The Certification of Adoption of Sustainability and Transparency Standards Act (the “Act”) establishes a voluntary disclosure regime to foster dialogue around sustainability and responsibility among participating Delaware business entities and their various stakeholders. Because issues relating to sustainability and responsibility are fact-specific and fact-intensive and may vary greatly depending on, among other things, the size of the entity, the nature of its business and operations, and the industry in which it operates, the Act does not prescribe specific standards, measures of performance or criteria for evaluating performance. Rather, consistent with the enabling approach of Delaware business laws generally, the Act requires the governing body of each entity seeking certification under the Act to adopt principles, guidelines and standards to guide its business activities in a sustainable and responsible manner, as well as metrics for assessing whether it has met its objectives. Although Section 5003D of the Act grants the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware (the “Secretary of State”) the authority and discretion to provide the form of application for certification under the Act, the Act does not contemplate that State officers will make qualitative judgments regarding the standards or metrics that an entity adopts. The Act also does not contemplate or require that State officers determine qualitatively whether an entity has been operated in a sustainable and responsible manner. The Secretary of State's certification is focused on information acknowledged by an authorized representative of the entity regarding its adoption of procedures to operate sustainably and responsibly and its commitment to disclose, at least annually, such procedures. To that end, Section 5003D of the Act requires an entity applying for certification under the Act to make disclosures regarding the sustainability and responsibility standards it has adopted, the metrics it uses to evaluate whether it has met those standards, and its performance in meeting those standards. The Act is entirely voluntary. The decision whether to seek certification is in the sole discretion of each entity. The Act imposes no obligations on any Delaware entities that have not elected certification. (Of course, any person or entity that misrepresents an entity's certified status may be subject to civil or criminal fines or penalties.) The Act does not impose fines or penalties on entities that elect not to seek certification, nor does it impose penalties or fines on entities that, having become certified, fail to satisfy their own performance standards. Moreover, the Act specifies that fiduciary liability shall not be imposed as a result of, among other things, the decision whether or not to seek certification or the failure to meet specific sustainability and responsibility standards.
Sponsored bills
This bill establishes in-person early voting for the State of Delaware. Registered voters will be allowed to vote in-person for at least 10 days prior to an election, up to and including the Saturday and Sunday immediately prior to the election at locations determined by the Commissioner. The Commissioner is also charged with determining whether such voting should occur by voting machine or paper ballot. All other procedures relating to conducting voting are the same as for election day voting. For statewide elections the statute directs that there must be at least one in-person polling place in each county, and an additional location in the city of Wilmington. This Act takes effect on January 1, 2020.
This Act permits the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control to renew or extend the term of a construction permit under certain circumstances.
This Act revises the data collection procedures and authority of the Workers’ Compensation Oversight Panel (“Panel”) to ensure that the Panel is able to obtain the data necessary to perform its statutory duties, without infringing upon the authority of the Department of Insurance to regulate the insurance industry. This Act also protects the confidentiality of data acquired by the Panel from the Department of Insurance or the Department of Labor. This Act also makes technical corrections to conform existing law to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act prohibits the manufacture, sale, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, receipt, possession, or transport of assault weapons in Delaware, subject to certain exceptions. One exception relevant to individuals is that the Act does not prohibit the possession and transport of firearms that were lawfully possessed or fully applied for before the effective date of this Act; although for these firearms there are certain restrictions relating to their possession and transport after the effective date of this Act. This Act is based on the Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (“FSA”) passed in Maryland in the wake of the tragic slaughtering of children on December 14, 2012, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The FSA’s assault weapons ban was upheld as constitutional on February 21, 2017, by the full membership of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017). The names Newtown, Aurora, San Bernardino, Orlando, Las Vegas, and Parkland, among others, have become synonymous with tragic killing of innocent, unsuspecting Americans of all ages and backgrounds, amidst a framework of federal and state laws that have permitted the purchase of weapons designed for the battlefield — not for our schools, our theaters, our places of worship, or our homes. Safety — both for the general public, as well as members of Delaware's law-enforcement community — is the objective of this Act, as it was for the FSA. And, as with the FSA, a primary goal of this Act is to reduce the availability of assault weapons so that when a criminal acts, he or she does so with a less dangerous weapon and less severe consequences. Relying on United States Supreme Court precedent from District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), as well as the holdings of its sister circuits, the full Fourth Circuit concluded that the assault weapons banned by the FSA are not protected by the Second Amendment. The Fourth Circuit was convinced that the banned assault weapons are among those arms that are “like” “M-16 rifles” — “weapons that are most useful in military service” — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach. The Fourth Circuit concluded that Maryland had presented extensive uncontroverted evidence demonstrating that the assault weapons outlawed by the FSA are exceptionally lethal weapons of war. The Fourth Circuit also concluded that the evidence showed the difference between the fully automatic and semiautomatic versions of military-style weapons is slight. Further evidence considered by the Fourth Circuit that motivates this Act is as follows: (1) Like their fully automatic counterparts, the banned assault weapons are firearms designed for the battlefield, for the soldier to be able to shoot a large number of rounds across a battlefield at a high rate of speed, and that their design results in a capability for lethality — more wounds, more serious, in more victims — far beyond that of other firearms in general, including other semiautomatic guns. (2) The banned assault weapons have been used disproportionately to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of law-enforcement officers. (3) The banned assault weapons further pose a heightened risk to civilians in that rounds from assault weapons have the ability to easily penetrate most materials used in standard home construction, car doors, and similar materials, and that criminals armed with the banned assault weapons possess a “military-style advantage” in firefights with law-enforcement officers, as such weapons allow criminals to effectively engage law-enforcement officers from great distances and their rounds easily pass through the soft body armor worn by most law-enforcement officers. (4) Although self-defense is a conceivable use of the banned assault weapons, most individuals choose to keep other firearms for that purpose. (5) Prohibitions against assault weapons will promote public safety by reducing the availability of those armaments to mass shooters and other criminals, by diminishing their especial threat to law-enforcement officers, and by hindering their unintentional misuse by civilians. (6) In many situations, the semiautomatic fire of an assault weapon is more accurate and lethal than the automatic fire. Finding this evidence and these conclusions by the Fourth Circuit to be strongly persuasive of the applicable framework of constitutional rights, and firmly believing that promoting the safety of the Delaware public and Delaware law-enforcement is a paramount function of the Delaware General Assembly, Delaware legislators file this Act in the name of public safety and with adherence to core constitutional principles.
This Act prohibits a tax rate greater than 50 cents per cigar upon the sale and use of premium cigars.
This Act authorizes a pharmacist or pharmacy to decline to dispense a prescription drug or provide a pharmacy service to an “insured” if the amount reimbursed by an entity subject to the Act is less than the pharmacy acquisition cost. This Act also prohibits a pharmacy benefits manager from reimbursing a pharmacist or pharmacy for a prescription drug or pharmacy service in an amount less than the pharmacy benefits manager reimburses itself or an affiliate for the same prescription drug or pharmacy service.
This Act is the first leg of a Constitutional Amendment reflecting the recommendations of the Advisory Panel to the Delaware Economic and Financial Advisory Council (DEFAC) on Potential Fiscal Controls and Budget Smoothing Mechanisms established as per House Joint Resolution 8 of the 149th General Assembly (Panel). This Act would build upon the State’s existing appropriation limit methodology by moving the Budget Reserve Account into a newly defined Budget Stabilization Fund, defining rules for deposits to and withdrawals from said Budget Stabilization Fund, and adding a check of the appropriation limit against an index comprised of relevant indicators of growth of the State’s economy. The Panel further recommended that any final adoption of the structural budget reforms included in this Act be accompanied by statutory enactment of structural reforms to the Personal Income Tax by broadening the tax base as initially recommended by the DEFAC Advisory Council of Revenues report dated May 2015 and further detailed in the Panel’s report dated June 1, 2018.
This legislation creates a benchmark for determining when a treatment or service is no longer experimental or investigational. When Medicare determines that a treatment is safe for its population, commercial insurers in Delaware may no longer deny coverage on that basis. This bill will remove inconsistencies for properly-evidenced treatments between payers.
This Act authorizes the creation and regulation of a new type of limited-purpose bank, the "Business Development Bank." Modeled on Delaware's successful credit card bank laws, this Act would allow Business Development Banks, or "BDBs," to concentrate their resources in the commercial lending space, leverage technology and expertise, and partner with existing banks to serve a broader spectrum of small to medium-sized businesses. This Act would limit the permissible activities of the BDBs to ensure that they cannot compete with existing banks for consumer customers or to provide several other forms of bank or trust services.