Latest news with #EnvironmentandNaturalResourcesCommittee
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Maine will wait to see how other states' climate superfunds fare before considering its own
A house on Fortune's Rocks beach in Biddeford, Maine tilts after a series of severe coastal storms in winter 2024. The house was later torn down. (Photo by Maine Morning Star) With other states tied up in a federal legal battle, Maine lawmakers are opting to pump the brakes on an effort to hold fossil fuel companies accountable to see how those other cases play out. The Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee voted Wednesday to carry over one of the two bills that would establish a superfund for large fossil fuel companies to pay for infrastructure repairs, resiliency efforts and other costs in the rural and low-income communities disproportionately affected by flooding and other disasters. Before the committee voted unanimously to ask the presiding officers to carry the bill into the second regular session that begins in January, Sen. Stacy Brenner (D-Cumberland) quoted a constituent of hers, Bob Monks, who recently died. Monks was known for his activism around good corporate governance and multiple U.S. Senate runs. Brenner said his idea that 'if you ran an elephant company, you would always clean up after your elephants,' captured the spirit of her bill. 'We need support to clean up after the elephants,' she added. However, Brenner agreed that it makes sense to wait until next year so the state has time to track what happens with the pending federal lawsuits before moving forward. Maine Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Melanie Loyzim made a similar suggestion during the public hearing for LD 1870. Vermont and New York have already passed similar superfund legislation. However, those states, as well as Hawaii and Michigan, have subsequently been sued for those policies, including by the U.S. Department of Justice. The Justice Department said the lawsuits are also meant to advance an executive order from President Donald Trump that targets state and local policies involving climate change, environmental justice and carbon emissions reductions. Rep. Mike Soboleski (R-Phillips) said his biggest concern with LD 1870 is the ongoing legal backdrop, so he appreciated the time to gather more information before deciding what to do in Maine. Since the committee agreed they only need one legislative vehicle to take up this topic again next year, members rejected the other related bill, LD 1808 from Rep. Grayson Lookner (D-Portland). Instead, they sent a letter to the Department of Environmental Protection asking it to report back to the committee with an update on those lawsuits. Lookner suggested having the department look into whether Maine would go after the same companies as the other states and collect other data, such as how much it would cost to implement this sort of measure. Loyzim told the committee her department was already planning to track the lawsuits as they unfold. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Maine bill would make oil companies pay into 'climate superfund'
May 5—Democratic lawmakers in Maine are looking to create a climate superfund that would collect fees from groups that extract fossil fuels and refine crude oil, then use that money to fund clean energy initiatives. Only two states — Vermont and New York — have passed similar laws, and they are being challenged in court by businesses and the Trump administration. Maine is among 11 states currently considering bills to create similar climate superfunds. LD 1870, a bipartisan bill sponsored by Rep. Stacy Brenner, D-Scarborough, would would be retroactive and apply to any fossil fuel extractor or crude oil refiner between Jan. 1, 1995, to Dec. 31, 2024. Brenner said the proposal is a matter of fairness, because greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are causing increased storm damage and public health concerns, and the costs are being borne by state and local taxpayers. Earlier this session, Gov. Janet Mills signed a bipartisan, emergency bill that allocated $39 million for recovery and rebuilding of communities and businesses damaged in a string of winter storms in late 2023 and early 2024. "I believe Mainers understand fairness," Brenner said. "When a company causes harm, it should help pay to fix it." The bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Rick Bennett, R-Oxford, would "assess a cost recovery demand for the entity's share of fossil fuel extraction or refinement contributing to greenhouse gas-related costs in the state," provided that the entity is responsible for more than a billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions. The funds would be used for clean energy and climate initiatives, including 35% for climate projects benefiting low-income people with "environmental justice concerns." The other bill, LD 1808, sponsored by Rep. Grayson Lookner, D-Portland, would establish a similar fund, only it would only be retroactive to Jan. 1, 2000, and would not contain a minimum allocation for low-income people with environmental justice concerns. Both bills were heard Monday by the Environment and Natural Resources Committee, which did not take action. Vermont became the first state to establish a climate superfund last year, followed by New York, whose law seeks to recover $75 billion over the next 25 years from fossil fuel companies. Vermont's law has no cap. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute filed a lawsuit challenging New York's law. The U.S Department of Justice filed its own lawsuits last week against Vermont and New York. In April, Trump signed an executive order titled "Protecting American Energy from State Overreach," which directly targets state efforts to assess fees or fines on out-of-state energy producers to fund climate initiatives. The order directs the U.S. attorney general to stop the enforcement of any state law the burdens energy producers, especially laws "purporting to address 'climate change' or involving 'environmental, social, and governance' initiatives, 'environmental justice,' carbon or 'greenhouse gas' emissions, and funds to collect carbon penalties or carbon taxes." Melanie Loyzim, commissioner of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, said superfunds are "intriguing" and of interest for the administration. But she urged lawmakers to hit the brakes until next year, saying Maine would benefit from seeing how implementation — and the legal challenges — play out in Vermont and New York. "Adopting some version of a climate superfund in Maine now creates an administrative burden for the department to develop a program that may be struck down by judges in the coming year," Loyzim said. "The last couple weeks of insane committee work is not the right time to pass into law something of this significance." Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Maine takes another shot at joining New England peers with proposed food waste ban
Annual food waste in Maine emits as much greenhouse gas as nearly 400,000 cars driven for one year. (Photo by Paul Mansfield Photography/ Getty Images) Maine is trying again to catch up with its regional peers by introducing legislation to prioritize donating and recycling food waste, rather than throwing it away. The Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee is holding a public hearing Wednesday morning for a bipartisan bill from Sen. Stacy Brenner (D-Cumberland) that could help address Maine's mounting trash problem and greenhouse gas emissions by diverting food waste from landfills. Commonly called a food waste ban, Maine attempted similar legislation last session, but it died due to lack of funding. Thanks to a first-of-its-kind study in 2024, there is concrete data showing that more than 360,000 tons of food is wasted or lost in Maine annually. While much of that could be recovered to feed the one in eight Mainers who face hunger, it instead rots in landfills creating methane, a harmful greenhouse gas. LD 1065 would prohibit significant generators of food waste, which could include schools, hospitals, food producers and others, from disposing of food waste if they are close to a facility that could compost or otherwise dispose of the waste. Like the proposal last session, the bill outlines a gradual approach to expand the requirement based on someone's location and the amount of waste generated. If adopted, LD 1065 would initially cover entities that produce an annual average of two or more tons of food waste per week and are located within 20 miles of an organics recycler, starting July 1, 2027. In 2029, those parameters would be reduced to one or more tons per week and within 25 miles of an available recycling facility. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection opposed the proposal last session, saying it would require additional staff to help people understand if they are subject to the ban and how to comply. Additionally, the department argued that the state lacks the infrastructure for food waste collection, processing and composting for the ban to be effective. Brenner's proposal does not yet have a cost estimate, but the previous bill was estimated to cost upwards of $550,000 for five staff positions and other associated costs for the department. Currently, Maine is the only New England state without some version of a food waste ban. Advocates argue that adopting such a prohibition not only offers social and environmental benefits, but is crucial to achieve Maine's goal of cutting food loss and waste in half by 2030, as outlined in the state's most recent climate action plan. Connecticut was the first New England state to pass a food waste law back in 2011. Vermont, Massachusetts and Rhode Island followed suit in the years after, and New Hampshire joined them in 2023. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Florida state parks bill stalls as lawmakers focus on budget, other battles
Environmental groups sent people to stand with a leading GOP lawmaker when she introduced a plan to protect Florida's award-winning state parks from the Gov. Ron DeSantis administration's Great Outdoors Initiative. DeSantis pulled the outdoor initiative when the public and lawmakers protested plans to build golf and pickleball courses and overnight luxury lodges at places like Jonathan Dickinson State Park in Martin County, Anastasia State Park in St. Johns County and Topsail Hill Preserve State Park in Walton County, along with a flying disc course at the Alfred B. Maclay Gardens State Park in Tallahassee. Now advocates' calls for tougher language and specific prohibitions may have stalled the bill. The proposal has entered into a legislative state of suspended animation, neither moving nor dead, just sitting and waiting to be heard. The bill (SB 80) by Sen. Gayle Harrell, R-Stuart, known as the State Parks Preservation Act, was intended to ensure such development never sees the light of day. But her bill has gone into hibernation, like Florida's famous black bears who inhabit many state parks, after the Senate's Environment and Natural Resources Committee cleared it on a unanimous vote Feb. 11. Why? Nobody knows. Or if they do, they aren't talking. A request for comment is pending with Harrell. 'I haven't heard anything definitive about it being dead. From what I understand, there's still work being done on the bill,' said Chadwick Leonard of 1000 Friends of Florida, a smart growth advocacy group. But lawmakers are now in the second half of the annual 60-day legislative session, and it's unclear whether Harrell's bill can regain the momentum needed to clear both chambers and be sent to the governor. Some committees have stopped meeting, and lawmakers' attention has mostly turned to crafting the state budget for 2025-26. There's a $4.4 billion dollar difference between the House and Senate budgets to close, for instance, and a $5 billion tax-cut dispute simmering between the House and DeSantis to resolve. That means there may not be enough room on the calendar to get the parks bill over the finish line, as lawmakers are wont to say. The House companion (HB 209) is stuck in the State Affairs committee, which has no more meetings scheduled. And the Senate proposal still has two more committees to clear: An appropriations subcommittee, which has yet to schedule a meeting since March 26, and the Fiscal Committee. At the same time, environmental groups have put up a website urging lawmakers to 'Strengthen SB 80' because 'it does not go far enough.' They had backed the bill while calling for clearer language and specific prohibitions on state park land. The bill now says any construction activity or land disturbance must to the 'maximum extent practicable,' and avoid disturbing 'habitats and natural and historical resources.' Kim Dinkins, also with 1000 Friends, said without a definition of what "maximum extent practicable" means, the bill has a loophole big enough to fit a golf course into a state park: 'You could have a golf course if the applicant says they've minimized the impacts. In fact, even a DEP analysis last summer was that the golf courses and the newly proposed uses would minimize impacts." Dinkins, the group's policy and planning director, added: 'We would really like to see something move forward rather than nothing.' The legislative process often involves rounds of "three-dimensional negotiations," according to Aubrey Jewett, who has taught political science for 30 years at the University of Central Florida. There are talks between the House and Senate, layered atop talks between the Legislature and the governor, added to a round of negotiations between constituents and lawmakers. 'Friction between the executive and legislature can slow things down, but when there's friction between the chambers, and throw (in) executive friction, that can really slow things down,' Jewett said. In addition, Nova Southeastern University political scientist Charles Zelden notes that only a small percentage of bills ever clear both chambers – usually 10% to 15% in the Florida Legislature. This year more than 1,300 bills were filed. Zelden said the parks bill could simply be caught in the usual session gamesmanship, with lawmakers holding onto bills as bargaining chips. 'Everything comes out in a big rush at the end, once the budget is figured out,' he said. James Call is a member of the USA TODAY NETWORK-Florida Capital Bureau. He can be reached at jcall@ and is on X as @CallTallahassee. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Florida state parks bill in limbo as legislative session winds down
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Committee rejects efforts to stymie development of Sears Island wind port
Sears Island in Searsport, the potential home of the new offshore wind port. (AnnMarie Hilton/Maine Morning Star) The Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee voted down two bills that would have put up roadblocks to the state's effort to develop an offshore wind port on Sears Island. Outside of the debate around developing offshore wind, a bipartisan majority of the committee feared the bills would squash the potential for any future economic development on the island. Last year, the state made clear that Sears Island is its preferred location for a new port to support a budding offshore wind industry. Rep. Reagan Paul (R-Winterport) brought these bills forward after a reelection campaign that emphasized her desire to save the currently undeveloped island in her district. In 2009, the state placed two-thirds of Sears Island, about 600 acres, into a permanent easement. The state plans to leave that portion untouched by the port, which will be built on roughly 100 acres outside of the protected area. LD 226 proposed extending that conservation easement to cover more of Sears Island, including a portion that has been reserved for port development by the Maine Department of Transportation. The committee voted against this bill 10-2, with one member absent. The state-owned land on the island is protected under the Natural Resources Protection Act, which prohibits new or expanded structures on coastal sand dunes. A bill last year sought to authorize the Department of Environmental Protection to grant an exception for the site, so long as all other applicable permitting and licensing criteria are met. The proposal drew strong pushback from local conservation and Indigenous groups and initially divided lawmakers, but eventually prevailed and was ultimately included in the supplemental budget passed last session. Reagan's other bill, LD 735, would roll back those efforts from last session and impose limits on who could propose similar legislation in the future. The committee voted against that bill 9-3, with one member absent. In addition to concerns raised by the committee's legislative analyst that aspects of the legislation could conflict with the state constitution, committee co-chair Sen. Denise Tepler (D-Sagadahoc) said she opposed the bill because she was informed that Wabanaki leaders weren't consulted, despite the proposal including the establishment of an Indigenous lands protection committee. Despite the overwhelming vote recommending against passage of the bills, they still advance to the full Legislature, beginning with the House of Representatives. The state is in the preapplication phase for developing a wind port on the island, said Matthew Burns, deputy director of the Office of Freight and Business Logistics for the Department of Transportation. Design work is a little over halfway complete, but Burns said the state doesn't anticipate submitting permit applications until there is more clarity about how the project would be funded. After conversation digressed into details about what dredging would be necessary for port construction, Tepler reminded the committee that LD 226 is not actually about a port. 'This bill is about voiding the ability of the Department of Transportation to use a small piece of Sears Island — or a third of the island that they own — for any possible future development,' Tepler said. Given that, she asked the committee to refrain from further conversation about building a potential wind port when discussing that bill. Rep. William Bridgeo (D-Augusta) said it is 'vitally important' to preserve the island's potential for economic development given that the other major ports in the state are either built out or logistically challenging. 'It would not be prudent for the state to relinquish its ability…to utilize that piece of land for open-ended purposes,' he said. While she appreciates conservation concerns, Sen. Stacy Brenner (D-Cumberland) agreed that the land should be left open for economic development opportunities in the future. Shutting that off would 'close a lot of doors,' she added. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
