North Dakota Senate Bill SB2024

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/7/25
• Refer: 1/7/25
• Report Pass: 2/10/25
• Engrossed: 2/12/25
• Refer: 2/18/25
• Report Pass: 4/2/25
• Enrolled: 4/18/25
• Passed: 4/23/25

Caption

Inspection fees.

Impact

By amending section 23.1-13-16 of the North Dakota Century Code, SB2024 introduces a new structure for inspection fees related to fuel dealers and enhances the operational framework for monitoring environmental quality. This amendment is significant as it aims to ensure compliance among fuel sellers, thereby protecting public health and the environment. The increased funding for environmental services could lead to improved regulatory compliance and enhanced protection against environmental hazards associated with fuels.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 2024 is an appropriations bill aimed at providing funding to the North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality. The bill outlines a budget that includes funds for salaries, operating expenses, and grants to enhance the department's capabilities over the upcoming biennium. Specifically, the bill provides over $132 million, which includes significant one-time funding aimed at upgrading environmental services, including capital assets for a new chemistry laboratory and equipment for programs addressing emerging contaminants.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB2024 appears to be positive, with legislators recognizing the need to bolster the state’s environmental quality infrastructure. The bill garnered significant support, evidenced by its unanimous approval in the Senate (46 Yays, 0 Nays) and a strong showing in the House (77 Yays, 16 Nays). This backing indicates a bipartisan consensus on the importance of addressing environmental issues through an adequately funded framework.

Contention

While the overall sentiment is favorable, there may be underlying contention regarding the allocation of funds, particularly concerning specific programs and projects outlined in the bill. Some members may question the prioritization of certain expenditures, such as the substantial investment in the new chemistry laboratory compared to other pressing environmental needs. This aspect of the funding distribution could generate discussions around resource allocation within environmental governance and regulatory practices.