Hamerlinck’s Observations Week 5

This week, I introduced new legislation that addresses the state’s budgetary problems, honors our veterans and sheds light on pollution testing.

As economic indicators point towards continual struggles for the State of Iowa, now is the time to set political differences and useless propaganda aside. Borrowing money when the State is facing a deficit is not a viable path towards financial stability. Culver’s $700 million bonding proposal will result in $420 million paid in interest over the life of the twenty-year loan. This means the state of Iowa this session could accrue another $1.42 billion in debt on top of our already $860 million deficit.

The State of Iowa must learn to budget as families are forced to in difficult times. In order to find realistic solutions to the state’s budget problem, we must think about the budgeting process, the state’s needs and how we will grow in a different light.

The bills I have filed and introduced include:

1.) Zero-Based Budgeting:
The process the State of Iowa uses in budgeting is antiquated. Each fiscal year, departments budget with the amount they are spending in a current year and increase the budget by what they believe they should spend in the following year. With this methodology, budgets are only limited by the imagination of department heads requesting funding. As a result, the cost of state government compounds faster than inflation and eventually, faster than the taxpayers ability to support it. For example, there were 2500 newly authorized full-time equivalent positions in the past two years.

This is like saying, my family spent $120 last year on candy bars and next year we would like to eat a few more candy bars so we will project our budget to be $150 next year for candy bars. Notice, in this example there was never a discussion on the benefit of having candy bars or if we can afford candy bars. It simply assumes, candy bars are wanted so they must be provided at the new cost.

My first bill requires each department to begin the budgeting process each fiscal year with a zero budget. Instead of demanding a dream list of items, departments will be required to justify to the taxpayers how their expenditures are accomplishing state goals. With Lean Processing and zero-based budgeting, waste is easily targeted and eliminated instead of hidden and absorbed. This budgeting process is utilized in nearly every private business in America. It is time politicians are responsible with taxpayer dollars and we offer the best bargain for any expenditure we make.

2.) & 3.) Exempt Iowa National Guard and Veterans of all Military Branches from Paying Income Tax:
Though exempting Iowa National Guard members from paying income tax will have a dramatic and immediate return on Iowa’s economy, it is also clearly the right thing to do. In Iowa, when you pay taxes, some of this money is used for salaries for those who enlist in the Iowa National Guard. The State of Iowa then turns around and takes a portion of this payment through an income tax. We should be thanking those who choose to serve our country and come to our aid when we call upon them for disaster recovery.

As an immediate economic stimulus tool for the 42nd District, the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) list from 2005 has ordered an influx in personnel to Arsenal Island and the Quad City Area. Cutting this income tax is a fantastic way of inviting these members to become Iowa residents.

South Dakota does not have an income tax and we are noticing out-flight from across the population. Exempting Iowa Nation Guard members from paying income tax is a small cut in the state’s revenue stream, however this is revenue the state should not have taken in the first place.

4.) PM2.5 Testing:
Clinton, Muscatine and Scott Counties are working hard to improve air quality standards in order to remain in attainment. Think of attainment as being compliant and nonattainment as noncompliant. PM2.5 refers to small particles in the air which the EPA has deemed potentially harmful to the population. If there is too much PM2.5 in the air, the EPA limits the amount of new industry which can be developed and fines potential polluters.

Though we can all agree that we want clean air to breath there is one massive problem; no one knows what PM2.5 is and there is no real way to test for it. Currently, monitors test for PM10 and the data is arbitrarily extrapolated down to PM2.5. This method is done irrelevant of any chemical connection between PM2.5 and PM10. This is like counting the number of strawberries in a county and using the data to fine those with cattle. More importantly, the fines and threats of non attainment often eliminate a county’s ability to grow jobs.

This bill requires monitors to test for PM2.5 and display the chemical makeup of particles collected. We know some of the particles are dust and pollen. If a specific pollutant is found, the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Natural Resources can handle the situation on a case by case basis rather than placing entire metropolitan areas in non attainment.

Hamerlinck’s Observations Week 4

Week Four at the Capitol Draws to a Close

In this week’s newsletter, I want to give you a glimpse at what I’ve been working on and what takes place at the Capitol. I’ll start with a letter I sent to city and county officials in District 42 urging them to voice their opinion on historic tax credits:

City and County Officials:

Two pieces of legislation have been on the move which will positively impact Iowa’s local communities. I wanted to make you aware of both and urge you to voice your opinion on the matter.

Senate File 1085 passes Economic Growth Committee:

This piece of legislation amends the 2008 Iowa Acts to allow the department of cultural affairs to award more than two historic preservation grants in the same county. The bill limits the total number of grants made in a county to $200,000 during the same round of grant reviews, rather than limiting the total number of grants made in a county as provided by current law.

Senate File 1086 gains support in the Economic Growth Committee:

This piece of legislation increases the aggregate amount of Historical Preservation Tax Credits that may be approved in the fiscal year. Current law limits the amount to $20 million. This bill increases the limit to $50 million for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2009, and subsequent fiscal years.

Cumulative total FY2001 thru FY2008 tax credits granted was $59 million. These credits resulted in rehabilitation investment in Iowa’s historic resources at $365.5 million. The Historical Tax Credit Program has been one of Iowa’s most successful legislative acts as it has directly resulted in job growth, rehabilitated neighborhoods, utilized previously unwanted structures and revitalized entire communities.

In the past, large projects have limited the number of credits which could be distributed. With an increase in the credits available, more projects become eligible for the program. Simultaneously, smaller communities will be more competitive in acquiring credits from an expanded program.

How You Can Help:

With local business making cuts in employment and housing starts declining, the job outlook is starting to deteriorate. The Historical Tax Credit Program is an opportunity to make a drastic turnaround. It gives small communities the opportunity to apply for various projects, regardless of size and scope. The $50 million cap is a limiting factor when other states are eliminating the cap altogether. By eliminating the cap on the Historical Tax Credit Program, states like Colorado and Michigan have experienced more than $2 billion in local economic stimulus.

Standing in the way of removing this cap is a potential Gubernatorial veto. Feel free to let Governor Culver know the importance of eliminating the cap on this credit program by contacting him at 515.281.5211 or Office of The Governor, State Capitol, Des Moines, IA 50319.

Thank you for your continued support.

Weekly Radio Spot:
I record weekly radio spots to air on local stations and for those of you who miss them, this is what I talked about this week.

The week the release of the Governor’s budget has been creating a lot of buzz. The budget problem’s Iowa is experiencing should not be blamed on the economy as the State of Iowa has once again experienced a record revenue year. Government will feel the hardship of the economy in another eighteen months due to our tax structure.

Like owning a credit card; when politicians couldn’t afford a program or project they budgeted to pay for it in future years. Iowa is now experiencing a time when the bills have come due and they have drained the savings accounts.

The Healthy Iowans Tobacco Trust, Crime Victim Compensation, Attorney General’s Forfeiture Fund, Property Tax Credit Fund, Gambler’s Treatment Fund, Child Care Tax Credit Fund and even the Senior Living Trust Fund which they promised to pay back is now gone.

The only fund left to take money from is the Rainy Day Fund. This is not cash as the Governor lets on. This is actually the state’s checking account. Extra money can be taken from it, in an emergency. If this account is drained much more the state will have to bond for in order to make paychecks for state employees and teachers.

Remember, borrowing is not the answer when you are already in debt. Making cuts in the size of state government is the answer. Consider this, there were 2500 newly authorized positions over the past two years. This money would have gone a long way for mental health funding.

I welcome any comments you have on the issue. Thank you for your support and I look forward to hearing from you.

Floor Action This Week:
Many bills cross my desk every week and below are a few that have made it to the Senate floor where they were debated and voted upon.

Wednesday, January 28:

DISASTER AID
Rebuild Iowa: HF 64
49-0

The bill would appropriate $56 million from the Economic Emergency Fund for disaster aid:
* $24 million for housing assistance
* $22 million for assistance to cities and counties
* $10 million for individual assistance

The bill would also establish the Rebuild Iowa Office (RIO) without any funds. RIO would be repealed on June 30, 2011.

S-3011 by Hamerlinck (R)failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have eliminated the use of vouchers under the Iowa Unmet Needs Disaster Grant Program.

S-3010 by Hamerlinck (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have required a detailed report regarding what was purchased by individuals under the Iowa Unmet Needs Disaster Grant Program.

S-3015 by Zaun (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have required any funds left over in the Iowa Unmet Needs Disaster Grant Program as of September 1, 2009 to be transferred to the Department of Economic Development for the small business disaster recovery financial assistance program.

S-3017 by Feenstra (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have required any city or county who failed to file a report on the expenditures under the Community Disaster Program to be penalized an amount equal to 10% percent of the amount of the grant.

S-3009 by Hamerlinck (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have eliminated the establishment of the Rebuild Iowa Office.

S-3012 by Hamerlinck (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have allowed the Executive Director of RIO to enter into 28E agreements with other state agencies for employees.

S-3014 by Hamerlinck (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have eliminated a provision under RIO that encourages them to seek innovative financing alternatives.

S-3013 by Hamerlinck (R) failed by a record roll call vote of 17-32. The amendment would have prohibited government from growing by requiring the rest of state government to reduce an equal number of full-time equivalent positions created in RIO.

OFF TO THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN

Wednesday, February 4:

COMPENSATION TO A CANDIDATES FAMILY
State Government: SF 50 (Formerly SSB 1044)
50-0

The bill would prohibit the payment of a salary or other compensation from campaign funds to the candidate, candidate’s spouse or the candidate’s dependent children. The bill would still allow for the reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses.

TO THE HOUSE FOR DEBATE

ELECTRONIC FILING OF REPORTS

State Government: SF 51 (Formerly SSB 1045)
50-0

The bill would require the state parties and PACs to file their reports electronically with the Ethics Board starting May 1, 2010. Currently 50% of the parties and PACs file electronically. This bill does not impact filings by candidates. Incumbent candidates must file electronically on January 1, 2012 while new candidates begin filing electronically by January 1, 2010.

TO THE HOUSE FOR DEBATE

ETHICS REGULATIONS
State Government: SF 52 (Formerly SSB 1046)
50-0

The bill would remove general references to “unacceptable” conflicts of interest and clarifies that in impermissible conflict of interest only exists as set out by the statute or rules established by the General Assembly (for the legislative branch) and by the Ethics Board (for the executive branch).

The bill would clarify the prohibitions on accepting employment for two years after leaving state government. The proposals would permit former state officials and employees to appear before their former agencies but would prohibit the receipt of compensation for two years for doing work on any case, proceeding, or application that they worked on as part of state government. The proposal would also clarify the prohibition on someone who served on a board or commission of a “regulatory agency” of the executive branch from accepting employment with the agency for two years or from receiving compensation for doing work on any case, proceeding, or application that they worked on as part of state employment.

The bill would clarify that complaints concerning alleged violations of Chapter 68B by local officials or employees are sent to the county attorney except when the complaint alleges a violation of the lobbying laws (complaints concerning the lobbying laws are already required by other laws to be filed with the General Assembly or the Ethics Board as appropriate).

The bill would remove a requirement for when a Personal Financial Disclosure Statement is to be filed by certain candidates for office as both the General Assembly and the Ethics Board already have statutory authority to draft rules on when such statements are to be filed and such administrative rules exist.

Finally the bill would renumber two statutes and amend the titles of two other statutes. This helps reorganize Chapter 68B to make it easier to read and understand according to the Code Editor.

TO THE HOUSE FOR DEBATE

DISPOSITION OF SCHOOL PROPERTY
Education: SF 9
50-0

This bill returns Code language back to the original language regarding disposition of school property that was in place prior to the passage of HF 2526 from the 2008 legislative session.

Last year, due to an issue in SD 8 (formerly that of Mark Zieman), legislation was crafted that would allow school districts to dispose of school property without taking the issue to the electors. Included in the new legislation, voters had 12 months to appeal the decision of the board.

The inclusion of the 12 months has been detrimental to the sale of the property in question, therefore until IASB develops language that would better address the disposition of school property, it is the general belief that it would be better to return to the original law.

Hamerlinck’s Observations Week 3

The Self-Inflicted Problem
Accountability and Responsibility in Government

The tempo of action at the Statehouse greatly enhanced this week as Governor Culver unveiled his proposed state budget for the next fiscal year. While Iowans are always especially attentive to the activity surrounding the crafting of the annual budget and the ramifications it has on taxpayers’ personal pocketbooks, this year is particularly significant given the substantial fiscal distress and serious budget deficits that face the governor and lawmakers.

Blaming Iowa’s budget problems on the economy is misleading and false. When money wasn’t available in a current year’s fiscal budget, politicians appropriated these expenditures over subsequent budgets to follow in future years; while not knowing what potential revenue might be. In the 2010 budget, there are currently more expenditures than revenues available to cover them. This means projects and programs must either be cut or additional revenue must be found. Politicians in the Capitol are now caught up in the “credit card effect” as it is now time to pay the bills.

All of this budgetary anguish is the result of self-inflicted fiscal mismanagement that could have and should have been prevented. When session ended last spring, the Legislature left town with a half billion dollar deficit. Since then the number has climbed to over $700 million. While the national economic conditions and the natural disasters that tragically struck Iowa last summer have not helped the budget situation, they are certainly not the reason the state’s finances are in such poor condition. The economy and disasters decreased state revenues by an estimated $120 million. This leaves a $580 million hole which was created through poor fiscal management.

Over the two year period that Governor Culver has been in office and his party members have been in control of the Legislature, the bloated state budget ballooned by an additional, and staggering, 21 percent – which amounts to nearly a billion new dollars in spending. For every new dollar that came into the state’s treasury, the controlling party members in the legislature and the governor spent one dollar and fifty cents. That would be like a family who earns $40,000 a year spending like they made $60,000. Iowa families cannot afford to put that kind of debt on a credit card and neither can the state. We know that family budgets in Iowa are not growing at a 20 percent level and we believe that Iowans want their state’s budget to live within its means.

Understand, the way we allow budgets to be presented to the legislature and voted upon is also a problem. Each department head begins with the approved budget from the prior year and projects the cost in additional staff and resources which would be needed to provide similar services for the following year. In addition, departments work capitol projects in over subsequent years. With this budgeting practice, it is easy to see how department budgets grow on a rolling basis. Think of each department as if it were a small snow ball atop a large hill. When the ball rolls down, it grows in size with each rotation. Dispensing any unwanted waste is impossible when the snowball is always growing in size.

Due to a long history of this budget practice at the state level, we see confusion from state employees when we ask for efficiencies and cuts in future budgets. When challenged to make cuts, department heads simply state that the price of offering the service was that high last year and any cuts in funds in future years will result in a cut in the amount of services provided. Using this frame of thought, waste is hidden and ultimately budgets are abused.

In the past two years, 2,600 new full time equivalent positions were authorized into the budget. I asked the Department of Transportation, with a roughly $1.6 billion budget, what would happen if the legislature made a cut in this department. The response was “we would buy less salt and plow less roads in the winter.” Departments currently employ no concept of zero-based budgeting.

Our budgets should be presented from the standpoint of what is necessary to offer and sustain the service, and not what is needed to sustain the current level of the department. Private business utilizes these principles because their ultimate goal is to find efficiencies and see the maximum return on their investments. Sadly, government often budgets differently as its future and revenue stream is relatively constant.

Politicians have an uncanny ability to divert attention when backed into a corner. The $700 million bonding proposal put out by the Governor is used to divert social attention from Iowa’s real budget problem, rather than dealing with the deficit. Look at the numbers: $700 million on a twenty-year bond results in $420 million in interest payments. If approved, this means my son will be making the last payment on this $1.2 billion debt when he turns twenty-six years old.

During these challenging times when families are worrying about job security and the market is still uncertain, Iowans should not have to worry about whether their tax dollars are being wasted or if their taxes and fees will be increased to pay for out of control spending. We need to immediately put our state’s budget back on the track toward manageability and sustainability.

The Governors Budget in Review
Remember the Promises

• General Fund appropriations of $6.211 billion
• This is an increase of 2.4% ($147.7 million) over last year’s budget, even with the 1.5% across-the-board budget cut Culver made from December
• Taxes are raised by $80 million to balance the budget
• Eliminates the Livestock Producers Tax Credit
• Fails to fully fund the state’s portion of school aid
• Eliminates the following funds; Senior Living Trust Fund, Healthy Iowans Tobacco Trust Fund, Crime Victim Compensation Fund, Attorney General’s Forfeiture Fund, Property Tax Credit Fund, Gambler’s Treatment Fund, Childcare Tax Credit Fund
• The Senior Living Trust Fund is never paid back
• The increase in tax on tobacco will not go to healthcare

Rebuild Iowa
Helping People in Need

This week the Iowa Senate debated a bill that will help Iowans rebuild their lives after devastating natural disasters. We can all agree the Legislature has a responsibility to assist municipalities which are unable to restore infrastructure as well as individuals who are homeless. A differences were heard on Wednesday during the debate, as both parties discussed the best method of providing assistance.

Simply throwing money at a problem and hoping something positive happens is something the federal government is good at doing. The Iowa Legislature needs to be more responsible in the assistance they offer. The money we spend comes from taxpayers, who are my bosses, and the taxpayers want to know if their investment will have a return.

In the appropriations bill totaling $56 million, each homeowner destroyed by flooding or tornados would be eligible for $24,999 in homeowners assistance for repairs and $2,500 in a voucher for unmet needs. Late in discussion on Monday night, the Democratic Chair caved to pressure from the Governor and included a new governmental office which will be called Rebuild Iowa. As the ranking member on this committee, I had a front row seat to the growth of government and the strength of bureaucracies.

When the debate hit the floor late Wednesday night, I offered the following six amendments for consideration:

1. Unmet Needs Receipts: Rather than using a voucher system which mimics the debit cards which were offered by the Federal Government to victims in Katrina, this amendment requires receipts to be shown before reimbursements can be given.
2. Report on Unmet Needs: Total allocation to unmet needs is $10 million in this bill. This amendment required the Department of Management to give a report to the Senators containing information on what was purchased with the $2,500 per family.
3. Removal of the Rebuild Iowa Office: In the bill, the office had no job duty and no exact function, however it was authorized and the Governor’s staff wanted 32 new employees in the office. This amendment removed the office from the bill.
4. 28E: Currently, staff working on rebuilding efforts were borrowed from other departments like the lottery. This action legalized the sharing of staff, which is currently illegal, so new staff would not have to be hired.
5. Innovation: This amendment removed the phrases which called for staff to use innovative accounting principles to accomplish goals.
6. FTE: This amendment was agreed upon by all four caucuses at the subcommittee level. It required that any full-time position added to the department must result in a full-time equivalent position being pulled from another department. This ensures government will not grow.

All amendments offered failed. Sadly, party politics eclipsed common sense on the Senate floor.

If you know anyone who would like to receive my weekly newsletters, feel free to email me at shawn.hamerlinck@legis.state.ia.us. Thank you again for allowing me to represent you at the Iowa Legislature!

Hamerlinck’s Observations Week 2

Transparency Bill Sheds Light on Spending
Legislators work for more government accountability

Traditionally, the Senate begins the legislative session moving slightly faster than a snail. The 2009 Legislative Session has proven to be the exact opposite with Iowa’s budget shortfalls and the unresolved disaster recovery plan which put legislators into high gear.

As we work through these difficult budget items, no legislator should be afraid to let Iowans know what they are voting for and where hard earned taxpayer dollars are being spent. This is why I agreed to cosponsor The Iowa Transparency Act Bill as my first piece of legislation. This bill requires the state of Iowa to make assessable to the public through the internet all expenditures and all categories of revenues.

Instead of having fifty senators in Des Moines oversee the budget we will now have three million residents of Iowa become watchdogs for the taxpayer. The Iowa taxpayers are my bosses and you deserve to know the facts about the votes I make. Accountability with our elected officials begins with a clear and open knowledge of the votes we are making.

Starting the website will have a limited price tag of under $40,000 due to the already established partnerships the State of Iowa has with private businesses and free software provided by the federal government. When the state of Texas implemented the same program it experienced an immediate savings of $4.8 million and identified an additional $3.8 million in expected costs savings. Through this piece of legislation I expect to find a clear means of making government more efficient, however my real goal is to engage the community to participate more closely in the legislative process.

The Sale of the Lottery is an Act of Desperation
Deal is being made to benefit politicians not Iowans

Governor Culver and legislative Democrats appear to be on the verge of cutting a deal to sell off one of Iowa’s biggest revenue generators at a time when Iowa’s budget is already burdened by budget shortfalls as a result of considerable overspending and irresponsible budgeting during the past two years.

Lets take a good look at the numbers. The state of Iowa made $57 million last year from the lottery. The initial proposal states the lottery will be leased for a one-time payment of $200 million and taxed yearly by the state after the sale at $35 million for the next forty-nine years. This means after the first year of lease the state will only get half of the lottery’s revenue power over the next forty-eight years. If the sale goes through we will be looking at $200 million which will be absorbed and lost within this year’s budget alone. The $35 million payment to the state, yearly, will not fluctuate. In as little as twenty years the lottery will be worth many times its current value and this money will go to the new lottery owners. Ask one question of any legislator who wants to sell the lottery: who is the buyer?

Rebuild Iowa

Rebuild Iowa legislation has been moving at a feverous pace as we attempt to work out what is best for those affected by last summers floods and tornados. As we work to hammer out the details of a bill that would put money directly in the hands of those who need it, we’re also examining establishing a permanent office to deal with disasters in the future. This is an example of growing government at it’s finest. I am pushing to have stipulations in the legislation that would specify that all funding go towards those affected by disasters rather than go to paying administrative costs on the back end. The more money that reaches Iowans’ hands, the better.

Substantial Increase in Hunting, Fishing Licenses Proposed
Increases go too far in tough economic times

We are questioning the timing of a 34% increase in Iowa’s hunting and fishing licenses that was asked for this week. Outdoor recreation is a basic component of Iowa Culture and now, the state departments are thinking about taxing it even more.

The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) believes they need the additional money to cover inflation and the recent flood damage. To misinformed politicians, a fee increase means more money. Historically, fee increases for recreation tend to have the opposite affect as less people are willing to participate.

Thank you for the opportunity to represent you in at the Capitol. I welcome anyone with questions to call me at (515) 242-5945 or email me at shawn.hamerlinck@legis.state.ia.us. If you know of anyone who would like to receive future newsletters or you wish to no longer receive newsletters please email me at shawn@hamerlinckforsentate.com.

Hamerlinck’s Observations Week 1

Monday, kicked off the first week of the 83rd General Assembly as the President of the Senate gaveled into motion the Iowa Senate’s legislative session.  The first week is traditionally reserved for pageantry and posturing which sets the tone for the next 110 days of business.  This year, the Senate chose to jump into action on the first day by outlining a path for improving the State’s fiscal health and assisting those still displaced by last year’s floods.

On Tuesday, Governor Chet Culver reiterated the need for legislative action in tackling the state’s top two concerns. In the infancy of the session, details in the direction of the $43 million proposed as Rebuild Iowa Funds are missing.  Clearly, the state needs to take a more active role in responding to Iowa’s natural disasters as damage occurred more than six months ago.  We eagerly anticipate learning more about the Governor’s plan for this money in the coming days and look forward to expediting the funds to the areas that need it most.

As the state’s economy responds to global recessionary trends, legislators will be forced to either sustain services with less or seek alternative forms of revenue.  Please understand the phrases “diversifying revenue streams” and “expounding upon revenue enhancement opportunities” and how they relate directly to creating new taxes.  With a budget in turmoil these phrases are popping up in an early session as a potential solution.

When the economy is stumbling and employers are downsizing our last move as a legislature should be to put more pressure upon taxpayers.  Simultaneously, the rationale of bonding $700 million and paying it back over 20 years is frightening.  Understand, as of this moment, $700 million is an arbitrary amount which will go for projects which are undetermined.  Anytime a state bonds, the projects must be justified to the community who will be paying the bill before an ask for funds should occur.

As we close the first week of the 2009 Legislative Session it is important to note that a local income surtax coupled with a rise in the gas tax and 20 years of additional bonded debt may not be the most appropriate manner for supporting taxpayers and our local economies.

Thank you for the opportunity to represent you at the Capitol.  I welcome anyone with questions to call me at (515) 281-3371 or email me at shawn.hamerlinck@legis.state.ia.us.  If you know of anyone who would like to receive future newsletters or you wish to no longer receive newsletters please email me at shawn@hamerlinckforsentate.com.