|
|||
| Political Action |
Legislative Update #8, March 2, 2001SIERRA CLUB - Grand Canyon Chapter To: Conservation Friends Hi all! Thanks for making calls, sending letters, and sending emails. It truly does make a difference. This week please call your House Members and ask them to oppose HB2364 northeastern Arizona environmental projects; appropriations (Flake, Brown, Allen, et al). It appropriates $350,000 to the state land department for distribution to a private nonprofit -- the Environmental Economic Communities Organization (EECO) -- formed by Greenlee, Graham, Gila, Navajo and Apache counties for planning and implementing of "environmental programs" impacting economic development in those counties. This is an inappropriate use of the public's dollars. In the past, our tax dollars have funded the incorporation costs and fundraising costs of this private non-profit, supported opposition to a ballot measure campaign, etc. If this entity was really doing public education on Proposition 202, then why didn't the proponents of Proposition 202 ever hear from it? Dr. Martin Moore was the campaign chair of "Arizonans Against Proposition 202," and is also the director of EECO. Are we to believe that he developed purely educational materials for Prop 202? EECO promotes anti-environmental propaganda -- surely it can find private funding for that. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS MEASURE. Please ask your House members to also oppose HB2556 initiative and referendum; pamphlet; signatures (McClure, Blendu, Cooley, et al.). It is another attempt to interfere with the public's ability to refer measures to the ballot. It says that the Secretary of State shall prepare an official title for ballot measures, that this title has to be appended to the petition before signatures can be collected and that the Legislative Council will review the applicants' proposed law and make recommendations to the public. It says that if a county recorder finds that more than one-third of the signatures are invalid then the political committee, the chair, and the treasurer are liable for the costs of examining and verifying the signatures, not to exceed 50 cents per signature, and it says the Legislative Council will review each measure and make suggested changes regarding unclear, inconsistent provisions or conflicts with existing law. I am not sure where to start regarding this bill, but the bottom line is ballot measures would not be referred by the public in the first place if the legislature was willing to pass them. The Legislative Council is biased against ballot measures and has and will do everything it can to sink them. Finally, there are some counties that have higher invalid rates for signatures not because the signatures are really bad, but because people do not have specific physical addresses. This punitive bill will hurt grassroots efforts enormously. WE STRONGLY OPPOSE IT. Please call senators again and ask them to oppose SB1355 community facilities districts (Bennett, Bee, Rios). It removes restrictions for counties to establish Community Facilities Districts. It allows for the creation of a special taxing district for financing urban infrastructure at tax-exempt rates. Can you say SPRAWL? This will mean more leapfrog development like Anthem and is a big ol' subsidy for Del Webb, Suncor, Don Diamond and all of our friends in the master planned community business. WE OPPOSE IT. Here is an update on a few bills: It looks like SB1292 land conservation fund; development rights (Cirillo) may have died a quiet death. It would have taken another $2 million from the dollars available for matching grants for the acquisition or lease of state trust lands for conservation and appropriates them for purchase of development rights on private lands. This bill appears to violate the Voter Protection Act and the rules attorneys agree. Voters were told these dollars were for acquisition or lease of state trust lands for conservation and that is how they should be used. HB2264 Arizona preserve initiative; nominated land (Huppenthal, Robson, Burton Cahill, et al.) would have allowed the land commissioner to nominate and classify trust land as suitable for conservation purposes in an area within a development plan if appropriate conservation purposes are incorporated within the plan. This measure was intended to help the folks in Ahwatukee have 620 acres there classified for conservation. This bill appears to be caught up in one of those power struggles between the Land Commissioner (Mike Anable) and the City of Phoenix. The Land Department whined about setting bad precedent and about hurting the integrity of the Arizona Preserve Initiative. Puh-lease! The API has been amended several times to include areas that were left out of the original bill and there are very few parcels that had development plans at the time the API was adopted and that people are seeking to keep undeveloped, so the precedent argument is pretty weak. HB2144 structural pests; integrated pest management (May) originally required a person selling property to disclose the number of times it has been treated for pests in the previous three years, the types of chemicals, the target pest, etc. It also set up a process for the structural pesticide commission to establish guidelines for integrated pest management. The Huffman amendment -- added in Environment Committee -- significantly weakened the bill; it now says that the information regarding the pest treatment would only be available upon request. There are important health issues related to many of these pesticides and they can be especially detrimental to those who already have chemical sensitivities. This is a basic right to know issue. While we liked it better without the amendment, we still support this bill. It should pass out of the House this week. HB2431 environment; chemical; electronic reporting (Landrum, Weason, Avelar, et al.) requires businesses that have reporting requirements under the Uniform Fire Code and have enough hazardous chemicals on site, to file and update their data electronically. This way, if there is a fire, an accident, etc. the firefighters will have the most up-to-date information about a facility. They can better protect themselves and the community. This bill made it out of the House Environment Committee this week and now goes to rules. WE SUPPORT THIS. SB1122 sales tax exemption; pallets; containers (Hamilton) exempts the sale of reusable or returnable containers from sales tax. The reusable pallets are returned to a pooling company that rents the pallets to farmers and manufacturers. The idea is that it will help cut solid waste and reduce the use of lumber by encouraging the reuse of these pallets. This bill was voted out of Senate Finance this week. WE SUPPORT THIS. HB2611 municipal general plan; amendment (Flake) defines a "major amendment" to a general plan. It means an increase of more than fifty per cent in density or intensity of a land use element. This is ridiculous. An increase of 25% in density is major, plus what in the world does an increase of intensity by 50% mean? This bill was voted out of Counties and Municipalities this week. WE OPPOSE THIS. Here's what's up in the legislature this week. Monday March 5th House Committee on Commerce & Economic Development @ 1:30 p.m. in HHR5 In case you thought things had changed a lot at the legislature, take a look at this agenda. Every bill on the agenda has a strike everything amendment on it. Remember strikers are amendments that totally gut the bill and replace it with a new bill. Senate Committee on Government at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3 SB1330 use tax; collection; technical correction (Mitchell) is supposed to have a strike everything amendment on ballots analysis; preparation, but the striker is not posted SB1332 state government; technical corrections (Mitchell) will have a strike everything amendment to establish a study committee on eminent domain. SB1546 towns, eminent domain; open space (Hellon) allows towns to acquire through eminent domain and for preservation purposes, major tracts of vacant land that are within the town or adjacent to the town. This bill is for Marana and a fight involving Connie Wolfswinkle and Cottonwood Properties. It seems fine to me -- towns can use eminent domain for other purposes, why not open space preservation. Senate Committee on Finance at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1 SB1410 tax rebate; international travelers (Bundgaard, Blendu, Avelar, et al.) has a strike everything amendment relating to the Prescott active management area. It requires the Director of the Department of Water Resources to waive the existing restriction on issuing certificates of assured water supply in the Prescott Active Management Area and to issue an assured water supply certificate for any applicant, who made a substantial capital investment for a development and if the certificate is for 10 acre feet or less of water. This is another paper water bill. The developers in Prescott should give it a rest. They want the paper assurance even if it is not clear that there is available water. Tuesday March 6th House Committee on Ways & Means @ 8:30 a.m. in HHR4 HCR2015 Court surcharges; transportation; traffic safety (May) attacks Clean Elections by eliminating the primary funding source of the Clean Elections Fund (10% surcharge on civil/criminal penalties) and allocating this surcharge to the Transportation & Safety Fund. Representative May should just knock it. WE OPPOSE THIS BILL. House Committee on Counties and Municipalities at 9:30 a.m. in HHR5 HB2426 environment; NPDES program (Huffman, Blendu, Graf, Landrum, et. al.) may or may not be on this agenda. This bill provides the foundation for ADEQ to pursue primacy for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program for discharges to surface waters. Right now the Environmental Protection Agency administers these. There was a strike everything amendment in the Environment committee, but we still have the same concerns. We are not confident that the legislature will provide adequate funding for the program and ADEQ has already given up the idea of charging fees for permits (the cities helped eliminate this). We object to language in the bill that prohibits ADEQ from doing anything more stringent than the Clean Water Act. Really, what is the point if the Department cannot do this? Also, in order to meet the goals of the CWA, the agency will have to adopt more stringent standards over time. We are also concerned about the level of enforcement and about how ADEQ will address endangered species issues. WE OPPOSE IT. House Committee on Retirement and Government Operations at 10:00 a.m. in HHR3 This committee also has many strikers. I am watching HB 2034 S/E on municipal emergency power and HB2179 S/E on road access. House Committee on Appropriations @ 1:00 p.m. in HHR1 HB2189 appropriation; agriculture preservation districts (Gleason) appropriates $7,500,000 from the general fund to support agricultural preservation districts in each of fiscal years 2001-02 and 2002-03. This is another save Luke Air Force Base, subsidize agriculture bill. HB2538 Brown cloud study; air quality (Allen) was amended again in Committee. It provides $500,000 in FY 2001-2002 and $2,000,000 in FY 2002-2003 for the Voluntary Vehicle Repair and Retrofit Program, expands area A to include Surprise and Buckeye, requires implementation of roadside testing of diesel trucks in area A and provides $750,000 to fund it, establishes the specific pollutants that qualify for the emissions trading program and provides $300,000 in both FY2001-2002 and FY2002-2003 to establish this program, among other items. We support the bill -- especially funding for the repair program -- but have expressed a few concerns and believe it could have done a lot more if it would have included requirements for cleaner burning diesel fuel. We are also very concerned about an emissions trading program if it does not include adequate enforcement and public accountability. We would like to see area B (Tucson) included in more of the clean air programs. The most ridiculous aspect of the air quality bills was having to listen to the Arizona Rock Products lobbyist talk about how they really care about clean air and just want to do their part -- after they helped kill CARB diesel of course. I know I'm breathing easier. WE SUPPORT THIS BILL. House Committee on the Environment @ 1:00 p.m. in HHR5 HB2155 Underground storage tanks; amendments (Brimhall) requires ADEQ to provide for the in-place closure of an underground storage tank without requiring that it be filled or removed if ADEQ determines that the tank cannot be removed and that the closure doesn't threaten the public health or environment. HB2408 water infrastructure finance authority (Huffman, Flake, Carruthers, et al.) has a strike everything, but the striker is not yet available. HB2432 environmental releases; impact analysis (Landrum, Huffman, Avelar, et al.) will have a strike everything on delinquent property tax reduction; contamination. The striker is not yet available. HB2577 emissions testing; heavy diesel vehicles (Allen, Weiers, Blendu, et. al.) sets up a program for testing out of state diesel vehicles for emissions, that means a snap idle smoke opacity test. If they fail they are issued a notice of violation, they have to repair the vehicle and pay a $150 fine; if they fail again they get a citation, they must repair, and a pay $300 fine; and the next time the fine is $800. The program would be administered by ADOT instead of ADEQ -- that seems a bit odd. WE SUPPORT THIS. House Committee on Judiciary at 1:30p.m. in HHR3 HCR2012 initiative and referendum; process (McClure, Blendu, Cooley, et al.) currently refers to the ballot a constitutional amendment that would require signatures for initiatives, referenda, and constitutional amendments to come from five different counties and to be apportioned among the five or more counties on the basis of the votes cast within each county in the previous gubernatorial election. It is just another attempt to make it more difficult to put something on the ballot. It is already tough enough -- unless you have a few million bucks. It will have a striker on it -- that's not yet available. WE OPPOSE IT. Wednesday March 7th House Committee on Natural Resources & Agriculture @ 9:30 a.m. in HHR4 HB2408 water infrastructure finance authority (Huffman, Flake, Carruthers, et al.) will have a strike everything in environment. The striker is not yet available. HB 2523 state land appraisal standards (Binder, O'Halleran, Camarot, et al.) requires that all appraisals for state lands comply with the uniform standards of professional appraisal practice. This sounds like a good idea to me. Thursday March 8th Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee @ 8:30 a.m. in SHR1 As usual the agenda is still not posted, so this is my best guess. SB1275 nonnavigable streams; disclaimer of title (Guenther, Bowers) originally gave away more streambeds. It now has a strike everything amendment that is supposed to actually make it constitutional and it repeals the previous giveaways. I am studying the amendment, but it does look like they eliminated the most offensive portions SB1317 vehicle emissions in lieu fee (Gerard, Gullett) eliminates the in lieu emissions test fee collected from the owners of the five newest model year vehicles in the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas. The dollars currently help buy down the cost of the emissions testing program and go to the Clean Air Fund. When the bill is fully implemented in FY2003, only $250,000 will be available in that fund. I guess I don't understand the need for this bill -- the fund helps convert diesel engines to cleaner burning fuels. SB1466 service stations; underground storage program (Bowers; Allen, Guenther, Richardson) will have an amendment to exempt dry wells for gas stations from obtaining aquifer protection permits (APPs). The APP program is intended to prevent contamination of our drinking water and this bill weakens that protection. WE OPPOSE IT. SB1541 state trust land for schools (Bowers: Bennett, Petersen; Flake, Huppenthal) establishes procedures to be followed for the donation of state trust land for school sites if the authority to make such donations is approved via a Constitutional amendment. This mucks up the efforts to find an overall solution to the state trust land issues. SB1563 growth management task force (Nichols, Guenther, Richardson, et al.) establishes a 13-member Growth Management Task Force that actually includes environmentalists. The Task Force will conduct hearings on and study growth management issues facing Arizona. We support the bill, but hope some day the legislature will move beyond studying the issue. We asked that they add a proponent of affordable housing to the mix. The governor's office opposes this because she has her own little committee with no representation from environmental interests. WE SUPPORT THIS BILL. SB1564 county infill incentives (Valadez, Soltero: Bee, et al.) authorizes counties to establish infill incentive districts in urbanized areas of a county if specified criteria are met. We are supportive of this and of infill incentives in general. Just a word of caution regarding this however, we need to be careful that we are not eliminating all of the affordable housing or running over neighborhoods in the name of redevelopment. WE SUPPORT THIS BILL. SB1565 county acquisition of development rights (Valadez, Bee, Hartley, et al.) allows a county board of supervisors to purchase, lease or transfer the development rights of private land within the county with monies from the development rights retirement fund or any other public or private source. We have the same concerns about this bill that we have about all of the purchase of development rights and conservation easement bills and that is the lack of accountability and public input that go with the use of these public dollars. We would like to see some conditions established such as providing for a public hearings and opportunity for public review, ensuring that the property remain substantially undeveloped to protect the natural open space -- that means they should forbid subdividing or portioning of the land, prohibit additional buildings, prohibit mineral development, prohibit the sale or export of any ground or surface water, prohibit commercial feed lots or concentrated animal feeding operations, trash dumps, utility easements, etc. They should also include monitoring and enforcement provisions. SCR1004 state land exchanges; school lands (Bowers, Hamilton, Bundgaard, et al.) allows open-ended land exchanges and focuses on preservation of urban farm land. This is really a bad deal for the state. The person who benefits from the trade could keep farming, plus access land for development. This could result in opening more acres of land for development, especially if the state trades rural land for urban lands. Because it allows private land exchanges, it also is likely to result in great deals for the developers and a sharp stick in the eye to the public. Finally, we are working with other conservationists, business interests, education, etc. to try to craft a consensus proposal on state trust lands. This measure just throws a monkey wrench into that effort. It also would allow for the donation of school sites. Many in the education community view this as a bad deal for schools because while one community may benefit -- those that actually have state trust lands -- others do not, so it negatively impacts the overall trust. WE OPPOSE THIS. SCR1005 trust lands proceeds and income (Bowers, Flake, et al) refers to the ballot a measure that would have 10% of the income from state trust lands go directly to the beneficiary. The Arizona School Board Association has some concerns about this and its impact on the permanent fund. Thanks for all your help! Sorry this is so long. For more information on legislation go to the web page http://www.azleg.state.az.us. If you're outside the Phoenix area, you can call your legislator's office toll free at 1-800-352-8404. In the Phoenix area call (602) 542-3559 (Senate) or (602) 542-4221 (House). Correspondence goes to 1700 W. Washington, Phoenix, AZ 85007-2890. To email legislators use first initial + 7 letters of surname@azleg.state.az.us. Page updated: 03/02/01Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Chapter, 202 E. McDowell Rd, Suite 277, Phoenix, AZ 85004, (602) 253-8633 |