On Monday of this week we presented testimony before the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee in opposition to LD 439, “An Act to Preserve Maine’s Sporting Heritage and Enhance Sporting Opportunities for Maine’s Youth by Allowing Maine’s Youth to Hunt on Sunday.” A repeat bill from last session, this is the 78th time that a bill to change Maine’s Sunday hunting law has been considered by the Committee. The landowner community remains unified in our support for the existing law. Our testimony on LD 439 can be found here.
***
On Tuesday, we spent the day monitoring the Senate for potential movement of the Supplemental Budget that contains critical funding for spruce budworm response (there was none). We also closely monitored the Labor Committee’s work session on LD 60, “An Act to Allow Employees to Request Flexible Work Schedules.” The committee voted along party lines in favor of an amended version of this bill. The Council remains opposed. Our testimony on LD 60 can be found here.
***
Thursday was action packed with our team spread out to monitor a number of meetings.
The Housing and Economic Development Committee held a work sessions on three bills that the Council is engaged on. The first was LD 161, “Resolve, Directing the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry to Convene a Stakeholder Group Tasked with a Comprehensive Overhaul and Modernization of the State Subdivision Laws.” While we originally testified neither for nor against the bill, we are concerned with the direction in which the discussion is now headed. Landowners, both large and small, must be adequately represented in a stakeholder group of this nature, especially if the goal is to streamline the subdivision process. A board packed with regulators and interest groups will not accomplish this goal. We will continue to engage on this legislation, and we will keep you posted as it progresses.
The second work session we followed in HED yesterday was on LD 195, “An Act to Create the Small Business Capital Savings Account Program.” While the committee is generally supportive of this proposal, they moved to transfer it to the Taxation Committee along with some recommendations in order for that committee to have the opportunity to weigh in. Once TAX has taken action on the bill, it will return to HED for a final vote. The Council testified in support of this legislation, and we will continue to monitor the bill through the process.
The final bill we engaged on in HED was LD 629, “An Act to Restore Matching Funding to the Maine Development Foundation.” We were pleased to deliver testimony in support of this legislation because we have found MDF to be a valued partner over the last eight years on the Forest Opportunity Roadmap project. These efforts have been important to the forest industry.
***
Also on Thursday, the Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee took action on two bills of interest. The first was LD 379, “An Act Regarding Confidential Information Gathered for Forest Fire Emergency Response and Planning.” Submitted by Senator Black at the request of the Maine Forest Service, this bill safeguards private information obtained by MFS for wildfire planning and response purposes. The Council testified in support of this bill, and it was supported unanimously by all committee members present and voting. We would like to thank Senator Black and Chief Forest Ranger Robby Gross for bringing this commonsense bill forward.
The final bill that was worked yesterday by the ACF Committee was LD 417, “An Act Regarding the Confidentiality of Certain Records Belonging to the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Related to the Bureau of Forestry.” While the Council supports the premise of the bill, that certain records held by the MFS should be kept confidential during investigations, it was unclear to us what problem the bill was trying to solve. As an organization representing the big tent that includes all sectors of the industry, we have received zero complaints from our members about how this information is currently being handled, so we testified neither for nor against LD 417. It also conflated the confidentiality of proprietary business records with investigative records in a way that was confusing and did not make sense. The bill, both as printed and in an amended version that was presented to the public for the first time at the work session, was overly broad. It would have prevented the Maine Forest Service from providing services to landowners, loggers, foresters and the public. For these reasons, the committee voted 7-1 in opposition to the bill.
***
The bills the Council intends to engage on next week are listed below. There are a number of other bills that our team will be monitoring. We are also hopeful that the Senate Democrats and Republicans will come together on a compromise that can move the Supplemental Budget forward with the 2/3 support necessary to get the early intervention funding in place in time for the limited spray window later this spring.
That’s all for now. A preview of the week ahead is included below. Should you have any questions about our policy positions, please don’t hesitate to reach out.
Patrick Strauch and Krysta West
Maine Forest Products Council