Legislative Office Building, Room 5200

Hartford, CT 06106 (860) 240-0200



As Amended by Senate "A" (LCO 4281)

Senate Calendar No.: 260

OFA Fiscal Note

State Impact: See Below

Municipal Impact: See Below


Section 1 requires the Department of Agriculture (DoAg), in conjunction with the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station (CAES) and the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to develop best practices by January 1, 2017 regarding neonicotinoids (a type of pesticide). As these agencies currently have staff with expertise in this area, there is no fiscal impact anticipated.

Sections 2 and 4 prohibit anyone from applying neonicotinoid insecticides to certain trees or blossoming plants. It allows DEEP and DoAg to enforce the ban and allows the agencies to set penalties for violations. This may result in a revenue gain, to the extent violations occur.

Sections 2 and 4 may also result in a cost or savings to municipalities that currently use neonicotinoid pesticides on certain trees or blossoming plants, as they would need to use an alternative pesticide in those situations. Such cost or savings would vary based on the alternative pesticide chosen by a municipality. Any municipality that does not currently use neonicotinoid pesticides on certain trees or blossoming plants would experience no fiscal impact.

Section 3 requires DEEP to classify all neonicotinoids that are labeled for treating plants as “restricted use” pesticides. As the agency currently has expertise with these chemicals, and this information is available in certain databases, this does not result in a fiscal impact.

Section 5 requires CAES to establish a Pollinator Advisory Committee consisting of at least three existing agency staff with certain expertise in pollinators. This does not result in a fiscal impact.

Sections 6 and 7 require DEEP and DoAg, by January 1, 2017, to jointly report to the Environment Committee on (1) the statutory and regulatory changes needed to apply current restrictions, and (2) certain information regarding varroa mites. Both agencies currently have staff with expertise to make these reporting requirements. As such, these provisions do not result in a fiscal impact.

Section 8 allows OPM to identify opportunities to foster state and local development in a manner that increases pollinator habitats. This has no fiscal impact.

Sections 9 and 10 require that a model pollinator habitat guide be established under certain conditions. Section 11 specifically requires CAES to compile such a plan. These provisions have no fiscal impact.

Section 12 requires the Department of Transportation (DOT) to (1) identify areas where nonnative, cool-season turf grass installed along state highways could be replaced with pollinator vegetation, and (2) report to the Environment and Transportation committees on these areas by January 1, 2017. Section 14 allows DOT to use Federal Funds if available for this purpose. To the extent federal funds are available; there will be a cost of up to $20,000 per acre for the initial installation of pollinator vegetation, which will be paid for using federal funds.

Section 13 requires the Siting Council's revegetation orders of overhead transmission line rights-of-way to include vegetation with model pollinator habitat. This may result in a cost to the state and municipalities depending on the ownership of the right-of-way.

Section 15 establishes qualifications for certain inspector positions that may be appointed by the State Entomologist. This does not result in a fiscal impact.

Senate “A” replaces the underlying bill resulting in the fiscal impacts identified above.

The Out Years

The annualized ongoing fiscal impacts described above would continue into the future subject to inflation.

The preceding Fiscal Impact statement is prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for the purposes of information, summarization and explanation and does not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose. In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst's professional knowledge. Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.