Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation District Fund Transfers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reports substitute for Delegate Bloxham’s bill to ease soil-and-water fund transfers
Summary
A committee voted 10-0 to report with a substitute on Delegate Bloxham’s Bill 2170, which would make it easier for soil and water conservation districts to move unspent or excess funds to other districts, subject to limits discussed by stakeholders and state staff.
A committee chaired by an unnamed chair voted 10-0 to report with a substitute on Delegate Bloxham’s Bill 2170, legislation intended to allow soil and water conservation districts to transfer unspent or excess funds to other districts.
The bill, the product of negotiations between the Farm Bureau and environmental groups, aims to relax a current prohibition on moving funds outside a watershed so districts can pool money for larger projects that benefit regional water quality. Delegate Bloxham, the bill’s patron, said the measure grew from stakeholder talks and work-group planning and is intended to "make it easier for soil and water districts to move excess funds or funds that could not be allotted in a calendar year to another district." He told the committee the change would help finance larger projects that benefit water quality beyond a single watershed.
The chief state and stakeholder concerns flagged during the hearing focused on where transfers could be used. Jay Ford, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said the foundation supports the bill and noted that during negotiations staff at the state Department of Conservation and Recreation informed negotiators that "transfers outside of the bay would be limited to those structural practices." An unnamed representative identified as speaking for the Department of Defense also urged the committee to move the bill forward. Ian Blair, representing Wetlands Lodge, also spoke in favor and thanked the bill’s patron.
Committee discussion did not produce a named motioner or seconder on the record; the committee clerk opened and closed the roll for the final vote, and the chair announced the bill "reports with substitute 10 to 0." No public opposition was recorded in the hearing.
The bill’s sponsors said they expect related work-group activity and budget provisions to address remaining implementation details. The committee did not adopt additional conditions on the substitute at the hearing and took no further action beyond the vote to report the substitute.
Votes at a glance: Bill 2170 (substitute) — Reported with substitute, 10 yes, 0 no.
The committee adjourned after the vote.
