On this week’s interview, Paul talks to Jennifer Mock. Jennifer is the Executive Director of the Estancia Valley Classical Academy (EVCA) based in Edgewood, NM.

EVCA is part of the Barney Charter School network which was put forth by Hillsdale College. It has a bent to classical education with an emphasis on using original texts and the Socratic method in learning. With everything going on in the K-12 sector these days we wanted to get Jennifer on the show to talk about her school and the many challenges it is facing in the COVID 19 pandemic. If you are concerned about New Mexico’s future as a state, education reform, or are in need of educational options, you won’t want to miss this episode.

Bill Richardson had his self-aggrandizing Governor Richardson Improvement Project (GRIP) which blurred the lines between campaign signs and taxpayer-funded government projects.

Now, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s Administration has highway signs throughout New Mexico saying, “Gov. Lujan Grisham Highway Improvement Project.” The Rio Grande Foundation has joined Power The Future New Mexico to highlight the issue and call on Gov. Lujan Grisham to remove her name from the signs and instead credit New Mexico taxpayers for funding the projects.

As if the COVID 19 lockdowns haven’t done enough harm to businesses around New Mexico and in the Metro area, two proposals (one from Albuquerque City Council and one from Bernalillo County Commission) would further inflict harm on local businesses, many of whom have been forced to close their doors since March.

In Albuquerque, the push for mandated paid sick leave rears its ugly head for the umpteenth time as Councilor Diane Gibson is pushing legislation to create “A Task Force To Explore Options For Implementing Minimum Sick Leave Requirements In The City.” It is ordinance R-86 if you contact your councilor to explain yet again, that in the best of economic times this is a job-killer. With the entire City under lockdown and businesses closing in droves, a biased task force is the last thing we need.

Not to be outdone in its effort to harm the local economy, Bernalillo County Commissioner Debbie O’Malley is introducing a “Project Labor Agreement” bill to the County. You can read more here under agenda item 8. PLA’s essentially hand public works projects over to unions in ways that increase costs to taxpayers. The bill will be introduced at the County Commission meeting on Tuesday, August 11, at 5:00pm. Here are a few choice portions of the proposed ordinance:

As we’ve noted in other posts the New York Times COVID 19 tracking website is very useful in understanding the impacts of the Virus. And, the news in terms of BOTH the spread of the Virus itself AND deaths is improving.

As can be seen below, as recently as July 29, the 7 day rolling average of new cases was 330. Now that number is just 221.

The 7 day rolling average of deaths is declining as well although the numbers are more volatile partly because there are fewer of them. The last two days have seen 3 and 1 death.

Does this mean people are “masking up” and that the Gov.’s policies are working? The Gov. made that claim back in June when numbers looked to be going in the right direction, but there really isn’t any evidence of that. Neighboring states like Texas and Arizona are also seeing declines in cases and deaths.

With the State having just entered ANOTHER extension of the Gov.’s health orders will things be relaxed if the good news continues? Your guess is as good as mine. The news on both spread AND deaths is good and we’ll just have to see how this impacts Lujan Grisham’s decisions. She holds the power.

On this week’s Tipping Point NM Paul and Wally discuss the Gov.’s latest COVID 19 orders. There isn’t much new aside from it being extended for 30 days, but quietly studio gyms can reopen at 25% capacity. Wineries are also able to open like breweries.

Mostly the Gov. complained in her press conference about lack of Congressional action on “stimulus.” 

GRT’s are down, but only a little. How is that possible? It has to do with the massive CARES Act spending. 

RGF signed on to an education lawsuit countering NM Attorney General Hector Balderas. Balderas wants to prevent private schools from accessing CARES Act funding.

ONE restaurant owner says the Gov. is doing a great job. Wally and Paul discuss.

NM’s PRC goes for 100% renewable/battery. What’s this mean?

Marathon will permanently close a refinery near Gallup. Allsup’s is closing its Clovis office.  

Back in February (in the  old days before COVID 19) the Rio Grande Foundation called out an Albuquerque City Councilor for abusing the City’s travel policy, spending exorbitant amounts of taxpayer money for her entire family to travel by train to the East Coast.

Additionally, the Rio Grande Foundation submitted a fraud report to the Office of the State Auditor on February 24, 2020. We believe this complaint triggered the investigation by the Auditor.

The news is that after an investigation by the State Auditor, the City Councilor will be paying back $4,000 in “excessive” travel costs. This sorry fiasco should never have happened and likely would have been prevented if appropriate controls were in place, but it is good that some justice was served. You can watch the follow-up story on KRQE Channel 13:

According to news reports, Marathon Oil is permanently closing its refinery near Gallup, NM. As the article notes, both the Gallup and another refinery being permanently closed in California are being shuttered “because they are the highest-cost facilities among its 16 refineries.”

The Gallup facility had 220 employees.

Earlier this year the Escalante coal plant near Gallup was targeted for closure. That facility had 107 employees.

To be clear, the Rio Grande Foundation believes in “creative destruction.” Market conditions change and jobs and economic conditions shift, but we also know that Gallup is an impoverished place. These refinery and coal plant jobs are good-paying work. There isn’t much to replace it. And, those heavily-subsidized and mandated “renewable energy” jobs are construction-only. Once the solar panels and wind turbines are built, there is minimal work to be done.

Recently, New Mexico’s Public Regulation Commission (PRC) voted to tell Public Service Company of NM (PNM) to use 100% “renewable” sources to replace the soon-to-be-shuttered San Juan Generating Station.

Not surprisingly, the environmental left went nuts with glee.

But, what will happen to the rest of us? The following chart from the Energy Information Administration shows that non-hydro renewables are growing in popularity (thanks in part to subsidies and mandates) they remains a small overall portion of America’s electricity portfolio. Cost and reliability are the major factors of course.

While supporters claim the cost of 100% “renewables” will be competitive (we don’t believe them) experts’ main concerns involve reliability. Energy analyst Thomas Conroy:

highlighted two risks associated with it (100% renewables) — a rapid increase of renewable energy onto PNM’s system at a rate that he said has not occurred before and relying on battery storage.

Conroy said it would increase the amount of electricity PNM receives from renewables from 7% to 30% in three years and would need long-term battery storage, which is still a technology being developed and has unknown risks.

“If New Mexico suffers blackouts, it will become extremely ugly extremely quickly,” Conroy said.

These are similar concerns that PNM has brought up while proposing a combination of natural gas and renewables.

PNM spokesperson Ray Sandoval had also told NM Political Report that “natural gas is a necessary component of its transition to renewables because it offers backup reliability to help protect against grid failures when renewables may not be able to perform.”

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham had yet another press conference on Thursday afternoon. She extended New Mexico’s health order for 30 days, but spent a great deal of time during the press conference and on social media complaining about the “lack of leadership” in Washington.

Mostly, as she says in the Tweet below, she wants another federal “stimulus” package with money for unemployment and other forms of government assistance.”

Whatever your thoughts on the Gov.’s “lockdown” or specific aspects of the various federal “bailouts” or “stimuli” we have a serious incentive problem here. The Gov. (and others) shut down their state economies doing massive economic damage and then want a federal government that is an astonishing $26.5 TRILLION in debt to take on EVEN MORE debt in order to subsidize her decisions.

Whatever one believes about the merits of locking down our state economies, the federal government can’t (and shouldn’t) front their entire cost. State policymakers must be asked to make some tough decisions.  Our problematic federalism has bad incentives that will bankrupt our nation.

Amity Shlaes is the author of several compelling books that counter the traditional narrative handed down by historians. Her “The Forgotten Man” showed how FDR’s New Deal policies actually prolonged the Great Depression. Her book “Coolidge” gave Calvin Coolidge the status update placing him among the great American presidents. Her latest book and the primary topic of this podcast is her new book “Great Society.” 

Today the idea of social democracy is popular in our country. The term socialism has taken on a glow. In the 1960s, socialism was also popular, as was its compromise, social democracy. Social democratic principles were the basis of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. In Great Society, Amity Shlaes shows that planning policy implemented in the name of the collective hurt both the nation and the individual. The result of our collective projects was a new Silent Majority. Former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan has called the book “accurate history that reads like a novel.”

On this week’s discussion podcast, Paul and Wally start out by providing a quick update on the back and forth in the Courts regarding dining at restaurants. The Environment Department releases data seemingly showing that restaurants ARE a primary source of COVID 19 spread, but further analysis of the data indicates otherwise.

This dovetails with a discussion of Gov. MLG’s latest orders which shut schools shut down for in-person learning until after Labor Day.

In a finger waving press conference the Gov. shames New Mexicans…“I can see you at the airports. I can see you on Facebook….”

Despite the Gov.’s aggressive stances and return to a more locked-down situation, according to Wallethub we are “only” the 42ndmost open state in the US.

Heather MacDonald’s piece in May/June Imprimis published by Hillsdale College is worth reading about the COVID 19 madness.

A chart from the New York Times shows that homeschooling is not just for the well-off.

Private schools will have to adhere to portions of MLG’s orders, but will they? Paul sees potential conflict between the State and schools.

What’s the latest on oil and gas production in NM? Paul and the folks at the Foundation wondered.

Santa Fe New Mexican profiles Carol Wight of the New Mexico Restaurant Association.

Single-payer health care in New Mexico would be very expensive according to the findings of a new report commissioned by the Legislature.

On this week’s interview, Paul talks to Lisa Conyers. Lisa was a speaker at a Rio Grande Foundation event a few years back on the Human Cost of Welfare.

Now, she has a new book “Welfare for the Rich” in which she details the numerous ways in which our tax dollars are redistributed by Federal and state governments, but not to the poor and working classes. Rather, much of this government largesse goes to the wealthiest Americans.

The Rio Grande Foundation has signed onto an amicus brief filed Wednesday in Michigan v. DeVos, a critical legal dispute in federal court between a group of state attorneys general (including New Mexico’s Hector Balderas) and the federal Education Department over the availability of CARES Act funding for private schools. The Foundation joins a coalition of 38 state and national groups representing the interests of private schools and parental choice.

As Rio Grande Foundation president Paul Gessing pointed out, “The Rio Grande Foundation has long held that education dollars should fund students, not bureaucracies. COVID-19’s impact on America’s students was not confined to public school sectors. Congress allocated critical funding to both public and private schools with the intent of helping schools reopen safely and serve their students.”

Background: The $2.2 trillion federal CARES Act, passed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, included an Education Stabilization Fund to support schools with the costs of safely reopening and navigating the crisis. The law directed the Department of Education to distribute these funds “equitably” between public and private schools and students but did not dictate exactly how the funds should be distributed.

On June 25, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued an interim final rule that gives states and local public-school districts options for how to fairly allocate CARES Act relief to private schools. Many states and local school districts refused to follow the rule. Nine attorneys general and four metropolitan school districts, including Balderas filed a multi-state federal lawsuit against the Education Department challenging the interim final rule and argued that the majority of the funding should be directed to public schools.

This amicus, on behalf of 38 state and national groups, represents the important interests of America’s private schools in this critical debate. COVID-19’s impact on education was not restricted to public schools. With more than 5 million students attending 33,000 schools, WILL and our coalition partners make clear that federal CARES Act relief is critical for the safety and education of the nearly 10% of American students attending private schools.

WILL’s amicus is joined by associations and advocacy groups that represent and support private schools and their families in Wisconsin, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, and throughout the nation, that serve Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, Islamic, Lutheran, other Christian, and independent secular schools, and that collectively educate millions of students.

The following opinion piece appeared in the Las Cruces Sun-News on Sunday, July 26, 2020:

As the head of New Mexico’s free market think tank and a frequent critic of New Mexico’s K-12 system, many are surprised to hear that my two school-age children have been in traditional public schools throughout their educational careers. That will change this fall due to COVID 19 and the policies being imposed by the State. According to numerous reports, parents across our nation are doing the same.

This crisis and our response to it is an opportunity for policymakers to reconsider how education works in the State of New Mexico. As a reminder, New Mexico has perpetually found itself among the lowest-performing education systems in the nation. Innovative thinking, especially policies that redirect funding to students as opposed to bureaucracies, could have positive impacts now and in the future.

While we at the Rio Grande Foundation are often critical of the powers that be in New Mexico education policy, this is not the case regarding COVID 19 and the reopening plans. In fact, our usual criticism is a systemic one and that is the situation here. The idea that one model of schooling makes sense for all students in normal times is faulty. Now, with such widely-variable views on COVID 19 and the appropriate response to it (not to mention the different educational needs for students of different ages and abilities) developing solutions that satisfy everyone is impossible.

For my family with elementary school aged children, the combination of mask wearing throughout the day and “social distancing” being imposed was a deal-breaker. And, while I support “virtual” or “hybrid” learning for some children, I simply don’t think the schools or educators are ready to deploy them on a large scale in an effective manner. We saw this firsthand in spring when the schools suddenly shut down.

Hopefully, school systems have better plans in place now, but the situation remains fluid and chaotic. New Mexico students are already behind due to lost months at the end of last school year. The chaos of masks in the classroom and a hybrid/virtual model that is completely new and unfamiliar to many students and teachers is not likely to lead to improved outcomes.

That is not just unfortunate: it is tragic.

My family is blessed. We can make home schooling work and we’ve already spent considerable time preparing for this big change. Unfortunately, that is not the case for all New Mexico families, especially low-income and minority families.

The COVID 19 situation leaves no “easy” choices, but with so many New Mexicans looking for educational options or even taking on the task of educating their own children, shouldn’t the tax dollars they pay into the system follow the child? Shouldn’t parents have resources made available to purchase computers and other curriculum materials for their children or, if they prefer, shouldn’t they be able to send their child to the school of their own choice? All of these choices involve major time and financial sacrifices by parents in tough economic times. Rather than penalizing these families, we believe the funding should follow the child and help them directly.

South Carolina’s Governor just announced the state will use $32 million to fund low-income families directly this fall. The scholarships are worth up to $6,500 each. These are the solutions that should be happening in New Mexico. Families are paying taxes for a school system that in times of “normalcy” is considered “inadequate” (Yazzie lawsuit). With many limitations and adjustments being made now, that system and the families it serves now face greater challenges than ever before.

I truly feel for our children who have lost so much already. The Legislature and Governor have long claimed to care for our children. It is time to call their bluff and fund children, not bureaucracies.

Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation. The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility

The RGF recently issued a report written by early childhood expert Katharine Stevens that debunked the Legislative Finance Committee’s paper offering support for pre-K funding. KOB TV Channel 4 picked up the report and did the following interview with Stevens. You can watch it below:

The Loss of a military base can be a traumatic experience for any community. Roswell experienced this phenomenon a little over 50 years ago when Walker AFB was shuttered.

In the new Rio Grande Foundation policy paper, “Roswell and Walker AFB Closure: History, Analysis, and Lessons Learned,” authors Paul Gessing along with Raul Ayala and Colin McGlinchey study the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process and how Walker AFB was closed (preceding the creation of the BRAC process by nearly two decades). 

In addition to BRAC, the analysts look at how Walker AFB transitioned to the Roswell Air Center (RAC) and how that process has gone. They also compare that transition and its impact to BRAC processes in other rural areas. Finally, the report offers a few thoughts on the current situation at RAC as well as considerations for state and local policymakers and considers the impact that the dramatic slowdown in air travel due to COVID 19 is having on RAC and its prospects for success.

The study offers a robust overview of the history of base closures dating back to the closing of Walker AFB and how the Vietnam era spate of base closings ultimately led to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process that is in place today.

The authors acknowledge the pain and challenges that the loss of Walker AFB caused the Roswell community. Nonetheless they argue that the BRAC process is arguably the greatest federal spending reduction effort of all time. And, if the BRAC process had been around when Walker closed (and the relevant federal programs made available), it might have benefitted the Roswell community.

The completely unexpected COVID 19 crisis which has had a devastating toll on the global airline industry has actually boosted the viability of the Roswell Air Center and its repair/maintenance operations.

Ultimately, the authors conclude, rural areas like Roswell inherently face more challenges than urban ones in recovering from a base closure. Big urban areas have numerous advantages including a “critical mass” of businesses and population, a demand for “prime real estate,” and proximity to supply chains. That being said, changing the relatively business-unfriendly policies of the State of New Mexico would help communities like Roswell attract businesses that would put facilities like Walker AFB (now the Roswell Air Center) to more economical use in the long-term.

The latest US Census Bureau data for 2020 came out a while back and we missed them in all the Corona Virus related news. So, we put together the following chart. You can see the Bureau’s data for the rest of the nation here.

While New Mexico is now in the middle with regard to its neighbors after several years of having been the biggest-spending state among its neighbors.

With everything going on in New Mexico due to the economic situation and COVID 19, we know State revenues from oil and gas are down. But how’s oil production? We were curious. So, we checked out the data from the Oil Conservation Division. 

Overall, there has been a 21.6712% decrease between January and May of 2020. What does the rest of 2020 hold? We simply don’t know.

The following chart form the New York Times caught our attention at RGF especially with home schooling becoming a more likely choice for many families here in New Mexico (including the head of the Foundation) and around the nation.

The point is that home school families ARE NOT necessarily wealthy. In fact, as the chart shows, the ranks of families of middle or low-incomes that home school are actually higher than for all families with kids.

Of course, home schooling essentially precludes two full-time worker families, so the data have that inherent limitation. As RGF has discussed, with the chaos impacting New Mexico’s traditional educational models, it is high time for dollars to follow students, not flow to bureaucracies.

We will be tracking the dramatic changes and shifts in New Mexico’s K-12 education system as they develop both in Santa Fe and at home.

In its constant search to put more of New Mexico’s economy under government control, a few years ago the Democrat-controlled Legislature signed off on a study to consider “universal” health care in the State.

Most “realistic” universal health care programs rely heavily on a seemingly-endless supply of federal dollars to stay afloat, but a number of states have had such programs and abolished them when they became financially unsustainable.

Here’s an article about the plan with a link to the full paper here.

The conclusion of the report shows just how costly “free” health care can be. As the report states, “premiums for other families, employer contributions and payroll taxes likely would go up to pay for what could be as much as a $5.8 billion shortfall for the program over the first five years.” New Mexico’s annual budget is $7.0 billion annually, so we’re talking a shortfall of $1.2 billion or so out of that budget.

Furthermore, the study notes, “While the goal is to have all New Mexicans insured, the study acknowledges that the gains in coverage may be overstated since many uninsured residents are already eligible for Medicaid.”

States as diverse as Vermont and California have tried and failed to implement single payer systems in recent years. Since states can’t print money like Washington, DC, one suspects that this report will not provide much impetus for adopting such a plan here in New Mexico.

On this week’s discussion podcast, Paul and Wally begin by discussing the fact that a judge in New Mexico issued an order to reopen indoor dining at restaurants for 10 days. That opinion was published immediately prior to the podcast being recorded. Unfortunately, the State Supreme Court reversed the decision later that afternoon.

Education issues loom large in this episode as Albuquerque Public Schools and other districts have released their “back to school” plans. Wally and Paul discuss the details and why Paul and his family have made the decision to homeschool their children. Is David Scrase holding our kids hostage to keep parents at home? 

A powerful state representative says New Mexico’s Permanent Fund is “racist.” And in education-related news, New Mexico falls slightly in the latest per student spending data from Census Bureau.

Finally, RGF recently produced an explainer video to show how most areas of NM have been minimally impacted by the COVID 19 Virus. An astonishing 11 of New Mexico’s 33 counties (including some population centers) have had zero deaths from the Virus. An additional 11 counties have had death numbers in the single digits per 100,000 residents.

Today’s Albuquerque Journal contained a report which discussed in glowing terms New Mexico’s expansion of pre-K programs. The reality is not nearly so compelling as Katharine Stevens argues in her new policy brief “Why Expanding New Mexico State Pre-K Won’t Help the Children Who Need Help the Most.”

The question of how to expand “early childhood” programs in New Mexico has long been one of the most contentious public policy issues in the state. Recently, the Legislative Finance Committee produced a new report “Prekindergarten Quality and Educational Outcomes,”The report makes multiple positive claims about the effectiveness of pre-K that Katharine Stevens addresses in her new policy brief, “Why Expanding New Mexico State Pre-K Won’t Help the Children Who Need Help the Most.”

In her brief, Stevens discusses several, glaring flaws in the LFC report.

• Correlation vs. Causation:The LFC report assumes that improved results among students who participated in pre-K programs is the result of those programs. The reality is that participation is voluntary and motivated parents are the ones who will enroll their children in such programs and take the time to ensure they get to school every day. It is no surprise that parents who value the program the most have children who perform better than average.

• Failure to ConsiderRigorous, Randomized Studies of Pre-K Programs: One of the serious challenges of social science is the relative lack of randomized control groups. There are, however, two important studies of pre-K that use randomized control groups (unlike the LFC or other New Mexico reports). One such study cited by Stevens is from Tennessee and another involved Head Start.

New Mexico has dramatically expanded pre-K spending over the last decade, which provides the opportunity to add to the evidence on pre-K’s effect on academic achievement. Stevens notes, however, that even as New Mexico has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into pre-K its test scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) have remained stagnant.   

• Finally, the LFC misuses the concept of Cost-Effectiveness. In public policy, Stevens writes, “cost effectiveness does not mean showing that the benefit of an intervention outweighs the cost. It means comparing various interventions to determine which ones yield the greatest benefit for resources spent to accomplish a particular policy goal.”

As Stevens concludes: “The fight for pre-K, however well intended, is the wrong fight for children who need our help the most. If New Mexico’s goal is to expand the school system and provide free pre- school to wealthier parents who otherwise have to pay for it, adding a pre-K grade to the public schools makes perfect sense. If the state’s goal is to improve the life chances of the most disadvantaged children, however, it is a deeply misguided approach.”

If you want to understand the dark forces that hold New Mexico back, Rep. Javier Martinez does a great job of illustrating the jealousy, anger, and refusal to take responsibility for their own station in life that so many on the left harbor. He argues (once again) in this opinion piece to tap into the Land Grant Permanent Fund.

And, with Sen. John Arthur Smith gone next year and New Mexico’s economy likely in shambles, unless the Democrats lose big this November, the Legislature will likely tap this fund. Of course, the mere existence of such funds is hardly “racist” as Martinez asserts. No fewer than 10 US states and numerous foreign countries have such funds.

The Rio Grande Foundation has always considered these Permanent Funds to be deferred State spending. The money is invested and spent over time. And, given the State’s sorry financial condition, it would be far better to use Permanent Fund money rather than raise taxes (the best strategy would be to cut spending, but unless dramatic change comes this November, that is unlikely).

So, IF the permanent fund is tapped, can the Legislature do something besides grow government? Money is fungible. In other words, tapping the Permanent Fund COULD allow for more K-12 spending, more for higher ed, the left’s dream of universal pre-K, AND some kind of tax cuts and/or economic reform for New Mexico businesses.

Would the Gov. be so bold as to do something like that? Will the GOP have an alternative come January? The Rio Grande Foundation has advocated for using Permanent Fund dollars to eliminate personal income and capital gains taxes. Those may not fly, but what could/should conservatives and the business community get behind?

The following is a list of some of the largest “permanent funds” by state:

Table

Rank	State	Funds	Assets (US$Billion)	Origin
1	Texas	Permanent School Fund & Permanent University Fund	55.2 (August 2016)[1][2]	Commodity / Oil & Gas
2	Alaska	Alaska Permanent Fund	52.7 (June 2016)[3]	Oil
3	New Mexico	New Mexico State Investment Council Permanent Funds	20.2 (June 2016)[4]	Oil & Gas
4	Wyoming	Wyoming Permanent/Endowment Funds	12.6 (March 2017)[5]	Minerals
5	North Dakota	North Dakota Legacy Fund	3.8 (March 2017)[6]	Oil & Gas
6	Alabama	Alabama Trust Fund	2.5 (June 2016)[7]	Oil & Gas
7	Utah	State School Fund	2.0 (March 2015)[8]	Public Lands
8	Oregon	Oregon Common School Fund	1.4 (December 2016)[9]	Public Lands
9	Louisiana	Louisiana Education Quality Trust Fund	1.3 (June 2016)[10]	Oil & Gas
10	Montana	Coal Severance Tax Trust Fund & Public School Trust	1.2 (June 2016)[11]	Fossil Fuels / Public Lands