Senator Colburn Reports From Annapolis (This Week)

ANNAPOLIS – Senator Richard F. Colburn (R. Eastern Shore) reported on events that took place this week. Senator Colburn stated, “Senate Bill 152 (Maryland Consolidated Capital Bond Loan of 2013 – Dorchester County – Cambridge Marine Terminal Redevelopment) unanimously passed the Senate on Thursday. This is an emergency bill and now just needs approval from the House of Delegates and the Governor’s signature. The bill would amend the Maryland Consolidated Capital Bond Loan of 2013 to change the grantee for the Cambridge Marine Terminal Redevelopment grant from the Maryland Economic Development Corporation (MEDCO) to the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Cambridge. The Cambridge Marine Terminal Redevelopment project (originally known as the Sailwinds Wharf Development Project) is located on the Choptank River in Cambridge and is part of a larger plan to help revitalize Cambridge’s economy. The main element of the current project is the replacement of a wharf and bulkhead at the Cambridge Marine Terminal, most of which is in need of urgent, immediate repair. This bill will give Cambridge the needed flexibility to deal directly with replacement of the wharf. Cambridge advises that it erected a barrier around the wharf to protect the public from the wharf’s failing structural integrity. It is also necessary to stabilize surrounding structures that serve the public during music and festival events. As a result of the project, Cambridge hopes to see increased sail and power boat traffic, as well as increased tourism. MEDCO advises that it was listed as the grantee in order to help with the general redevelopment of the Cambridge Marine Terminal, although the scope of its role has never been clearly defined. Cambridge advises that it is in a position to shift the project into the design and engineering phase, and changing the grantee from MEDCO to the Mayor and City Commission of the City of Cambridge will give the city the flexibility it needs to advance the Cambridge Marine Terminal’s redevelopment and repairs. The Maryland Board of Public Works will review the project’s Maryland Department of the Environment core borings permit for approval on February 19th.

Regarding another matter that was brought to my attention is the fact that Eastern Shore legislators appear to be going in two directions on legislation regarding economic impact statements (EIS) for proposed legislation. There have been two separate bills filed on this matter.

The first bill, Senate Bill 27 (Nutrient Management – Phosphorus Risk Assessment Tool or Index – Economic Impact Analysis) sponsored by Senator Jim Mathias (D. - Lower Shore) and cross-filed by Delegate Norm Conway (D. Lower Shore) would require the Department of Agriculture to prepare an economic impact analysis concurrently with proposing Phosphorus Management Tool regulations (PMT). It would require the economic impact analysis to estimate the cost or economic benefit of a proposed change to a phosphorus risk assessment tool or index to a person required to have a nutrient management plan for nitrogen and phosphorus.

Senate Bill 151 (Administrative Procedure Act – Fiscal Impact Statements for Proposed Regulations) was heard on Thursday, January 30th in the Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee. I sponsored this bill and it is cross-filed by Delegate McDermott (R. Lower Shore). It would clarify that a governmental unit be required to submit a fiscal impact statement with a proposed regulation to the Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive, and Legislative Review (AELR) and the Department of Legislative Services. It would also prohibit such a unit from adopting a proposed regulation until after a fiscal impact statement is submitted with the proposed regulation to the Committee for preliminary review. A major difference between the bills is that Senator Mathias’s bill addresses the Phosphorus Management Tool and my bill addresses all regulations. I certainly agree that we need to be united in our efforts and I am happy to report after polling all members of the Senate Eastern Shore Delegation, that we are in full support of both bills. The overall immediate goal would be to get an Economic Impact Statement (EIS) for the PMT (SB27). However, I personally believe that a thorough EIS should be completed and reviewed by the AELR before any regulation is passed or rejected (SB151). We need to know at least an estimated economic impact of any proposed regulation on groups such as consumers, our taxpayers, and our trade groups and industries.