[Durham INC] How to respond to bad bills from the General Assembly

[Richard Ford]

Pat,

Who is Bill Gupton?? The guy who is emplyed by Consumers Against Rate Hikes??  Thanks.

Dick
On Apr 24, 2013, at 5:28 PM, Pat Carstensen wrote:

> Last night at the delegate meeting, we had a lively discussion of a bill that is part of what Senator Woodard called the "attack on local government" from the General Assembly.  The question is how to respond to issues in a timely way without losing the representative character of our organization -- that is, to make sure that neighborhood sentiment is what shapes our policy.
> 
> I believe that unless or until the Responsible-Government Republicans (the party in which I was raised) reclaim their party from the people who treat the General Assembly as a weapon of mass destruction, we will be facing a steady drip of bad bills that we will want to respond to (see the e-mail below for information on an attack on our ability to regulate storm water).  
> 
> What I think we need to do:
> Pass an enabling resolution that lays out the principles on which INC would react to bad bills from the General Assembly and what those reactions would be.
> Form yet another committee to keep an eye on what is going on.  This committee might set up a list-serve on which to share legislative news, and when there is some agreement that it is time to react, let the general list-serve know what the threat is and what to do about it.  
> 
> Regards, pat
> 
> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:32:55 -0400
> From: ed.harrison at mindspring.com
> Subject: Re: SB612 - Relaxing Stormwater Rules
> To: NC-CONS-FORUM at LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG
> 
> This was the most cited bill by participants in a legislative forum that I facilitated last Friday for Triangle-area elected officials and water resource professionals (mostly the latter). Panelists were Erin Wynia of the NC League of Municipalities and Grady McCallie of the NC Conservation Network. The concept that "local ordinances cannot be more restrictive than state or federal regulations" means that stopping this bill as written is a top priority for both organizations, and for many allied organizations (such as the regional council that hosted the forum). Have to assume the source for this is the Homebuilders Association. 
> 
> Thanks for highlighting this bill, one of the worst of the dozens of anti-city/anti-environment bills introduced this session. 
> 
> Ed H
> 
> 
> On Apr 24, 2013, at 3:48 PM, Bill Gupton wrote:
> 
> If you have ordinances in place  like Charlotte, they could be at risk. We have fought hard for years against the Builders on this issue. Let's keep an eye on this one. 
> 
> NC bill could reduce Charlotte’s stormwater, erosion regulations
> Charlotte city officials are keeping a close eye on state Senate Bill 612, which proposes fast-tracking environmental permitting and rolling back local rules that mitigate flooding and stream erosion.
> SB 612 was introduced this month by state Sens. Harry Brown (R-Jones), Brent Jackson (R-Duplin) and Andrew Brock (R-Iredell).
> The bill — titled the Regulatory Reform Act of 2013 — wants to mandate that local ordinances cannot be more restrictive than state or federal regulations. It also would allow for stormwater management and erosion-control plans to be “self-permitted,” according to the city.
> That means, if a permit application includes plans sealed by a professional engineer stating the plans comply with predefined minimum design criteria, then the permit must be accepted without a technical review by the local government staff, according to the city.
> http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/going_green/2013/04/nc-bill-charlotte-stormwater-erosion.html?page=all
> -- 
> Reduce, Reuse, Recycle & Rethink... 
> Bill 
> Bill Gupton
> 704-367-0068
> The Constitution of the State of North Carolina
> Article XIV, Section 5 
> “It shall be the policy of this State to conserve and protect its lands and waters for the benefit of all its citizenry, 
> and to this end it shall be a proper function of the State of North Carolina and its political subdivisions to acquire and preserve 
> park, recreational, and scenic areas, to control and limit the pollution of our air and water, to control excessive noise, 
> and in every other appropriate way to preserve as a part of the common heritage of this State 
> its forests, wetlands, estuaries, beaches, historical sites, open lands, and places of beauty.”  
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the NC-CONS-FORUM list, send any message to: NC-CONS-FORUM-signoff-request at LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/
> 
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the NC-CONS-FORUM list, send any message to: NC-CONS-FORUM-signoff-request at LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions athttp://www.sierraclub.org/insider/
> _______________________________________________
> Durham INC Mailing List
> list at durham-inc.org
> http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20130424/be54b9be/attachment.html>