Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Brownfields Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let counties offer tax credits to convert abandoned gas stations; members raise cleanup-cost concerns
Summary
Delegate Sheila Ruth said HB 161 allows counties to authorize tax credits to encourage conversion of shuttered gas stations, but members warned that underground storage-tank removal and remediation can cost tens of thousands to millions, and the bill no longer guarantees state reimbursement.
Delegate Sheila Ruth told the Ways and Means Committee HB 161 would authorize counties and municipalities to create a local tax credit to encourage conversions of shuttered gas stations into other uses by offsetting cleanup or redevelopment costs.
Ruth described the problem of abandoned stations with underground storage tanks that require removal and environmental remediation before conversion. She said the version introduced this year includes a Senate amendment that changed state reimbursement language from a requirement to a discretionary option so the state would not be automatically liable for 50% of local credits.
Committee members pressed the sponsor on costs and enforcement. One lawmaker with underground-storage-tank experience warned that cleanups can be "millions and millions of dollars" when contamination spreads and cited federal statutes such as CERCLA and RCRA that govern hazardous releases. Ruth said developers gave an estimate of roughly $100,000 to remove tanks where contamination is limited and noted a separate Brownfields tax credit exists for the most serious cases but carries a high qualification bar.
Other members asked whether local governments would use the tool given budget pressures and whether there are mechanisms to recoup cleanup costs from prior owners; Ruth said liability and recoupment go beyond this bill’s scope but said existing shutdown requirements and agency enforcement (MDE) are relevant.
The committee ended the hearing without taking a vote.
What’s next: Sponsors and committee members signaled a need for further analysis on remediation cost ranges and local fiscal appetite before the committee advances the bill.
