TESTIMONY OF THE MAINE ASSOCIATION OF PLANNERS
TO THE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE
SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION TO LD 891
“An Act to Amend the Site Location of Development Laws to Include Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions”
DATE OF HEARING: March 24, 2009
Honorable Senator Goodall, Honorable Representative Duchesne, Distinguished Members of the Natural Resources Committee:
My name is Helen Edmonds. I am a partner at Pierce Atwood LLP, however I am not here representing a client today, but rather as a member of the Maine Association of Planners Legislative Policy Committee. The Maine Association of Planners, or MAP, is an organization of over 100 members, including professional public, private, and nonprofit planners, citizen volunteers serving on local boards, and Mainers from other professions such as myself, including attorneys, landscape architects, professors, and developers. Though our membership works in diverse settings, we are all dedicated to enhancing the practice of planning in Maine.
MAP has significant concerns regarding this proposed Act, and we oppose it for many of the same reasons that we testified in support of LD 460, the Resolve to create a Climate Change Adaptation Stakeholder Group. Although we agree that Maine as a state should analyze and plan over the long term for the most likely impacts of climate change, to the extent such impacts can be identified at this time, we believe that it would be premature, and ill-advised, to incorporate a broad requirement into the Site Location of Development Act prohibiting “unreasonable emissions of greenhouse gases,” together with requirements to “mitigate” and “compensate” for such emissions. We believe that other Department bureaus, such as Air Quality and Solid Waste, and other State agencies such as the Department of Transportation, may be better equipped in the long run to devise and implement strategies to address greenhouse gas issues than is the Bureau of Land and Water Quality in the context of a Site Law application.
Adapting our infrastructure, forest management, agricultural, and development practices to potential climate change conditions will significantly impact our landscape, including the built environment and our open spaces. We strongly support a collaborative and inclusive stakeholder process, such as would be established by LD 460, rather than the top-down, prescriptive approach embodied in LD 891. It seems to us to be unfair, when adaptation and mitigation strategies have not even been discussed and identified yet, to place the burden on a small subset of property owners and applicants to either implement such measures or to pay a compensation fee to be used for as-yet undefined projects.
The proposed new standard, moreover, is vaguely worded. The Department is directed to make a determination of whether emissions of greenhouse gases will be “unreasonable,” and “may consider factors related to the location, design, construction and operation of the development, including, but not limited to, land use, transportation, building materials, building energy usage, energy conservation policies and actions, and solid waste.” What is an “unreasonable” emission, when it comes to greenhouse gases? How will the Department review such broad issues as “land use,” “solid waste,” and “transportation”? With due respect to the Department, MAP believes it is unwise to leave so many unanswered questions to the rulemaking process. As already mentioned, moreover, other bureaus and agencies already review issues such as traffic impacts and solid waste capacity.
MAP also believes that if the State’s objective is to encourage the incorporation of standards such as LEED and green building design into development proposals, then an incentive-based program that all applicants can access might be a better approach than a vaguely-worded Site Law standard. All of these issues would be appropriate for discussion, and are certainly worthy of consideration, by the broad-based, collaborative Stakeholder Group envisioned by LD 460.
Finally, MAP questions how the incorporation of the proposed “greenhouse gas” standard into the Site Law would impact those municipalities that exercise delegated authority or have been found to have the local capacity to review Site Law projects. Bringing such a “technical” issue into the Site Law as a review standard could make it difficult for these municipalities to continue their important role in reviewing projects within their borders.
In summary, MAP supports the reduction of greenhouse gases in concept. It is our experience, however, that implementing a policy, however laudable that policy may be, requires the kind of stakeholder process envisioned in LD 460 in order to effectively move the reduction of greenhouse gases forward. MAP suggests that the Committee should vote “Ought Not to Pass” on LD 891. MAP would be happy to answer any questions you may have about our testimony.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.