By Cassie Gavin
Director of Government Relations
This week, the NC General Assembly passed the state budget for the biennium. Most Democrats voted no and all Republicans voted yes. The vote was on a conference report that represented negotiations between the two chambers’ budget proposals. The result was a compromise - along with a few surprises. The surprise that has attracted the most attention is severe cuts to the Attorney General’s office, which could affect the capacity of the AG’s office to be involved in environmental legal challenges. It did not appear in either the House or the Senate’s version of the budget.
The budget next goes to Governor Cooper, who may sign it, veto it or let the bill become law without his signature. See below for more details on environmental provisions in the budget.
Since the Legislature has accomplished the main goal of the long session - a budget - the 2017 session should wrap up soon. Legislative leaders have said that they are aiming for adjournment by July 4. There will be a flurry of activity in these last days and many environmental provisions that the Chapter has opposed all year will be in play. It’s important to reach out to your legislators during this hectic time and urge them to defend the environment.
Among the provisions of most concern that are still in play is one that would limit citizen access to the courts for environmental cases; and another that would eliminate the popular Outer Banks plastic bag ban that protects sea turtles. More on these below.
H 374 would limit citizen access to the courts
Section 12 of H 374 “Business Freedom Act” targets the public’s access to the courts to challenge environmental permits. The proposal would change contested case procedures for appeal of environmental permits on which DEQ or the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) received public comment. That would include permits that protect water quality, many air quality permits, coastal major development permits, and interbasin transfer certificates that protect water supply. Essentially this would make it more difficult for regular people who don’t have full-time lobbyists engaging in every comment period to challenge environmental permits.
Opportunity for Action
Please ask your senator to oppose H 374. This bill has one more stop in the Senate Rules committee then it will go back to the House for a vote of concurrence.
Don’t let the Legislature trash the Outer Banks plastic bag ban
House Bill 56 and Senate Bill 434 include a repeal of the Outer Banks plastic bag ban. The bag ban protects endangered sea turtles and prevents litter in a sensitive coastal area. Kill Devil Hills, Dare County, Kure Beach, Carolina Beach, Nags Head and Manteo all recently passed resolutions opposing lifting the ban. Even though the local communities support keeping the ban, Sen. Bill Cook (R-Beaufort, Camden, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Hyde, Pasquotank, Perquimans) and the NC Retail Merchants Association have continued to champion the repeal.
Opportunity for Action
Please ask your representative to oppose the plastic bag ban repeal in House Bill 56. While Senators have repeatedly voted for this provision, the House has not yet done so.
Billboard bill on the House calendar for Monday
Thank you for your advocacy so far on the billboard bill. Sierrans have contacted legislators more than 1,400 times this session to oppose House Bill 581! We may have helped slow it down, but H 581 is currently on the Monday evening House calendar to be voted on. As a reminder, the bill would allow more cutting of trees along highways, more digital billboards and would take away local controls to regulate where billboards may be located. H 581 would be a giveaway to an industry that is seeking special treatment at the expense of North Carolina’s scenery and taxpayers.
Opportunity for Action
This weekend is likely the last opportunity to reach out to your House representative and ask them to support scenic roadways and local control by opposing the billboard bill.
Budget Details
The budget as passed by both chambers has cause for relief, concern, and outrage.
Unfortunately, the budget contains cuts to the state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) at a time when the EPA is also facing cuts. That said, House appropriations chair Rep. Chuck McGrady (R-Henderson) was able to largely hold the line in the face of an onslaught by the NC Senate. Please thank Rep. McGrady for working to defend the environment this session.
DEQ has already seen significant cuts in recent years and the Legislature has cut more. Specifically the final budget cuts $828,000 from DEQ in the first year, rising to $1,000,000 in the second year. The budget also contains staffing cuts to the DEQ leadership team and slashes seven positions in DEQ regional offices. And state funding for the energy center at NC State University is eliminated. This is a lot - but again, note that the cuts are much less severe than the 32-plus position cuts proposed by the Senate. Thank you for your advocacy in encouraging legislators to protect DEQ.
As noted above, the budget also included a surprise, significant cut to the NC Attorney General’s staff - estimated at 123 attorney positions. This is important for the environment because the Attorney General’s office investigates and prosecutes environmental crimes. For example, the Environmental Crimes Task Force investigates illegal activity and assists state and federal prosecutors in bringing people to justice. Past successes include when the AG’s office won a landmark settlement to force pollution controls on all of of Tennessee’s coal-fired power plants that were contaminating North Carolina air. This cut appears to be politically motivated and did not receive any public debate or consideration in committees.
The budget retains the provision requiring DEQ to study the use of algaecides to address pollution in Jordan and Falls lakes. DEQ already studied in-lake treatments in 2016 and wrote a report describing the potential efficacy of different approaches. The report noted the following: “A comprehensive, adaptive, and science-based approach to reducing nutrient inputs to the watershed remains the most viable option for recovering these waterbodies from impairment.” Nonetheless the Legislature renewed its 2016 plan to dedicate $1.3 million in taxpayer funds to a study of in-lake treatments including algaecides and eliminated a requirement to study whether in-lake treatments would be more cost-effective than conventional nutrient management.
Also on the list of unwise spending: The Legislature allocated $250,000 to the NC Department of Agriculture to join a lawsuit against the 2012 federal Waters of the United States rule meant to protect wetlands and water quality. Since the Trump administration has already indicated that they won’t defend the federal rule this earmark is a waste.
On a positive note, the budget does not include the wind energy moratorium proposed by the Senate and pushed by Sen. Harry Brown (R-Onslow, Jones). But note that the wind provision could be added to another bill.
Also, there is a provision that will lower the blood level threshold for lead poisoning identification in children and pregnant women, and provide funding to the NC Department of Health and Human Services to better protect children and mothers from lead.
Thanks again for your advocacy in this home stretch!