Calaveras County $280,000. And it's not partisan, pork-barrel cash
thrown like bones to constituents in return for some politician's
Instead, the $500 million annual pot would be split among nearly
800 rural counties having tax-exempt national forest land with their
boundaries. Tuolumne County, with 611,395 acres of Stanislaus National
Forest land (42 percent of its total acreage), is near the top of the
The idea behind the act has been to compensate the affected
counties for the taxes they don't collect on millions of undevelopable
acres of timberland and wilderness.
Most of the cash is split between county schools and roads, with
smaller amounts going to resource advisory committee for forest- and
conservation-related projects. At stake, backers of the new bill say,
are some $1.37 billion in lost annual business revenues and 11,000 lost
SRSC has been around since 2000, but federal help for forest
counties dates back more than a century. In 1908, Congress passed a law
giving such counties a 25 percent slice of revenue from timber sales
and other income-producing activities on national forests within their
For many decades the so-called Forest Reserve program was a
reliable source of income for rural counties. But with the advent of
stiffer environmental regulations and new U.S. Forest Service
priorities, timber cuts plummeted and so did local revenues.
The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act was
passed as a replacement source of income. The trouble is, as Silva can
attest, the legislation has not been reliable.
Funding has never been guaranteed for more than a few years at a
time, and pending expiration has typically triggered a stampede of
school superintendents and road department administrators to Washington
for frantic rounds of lobbying.
Drama and uncertainty has been high, and success mixed. By now Joe
Silva and other members of the National Forest Counties and Schools
Coalition - a 1,600-member, 39-state advocacy group aimed at
perpetuating funding - know that this common-sense measure is unlikely
to get an up-or-down House or Senate vote on its merits.
Instead, success or failure of SRSC has hinged on the fate of huge,
multibillion-dollar spending bills it has been attached to. In past
years it has been linked up with Iraq War spending (passed), energy
spending (failed) and 2008's $700 billion bailout bill (passed).
This year, said Silva, the coalition wants to link the bill to the
2012 federal budget, with provisos that SRSC be good for 10 years and
that funding stay 80 percent of its historic maximum (Tuolumne County's
$2.5 million high would translate to $2 million annually).
Solid groundwork has already been laid: Twenty-nine senators and 59
members of the house, from both sides of the aisle, have urged
inclusion. Also, a previous funding formula which favored Far Western
states has been amended to give other forested states a larger slice of
The moves have brought more backing from a broader base. "And, as
rare as it is these days, any time there is bipartisan support, that's
a good thing," said Silva.
Not only that, he added, but the $500 million in SRSC fund "hardly
amounts to the dust on the cover" of a gargantuan federal budget edging
toward $4 trillion.
Still, Silva estimates the 10-year proposal's chances of success at
no more than 50-50 and said a lot of work will be needed.
Quoting from a letter by U.S. Senate advocates: "SRSC is not an
entitlement program, but rather a demonstration of the commitment that
this nation made to rural forest counties when it determined that large
blocks (193 million acres in total) of our forrest lands should be set
aside for the benefit of the entire nation. President Theodore
Roosevelt understood the value of conserving our forest lands and
placing them in public trust. He likewise understood the economic
burden this placed on rural counties to provide essential
infrastructure, like roads and public schools, with their tax revenues
reduced by the federal lands within their boundaries."
We encourage lawmakers to again examine the merits of this proposal
and give forest counties the long term funding and support they need