By KEVIN WALKER

Michigan Correspondent

LANSING, Mich. — Numerous agriculture groups in Michigan have come out in favor of legislation that would provide outside oversight and, to some extent, regulatory power within the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), a department that often impacts the agriculture industry.

The state Senate recently passed along a mostly partisan vote a three-bill package designed to increase transparency and accountability within the DEQ, according to its advocates. Senate bills 652-654 would, for one, create a science advisory panel (S.B. 654) consisting of nine individuals with expertise in various scientific disciplines.

It would also include one legislator or one employee of any state office, department or agency. The science advisory panel would provide recommendations to the governor based on environmental scientific evidence with which it is presented.

The more controversial S.B. 652 would create a second body to review, amend, deny and approve DEQ rule promulgation. This is based on a similar law that has operated in Indiana since 1996, according to a letter to the Michigan Senate from 20 agricultural groups, including the Michigan Pork Producers Assoc., Michigan Corn Growers Assoc. and Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB).

The final bill, S.B. 653 – also controversial – would create a permit appeal board that, upon request, would hear an appeal by a permit applicant denied by the DEQ. This would be similar to the structure currently in place for environmental remediation, the MFB stated.

Although the proposal is intended to strengthen faulty processes and increase stakeholder involvement, the legislation is facing some unjustified opposition, according to Matt Smego, MFB’s state government relations manager.

“We’ve heard accusations that the proposal is an attempt by the business community to control DEQ decisions, and in fact we’re doing just the opposite,” he said. “The legislation creates a better structure for a focus on cooperative solutions to maintain environmental protection without creating undue regulatory burdens, as well as ensuring farmers receive reliable communication from DEQ staff.”

Escanaba’s Republican Sen. Tom Casperson, lead sponsor of the bills, is quoted in an article saying the new structure is needed because DEQ staff are too often arbitrary and unreasonable in their decisions, leaving businesses and ordinary citizens harmed.

“We want to protect the wetland; we want to protect the environment,” he said in a Dec. 18, 2017, Detroit Free Press piece. “But there’s got to be some common sense and some grace put into this process. And right now, there doesn’t seem to be any.”

The Michigan League of Conservation Voters (LCV) blasted S.B. 652 and 653, dubbing them “fox guarding the hen house” bills that give “big polluters decision-making authority” over the DEQ. The Michigan LCV is engaged in an ongoing effort to oppose this legislation, stated a press release from the group.

“We learned from the Flint water crisis what happens when we have weak and ineffective protections, and this legislation would further weaken our state’s ability to ensure Michigan families are not put at risk,” said Executive Director Lisa Wozniak.

According to a Jan. 25 statement from the Michigan Environmental Council (MEC), S.B. 652 and 653 would give companies like Enbridge Energy the final say in how much oil they have to clean up when things go wrong. Individuals serving on the newly created boards could only be dismissed for cause, said James Clift, MEC policy director.

He said there is also no requirement that members of the boards would have to be Michigan residents. “We urge the House to oppose both bills,” he added.