Despite the disappointing results for U.S. Senate, the environment saw some important election wins in North Carolina. This week in CIB.

Campaign Watch: Green Wins in Legislative Contests

Environmental issues, including public objections to fracking, helped carry NCLCV-supported candidates to wins over anti-environmental incumbents in three NC House districts last week.

The highest profile state legislative loser was Representative Tim Moffitt of Buncombe County, who had been named to the national “Dirty Dozen in the States” list of the most anti-environmental officials seeking election to state office around the country. NCLCV sponsored voter education efforts targeting Moffitt’s poor environmental record on issues like coal ash pollution and endorsed his successful opponent, Brian Turner. The investment by NCLCV and others in this contest helped to overcome spending by the American Petroleum Institute (API) backing Moffitt.

The other losing incumbents successfully targeted by NCLCV for defeat were Rep. Nathan Ramsey (also of Buncombe County) and Rep. Mike Stone of Lee County. Ramsey lost to NCLCV-backed John Ager. Public opposition to the prospect of fracking in Lee helped drive the decision by voters who dumped Stone in favor of NCLCV-backed Brad Salmon.

Speaking of the handful of incumbent legislators who lost their seats this fall, post-election analysis from the NC League of Municipalities agreed that, “Hydraulic fracturing, and opposition to it, helped shape the outcome in at least three of the contests, as environmental groups poured large sums of money into the races supporting the [successful challengers].”

For a complete review of the successful N.C. General Assembly candidates supported by NCLCV, see here.

While NCLCV did not endorse in judicial elections, the results in the contests for NC Supreme Court this year still deserve mention. The three candidates not favored by a flood of corporate energy interests money nonetheless won their contests, ensuring that North Carolina’s highest state court would not become the exclusive domain of Justices elected with the help of big money from oil, gas, and utilities corporations. The winning candidates instead were incumbent Justices Robin Hudson and Cheri Beasley and state Appeals Court Judge Sam Ervin IV.

For a recap of the role of corporate energy money in North Carolina’s legislative and judicial contests this year, see the Facing South article here. A big difference in the results this year compared to 2012 was the effective involvement of environmental groups in targeted state legislative races.

Campaign Watch Hagan Loses, but Adams Wins

The national League of Conservation Voters (LCV) Action Fund received a split decision from North Carolina voters on its two Congressional endorsements in the state this cycle. In the state’s marquee contest of the year, NC House Speaker Thom Tillis edged incumbent Senator Kay Hagan for the U.S. Senate. However, Representative-elect Alma Adams blew out her opponent in winning election to the U.S. House of Representatives from the state’s 12th Congressional District.

Exit polling indicated that the primary issues in the minds of voters in the Hagan/Tillis contest were economic insecurities and health care. Polling during the year confirmed the unpopularity of the state legislature’s attacks on environmental protections, but these issues did not seem to drive voters in the U.S. Senate contest. Voter polling consistently indicates support for clean energy development and action to address climate change as well. Thus far in the biggest contests, the challenge remains that of persuading voters to take these issues into prominent account in deciding whose box to check on their ballots.

Executive Watch: Drilling in the Dark

Over the strong objections of citizen conservation groups, Gov. Pat McCrory and his Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Secretary John Skvarla shut out the public and reporters from a high-level multi-agency meeting on oil and gas drilling off the North Carolina coast.

Ten citizen groups, including NCLCV, signed on to a letter to McCrory and Skvarla calling on them to open this critical coastal policy session to public scrutiny.

In rejecting the call for sunshine on state transaction of the public’s business, McCrory’s DENR dubiously asserted that industry would not be let in either. That claim rang hollow and disingenuous (at best) after investigation revealed thatpresenters at the meeting included staff from oil industry-financed “think tanks” who used their participation to sing the praises of offshore drilling.

NC Rep. Pricey Harrison, who was allowed in as a state legislator on key committees, confirmed the bias of presenters. She told WRAL news, “This is a huge issue for our state, and I think we need more balanced participation. It would have been nice to have the pros and cons [of offshore drilling]. All we heard were the pros today.”

A half-dozen conservation groups (again including NCLCV) followed up with another letter calling out DENR for its deceptive misrepresentation of participants at the meeting. They pointed out that speakers represented entities including the Center for Offshore Safety, a self-described “industry sponsored organization” with members including the major oil corporations and drilling contractors; and the Consumer Energy Alliance, also featuring oil corporations and pipeline groups as its members.

The Associated Press picked up the story and detailed the extensive oil-industry associations of speakers at the meeting.

DENR’s other assertion, that federal agencies wanted the meeting closed, also fell well short of verifiable honesty. A spokesperson for the federal Ocean Energy Management agency denied that his agency asked for the meeting to be closed. In responding to media questions, DENR Secretary Skvarla would not (or could not) name the federal agencies who had made the alleged request.

While some observers (perhaps charitably) wondered aloud why the McCrory Administration would close such a meeting to the public and exclude those who would raise challenging questions about the cons of drilling, we are not surprised. The McCrory Administration policy on offshore drilling is already firmly set: They’re for it, and damn the questions about safety and adverse environmental and economic impacts.

Public scrutiny is not welcome, and citizen conservationists’ questions are not relevant to this Administration’s biggest environmental policy decisions.

Administrative Watch: Public Comments Impact Fracking Rules

The NC Mining and Energy Commission (MEC) last week heard the report of its hearing officers after they finished poring through over 217,000 public comments on the proposed rules on fracking. The hearing officers’ report included recommendations to strengthen monitoring and enforcement of pollution controls in at least two important ways.

In discussions, MEC members tentatively agreed with the hearing officers’ recommendation that the rules should explicitly allow the agency to order that work be stopped on a drilling site which regulators find to be in violation of state rules. They are also considering hearing officers’ recommendation that state regulators be allowed to make unannounced inspections of drilling sites to determine compliance.

Both recommendations were among those that NCLCV and other groups encouraged concerned citizens to request during the public comment process, and many commenters did. (Many others, of course, simply objected to the entire concept of allowing fracking. Unfortunately, the MEC’s legal authority as delegated by the state legislature does not include determining that fracking should be disallowed or delayed for further study.)

The MEC is expected to make its final rule decisions at its meeting on November 14 or November 17. After that, the fracking rules will proceed to the Rules Review Commission in December and the legislature in January. Read more here.

These and other possible concessions to safety don’t make conservationists any happier about the very likely problems that fast-track fracking would bring to our state. They do at least provide more tools to deal with those problems as they occur.

Education & Resources: Using the Clean Power Plan

The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy this week will sponsor a free webinar on how clean energy advocates in the southeastern states can use the EPA’s “Clean Energy Plan” to press for expansion of renewable energy and energy efficiency opportunities. The webinar will be held this Friday, November 14, from 1 to 2 pm. There is no fee but registration is required. Click here for more information and to register.

That’s our report for this week.