'CHICKEN LITTLE' STORIES

On August 7th the Tennessee General Assembly overrode Governor Sundquist's veto of the "No New Taxes" budget. Since then, newspaper readers in Tennessee has been hit by a hailstorm of "The Sky Is Falling" stories about how much we are going to suffer as a result of the drastic budget "cuts" and the "shortfalls" in revenue.

Let's see, the budget increased by 5.2 % this year - for the first time ever we collected 7 billion dollars in just 11 months (primarily through sales tax) - departments got supplemental appropriations last year - and had money left over.

Yep, fer sure, the sky is falling. But our red "Chicken Little" here doesn't look fearful, does he. Do we see a trace of pleasure in his face at the consternation he is causing by his cries of "TheSky Is Falling"?

Here are a few of the headlines:

Now all of this has inspired your friends here at TaxFreeTennessee to come up with the idea of a "Chicken Little Series". This will be a series of stories, some of which we hope will be sent in by our readers, lampooning or otherwise discrediting some of the "Sky Is Falling" stories being printed in our daily newspapers.

The state of Tennessee is finally getting around to charging people for stocking fish in private ponds.

Yes, listeners out there in RadioLand, that's what I said. You heard me right. Don't wreck your car laughing. And watch out for that guy on your right trying to squeeze in his SUV into the two-foot space you left between your vehicle and the car ahead of you.

Okay, now back to today's incredible fish story.

I said the state of Tennessee is finally getting around to charging people for stocking fish in private ponds.

Okay, I've already got a call in on our hotline that lit up immediately. Must be a cell phone caller to cut in that quick. Yes, caller number 1, I can read your mind and I can hear your question and I know the answer to that one. I'll repeat your question for the other listeners out there today.

Question # 1 from Caller # 1: What the hell was the state ever doing stocking fish for free in private ponds?

Well, that makes answer # 1 real easy, Caller # 1: Beats the living hell out of me. The state must have had money to waste is the only thing I can think of right away and then maybe they didn't know where else to waste it. It makes absolutely no sense to me at all. Does it to any of you listeners out there?

Okay, here's the Next Caller and our Next Question. Okay, Caller # 2, that's a good question, one I'd anticipated someone might ask. Let me repeat it for our other listeners out there in RadioLand.

"Why hasn't the state been charging all along? Or even better, why are they even stocking fish in private ponds in the first place?"

Answer # 2: Well, Caller #2, apparently or, at least to the best of my knowledge, the law doesn't actually require the state to give away free fish to wealthy landowners who can afford to own ponds in the first place. And I'd have to wonder how many of these people getting the free fish from the state all these years turned around and charged people for fishing in their private ponds in order to catch the free fish the state stocked in those private ponds. But that's another point we won't pursue now. Maybe, later. I'm told that it may have something to do with fish and game supposedly being owned and controlled by the King or England or the Crown under the old English law. Somehow, despite the Revolutionary War, the concept survived here in the United States with government trying to regulate and control virtually every aspect of a "wild" animal's" life from the moment of conception to somebody picking up roadkill on the side of the road and taking it home for dinner.

We really do need to delve into this question a bit more, but first let us give the other listeners a little fuller explanation of what we think if really going on here.

The word out there is that the Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency or TWRA will start charging $100 an acre or so to stock fish in private ponds beginning sometime between now and October 1.

Why haven't they been doing it all along? Well, if they were going to stock the fish in the first place, they should have been charging, but apparently somebody in government believed that they weren't allowed to or something like that. So state law was changed sometime back last year to allow it.

We're told that the change was in Public Chapter 837 which allowed the TWRA to charge for certain programs, including the Private Pond Fish Stocking Program or the PPFSP as bureaucrats would probably refer to it just so us ordinary citizens wouldn't know what they were talking about. The PPFSP is apparently governed by Tennessee Code Annotated section 70-2-212.

Let's see, now. Being a lawyer of sorts or at least so some people think, I just happen to have a copy of the law right here. It's online, too, so you can read along at home with me if you'd like. I'll just read out loud to those of you driving out there right now. You really shouldn't try drive to drive and read the Internet at the same time. You have enough trouble using your cell phone as it is. That's one thing that's still legal here in Tennessee.

Now this is straight out of Tennessee Code Annotated which is our statutory law. Boy, that almost sounds dirty, doesn't it? Seriously now, this is the law of the land -- our bible so to speak -- so we need to give it the proper respect it deserves, despite knowing that legislators and a few hundred or so lobbyists wrote it on Mt. Sinai for us to live by. No, no, Mt. Sinai was that other guy. What was his name? Charlton Heston. No, no, that's the head of the NRA. Moses. That's it. Moses was the one that was the Mt. Sinai guy. This act that we're talking about was committed on Capital Hill right here in Nashville.

Here's sub-section a: "Stocking of wildlife is declared to be a prerogative of the state." A prerogative? Well, I guess that's their prerogative as successors to the King of England. Let's read on. "All persons desiring to stock wildlife shall first obtain a permit from the executive director." Executive Director of what? I guess that must mean the TWRA. Let's go on. "Such a permit will be issued free of charge." Free of charge? Why? Anyway, let's go on. "Applications for such fish from the United States fish and wildlife service, when approved by the wildlife resources agency, shall be considered a sufficient permit for the purpose of this section."

Okay, that takes care of sub-section a. Let's see what sub-section b has in it: "The wildlife resources agency has the power to inspect all live fish entering the state, regardless of their source, and to destroy any shipment found to be diseased without incurring any liabilities for so doing." Hmmm. They're sounding like control freaks, aren't they? I don't know. Maybe it's really necessary to keep people from trying to stock Old Hickory Lake with some bizarre type of freshwater sharks or something like that. Or maybe it's to keep me from stocking my swimming pool with piranha if I bring any back from a vacation to the Amazon. Of course, I don't have a swimming pool in the first place and I sure can't afford to go to South America so that one doesn't seem to affect me all that much.

Now here it is in sub-section c. That's it. It just what we're looking for right here in section c: "The agency is authorized to impose reasonable charges to defray expenses for stocking fish in private ponds. The charges may reflect the agency's costs for raising and transporting the fish together with other associated costs."

Yep, that's it. The TWRA can charge all right to stock fish in private ponds. These footnotes always confuse the daylights out of me. And I'm having to cheat a little bit by looking in my law books. Here it is. There's another footnote or two here in my law books that says: "Amendments. The 2000 amendment added (c)." That's the one we've talking about. "Effective Dates. Acts 2000, ch. 837, § 8. May 24, 2000."

Okay, I know it's permissive in nature because the language doesn't say they absolutely have to or are required to charge for the fish. It just clearly says the TWRA "is authorized to impose reasonable charges to defray expenses for stocking fish in private ponds. The charges may reflect the agency's costs for raising and transporting the fish together with other associated costs." The operative phrases are "is authorized" and "may" which are definitely permissive and not mandatory. So the state doesn't have to do it. They haven't been breaking the law or anything by not charging. They've just been stupid about it. It seems to me they could have been charging since the effective date of May 24, unless I'm misreading this somehow.

I'm shocked. I really am. I thought they said we were in some kind of a budget crisis and we had an Armageddon Budget and here the state finally is getting around to charging for stocking fish in private ponds when it's clearly been entitled by statute to do so over well over a year.

We need to find out more about this. We sure got off track on that one, didn't we?

Okay, here's Caller # 3. Maybe Caller # 3 has some answers for us. Nope, just more questions. Oh, boy, here we go. These are some tough ones, folks out there. I'm not sure I know the answers to these. I'm going need some help. But I'll give it a shot. I'll repeat it for you listeners who might not have heard the question. Actually, it wasn't an it and it wasn't a question. It was a them and they were a whole string of questions.

Here we go with Caller # 3 with Questions # 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8, Opening up the Pearly Gates:

If the law was changed last year that would allow the state to charge for a service I'm still not sure it's really required by law to do, why is the Sunquist administration just now getting around to charging for stocking fish in private ponds? Isn't that mismanagement? If the state was really in a crisis on funding, why didn't they start sooner? And exactly how much did it cost the taxpayers to stock free fish in the private ponds of pond-owners during the last budget year? How many acres of ponds did the state stock? And had they charged $100 an acre to stock these private ponds, how much would the state have collected in additional revenue which is the same dollar-for-dollar amount the majority non-pond-owning taxpayers would have saved?

Answer # 3 to Caller # 3: That's a lot of questions. And I don't think I know all the answers. Let's take it small bites. Why didn't the Sunquist administration charge for stocking free fish in private ponds for the last year when it was allowed to do so by law? The question answers itself, Caller Number 3: It's the Sunquist administration. Need I say more?

The next question is: Isn't that mismanagement? Well, we did say the Sunquist administration, didn't we?

The next question is: During a crisis, why didn't the Sunquist administration start charging sooner to stock fish in private ponds? Hmmm! The only obvious answer would be they wanted to try and end the last year by taking in less revenue so they could appear to close the books June 30 at a loss instead of the surplus they actually had and which they've already spent. How much did all this cost and how many acres of private ponds they stocked with free fish and how much would they have collected in revenue if they'd charged $100 an acre are all questions I don't know the answers to. But I just happen to know someone who should be able to get you those answers, Caller Number 3.

Caller Number 3 and all of you listeners out there who are outraged by this obvious nonsense and mismanagement, call the governor's office at (615) 741-2001 and ask him for the answers to those three questions. When you find out, call us or e-mail us and tell what they tell you. We WANT to know the answers to these questions. We'll be calling too. That number again is 741-2001. If that's long distance for you, you might try the free -- well it's not really free, it's actually taxpayer-funded, so let's start calling it by its correct name of toll-free --. If that's long distance for you, you might try the toll-free 1-800 number at 1-800-449-8366 and then punch in extension 12001. You can remember that number because it's the same as 1-800-449-TENN. Again, that's 1-800-449-TENN, then extension 12001.

Ask him if the story is really true that they didn't WANT the revenue they could get for charging to stock fish in private ponds? I mean we are not even really sure this story about them starting to charge for this is true, but it's been reported in some of the newspapers, if you can believe them.

Stay tuned out there in RadioLand. There may be more news coming up shortly.