The agriculture and environment bill that became a final hurdle in completing the 2015 legislative session includes a dozen provisions with far-reaching implications for Minnesota's environment and the way the state regulates polluters.
Passed by the Senate on Friday but not by the House, the final outcome of the legislation remained in doubt. But the Senate-passed bill was the source of heated divisions among lawmakers that set the stage for the continued rancor at the Capitol.
In a development that outraged a number of Senate DFLers, some of the provisions were inserted during late negotiations, without the benefit of committee hearings or floor debate, and received little public scrutiny during the regular session.
One of the bill's key elements, regarded as a victory for Gov. Mark Dayton, would strengthen a state law that requires farmers to install natural buffers of grasses, trees and shrubs along lakes, creeks and rivers to prevent runoff of agricultural pollution.
Water quality advocates hailed it as one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation in years, but farm groups said it was inflexible and an overreach of government. It was approved in the Senate after Dayton agreed to allow more site-specific flexibility, but it requires an average 50-foot buffer along a waterway. It also would require 16½-foot buffers along most agricultural ditches, and gives the state increased authority to penalize those who don't comply.
A second provision, designed to attract biofuel plants to Minnesota, would create incentives eventually worth up to $6 million a year in subsidies. To be eligible, the facilities would have to use at least 50 percent perennial grasses or cover crops to make the fuel, reducing the amount of agricultural land devoted to row crops, the state's leading source of water pollution. In the first year, it would provide $2 million in funding, enough for two small plants to get started.
Still uncertain was the fate of the Citizens' Board that holds significant power over decisions by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Republicans and corporate interests see the board as an unnecessary and unpredictable impediment to regulatory approval. Environmentalists and DFLers were furious about a last-minute deal that would have eliminated the board, which they see as a critical forum for the people most affected by pollution and development. Late Friday, different versions of the bill left the status of the Citizens' Board unsettled.
In other provisions, the bill would:
