Senate Transportation to push Clean Water Fund priority for municipal salt‑shed covers

At its March 12 meeting, the Senate Transportation committee discussed drafting amendment language to direct the Clean Water Board to prioritize assistance to municipalities for covering municipal salt sheds when it makes annual recommendations from the Clean Water Fund.

Committee counsel Michael Grady said he would prepare language so the Clean Water Board would treat salt‑shed covers as a priority (likely in a middle priority tier) and report back. The committee discussed the path for the language: members of this committee would be asked to sign the amendment, after which the chair of the committee across the hall would take it up in that committee.

Why it matters: municipal salt‑shed covers are a compliance item for communities that store road salt; prioritizing them in Clean Water Board recommendations could steer state grant support and affect municipal budgets and stormwater outcomes. Committee members noted the Clean Water Fund is financed by multiple sources, including a property transfer tax surcharge and rooms and meals tax deposits, and that overall annual deposits to the fund typically range from roughly $47 million to $52 million.

Committee discussion addressed fiscal availability and timing. Members noted that the Agency of Administration had set aside roughly $8 million pending a potential federal grant, and that appropriators on the committee would ultimately weigh funding decisions. The Clean Water Board’s recommendation process uses tiers and can specify recommended award amounts for particular grant types; committee members cited examples used by staff (for instance, a referenced recommendation cap of $5,000,000 for a water quality enhancement grant and $500,000 for basin planning grants) to illustrate how priority language can be framed.

Next steps: counsel said he could draft prioritization language and return to the committee with an amendment; the chair asked that the amendment list committee members who would sign on, and committee members agreed to circulate and review that language. Senator Watson was described by staff as supportive of pursuing the prioritization if the committee chose to do so.

Ending: Committee staff to circulate amendment language and a sign‑on list so the committee can decide whether to attach the prioritization as an amendment to the relevant Clean Water Fund bill or to seek consideration in the committee across the hall.