This year's General Assembly Legislative Session was a challenging one on the environmental front. Coming off of strong victories in previous years on wind energy and protecting the Chesapeake Bay, lawmakers’ attention seemed to be elsewhere as they wound down to the election season. We had mixed results with wins (new wildlands!) and losses (can we save on-shore wind farms?) But it was exciting to have both new and seasoned Sierrans participating -- working on bills, testifying in Annapolis, and meeting with their legislators.
Read about the outcomes of this session and find out who to contact to get involved in next steps.
Energy
Greening energy production and use is critical to the health of all Marylanders because much of our electricity comes from burning coal and fracked gas. Mining coal, especially through mountaintop removal, harms the land where it is produced. Increasingly natural gas is produced through horizontal drilling and fracking, which harms the air, land, and water around these wells. Burning these fossil fuels, as well as incinerating municipal solid waste, leads to air pollution which worsens asthma and other lung disease. As fossil-fuel plants generate electricity, they emit global climate change gases that undermine climate stability.
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)
During this session, the Sierra Club testified in favor of two bills which would have improved the RPS. The first (SB-733/HB-1149) would have increased the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard from 20% to 40% by 2025, while increasing the solar portion from 2% to 4%. This could be done by increasing the use of clean, renewable energy sources like wind and solar power, in combination with lowering the total electrical energy use within the state. However, discussions pointed out that the bill could also have had the paradoxical effect of encouraging relatively dirty energy sources that are acceptable for credit under the RPS, such as trash incineration. These bills failed in both chambers of the legislature.
The Sierra Club also testified in favor of a bill (SB-734/HB-747) which would have phased out the inclusion of black liquor (a waste product from paper mills) and wood waste incineration in the RPS. By phasing out these dirty energy sources, there would have been more room in the RPS for clean power sources. This bill faced strong opposition from labor, representing western Maryland’s one paper mill in Luke, MD as well as out-of-state paper mills, all of whom benefit from selling RECs (Renewable Energy Credits) based on their black liquor (even though the bill included protections for the Luke plant). The bills ultimately failed.
Community Renewables
The Sierra Club was part of a large coalition supporting “community renewable energy” in Maryland (SB-786/HB-1192). These bills would have set up a pilot program that would have allowed residents who could not host renewable energy at their homes (such as apartment dwellers, or those with trees making solar panels impracticable) to invest in a nearby community-scale project (for example, a solar project on a community center) and be rewarded by having the energy from that facility credit to their energy bills. Unfortunately, these bills were defeated due to strong opposition from utilities.
Fracking
Fracking can lead to groundwater pollution, increases in climate change pollutants, land scarring, and other ill effects. In previous years, Maryland had agreed to perform a study of the health and environmental implications of fracking, and to analyze the results and provide for acceptable controls, before allowing fracking in our state. That study is still not complete, and therefore the Sierra Club has hoped to mandate additional time for legislators and the public to consider the implications of fracking. However, a bill that would have done this (SB-745/HB-1122) did not pass. In addition a number of other bills were introduced to limit the introduction or effects of fracking, including SB-360 and HB-292 which would have prohibited fracking in Maryland altogether, HB-865 which would have prohibited fracking within a kilometer of drinking water sources, and HB-1030 which would have required fracking companies to submit information to the medical community about chemicals to be used in fracking. None of these bills passed out of committee.
Other Energy Legislation
The Sierra Club testified in favor or against a number of other energy-related bills considered by the legislature this year. Samples of these bills are described below.
SB-949/HB-729 (County and Municipal Lighting Investment Act) would have given local governmental entities as opportunity to purchase the street lighting in their areas and institute more efficient and reliable LED lighting. (In Los Angeles, LED lighting led to a 61% reduction in lighting energy use.) This bill faced opposition from electrical utilities and ultimately failed in both chambers.
HB-1168 would delays the construction of wind turbines above a certain height within 56 miles of the PAX River Naval Station until July 1, 2015, pending a study of possible effects on naval radar systems. We oppose this bill because it overrules existing and effective processes to protect naval interests, and also because of the benefits of being able to harness wind energy in this area - the bill would have the effect of scuttling the largest wind energy farm being planned for Somerset County (Great Bay Wind Energy Center, which could power 45,000 homes). Unfortunately, the bill was strongly supported by the US Representative Hoyer who personally and extensively testified before the Senate Finance Committee, and it passed both chambers. As of this writing, we are encouraging Governor O’Malley to veto this damaging bill.
SB-985 passed both chambers and is awaiting the Governor’s signature – this bill authorizes a study of green banks and clean bank financing initiatives, which can provide low-cost financing to clean energy, renewable energy, and energy-efficiency projects.
HB-553 also passed both chambers. This bill establishes the Energy-Efficient Homes Construction Loan Program within the Department of Housing and Community Development to provide low-interest loans for the construction of “low-energy” and “net-zero” homes, and also establishes an Energy-Efficient Homes Construction Fund to pay for the expenses of the program.
Polluted Run-Off
Polluted run-off, from stormwater that is unable to percolate into the ground, results is a significant problem for the owing into the Chesapeake Bay. It contaminates our seafood, leads to beach closings, causes flooding, and is a leading pollution source to the Chesapeake Bay. This run-off is exacerbated by paved and other impermeable surfaces, which limit the capacity of land to absorb stormwater. In previous years, Maryland passed the Polluted Run-off program, which is critical for cleaning up our waterways. This program levies fees on impermeable surfaces – the fee both acts as a disincentive to paving open land, and creates a dedicated source of funding for projects that reduce polluted runoff and protect our waterways.
Despite constant attacks on this program during the 2014 legislative session, the Sierra Club beat back all 20 bills attempting to weaken this law. The twenty bills were introduced in the House and Senate to dismantle, weaken, or delay this program – both across the entire state or in individual jurisdictions. Working with our coalition partners, the Sierra Club was successful in turning back every one of these bills.
However, late in the session, faced with the likelihood of losing on every front, our opponents tried to co-opt the budget process. At the last minute, they inserted language into the budget bill to alter implementation of the law, and thus preventing the public from reviewing and commenting on the proposed changes. Although the Sierra Club helped ensure that most of those last minute efforts were not successful, Carroll and Frederick Counties -- familiar bad actors when it comes to stewardship of our natural resources -- will now have the opportunity to apply for a waiver that allows them to use their citizens' property taxes to pay for reducing polluted runoff rather than having to create a dedicated funding source like everyone else. We intend to monitor implantation to ensure that new impermeable surfaces are still discouraged and that those counties have adequate funds for a credible stormwater protection program.
Wildlands
Our biggest success this legislative session was the passage of SB-336/HB-296, "Natural Resources - Wildlands - Designation of New Wildlands”. This victory will result in a 50% (22,000 acre) expansion of Maryland’s Wildlands – including the creation of 9 new wildland areas and the expansion of 14 others. Sierra Club members attended hearings throughout the state to defend the proposal from the developers, commodity exploiters and motorized recreation enthusiasts, and volunteers and staff worked the legislative halls in Annapolis where their efforts were rewarded by legislative approval; the Governor is expected to sign this bill in the near future.
In addition, with Sierra Club support, SB-471/HB-420 passed in the General Assembly; this bill will prohibit the establishment of off-road vehicle trails in the Sideling Hill Wildlife Management Area and nearby areas.
Pesticides
The Sierra Club strongly supports right-to-know on pesticides, and had intended to support a bill which would have mandated the creation of a database of pesticide use across the state. When this bill (SB-700/HB-621) was introduced, however, it was clear that it was only a first step – it requires a modest increase in annual product registration fees that would be targeted towards creation of such a database. Eventually, this information will help determine what effect pesticide use has on human health and the environment. With Sierra Club and coalition partner support, this bill passed and is expected to be signed into law by the Governor.
Waste and Recycling
Sierra Club volunteers have been at the forefront of advocating for pathways to “zero waste”. This year, a number of bills were introduced and met with mixed success.
Recycling
One of the Sierra Club’s legislative priorities this year was to pass a “bag bill” (SB-707/HB-718) which would enable counties across the state to impose a five cent fee on single-use plastic and paper bags, and then to follow that with a bill (HB-1049) which would have instituted such a program in Prince Georges County. Despite active lobbying and presentation of a study which documented the benefits of such a program, neither bill was even brought to a committee vote.
A second recycling bill met with more success. HB-781 will require recycling bins at public events of more than 200 people. The Sierra Club testified in favor of this bill and it passed late in the legislative session.
Solid Waste
SB-56/HB-240 (Solid Waste Management Practices – Maryland Recycling and Landfill Diversion Task Force), among other things, would have indirectly encouraged incineration by suggesting caps on the percentage of solid waste that could be landfilled. Although it passed in the House, it received an unfavorable report from the Senate Finance Committee. The Sierra Club testified against this legislation and many members contacted their legislators. Fortunately, this legislation was defeated.
Other Environmental Bills
SB-706/HB-1210 would have required cumulative impact assessments of effects on human health and the environment before new permits are granted. It is especially important to consider cumulative impacts in environmental justice areas – generally poorer communities already overburdened with the effects of pollution – but consideration of cumulative effects is always a worthwhile effort because account for incremental environmental assaults. The bills died in committee.
HB-118 establishes a task force to study the impact of ocean acidification on state waters. Acidification results when rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide dissolve into the oceans or other surface waters such as the Chesapeake Ba. This task force will analyze the best available science regarding ocean acidification and the potential effects of acidification on the ecology of State waters and fisheries, and make recommendations regarding potential strategies to mitigate the effects of acidification. This bill passed with Sierra Club support.
While the Sierra Club generally concentrates on the outdoor environment, we were pleased that SB-238/HB-628 passed. This bill requires the establishment of standards for indoor air quality in relocatable classrooms.
Good Government
The Sierra Club is actively involved in issues of good government even when they don’t relate specifically to environmental issues because, in a nutshell, good government is good for the environment, as well as for the average citizen. Unfortunately, none of the general good government bills the Chapter supported this session was even voted on in committee, except for one (HB 157, below) that was killed by different means: repeated delays on the last day of the session.
Public Financing of Political Campaigns
The overriding reason the Club supports public financing of campaigns is that, as Maryland Common Cause said in testimony this year, “As special interest funding increasingly determines the outcome of elections, it is inevitable that those special interests will also increasingly determine the outcome of legislation.”
Maryland has had a program to finance campaigns for governor since 1975, using optional donations by income taxpayers via their tax forms, often called a “checkoff.” Until this year no candidate but Ellen Sauerbrey in 1994 has used the program, presumably because they were confident they could get more in private contributions than this program would allow them to spend. The General Assembly used some of the accumulated money for other purposes and in 2010 ended the checkoff. This year one candidate, Heather Mizeur, the Chapter’s endorsee, has chosen and qualified to use the program, and at least four others have said they intend to. They could exhaust the fund. This session we signed on to Maryland Common Cause’s testimony supporting HB 1401, which would have reinstated the checkoff. It never got a committee vote.
The Chapter has offered testimony for a dozen years or more in support of unsuccessful bills, all similar, to use government funds (from a variety of revenue sources) to finance the campaigns of candidates for General Assembly seats who so request and demonstrate broad public support. They would do that by raising a specified number of small private contributions, and in some bills also a specified total amount, from residents of the district they seek to represent. They would be allowed to spend little or nothing on their campaigns beyond the amount of government money they receive.
This session saw a considerably more ambitious public financing bill, which we enthusiastically supported. HB 1269 would have provided public funding to candidates for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and comptroller, as well as the General Assembly. It would have provided more money than previous bills to Senate candidates, to make the public funding option more attractive. Finally, it would have conditioned each dollar of public money on private contributions, matching contributions up to $200 per contributor at ratios from 5:1 to 3:1—more for smaller contributions than larger. The bill never got a committee vote. (Meanwhile, in Montgomery County, a similar bill was sponsored by every member of the County Council.)
Open Government
The Sierra Club favors measures to make it easier for citizens to learn what public officials are doing and what they are saying to each other—knowledge without which there’s little chance for citizens to have a say in government decisions. This session we offered testimony supporting two such bills, though there were several others of less importance.
One was HB 177, which would have mandated public availability of live and archived video streaming of all Senate and House floor sessions and meetings of standing committees, including hearings and voting sessions. All these sessions are open to the public, and some are already available in video or audio. With audio it’s hard to know who’s speaking. The bill never got a committee vote.
The other bill we supported was HB 157, which would have required that advance notices of meetings of “public bodies,” required by the Open Meetings Act, include an agenda. Without some idea of what a meeting is about, citizens have no way to know whether it’s worth attending. After being watered down to a mere call for a study of whether and when agendas should be provided, the bill was on the verge of final passage, but even this less-than-baby-step was killed by repeated intentional delays on the last day of the session.
Public Information
Finally, an open government bill on which we took no action deserves mention because it passed and has been signed by the governor—and because it was so thoroughly watered down from its original form. As introduced, HB 658 would have set up a board to consider citizen complaints about denial of material requested under the state Public Information Act or about charges for locating and copying it. As passed, the bill was reduced to a mere call for a study of how to improve the appeals process. We liked the general idea of the original bill, of course, but took no action to support it because we thought the board of three unpaid volunteers would likely be overwhelmed by its workload. In this instance, a study may be warranted.
Planning for 2015
We will soon begin planning for the 2015 General Assembly session. Assistance is needed in many areas:
1) See the related article on what the Political Committee is doing to elect strong environmental advocates this year. Our job is much easier when the right legislators are in place. This is extremely critical as some of our strongest allies in Annapolis are retiring from the state legislature this year.
Contact Betsy.Johnson@mdsierra.org Political Chair
2) We need to start over the summer, as soon as the primary elections are over in many cases, to forge strong relationships with our legislators and their staff members. We need to do this across the state, as we lost many bills in committee this year, and we don’t yet know what the committee assignments for next year will be. Making these initial connections is something that everyone can help with.
Contact Doreen.Pastern@mdsierra.org Legislative Chair
3) We will continue to align our state legislative efforts with Chapter and National conservation priorities. Work on setting these priorities will also begin over the summer and be finalized by the fall. If you’d like to be involved here, please contact the issue chair for the issues you are interested in. In some cases, we are looking for new issue leads – so there is room for you to engage at whatever level you are comfortable with.
Contact Dave.OLeary@mdsierra.org Conservation Chair
Credit where credit is due
Enthusiastic thanks to all of the issue leads – Rich Reis, Claudia Friedetsky, Cary Coppock, Sarah Peters, Donna McDowell, Kim Birnbaum, Lore Rosenthal, Sam White, Dan Andrews, and Martha Ainsworth, and Cliff Terry – who worked tirelessly this session, reviewing bill language, suggesting amendments, writing and presenting testimony, talking with legislators, and providing guidance on whether the Chapter should support various bills. Special thanks also to all those to visited Annapolis, wrote letters or email to your Delegates and Senators, and made phone calls to legislators or participated in phone banking to generate even more calls. We not only demonstrated our strength to legislators but also built our base for next year.
Submitted on behalf of Doreen Paster