Lawmakers hear 'Climate Superfund' and all‑electric public‑buildings bills; advocates say 'polluters should pay'

Representative Boyle introduced the Rhode Island Climate Superfund Act (H7004), saying the measure copies elements of existing Superfund law to require the largest fossil‑fuel companies to pay for climate‑related cleanup and adaptation costs rather than leaving the bill to taxpayers.

Under Boyle’s proposal the Department of Environmental Management would identify eligible climate‑response work over a one‑year review and would have six months to calculate proportional amounts owed by responsible parties for the period 2000–2025 using accepted attribution methods. The treasurer would hold funds in a Climate Superfund account and distribute money to municipalities, tribes and community organizations under an allocation system the bill would define.

Boyle also introduced H7081, the Next Generation Public Buildings Act, which would prohibit combustion‑based heating and hot water in new construction or major renovations of state and municipal buildings open to the public commencing Jan. 1, 2028, to avoid locking in fossil‑fuel systems for decades.

Multiple witnesses testified in support of the Climate Superfund idea. Bill Ibel of Climate Action in Rhode Island said, "If you made the mess, you clean it up," and cited national disaster costs and local coastal impacts. Greg Garrett and other witnesses emphasized rising storm, insurance and infrastructure costs and said the approach follows models in New York, Vermont and other states. Justin Boyan described the bill as revenue‑positive and argued the fee targets the largest historic contributors rather than shifting costs to taxpayers.

Opposition registrations included the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce, the Energy Marketers Association, Rhode Island Energy and several business coalitions; some industry representatives did not speak on the record. Committee members asked witnesses for localized cost figures and implementation details; proponents offered to provide links and supporting studies.

No vote was taken. Committee members agreed to hold bills for further study while staff and witnesses supply requested data and written information.