Connect with us

Politics

Doral-inspired blocking new waste-to-energy plants a half-mile from populated areas advances in Senate

Published

on


Two years after Miami-Dade County’s waste-to-energy plant burnt to a crisp, there may be new safeguards in place to protect residents from another such blaze.

Members of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee voted 8-0 to advance a bill (SB 1008) that would block any future waste incineration facility from being built within a half-mile of population centers.

The bill, effective July 1, would apply the restriction to sites a half-mile (2,640 feet) from any residential property, school or commercial property.

Hialeah Gardens Republican Sen. Bryan Ávila, the measure’s sponsor, said the proposed change wouldn’t apply to existing facilities. He’s also looking at amending the bill to allow more allowances near commercial properties.

Florida has 10 waste-to-energy facilities statewide, according to the Florida Waste-to-Energy Coalition whose Executive Director, Joe Kilsheimer, spoke against SB 1008 on Monday.

Kilsheimer argued that waste-to-energy, when compared to landfilling and older trash incineration methods, is far and away the superior method for disposing of trash. He said waste-to-energy facilities annually prevent landfilling 5 million tons of municipal solid waste that would otherwise produce methane emissions, create toxic runoff, take up huge areas of land and require post-closure remediation that can last up to a century.

It also recovers and recycles more than 200,000 tons of metal yearly, enough to build 140 cars, he said, adding that in other areas in the state and across the country — from Lake County and Fort Lauderdale to the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center outside the Twins’ ballpark in Minneapolis — waste-to-energy facilities are situated far closer to cities than Ávila’s bill would allow.

“In fact, in major countries around the world, waste-to-energy facilities are often sited in the middle of major cities, literally next to school and home,” he said. “Because waste-to-energy is a proven, safe and reliable technology.”

Residents of Doral, where the Miami-Dade plant burned for nearly three weeks in early 2023, have a different perspective, and they’ve fought plans to construct a replacement within the city’s bounds. So have those who live in the Broward County city of Miramar, where a nearby site has been floated as an alternative place to build the plant.

Firefighters respond to a February 2023 blaze at a waste-to-energy plant in Doral. Image via Miami-Dade County Fire Rescue.

Facing that opposition already, Miami-Dade is also against SB 1008 in its present form. Executive Assistant County Attorney Jess McCarty told the committee the bill’s restriction on projects near commercial areas is a non-starter.

“The way the bill reads currently, all five sites currently under consideration for a new facility in Miami-Dade would be ineligible under the bill,” he said.

Ávila said that concern was already on his radar and would likely be addressed soon through an amendment. Other changes may include language specifying from what part of the facility the half-mile distance would be measured. Ávila said the incinerator stack or cooling tower could be the “central point from which we have that distance.”

But a change is needed, he said. A representative from the environmentally focused Sierra Club agreed and signaled support for SB 1008.

Ávila briefly detailed what Doral residents experienced after the facility caught fire. Flames erupted outside of the building numerous times. Ash filled the sky, covering cars and homes. Many residents couldn’t go outside for any extended length of time because of the contaminated air.

The incident caught the attention of President Donald Trump’s second son, Eric Trump, who has opposed rebuilding the plant in Doral, where his father owns a golf resort.

Ávila acknowledged the half-mile restriction may make it difficult for some local governments. Lake Mary Republican Sen. Jason Brodeur said that the commercial restriction, which encompasses agricultural operations, would make it all but impossible in some areas of the state.

“But I think having some sort of buffer there,” Ávila said, “is something that’s imperative. I don’t live within a half-mile of one of these facilities, but I know a lot of residents that do, and they tend to be not very well off, and they tend to not have many options as it relates to housing.

“So, my heart is really with those residents and trying to make sure that moving forward for any new facility that we have some protections for those residents and that local governments are not allowing for a massive development around these sites where there should be at least a little bit of space.”

SB 1008 will next go to the Senate Community Affairs Committee, after which it has one more stop before reaching a floor vote. Its House twin (HB 1609) by Republican Reps. David Borrero of Sweetwater and Meg Weinberger of Palm Beach Gardens awaits a hearing before the first of three committees to which it was referred this month.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Free kill’ fix moves forward in Senate as survivors argue for medical malpractice reform

Published

on


Sen. Clay Yarborough’s proposal to fix a long-standing gap in state law that penalizes certain survivors of deaths at the hands of negligent doctors continues to move.

The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services is the latest panel to advance SB 734, which Yarborough calls a “clean repeal” of state statute — 768.21(8) — prohibiting adult children and their parents from collecting negligence and non-economic “pain and suffering” damages for medical malpractice.

Yarborough says the current state of play “singled out a narrow group of survivors who cannot recover non-economic damages in the case of a wrongful death due to medical negligence, even though the same damages can be recovered by survivors for a wrongful death that is caused by all other forms of negligence.”

Florida is the only state in the nation with the restriction on its books. Lawmakers passed it in 1990 when the state was trying to rein in increasing medical malpractice costs and attract more doctors to the state.

Yarborough stressed that most doctors do a good job.

“This is in no way a knock against the medical profession or anyone in it because Florida has some of the best health care providers and institutions in the country and beyond. I do not have a statistic to quote, but I will venture to say, we likely have a low single-digit percentage of those in Florida’s health care community that have issues with malpractice or negligence,” Yarborough said, framing his bill as being about “accountability” and “the value of life.”

More than two dozen speakers showed up with passionate cases for or against the legislation.

Opponents made the case that medical malpractice insurance has gotten more expensive and more difficult to procure in the last few years, so the pool of claimants should be expanded.

Tallahassee Memorial Hospital’s Judy Davis, a risk manager, said that “bad, unfortunate outcomes” do happen, but only 1 in 4 of them involve “some degree of negligence.”

“When physicians and hospitals have to pay large sums of money, it does reflect in higher insurance premiums,” Davis said.

Andy Bolin of the Florida Justice Civil Reform Institute said his clients “face the highest medical malpractice premiums” in the U.S. He argued that “infusing” new cases into the system would make that problem worse, and suggested that if the bill must go forward, damages need to be capped.

Associated Industries of Florida’s Adam Basford urged lawmakers to take a “holistic” view of the problem and “mitigate” the impact on providers.

The Florida Chamber’s Carolyn Johnson warned that the bill would increase litigation, insurance rates and health care costs, while decreasing access to care.

Proponents argued that survivors need the opportunity for compensation without caps.

Some told their personal stories of treatment deferred with horrible consequences and no recourse, while their advocates made the larger case for change.

AARP’s Karen Murillo said current law discriminates against older adults, arguing that people are being deprived of justice and rejecting the idea that this class of claimants should be held responsible for reducing liability for medical providers.

Ethan Perez described maltreatment for his grandfather that included injection with hydrogen peroxide, which an autopsy deemed to be “homicide,” but which was protected under current law.

“Civil lawsuits have an opportunity to reveal criminal wrongdoing,” Perez said, adding that his family is “being left without justice” due to the current “inhumane and barbaric” free kill law.

Lauren Korienko said her mother was found dead in a hospital bed, “covered with blood” after a minor surgery because medical professionals let her bleed to death over the course of 24 hours and succumb to septic shock. Her family was aghast to find they lacked recourse and protection under state law that makes Florida a “sanctuary for medical malpractice.”

Darcy McGill, another person who buried her mother after maltreatment, called Florida’s “free kill” law the state’s “dirty little secret.”

“I’ve yet to hear one good reason why my life is less valuable because I’m married and without children,” McGill said.

After the testimony, Senators diverged on whether the bill could work ahead of the bill moving forward.

Republican Sen. Gayle Harrell said the right move wasn’t this bill, but was to empower the Board of Medicine.

Republican Sen. Jason Brodeur said other states had these provisions without caps, so Florida should as well.

Democrat Sen. Darryl Rouson said the passage of the bill would be a “milestone moment” for people without recourse until now.

__

Jesse Scheckner of Florida Politics contributed to this report.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Byron Donalds calls for removal of Ft. Myers Council members after illegal immigration deadlock

Published

on


The Naples Republican expects Gov. DeSantis to take action.

A candidate for Governor from Southwest Florida is accusing Fort Myers officials of “dereliction of duty” for failing to ratify an agreement between their local police and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on handling illegal immigration.

And U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds is arguing that local officials should be removed from office if they don’t change their stance.

“These officials that don’t understand their role, which is to implement a federal and state law, not circumvent and create sanctuary cities. They simply need to be removed from office. They’re not going to follow the law. It’s that simple,” Donalds said on Newsmax.

The measure failed on a 3-3 tied vote of the City Council Monday night, amid worries that the enforcement agreement would lead to racial profiling.

Donalds thinks the legislators need to flip their positions sooner than later.

“These Council members need to understand they have a responsibility to execute and implement state and federal law not to run against it, not to create a sanctuary,” Donalds added. “In my view, that’s a dereliction of their duty and their oath of office, and if they don’t reverse course, they should be removed.”

State law passed earlier this year bans local officials from not cooperating with federal and state efforts to cooperate with attempts to fight illegal immigration.

Gov. Ron DeSantis has removed local officials before for not following his interpretation of the law, and Donalds noted during his interview Tuesday that the Governor is “not going to let this go,” suggesting that he expects potential gubernatorial suspensions of the wayward Council members.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Top House Democrats seek DOGE details, questioning if it operates ‘outside the bounds’ of U.S. law

Published

on


Top Democrats on the House Judiciary and House Oversight committees have filed a lengthy Freedom of Information Act request questioning whether the Trump administration’s DOGE Service is operating “outside the bounds of federal law,” The Associated Press has learned.

U.S. Reps. Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Gerald Connolly of Virginia are seeking detailed information about the authority of the Department of Government Efficiency Service, including billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk and some 40 other people, to carry out firings of federal workers and dismantling of federal agencies.

They also are requesting detailed information about DOGE’s access to sensitive data, its use of artificial intelligence, the resumes and training of its staff and its communications related to Musk-held entities including SpaceX, Starlink and Tesla.

“The Administration and Mr. Musk have hidden behind a veil of secrecy as they systematically dismantle the federal government of the United States,” the Democrats wrote in a letter to DOGE Administrator Amy Gleason accompanying the FOIA request, which was obtained by the AP. “The American people deserve answers, and we are committed to using every tool at our disposal to expose the truth about DOGE’s operations.”

They are seeking expedited review of the request, with a response within 20 days.

The FOIA request is the latest in an escalating confrontation between Congress and the executive branch as President Donald Trump is rapidly slashing routine aspects of the federal government by doing away with thousands of workers and unwinding various longstanding agencies and services.

While generally anyone can file a FOIA request, the Democrats on the panels are utilizing the avenues at their disposal as the minority party to press for oversight of the Republican administration any way they can. It’s also a potential step toward more binding measures, including legal action.

In the FOIA request, Raskin and Connolly, who are the ranking Democrats on the committees, wrote that the information is necessary “to provide answers to the many open questions and an explanation to the public.”

They said, “There exist possible questions concerning the government’s integrity regarding DOGE’s operations, formation, and activity, which form the basis of this request, as many of DOGE’s actions may be outside the bounds of federal law.”

It’s unclear if the Trump administration will respond.

Trump and Musk have shown little regard for the protests coming from Democrats — and some Republicans — in Congress as their teams march across the federal government. Musk has vowed transparency, but the Democrats noted he has met privately with House and Senate Republicans.

The Trump administration is purging employees, shuttering federal agencies and otherwise disrupting operations in the name of rooting out waste, fraud and abuse. Some 100 lawsuits have been filed, with judges slowing and stopping some actions, while allowing others.

In the sweeping request, the Democrats seek four main types of information about the authority involved with DOGE’s activity: its access to sensitive data; the guidance and decision-making around its firings of federal employees; the potential conflicts of interest around its leadership; and its internal communications.

They seek the names, job titles and qualifications of DOGE staffers who have “been granted access to personally identifiable or sensitive information” since inauguration day, Jan. 20, and their purpose for doing so.

Additionally, they want to know about the various computer programs, including but “not limited to, artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs), your agency is using to store, process or analyze personally identifiable or sensitive information or data.”

The request seeks all DOGE directives, guidance and analyses around the firing of federal workers, including the dismissal of Inspectors General, and the undoing of various government agencies, including the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Department of Education and others.

Democrats are also requesting information about DOGE’s authority to direct and execute these directives as well as details around the funding of DOGE operations.

Musk, DOGE Administrator Gleason and some 40 other employees are listed in the FOIA request, which seeks information about their resumes, salaries, any conflict of interest waivers and any non-disclosure agreements involving their employment.

The request also seeks all communication from those workers, including via text message, and various messaging platforms, and specifically around key words including Musk-related entities SpaceX, Starlink, Twitter, Tesla and others.

___

Republished with permission of The Associated Press.


Post Views: 0



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.