Skip to content

Three key issues to watch as lawmakers return to Lansing

When the leaves begin to turn colors each autumn, the wardrobe around the MEC offices also undergoes an unmistakable change.

Friends, the glorious days of t-shirts, jeans and flip-flops are coming to an end. Now begins the season of the necktie. The Legislature is coming back to town.

Our summer dress may have been casual, but we’ve been working hard behind the scenes on issues we expect to make some waves in the next few months. There’s no time to waste; lawmakers will only be in session for nine days in September, three days in October and a smattering of lame-duck days after the November election.

Some of the fall’s meatiest environmental debates will be hammered out quietly through the administrative rulemaking process, not in the Legislature. And what follows certainly isn’t the only important legislation that will see action in the House and Senate chambers. But for our money, here are a few of the most interesting issues to watch in the new legislative session that begins Tuesday.

Oil and gas.

As oil and gas operations have moved beyond rural parts of the state to more populous residential areas, citizens have begun organizing to call for greater local control over drilling regulations.

A crowd of those advocates will greet lawmakers on their first day back in Lansing. The rally is in support of legislation introduced by a pair of Republican state senators from Macomb County—Jack Brandenburg and Tory Rocca—that would restrict drilling in townships with more than 70,000 residents.

MEC supports giving local residents and governments more authority over oil and gas activity in their communities. At one of our regional meetings in the spring, we hosted a presentation by the group FLOW on what townships can do to regulate fracking for oil and gas. We also have urged the state to apply proposed fracking rules—including required baseline water quality testing before drilling begins—to all types of oil and gas activity to better protect communities like those in southeast Michigan where methods other than fracking are proposed.

However, we believe—and will make the case to lawmakers—that the recently introduced legislation should be broadened to give that same authority to communities across Michigan, including those with fewer than 70,000 residents.

In any case, we applaud residents in Shelby Township, Scio Township and other communities who have organized to have a greater say in what happens in their backyards. If you’re interested in joining the Sept. 9 rally, you can find more information here.


Time may heal all wounds, but—as a recent Detroit Free Press editorial made clear—Michiganders are still hopping mad three months after lawmakers failed to pass a desperately needed transportation funding package.  Leaders from both parties admit a solution is unlikely before the election, since filling Michigan’s more than $1 billion annual road funding shortfall means raising taxes. Some lawmakers even doubt they can get the job done during lame duck, according to the Free Press editorial.

That is unacceptable. From MEC’s perspective, the Legislature simply cannot let another year go by without approving a plan to fix our transportation system.

You might ask: Why does an environmental group care so much about a road funding package? For one thing, we all rely on roads in our everyday lives. Their sad condition is a safety hazard that only gets more expensive each day without new funding.

More broadly, we’re advocating for a transportation funding package that’s about more than just roads and bridges. As we did in the spring, MEC will continue to urge lawmakers to run new funding through the full Act 51 formula – the traditional way to divvy up dollars among Michigan’s entire transportation system.

Fixing the immediate problem of our crumbling roads is crucial, but we’ll also urge legislators to keep in mind the key role other transportation assets will play in Michigan’s future. Under the traditional Act 51 formula, transportation funding would help provide the strong passenger rail, bus service and other public transportation services that today’s young professionals list among their must-have amenities when choosing where to live. It also would support infrastructure for freight rail and shipping, which are crucial for agriculture and other industries. And it would yield new investments in public boat launches, trails and other outdoor recreation facilities.

We urge lawmakers to approve the funding Michigan needs to fix our roads and bridges while also building a 21st century transportation system that supports thriving downtowns, discourages sprawl and helps cut air pollution and carbon emissions.


The remainder of 2014 could be pivotal for Michigan’s clean-energy outlook. Important action already is underway on a pair of bill packages that take very different approaches to renewable power.

Michigan’s existing clean-energy mandates—which require utilities to produce 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2015 and trim energy use by one percent each year—are set to plateau next year. MEC is part of a workgroup assembled by Senate Energy and Technology Committee Chair Mike Nofs, a Battle Creek Republican, to map out the future of Michigan’s renewable-power and energy-efficiency programs. We’re hopeful the group’s meetings will produce draft legislation soon and that lawmakers will approve new energy standards this year to continue accelerating our state’s transition to a clean-energy economy.

As we work to build consensus on new clean-energy benchmarks for our utilities, a bipartisan group of lawmakers already has introduced a bill package designed to empower homeowners and businesses to help the state reach those targets. The “Energy Freedom” package aims to make it easier for utility customers to produce their own power and sell it at a fair rate. It also includes provisions to make the electric grid more efficient and reliable. MEC supports these bills as important complements to larger, utility-scale renewable energy projects. We look forward to working with legislators to make them law.


One Comment
  1. Thank you, Chris for the update, and to James, and everyone at MEC. Director Creagh’s annoucement on Hartwick Pines is a positive step, but we must realize that the minerals and oil and gas under other state parks, recreation areas, and wildlife and game areas have been leased and continue to be auctioned. The rationale is that the oil or gas would be drained. But with high water volume fracturing, the rock must be exploded first, so there is no drainage or risk of drainage from this process. And, with conventional oil and gas wells, where there is a risk of drainage, the auctioning, leases, reclassification, and provisions for variances and lifting of resrictions on “non development” clause, in effect means that development, with noise, fumes, clearing, and roads, pipelines and other facilities will occur next to, and in some instances through or inside these specially designated state lands, teeming with rivers, springs, wetlands, creeks, widlife and plantlife. We’re talking less than 10 percent of our state lands. MEC and all of us should call on Director Creagh, NRC, and DNR to lead the way in taking all of these lands off the auction block, or at the very least remove any possibility that “non development” of the surface acutally means some development of these lands or the lands adjacent.

    September 12, 2014

Comments are closed.