GOP aims to ease biz rules
New bill would loosen state environmental laws
By Anita Weier
March 31, 2005
Republican state legislators have introduced a bill that would continue
the loosening and streamlining of environmental regulations begun last
year.Environmentalists
say the proposed changes would literally remove breathable air, but a
Department of Natural Resources administrator says the changes merely
clarify the intent of the first Job Creation Act that went into effect
in 2004. Jean Hundertmark, R-Clintonville, the main author of the
two bills introduced Tuesday evening, says the Job Creation Act II is
merely a "technical cleanup" that fills in gaps in the regulatory
reform enacted in the last legislative session. That bill was aimed at
streamlining permit processing that sponsors said was discouraging
businesses from starting up or expanding in Wisconsin. A second
bill that is part of the Job Creation Act II would add protections for
business in four specific areas - public nuisances, shareholder
liability, expert witnesses and liens. The first bill, AB277, was
introduced just 17 hours prior to its public hearing before the
Assembly Natural Resources Committee, which was scheduled to consider
the bill at 10 a.m. today. That bill would remove the requirement
for a construction permit for someone who builds a stationary source of
air pollution. The operator would still have to have a general air
pollution control permit. "The proposal goes further than even
the first version by allowing utilities, paper mills and other sources
of air pollution to avoid construction permit requirements," said
Melissa Scanlan, executive director of Midwest Environmental Advocates. But
Mary Jo Kopecky, deputy administrator of the Air and Water Division of
the DNR, said the proposal "does not have a large effect," and helps in
the current rule-making process. "A registration permit was
created in Job Creation I. The changes here make clear that what we are
doing in the rules is supported in the statutes," Kopecky said. AB277
also says the DNR may issue streamlined registration permits that never
expire for operation of a stationary air pollution source with low
emissions. In addition, the bill would allow an air pollution permit
holder who challenges an emission limitation to continue to emit the
material while challenging the limitation. The bill would also
require the Department of Administration to prepare a report that
identifies regulatory barriers to the growth of the state's
manufacturing sector. "When you give the public less than 24
hours to analyze and comment on a bill that could have serious effects
on their health and the health of their children, you clearly are
hoping to sneak something by them," charged Kerry Schumann, executive
director of the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters. Assembly Speaker John Gard, R-Peshtigo, could not be reached this morning for comment on the timing of the hearing. Hundertmark described the second bill being introduced, AB278, as "a collection of protections for businesses." It
would prohibit the state, counties, cities and villages from bringing
legal action against a public nuisance if the nuisance is not in
violation of any state or local laws. AB278 would require a court
to award litigation expenses, including reasonable attorney fees, to a
defendant in a nuisance action if the activity alleged to be a nuisance
is found not to be so. "A company should not be harassed by the
attorney general or local municipalities," Hundertmark said. "If it is
not breaking the law, it should not be kept tied up in court." Scot
Ross, a spokesman for Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager, said, "The
Department of Justice just received the bill and it will be thoroughly
evaluated. An initial review raised some concerns." Hundertmark described that provision, and another regarding expert witnesses, as tort reform. That
provision would prohibit a non-expert from giving testimony in court
based on scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge. It also
would provide that expert witnesses testify only on facts or data based
on reliable principles and methods, and that they would not receive
compensation based on the outcome of a case. Another provision of
that bill would end personal liability for shareholders of corporations
for any amount owed by the corporation to its workers for up to six
months of work per employee. The bill would also apply to stock
insurance corporations. "We don't believe shareholders should have liability," Hundertmark said.
|