General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Wednesday, April 16, 2025
A rare Wednesday with not even a Senate Agenda to warrant either house going into session. All committee meetings in both chambers today.
We have yesterday’s productive session to discuss, with a few interesting footnotes. Here’s yesterday’s Session Activity Report.
The Senate passed SB 75 (Paradee), which seeks to eliminate county impediments to the creation of legal marijuana stores. I really liked it when Paradee, who apparently got as fed up as I did with downstate legislators crying about tyranny, pointed out that Suxco gets lots of money from the state and that they would get lots of money from the implementation of this program. I’ve heard this bleating from downstate legislators ever since I started working there in 1983. They claim they want their ‘sovereignty’, but they want the money that they wouldn’t get if they actually became sovereign. It was during the debate that Mansplainer Eric Buckson told Lt. Governor Gay to ‘chill’, which tells you all you need to know about Mansplainer Buckson. The bill passed, 13-8, with two D’s voting no: Darius Brown, and Russ Huxtable (that Suxco sovereignty ‘thing’ again).
Plus, was I imagining things, or did this happen?: During one of the roll calls, when Sen. Poore’s name was called, a banner reading ‘Sen. Poore’ appeared, and she responded. Was she voting from home, or was she in the Chamber? Believe me, I have no problem with someone voting from home if they’re unable to attend. So, if the Senate rules permit it, I’m fine with it. It does raise the question, though, as to whether the House can do the same for the terminally-absent Rep. Stell Parker Selby. Seems only fair. Anyway, I turn to you for answers.
The key bill in the House was HS1/HB 50 (Heffernan), which seeks to provide utility/heating relief for low-income families. The bill passed on a straight party line vote of 27-12, with. two absent. Back to the absences in a sec. House Minority Whip Jeff Spiegelman got up to announce that the entire Rethug caucus would vote against the bill, presumably because of electric cars or something. Ill-advised, but fair enough. Those two absences? One of course was Stell Parker Selby, who has been duly sworn in and is on the payroll. The other? Kevin Hensley, who indeed was present yesterday, but ‘took a walk’ on the vote rather than have to explain a no vote to his constituents. Thing is though, Kevin, that your constituents will be informed that disappearing on a roll call is the same as voting no. Hope your real estate business isn’t in a slump.
Ho-kay. Time to dive into today’s committee meetings. We’ll start with the Senate since Sen.Sokola had announced that the main reason why the Senate wouldn’t be in session was due to a lengthy series of nominations to be considered by the Senate Executive Committee. Here is the Executive Committee Agenda. You’ll note four nominees to the Port board, absent the two that Senate leadership has said they won’t consider. I don’t know whether the Executive Committee actually considers the nomination of the Secretary of State for a position, or whether that’s an ex-officio appointment. The committee will also consider HB 110 (Osienski), which clarifies criminal background check requirements for those working in the commercial marijuana field. The hearing starts at 3 pm. It might be interesting to listen in, if, for no other reason, to take measure of the tone of the questions on the Port.
Other Senate committee highlights (I only mention House bills in Senate committees under rare circumstances):
“…requires the Division of Public Health (“Division”) to create a website where Delaware residents can find out the level of PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals,” in their public drinking water systems. This Act also requires the Division to notify public water utilities if the PFAS in their water exceeds certain limits, known as maximum containment levels, or MCLs. Water companies receiving this notice from the Division must then notify their customers that the PFAS levels in their water exceed the MCLs.” Health & Social Services.
SB 10 (Townsend) modifies and expands the ability of the Department of Correction to release prisoners for ‘good cause’. It also removes the Parole Board from the process, thus streamlining it. Corrections & Public Safety.
SB 6 (Townsend) seeks to improve transparency and timeliness when it comes to health insurance pre-authorization. Banking, Business, Insurance, and Technology.
SB 82 (Lockman) ‘changes the period of time for which relief may be granted under a lethal violence protective order from 1 year to 5 years. Judiciary. The committee will also consider its inevitably-cursory review of the annual package from the Delaware Corporate Law Bar, as in a low bar to passage.
Today’s House committee highlights:
HB 89 (Morrison) establishes a home improvement dispute resolution process. And, boy, do we need one. Judiciary.
HB 58 and HB 96 (Lynn) both seek to safeguard residents against Trump era attempts to intimidate people. I especially like the synopsis for HB 58:
Under this Act a law-enforcement officer of this State is not allowed to do any of the following: (1) Stop, question, arrest, search, or detain any individual based on actual or suspected citizenship or immigration status, or actual or suspected violations of federal civil immigration law. (2) Inquire about an individual’s immigration status, citizenship, place of birth, or eligibility for a social security number. (3) Make an arrest, detain, or prolong the detention of an individual based on civil immigration warrants or immigration detainers.
Both bills are in the Judiciary Committee. Y’know, I recall the days when attempts to stop the spread of AK-47’s were met with outraged cries of ‘jackbooted storm troopers’ from Rethug legislators. Don’t hear a peep out of ’em now, do ya?
“…expands the availability of free meals by making them available to all public school students attending schools participating in the federal School Breakfast Program or National School Lunch Program. This Act requires public schools participating in the School Breakfast Program to make available free breakfasts to all attending students, regardless of household income. This Act also requires public schools participating in the National School Lunch Program to make available free lunches to all attending students, regardless of household income.” Education.
HB 80 (M Smith) is straight out of the Caesar Rodney Institute. It seeks to roll back renewable energy initiatives because the Caesar Rodney Institute is under the thrall of Big Oil. In Natural Resources & Energy Committee, where it should be buried.
Oh, one little tickler to prick up your ears–word on the street is that a certain public official who also has a private practice in an area that coincides with said official’s public position is fiercely lobbying against a bill that could impact said public official’s private practice. I’ll leave it at that for now. Just wanted to let said certain public official know that I know, and will be calling said public official out for this blatant conflict-of-interest should they persist.
Ya gotta admit–you got more than you didn’t pay for today.
Maybe Rep. Hensley missed yesterday’s vote because he was attending to this matter, as they say in Leg Hall, of “pressing, personal business” — https://www.wdel.com/news/state-lawmaker-loses-license-for-dui-crash/article_031d3461-23e8-4265-b930-1d992f0c613c.html
Whoa. But no.
He was there and voted on everything but that.
In fairness two NCC Council members I respect, Carter and Caneco seem to be on record opposing the State setting zoning laws because they think it’s illegal in some capacity. I have no idea if that’s right, but I also see Jane Greenbaum in Sussex say something similar. These are 3 pretty progressive Dems. I guess this is two governments flexing at each other over power. Seems Sussex was more of the issue than NCC, but zoning laws are above my pay grade with complexity. I do highly question anything that comes from Pardee but that’s for another day.
I don’t think the bill changes any county zoning laws.
It DOES forestall after-the-fact changes that would be for the specific purpose of restricting shops and cultivation centers where they would otherwise be permissible.
You cited three truly-superior elected officials. I think, and I know that at least two of the three have commented here before, that they are more concerned and, in fact opposed, the state sweeping aside county ordinances to favor a couple of large ‘economic development’ projects, which they blatantly did last session.
But I’d love to hear from them on this issue.