HB1713 amends Pennsylvania’s Economic Development Agency, Fiduciary and Lender Environmental Liability Protection Act by updating the definition of “economic development agency.” The bill expands and modernizes the list of entities covered by the law, which is designed to limit environmental liability for certain public and quasi-public entities involved in acquiring, holding, or redeveloping property for economic development purposes.
Under the bill, the definition would expressly include redevelopment authorities and nonprofit corporations controlled by them, industrial development agencies, industrial and commercial development authorities, area loan organizations, municipalities and municipal industrial development or community development departments organized under home rule charters, tourist promotion agencies and their nonprofit sponsors involved in industrial heritage projects, conservancies engaged in industrial site reclamation, and land banks. The bill also makes technical wording updates, such as changing plural references to singular and updating cross-references to current law.
Impact
HB1713 would broaden and clarify which entities receive environmental liability protections under Pennsylvania law when they acquire or redevelop contaminated or former industrial properties. By updating statutory definitions and cross-references, it would align the 1995 act with current redevelopment structures, including land banks and home-rule municipal departments, and could reduce legal uncertainty for local and regional development entities involved in brownfield reuse and community revitalization.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable treatment in the House, moving through the Local Government Committee, Appropriations Committee, and final passage with strong vote margins. The committee and floor votes suggest broad support for the bill’s technical and redevelopment-focused changes, with only limited opposition at the committee stage and a larger but still minority level of dissent on final passage.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the scope of the liability protections and which entities should qualify as “economic development agencies.” Supporters likely view the changes as necessary to reflect modern redevelopment practices and to encourage reuse of former industrial sites, while opponents may be concerned that expanding the definition could extend environmental liability protections too broadly or reduce accountability for property acquisition and cleanup. The final passage vote indicates these concerns did not prevent approval, but they likely explain the limited no votes.