Relative to rules of the site evaluation committee.
Impact
If enacted, HB 1611 would significantly impact how energy facility applications are processed in New Hampshire. By limiting the regulatory requirements imposed on applicants and explicitly clarifying the committee's authority, the bill could expedite the approval process for new energy projects. Proponents argue that this measure will reduce unnecessary delays and foster a more business-friendly environment for energy development, potentially leading to increased investment in the state’s energy resources.
Summary
House Bill 1611 introduces amendments to the rules governing the Site Evaluation Committee in New Hampshire, aiming to clarify the extent of its authority. The bill mandates that the committee must take specific actions to amend certain rules that are deemed to exceed its statutory authority. Key areas of focus include the requirement of adjudicative hearings for exempting applicants and the necessity for visual, sound, and fire assessments for energy facilities which, according to the bill, should only apply to wind energy systems and not to all energy facilities in general. This aims to streamline the regulatory process and ensure that the committee operates within its intended scope as defined by current law.
Sentiment
The sentiment around HB 1611 appears to be cautiously supportive among business groups and some members of the legislature who advocate for reducing regulatory burdens on energy development. However, there may be concerns from environmental advocates and local governance groups who fear that such reductions could lead to insufficient oversight and potentially negative environmental consequences. The discussion suggests a balancing act between fostering economic growth and ensuring environmental protections.
Contention
Notably, the contention surrounding the bill revolves around the perceived limits of the Site Evaluation Committee's authority. Opponents may argue that scaling back regulations could result in inadequate assessments of environmental impacts, thereby undermining public safety and resource conservation. The amendments proposed in HB 1611 suggest a shift in the oversight paradigm for energy facilities, inciting debate over the optimal level of regulation needed to safeguard both economic interests and environmental standards.
Relative to least cost integrated resource plans of utilities; municipal hosts for purposes of limited electrical energy producers; the cost of compliance with disclosure of electric renewable portfolio standards; repealing the energy efficiency and sustainable energy board; and procedures for energy facility siting by the site evaluation committee.
Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; provision related to officeholders raising funds when facing a recall; modify, and require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.
Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; funds donated to a candidate for recall efforts; require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.
A concurrent resolution recognizing wild rice as sacred and central to the culture and health of Indigenous Peoples in Minnesota and critical to the health and identity of all Minnesota citizens and ecosystems and establishing a commitment to passing legislation to protect wild rice and the freshwater resources upon which it depends.