SB 227 – Enforcement of Pesticide Violations
Authored by Sen. Jean Leising (R-Oldenburg)
Provides a list of violations for which the state chemist may impose a civil penalty. It eliminates the schedule of civil penalties as adopted by the Indiana Pesticide Review Board. (Under current law, the state chemist imposes a civil penalty in accordance with a schedule of civil penalties as adopted by the Indiana Pesticide Review Board.) Also provides that the state chemist may adjust a civil penalty by 20% for certain violations if a person responsible for the violation takes mitigating actions.
Chamber position: Support
The latest: Heard in the Senate Agriculture Committee on Monday and passed unanimously 7-0. Passed second reading on Thursday and is eligible for further action (third reading) in the Senate.
Indiana Chamber action/commentary: We testified in support of this bill, which is a compromise from the 2020 General Assembly – a rework of House Bill 1119, authored by Rep. Don Lehe (R-Brookston), and Senate Bill 438 from Sen. Leising. The Indiana Chamber opposed those bills on the grounds that they would have unintended consequences to the overall business community, even though they were supposed to be directed at the agriculture community. During the 2020 interim period, the Indiana Pesticide Review Board established a working group – the Chamber was a participant – to review civil penalties and make recommendations concerning those to the General Assembly. This bill is a result of those recommendations. While it raises civil penalties slightly, it provides the Office of Indiana State Chemist and the Pesticide Review Board with discretion to reduce penalties if there are mitigating circumstances.
HB 1191 – Local Unit Power to Prohibit Utility Connection
Authored by Rep. Jim Pressel (R-Rolling Prairie)
Provides that the legislative body of a city/town or a county executive does not have the power to prohibit a utility from furnishing service to a customer; or utility from purchasing, using or connecting or reconnecting to a utility service based on the energy source of the utility service. It also provides that any code, ordinance, land use regulation or plan provision adopted by the legislative body of a city or town or a county executive must preserve the ability of an owner of private property to use the utility service of a utility service provider that is authorized by state law.
Chamber position: Support
The latest: Heard in the House Utilities, Energy and Telecommunications Committee on Wednesday. No vote was taken; one is anticipated January 20.
Indiana Chamber action/commentary: Several witnesses, including the Indiana Chamber, testified in support of the bill, with only one witness testifying in opposition. This bill would prohibit units of local government from passing ordinances from banning utility services based upon fuel service. This has happened in some locations throughout the United States. Typically, it is directed at fossil fuels (such as heating and cooking with natural gas), but sometimes applies to renewable energy sources as well. The Indiana Chamber Foundation’s energy study, Powering Indiana’s Economic Future, has a section that addresses these types of scenarios (pages 153-156). The study notes that bans on fuel sources often result in upward pressure in costs (price increases) due to underutilization of existing infrastructure and stranded costs. More importantly, the consumer, both business and residential, are in a better position to decide what best fits their needs. The market should decide these types of questions.
Resource: Greg Ellis at (317) 264-6881 or email: gellis@indianachamber.com
