(Source: MIRS.news, Published 05/22/2024) The House Energy, Communications and Technology Committee seemed to experience a “Groundhog Day” phenomenon, Rep. Jaime Greene (R-Richmond) said Wednesday during a line of questioning between herself and Chair Helena Scott (D-Detroit).
Her reasoning? A second House bill codifying the Michigan High-Speed Internet Office, almost identical to legislation that moved out of the same committee a year ago in May.
“Is Bill Murray going to pop out? I’m waiting for Bill Murray to show up,” Greene said, “because we’re literally living Groundhog Day.”
The second bill, which received testimony Wednesday, was Scott’s HB 5568, codifying the Michigan High-Speed Internet Office within the Department of Labor and Economic Opportunity (LEO) and making concrete Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s June 2021 executive directive creating the office.
The office’s goal now is to ensure that federal dollars go to parts of the state most in need, and the attempt to codify it would ensure that the office isn’t eliminated by future administrations or Legislatures, making it harder to deploy resources.
Scott’s bill, which would allow the office to indefinitely continue providing grants and other financial and technical assistance related to broadband and digital infrastructure, is nearly identical to former Rep. Kevin Coleman’s HB 4066, which was reported from the House Energy Committee in May 2023 and passed the House in June 2023.
Coleman’s bill is currently in the Senate Energy and Environment Committee, where it still sits. An identical-as-introduced bill, Sen. Sean McCann (D-Kalamazoo)’s SB 687, was also taken up in the Senate committee, but was voted out with a substitute adding a five-year sunset to the office.
Despite some hesitation, McCann said previously he could be fine with the substitute if it expands the coalition around broadband and increases support to force a review of the agency in five years.
But, as of Wednesday, it appears that at least the House is trying to go back to the drawing board.
Scott’s HB 5568 does not include a five-year sunset.
When asked about the repeat introduction by Greene, Scott responded that Coleman is “no longer here."
“You have these federal dollars, and … it is very similar,” she said, “So we are presenting it again.”
When pressed by Greene, Scott said the Senate is not taking it up.
“I’ve had conversations with Sen. McCann,” she said. “It’s not sitting in the Senate. He’s not going to be adopting this. I’m taking it up."
When asked how the reintroduced bill will likely fare in the Senate, considering the version without a sunset is still sitting in committee, Scott said her understanding is that the bill is “well received, and it will pass, so I don't know. I guess we'll have to see.”
In response, Greene told MIRS she feels that if the bill was so important, “then we would have taken this up over a year ago. Instead, we’re sitting on this for over a year.”
She said maintaining the Senate-included sunset is necessary because “in five years, technology is going to change again.
“How many offices do we have sitting in the basement of those buildings across the street … that are just doing nothing because they didn’t have a sunset, because they were formed in the ‘60s and they still exist today but have no purpose, because we haven't ever changed that.”
Greene said sunsets are important to allow the government to review the efficacy of state bureaucracy.
“And hopefully, our infrastructure will be so amazing in five years (that) we won't need that office anymore,” she said.
Besides frustration stemming from the reintroduction and removed sunset, both Green and Rep. Kathy Schmaltz (R-Jackson) said Republican members are concerned about the codification of a new government office.
In other news, the House Energy Committee also took testimony on Rep. Jenn Hill (D-Marquette)’s HB 5682, which retroactively exempts grant money both related to broadband expansion and received under specified federal or state government programs to be deducted from the income tax, back to the 2023 tax year.
The bill, which was supported by the Broadband Association of Michigan, would reduce general fund revenue over the next four fiscal years by between $1.3 million in Fiscal Year (FY) ‘24 and $5.4 million in FY ‘27, if the bill is interpreted to apply to net income related to the grant.
According to House Fiscal analysis, it does not appear that expenses in subsequent years after the grant receipt could be used in calculating net income, and the fiscal impact of the bill could exceed initial Department of Treasury estimates.
The bill received testimony only.
