Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Grants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee narrows municipal stormwater language, discusses $1M grant carve‑out with possible sunset
Summary
The Natural Resources & Energy Committee reviewed revisions to stormwater language in bill 03/19 on April 16, aiming to clarify municipal access to implementation grants for 3‑acre regulated sites and debating a proposed $1 million carve‑out for developed‑lands grants.
The Natural Resources & Energy Committee on April 16 discussed revisions to stormwater language in bill 03/19 that would expand municipal access to state municipal stormwater implementation grants and make 3‑acre regulated sites eligible for certain grant funds.
Committee counsel Mike Grama walked members through a revised draft that adds notice and procedural clarifications for the "permanent" three‑acre permitting requirement and edits to the municipal implementation financing program. Counsel said the revisions clarify when a municipality assuming responsibility for stormwater (for example, in a residential subdivision) can access grants intended to help municipalities meet regulatory obligations.
Neil (staff) and others raised concerns that the draft language could be read as requiring a municipality to "assume full legal responsibility" before accessing funds. Committee members asked that the language be made explicitly permissive and expansive so that municipalities are not forced to take on private obligations. As counsel summarized, a simple insertion of "also" or similar clarifying wording would make clear the program is additive — municipalities can access assistance to comply with municipal permits even if they do not assume full legal responsibility for a private site.
The committee also debated a financing question: whether to set aside $1,000,000 annually from the municipal/developed lands programs for 3‑acre projects. Conservation districts and regional planning commissions expressed concern about permanently earmarking a dedicated $1 million because it could divert funding from other projects that yield larger water‑quality or equity benefits. Committee members discussed placing a sunset on the $1 million carve‑out; one proposal was a sunset through fiscal year 2028 to allow near‑term support while preserving future flexibility.
Committee members requested clearer statutory language so that the municipal stormwater implementation program is ‘‘expansive and not restricting," and directed bill authors and counsel to incorporate edits making the grant program permissive, to clarify notice requirements, and to confirm whether the bill will be referred to the Joint Fiscal Committee (finance) given fiscal impacts. Members also noted that municipalities with limited staff capacity may need technical assistance or regional approaches to apply for funding.
What happens next: Committee counsel will produce an updated draft showing the permissive language (for example, adding "also" where appropriate), add clarifications about municipalities that already have assessments in place, and include a proposed reporting timeline. The committee indicated it would consider a time‑limited appropriation (through 2028) if the draft moves forward.
Votes at a glance: No formal committee votes were recorded in the April 16 session; members gave drafting instructions and discussed a possible $1 million annual carve‑out with a sunset.
