Trending
Legislation that would have given local governments more authority to limit pesticide use in local watersheds has been vetoed by Gov. Katthy Hochul.
The legislation (S.9379/A.9712) was first introduced in 2022 and had already been approved by the state Legislature and vetoed once before. The legislation passed the legislature again this year after tweaks from state Sen. Pete Harckham, D-Peekskill, and state Assemblyman Chris Burdick, D-Mount Kisco, but was among 114 vetoes issued recently by Hochul.
Republicans heavily opposed the bills in the state Assembly, where the bill passed by a 103-42 vote with Assemblyman Andrew Goodell, R-Jamestown, opposed. The bill passed the state Senate 49-9 with state Sen. George Borrello, R-Sunset Bay, opposed. The bill would have applied to Chautauqua Lake since it applied to Class A waterways. It also would have come at a time when there are concerns how implementation of new watershed regulations will be handled by the DEC on lakes like Chautauqua Lake.
The bill would have given local governments which have implemented a freshwater wetlands protection law or ordinance to adopt a local law or ordinance prohibiting the application of pesticides to wetlands, provided that such laws allow for the use of pesticides for the control of invasive species, pests of significant public health importance, or noxious weeds; or for the protection of critical native plant species. Local laws would have been limited to wetlands hydrologically connected to a source of public water supply.
"You know, I start from the standpoint of having come out of local government, that local governments are uniquely situated to deal with local problems," Burdick said following floor debate. "And I feel that they can handle complex
matters, I have a high regard for local government. And I also recognize that the DEC, while doing a very good job to the extent they can, are highly limited in their resources. And that, I think, is one of the reasons why there has been for decades now, the regulatory framework which did delegate to localities the opportunity to be able to regulate local wetlands in order to provide for public health, and for other benefits which wetlands provide."
Goodell expressed concern with how the legislation could have created a patchwork of regulations, using New York City's reservoir as an example. The city's watershed collection extends for 125 miles outside of New York City, crosses several counties and encompasses more than 2,000 square miles. That means the city could have exerted influence far beyond its borders.
"So while on the face this looks like it's pretty narrowly crafted, when you realize it applies to allowing the City of New York to govern wetland pesticide — or pesticide use anywhere in 2,000 square miles outside of the City of New York, it's really quite an expansive law. And for those reasons and the reasons mentioned by my colleague, I will not be supporting it. I would, however, commend the sponsor who is working on narrowing this bill to address his specific concerns. I appreciate his willingness to do that and I hope he continues that process as we move forward," Goodell said on the Assembly floor earlier this year.