Forest Protection, Restricting Forever Chemicals Top Environmental Legislative Goals for 2020


PROVIDENCE — After a lackluster session for environmental initiatives in 2019, environmental groups have high hopes for legislation this year.

Here are a few environmental efforts to watch:

Green Bond/Save Woodlands. A broad coalition of stakeholders is expected to rally behind the biennial environmental bond referendum and its funding for open-space protection. The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) is expected to release details of the 2020 Green Economy bond on Jan. 16, the same day Gov. Gina Raimondo is scheduled to issue her fiscal 2021 budget.

Rhode Island lacks a state-funded program to protect forests, so the Audubon Society of Rhode Island, the Rhode Island Land Trust Council, The Nature Conservancy, Save The Bay, the Rhode Island Woodland Partnership, and Grow Smart Rhode Island are asking that the bond earmark $5 million for forest protection.

Protecting woodlands gained urgency in recent years because of the proposed — and ultimately defeated — Burrillville fossil-fuel power plant and the siting of utility-scale solar installations on open space.

These environmental advocacy groups are supporting legislation that creates a statewide process for cities and towns to write rules for renewable-energy development.

Environmental groups are also seeking legislation that allows municipalities to levy taxes for local conservation efforts such as protecting open space, preserving historic sites, and launching climate adaptation projects. The local-tax concept is modeled on a system in Massachusetts.

Save The Bay hopes to enact a 5-cent per barrel fee on petroleum products that enter the state by ship. The Ocean State Climate Adaptation and Resilience Fund, or OSCAR Fund, would raise about $1.9 million annually and support grants for municipal climate adaptation projects.

As it does most years, Save The Bay also will be asking the state to boost or at least maintain compliance and enforcement jobs at DEM and the Coastal Resources Management Council.

Forever chemicals. Despite years of failed attempts to pass state restrictions on a long list of harmful chemicals, there will be another push this year by the environmental community to set restrictions for PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. These so-called “forever chemicals” are everywhere and in just about everything. The are common in nonstick cookware, takeout containers, carpeting, clothing, stain-resistant products, and most anything that repels moisture. PFAS don’t break down and traces of them have been found in drinking water, food, and in human blood. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), PFAS have been linked to low infant birth weights, immune system disorders, cancer, and thyroid hormone disruption.

A report by the Environmental Working Group found 11 drinking water sites in Rhode Island contaminated with PFAS, largely by firefighting foam and school floor waxes.

The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) is sounding the alarm on PFAS. Last year, the Rhode Island Department of Health (DOH) denied a petition from CLF and the Toxics Action Center to regulate PFAS. Instead, DOH and DEM opted for a wait-and-see approach until the EPA sets national standards. Meanwhile, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New Jersey are regulating PFAS. Other states are also considering such rules.

Congressmen David Cicilline and James Langevin, both Rhode Island Democrats, co-sponsored the PFAS Action Act, which recently passed the House of Representatives. The bill provides funds for cleanups of contaminated sites, limits the use of new PFAS, sets safety thresholds, and requires drinking-water monitoring.

President Trump promised to veto the legislation if it passes the Senate.

Bills addressing a carbon tax, electric vehicles, and recycling are expected to be introduced in the Rhode Island House and Senate in the coming weeks, with committee meetings to follow.

Raimondo is scheduled to announce her priority legislation when she addresses the House and Senate on Jan. 14 at 7 p.m.


Join the Discussion

View Comments

Recent Comments

  1. please note the Environment Council of RI is sponsoring a coffee hour 3 to 4pm with legislators on Wed Jan 15 – a chance to network with other environmentalists and legislators, and hear what legislative leaders have to say on the environment. ECRI welcomes all in the environmental community to come and participate

  2. If our Legislators were serious about protecting our state’s forests, they would have listened to the overwhelming demand for renewable energy siting rules and passed some version of the siting bills presented in the last two years. They were warned that if they did nothing, the clear cutting would continue and they chose to do nothing. Maybe they’ll have a change of attitude this year and place the state’s forest’s interests above political sparring.

  3. The ballot box is the only solution to legislative indifference to deforestation. The people in power now are happy to smile and voice platitudes. But they will not act. Key players have to be removed. Only that will spur responsible action.

    For example, Senator Susan Sosinowski of District 37, basically SK, Charlestown and Block Island, is chair of the Senate’s committee on the environment that gutted last year’s solar siting bill of all effective provisions before Senate President, Dominic Ruggerio, finally euthanized it by preventing its reaching the floor for a vote. While Ruggerio’s North Providence seat is absolutely safe, certainly there are enough green voters in Sosinowski’s district to give her a run for the money in the up-coming Democratic primary. But it remains to be seen if there is a Democratic challenger politically wise enough to pitch an environmental agenda that will appeal to the centrist voters who will be Sosinowki’s bread and butter in a primary? …That would mean practical solutions to the District’s environmental problems such as hiring enough DEM personnel to clean the state beaches and state campgrounds and to police and protect the shellfishing and aquaculture industries, and to pass the legislation already hammered out to protect—in the face of Sosinowki’s indifference—the District’s most ecologically sensitive and aesthetically popular forests from irresponsible solar proposals.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your support keeps our reporters on the environmental beat.

Reader support is at the core of our nonprofit news model. Together, we can keep the environment in the headlines.


We use cookies to improve your experience and deliver personalized content. View Cookie Settings