Environmentalists breathed a heavy, if reluctant, sigh of relief last week when a bill to repeal the stateâs wetlands protections was amended to cut regulation with a scalpel, rather than a cleaver. But more changes made to the bill on the House floor this week have them back on the defensive.
In its original form, Senate Bill 389 would have repealed the stateâs law regulating wetlands, leaving more than 80% of them unprotected from development. In committee last week, and after reviewing dozens of amendments, representatives amended the bill to reduce wetlands regulation on certain land types and cut back on permitting costs.
Indiana wetlands bill puts more areas on chopping block indystar.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from indystar.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
INDIANAPOLIS â Wetlands legislation that had seen compromises added that were favorable to environmental groups ended up passing Tuesday with those changes stripped, providing little protection to Indiana classified wetlands.
The bill passed the House on a 58-40 tally, with numerous Republicans voting no on the final version, which saw amendments favorable to environmental groups stripped out at the last minute Monday.
Lawmakers from northeast Indiana, where much of the stateâs remaining wetlands can be found, voted against the bill. They included Reps. David Abbott, R-Albion, Ben Smaltz, R-Auburn, and Denny Zent, R-Angola.
The bill now returns to the Senate where its author, Sen. Chris Garten, can either agree to the amendments to the bill or send it to a conference committee between the House and Senate to work out differences. Once that process is complete, the bill advances to Gov. Eric Holcombâs desk for approval or a veto.
A bill that would have eliminated the state’s law regulating wetlands was amended Wednesday morning to tackle the issue of wetlands regulation surgically, rather than with a “meat cleaver.”
The bill, which has been the subject of heated debate, initially proposed repealing the state’s environmental program protecting wetlands, which would have left more than 80% of the state’s wetlands unprotected. Authors claimed the program created unnecessary red tape and was costly for landowners.
Environmentalists and good government experts alike staunchly opposed the legislation, pointing out that wetlands play a crucial role in mitigating flooding and water quality. They also were concerned that bill authors have close ties to the building industry.