Kentucky House Bill HB773

Kentucky 2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/26/24
• Refer: 2/26/24

Caption

AN ACT relating to the environmental remediation fee and making an appropriation therefor.

Impact

The implementation of HB 773 is expected to enhance Kentucky's environmental management framework. By establishing the Kentucky pride fund, the state aims to streamline funding for environmental clean-up efforts and provide active financial resources to combat illegal dumping, a significant concern for public health and safety. Local governments will benefit from grants that can be utilized for litter control and solid waste management initiatives, with a structured approach to funding based on both population and road mileage. This could potentially lead to healthier communities and improved land stewardship.

Summary

House Bill 773 addresses the environmental remediation fee associated with waste management in Kentucky, introducing a fee structure designed to support the Kentucky pride fund. This fund is focused on environmental cleanup and education initiatives, particularly concerning solid waste disposal sites. The bill proposes a fee of $2.00 per ton of waste that will be paid by generators and collected at transfer stations and disposal facilities. The funds collected will be allocated for various environmental projects, including closure and remediation of abandoned waste sites, anti-litter campaigns, and grants aimed at eliminating illegal dumping practices across the state.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding HB 773 is largely supportive, especially among environmental advocates and local governments keen on addressing waste management issues. Legislators recognize the need for sustainable practices in waste management and the value of funding localized efforts. However, some criticisms may arise regarding the adequacy of the fee structure and whether it will truly provide sufficient funding to address the challenges effectively. Stakeholders may express concerns about the operational efficiency of the fund and the actual impact on reducing illegal dumping.

Contention

Notable points of contention involve the clarity of fund administration and the distribution of financial resources. Some legislators may question the proportion of funds allocated to administrative costs versus direct environmental initiatives. Another area of debate could concern the enforcement of compliance among counties, ensuring that they effectively utilize grants for intended purposes and maintain robust waste management practices. There remains uncertainty about long-term sustainability and the adequacy of fees to meet increasing environmental challenges.