Economic development: other; natural resources and environmental protection act; amend to reflect elimination of the Michigan strategic fund. Amends secs. 512, 11550, 20104a, 72103 & 72104 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.512 et seq.). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0631'25
SB 669 amends multiple sections of Michigan’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act to update references tied to the state’s economic development structure and to expand or clarify several programs administered by the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy. The bill revises the film-location use provision to allow department-controlled property to be used for film production under department-set terms, while continuing to prohibit obscene productions and productions subject to federal performer-recordkeeping requirements. It also updates the brownfield redevelopment board and trail/town designation provisions to reflect the replacement of the Michigan Strategic Fund reference with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation’s bureau of fair competition and free enterprise.
A major portion of the bill reorganizes and expands the solid waste management fund framework. It creates or continues dedicated accounts for solid waste staffing and perpetual care, and adds a new coal ash care fund for coal ash impoundments and landfills. The bill specifies allowable uses for those funds, including permitting, inspections, enforcement, groundwater monitoring, corrective action, closure and post-closure care, and administrative support. It also directs the department to establish and fund recycling-related grant and loan programs for recycling markets, local recycling innovation, and recycling access/voluntary participation, with eligibility rules and reporting requirements for recipients.
The bill’s impact on state law is primarily administrative and programmatic: it updates statutory references, formalizes funding streams, and expands the department’s authority to support recycling infrastructure and market development. It also requires annual reporting to the governor and legislature on staffing, permit processing, inspections, enforcement actions, complaints, and fund balances, increasing transparency around solid waste and coal ash program operations. For trails and trail towns, the bill preserves the Pure Michigan designation system but ties trademark licensing and related approvals to the new economic development entity.
Overall sentiment appears neutral to favorable based on the bill’s structure and caption, which frames it as a technical update reflecting the elimination of the Michigan Strategic Fund. The bill seems designed to preserve existing programs while modernizing references and strengthening environmental management and recycling support. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from debate or roll call history.
Notable points of contention, to the extent they can be inferred from the text, would likely center on the scope of new recycling grants, the use of state fund revenues for staffing and program administration, and the creation of a coal ash care fund that could affect regulated facilities and fee structures. Another possible issue is the bill’s tie-bar to Senate Bill 631, meaning SB 669 would not take effect unless the companion bill is enacted, which suggests the package is part of a broader statutory reorganization rather than a standalone policy change.
The bill amends sections of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act to update agency references, revise fund administration, and expand the statutory basis for recycling, solid waste, and coal ash programs. It creates and defines uses for the solid waste management fund accounts and the coal ash care fund, authorizes grants and loans for recycling markets and local recycling initiatives, and requires annual reporting on program activity and finances. It also updates the brownfield redevelopment board and Pure Michigan trail/trail town provisions to reflect the current economic development entity, while leaving the underlying designation programs in place.
The available context suggests the bill is largely technical and administrative, with a policy emphasis on maintaining existing programs after the elimination of the Michigan Strategic Fund and on strengthening recycling and waste-management infrastructure. Because no committee transcripts or votes were provided, there is no recorded floor or committee sentiment to assess directly. Based on the bill text and caption, the overall tone appears pragmatic and generally supportive of environmental program administration and economic development-related updates.
Potential points of contention include whether the bill’s expanded grant and loan programs for recycling markets and local recycling innovation should be funded through state environmental accounts, how much discretion the department should have in allocating those funds, and whether the new coal ash care fund and reporting requirements impose additional burdens on regulated facilities or the department. The tie-bar to SB 631 is also significant, because the bill’s effectiveness depends on companion legislation, indicating that some provisions may be part of a broader negotiated package. No explicit opposition or support was included in the provided materials.