PLDC bill hearing waiver was not unprecedented or premeditated

The Public Land Development Corp. was created by Senate Bill 1555, passed during the 2011 session.

Back then, the effects of the Great Recession still lingered. State government was faced with a $1.3 billion general fund deficit. Unemployment was 6.3 percent.

Because of these problems, one priority was to promote economic and job growth. Emphasis was placed on supporting capital improvement projects that would result in the dual benefits of public infrastructure construction and job generation. The PLDC, which was intended to encourage public-private partnerships to construct public facilities, fit into this concept.

The PLDC was a Senate initiative, about which the House initially was not enthused. The House recognized that, if enacted, the PLDC would not produce economic or job growth immediately. A new bureaucracy, administrative rules and public land optimization plan would have had to be established before any actual project groundbreaking.

Thus, the Finance Committee chairman and House leadership did not feel SB 1555 should move forward, and so a public hearing was not scheduled for it. The failure to hold a hearing would have killed the bill.

There was, however, great interest from SB 1555’s introducer to keep the bill alive. Consequently, I approved a waiver for a hearing on short notice for SB 1555 (and seven other bills). My point is that the waiver for SB 1555 was not unprecedented or premeditated by the Finance Committee chairman and me to avoid public input.

SB 1555 was subsequently passed by the Legislature and signed into law.

Now, approximately 12 to 18 months later, the PLDC is a target for repeal because opponents apparently feel it has the potential for inappropriate development and environmental harm.

The PLDC has not yet adopted administrative rules or the public land optimization strategic plan as required by law. The PLDC is not nearly ready at this time to pursue the development of any public project. Thus, I feel that call for the repeal or amendment of the PLDC law is premature.

Opponents have been very vocal about the broad exemption authority granted to the PLDC (which does not include an exemption from the environmental review process). This exemption provision was inserted into SB 1555 at the suggestion of a testifier from outside the House. The exemption was meant to avoid delays due to the land use and building approval process.

I do not believe that the PLDC would abuse the exemption authority. The PLDC knows that exempting any public project over extreme opposition would be counterproductive and ultimately self-defeating.

More important, the PLDC is subject to the environmental review process, and the environmental effects from an exemption would be disclosed during the review.

Despite my current defense of the PLDC, I am willing to consider amending or even repealing the PLDC. The state Board of Land and Natural Resources chairman has indicated he will engage in discussion with PLDC opponents and others to resolve differences.

If the effort results in a recommendation for amendment or repeal, I will take the recommendation seriously.