 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Shopping Centers Today -> September 2002
 PRINT THIS STORY: |
  CHANGE TEXT SIZE: |
ICSC BILLS BACK ON AGENDA?
By Ian Ritter
When Congress returns from recess this month, industry members hope it will take up some unfinished business on ICSC-backed bills. Legislators recessed last month without passing some key bills, though important progress was made on at least two of them, dealing with bankruptcy protection and affordable terrorism insurance.
However, Congress doesn’t have much time to act before its Oct. 4 adjournment. In addition, the November elections are certain to distract lawmakers further, observers note. And any bills that fail to pass will have to be reintroduced before a Congress with a number of newly elected members.
The status of the bills is as follows:
• Terrorism insurance — Joint committee members have been appointed to iron out the differences between House and Senate bills designed to make terrorism coverage more available and affordable. They have not yet resolved differences over protecting businesses from terrorism-related punitive damages, but ICSC’s legislative staff in Washington predicted they would come to an agreement during the recess.
• Bankruptcy reform — A bankruptcy reform bill said to be supported by both houses came very close to passing before the Congressional recess. The House was to vote on the bill July 26, but conservative members opposed a portion of the bill that would prevent anti-abortion protesters from filing for bankruptcy to avoid court fines. Nevertheless, Norman M. Kranzdorf, chairman of Plymouth Meeting, Pa.-based Kramont Realty Trust and chairman of ICSC’s bankruptcy task force, said he expects the bill to go through and be signed into law in the coming month.
It has been a long wait. Legislation was first introduced five years ago, and the current versions were passed more than a year ago, before being held up while a conference committee worked to reconcile the two. As proposed, the bill limits the time a bankrupt tenant has to decide whether to reject a lease. Currently, tenants have 60 days, but a judge can extend the time indefinitely, leaving landlords saddled with failing or dark stores. The proposed legislation would give tenants 120 days, but limit extensions to a maximum of 90 days.
• Banking rules — ICSC supports House and Senate bills prohibiting the Federal Reserve Board and the Treasury Department from passing rules that would allow financial institutions to take part in real estate brokerage and management. The Fed and Treasury are able to pass such rules following a recent amendment to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. There is no rush to get the legislation passed, however, because Treasury said it would take no action related to the amendment until next year. ICSC member Elizabeth Holland, CEO of Chicago mall management company Abbell Credit Corp., spoke in favor of the legislation before the House Financial Services Subcommittee July 24. Holland asserted that allowing financial services companies to participate in real estate activities decreases competition and gives those institutions unfair advantages. Other ICSC members told legislators at this year’s Congressional Contacts Meeting in Washington that allowing a moneylender institution to also broker deals could lead to conflicts of interest. But there is formidable opposition. “The American Bankers Association is a powerful lobby,” Holland said. “They’re pushing it, because their members want to be in this business.”
• Endangered Species Act reform — No action will likely be taken on a bill to amend the Endangered Species Act, advocates of the ICSC-backed legislation say. But the bill did gain ground this year after it was passed by the House Resources Committee. Developers complain that they are prevented from building on their own land and that there are species on the endangered list that are not in fact threatened at all. The developers want to require that more-stringent scientific data be presented before animals are put on the list. The legislation also would provide for an economic-impact assessment before any further regulations can be enforced.
“We believe in the Endangered Species Act, and we certainly don’t want to prevent any endangered species truly at risk, but groups have claimed a species is endangered without backing it up,” said William Hoffman, ICSC’s environmental issues director.
 | Current Issue December 2008 |