Editor’s note: This story was updated to eliminate the inclusion of House Bill 243, a bill that was not voted on June 27.
Welcome to The Press Room, a semi-regular weekly roundup of the major stories and happenings of the 2023 Delaware legislative year.
To mark the final week of the legislative year, The Press Room will publish every day. Here are the bills that passed in Legislative Hall on June 27.
As always, send story tips’, feedback, ideas or gossip to me at mnewman@delawareonline.com.
Follow me on Twitter at @MereNewman.
Delaware General Assembly pass series of environmental bills
Lawmakers passed the Climate Solutions Act on Tuesday, a significant environmental bill which seeks to reduce greenhouse gas net emissions by 50% by 2030 and reach a 100% net reduction by 2050.
The legislation requires Delaware to write a climate action plan in order to meet these goals with the intent that it would be updated every five years. Delaware is the lowest lying state in the nation, a concerning position as sea levels continue to rise.
HB 99 passed the Senate Tuesday, with it passing in the House earlier this month. It now heads to the governor’s desk. Most in the Republican Party have been against the authority this bill could give to the secretary of the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control.
Lawmakers also passed three other environmental bills, which all head to the governor:
- HB 12 codifies the state’s Clean Vehicle Rebate program, allows up to a $2,500 rebate for electric vehicles and a maximum of $1,000 for hybrid vehicles that retail up to $60,000.
- HB 10 requires the Department of Education to have 5% of buses that are replaced in fiscal year 2025 be electric. This percentage then increases each year until it reaches 30% in 2030.
- HB 11 requires, in 2025, new commercial buildings built with a foundation footprint of 50,000 square feet or greater would need to have a roof that supports solar infrastructure.
A new type of bereavement leave for state workers
The House passed a bill that would provide state employees with five days of bereavement leave if they experience a miscarriage, stillbirth or pregnancy loss.
The idea came as a result of a state employee suffering a miscarriage, and then quickly learning she wasn’t afforded any bereavement to recover emotionally or physically. No Republicans voted in support of the bill. It now heads to the Senate.
BACKGROUND:Delaware lawmakers introduce bills to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050
House lawmakers also passed HB 177 on Tuesday, which would increase the amount of bereavement leave for state workers who have had an immediate family member die.
The legislation increases the number of days off from three to five. The bill defines “immediate family” as: “the employee’s spouse or domestic partner; parent, stepparent or child of the employee, spouse or domestic partner; employee’s grandparent or grandchild; employee’s sibling; or any minor child for whom the employee has assumed and carried out parental responsibilities.”
Will lawmakers vote on the controversial Seaford charter?
For a third time, the Delaware House of Representatives did not vote on a bill that would allow limited liability companies, and other artificial entities, to cast a ballot in Seaford municipal elections.
It was scheduled to be on the House’s Tuesday agenda, like it has twice previously, but lawmakers did not vote on it. The legislative calendar ends June 30, though it could still be voted on next year.
Seaford, one of the biggest cities in Sussex County, already allows non-resident property owners to vote in local elections. This charter could allow more than 200 entities to vote and possibly determine the outcome of elections.
READ MORE:If Seaford gets its way, these corporations and LLCs could be voting in the next election
Supporters of this charter, including Rep. Danny Short, a Seaford Republican, say these business owners have a right to have a say in local issues of taxation and development. But critical opponents believe corporate influence is being prioritized over the will of Delawareans.
The legislation has received a wave of criticism in recent weeks, as more national news organizations have written about the charter. Democrats have been vocally uneasy about this bill. But it is also rare for the legislature to go against the wants of a local government, in this case the Seaford City Council.
The Delaware Voting Rights Coalition, which describes itself as a statewide coalition of 40 voting rights organizations and advocacy groups, sent a letter to lawmakers on June 20, urging them to vote no on the bill. It includes groups such as the ACLU of Delaware, YWCA Delaware and Delaware Center for Justice.
“This legislation is not only a dangerous attack on election integrity, but also endangers the very foundation of our democracy by drowning out the voices of residents living in Seaford,” according to the letter obtained by The News Journal. “Local elections already suffer from chronically low voter participation, making them vulnerable to candidates and policies that overlook the real needs of the community.”
The group argued that the bill would allow business owners to vote “once where they live and once where their business is located.” The original version of the bill was updated to require that, in those circumstances, an individual is only entitled to one vote.
In 2019, it was revealed that a property manager voted 31 times during a Newark referendum election. He was allowed to do this because he was in control of 31 LLCs, which owned 31 parcels of land. The city then changed its regulations after this became public.
The coalition also finds this bill “directly contradicts the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment” because it extends voting rights to property owners, but not to those who rent property.
“This property requirement harkens back to the dark times in U.S. history where similar property requirements were put in place in order to prevent women, people of color, low-income individuals, and other marginalized groups from voting,” the group writes in the letter.
