Mining is both a controversial and complicated topic and there are few simple answers to the challenges surrounding this difficult issue. However, the public expects public officials to pursue responsible and reasonable solutions that assure balance between job creation and protecting the public interest. Today we are offering a bi-partisan proposal that will honor that expectation.
The public yearns for bipartisanship. I want to thank Senator Schultz for his willingness and his commitment to work with me in order to prove to all of Wisconsin that Republicans and Democrats can work together to get a job done on behalf of the public.
During the past 4 months I have been pleased to work with Senator Schultz, Senator Kedzie, and other Senate colleagues in an effort to establish a regulatory process that is fair to every applicant but one that works for Wisconsin. The challenge for Senator Schultz, myself and many others invested in this effort has been balancing the passions of those who find themselves firmly on one side or the other against the commonsense of a great majority of Wisconsin residents who wish for us to develop responsible mining legislation.
We have listened to citizens from all points of views and all parts of Wisconsin. We have carefully reviewed other states and looked for best practices. We have spoken with federal agency officials, met with tribal representatives and listened to passionate citizens on each side of the spectrum. The plan we offer today is a fair and responsible plan that represents the Wisconsin voice.
Almost every editorial in the state has expressed the same theme as the editorial in the Ashland Daily Press; “Support mining, but not the Assembly bill.” The majority of testimony during recent hearings has called for substantial changes in the Assembly bill. Many northern Wisconsin citizens who support mining have called for significant changes to the Assembly bill.
If one commits to responsible mining, one should equally commit to a responsible mining law. Today, after listening to hundreds of citizens of diverse views I am very proud to join Senator Schultz in offering a commonsense plan meets that test.
It is a very simple plan that strikes the right balance between job creation and environmental protection and one that is easy to read and understand. Our draft is approximately 12 pages compared to the 183 page Assembly bill.
It creates a regulatory policy for ferrous mining.
It is a plan that expands the opportunity for economic development in Wisconsin without jeopardizing the environmental policies that have protected the resources that sustain our economy and way of life.
It is a fair and flexible plan that provides predictability and certainty but also retains safeguards to protect the public voice.
It is a plan that streamlines the regulatory process without sacrificing our environmental policies that protect the public interest. Company officials have repeatedly stated that they can do this project in an environmentally sound way. By retaining current environmental law we keep them to their word by assuring that there is no special treatment and exception to environmental policy for mining projects.
It is a plan that will make Wisconsin's mining permit process comparable with Minnesota. It contains a defined process and timelines and a certain end date so it doesn’t become an open ended process.
It is an honest plan that maximizes collaboration between the mining company and the state and federal regulators. Fictitious timetables will only sacrifice our working relationship with federal regulators and potentially double the cost to mining companies and result in more permitting delays. Unfortunately, the Assembly draft pretends that Wisconsin has some unilateral role in approving permits. Our plan acknowledges reality and includes the essential role the Corps of Engineers will have in the drafting of an Environmental Impact Statement.
Just as our plan provides regulatory certainty for a mining company it is necessary to assure economic certainty for local communities affected by mining. Our plan requires $5 million in up front, guaranteed payments to communities for the first five years of operation when they need the funding the most. However, we allow the company to recoup these up front payments in subsequent years.
To ensure fairness for the company, there will be no additional taxes or payments required for the mining company over the operation of the mine and there should not be any additional liability for taxpayers either.
Similar to Minnesota’s shared resources plan our proposal will allocate 20% of the taconite revenues to a mining diversification fund that will be targeted for economic development throughout the region. These funds, administered by WEDC, will be used to diversify job creation throughout the north as a defense against economic instability and cyclical swings commonly associated in mining communities. Another 10% will help pay infrastructure costs in the north.
In recent remarks, Speaker Fitzgerald adamantly warned that any bill that includes an iron ore tax or leaves the permitting process uncertain would be a “non-starter” in the Assembly. Even though we strongly support a gross tonnage tax similar to Minnesota we recognize that opposition from the Assembly Republicans and Governor would result in impasse.
We are not interested in forwarding a plan that creates impasse. This plan honors our commitment to achieving resolution through compromise. Instead of offering a politically pure bill that would define insurmountable differences, we included many significant Assembly provisions in an attempt to find common ground.
In drafting a new mining law we ought to heed the request of a resident at one of the public hearings who told us that the best mining law is the one that will be for a mine that is located 1500 feet from our house.
This is a proposal that works for them and works for Wisconsin.