| ny-brownfields.com |
Sample Letters |
|
|
February ___, 2003
Senator __________________
___ Legislative Office Building [member information and addresses: http://www.senate.state.ny.us/senatehomepage.nsf/senators?OpenForm]
Assemblyman _________
Legislative Office Building [member information and addresses: http://www.assembly.state.ny.us/mem/]
Re: Need for Meaningful Brownfields Reforms
Dear Senator _______/Assemblyman ______:
Any agenda for improving New York State’s economy cannot ignore the need for effective incentives for the cleanup and redevelopment of Brownfield sites. In this time of fiscal austerity, what is needed most is NOT more State money—but a realistic approach to the issue of redeveloping these sites, which are a drag on the economy and a blight on the landscape of older communities throughout the State. A realistic approach is one that bases cleanup standards on the intended new use of the property and the potential risks that would be associated with such use.
Most Brownfield sites are privately owned and the best opportunities for redevelopment are on the part of prospective purchasers and developers who have no connection to prior site uses or polluting activities. So, the key to promoting beneficial site reuse and associated economic revitalization is to encourage such entrepreneurs to come forward and voluntarily clean up the many thousands of such sites found in every part of the State. Entrepreneurs will not step forward as long as the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) insists on treating them as though they were legally culpable polluters and continues to require low-risk Brownfield sites to meet the same cleanup standards as high-hazard Superfund sites.
If volunteers do not come forward to redevelop Brownfield sites, no one else can afford to do so. The result will be sites that do no good for the economy, while continuing to leach their pollution. A more detailed position paper is attached.
The Legislature needs to treat the issue of Brownfields (and Voluntary Cleanup Program) reform as what it is: an economic development issue with ancillary environmental benefits—rather than the other way around. I urge you to encourage Assemblymen Tom DiNapoli and Robin Schimminger to convene joint hearings of the Environmental Conservation and Economic Development Committees on this important issue.
Sincerely,
__________________________
Attachment
[Please add a personal, handwritten note at the bottom] Letter to Assembly Committee Chairs Seeking Joint Hearings
February 10, 2003
The Honorable Thomas DiNapoli, Chairman NYS Assembly Committee on Environmental Conservation 837 Legislative Office Building Albany, NY 12248
The Honorable Robin Schimminger, Chairman NYS Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Job Creation, Commerce & Industry 847 Legislative Office Building Albany, NY 12248
Re: Need for Joint Effort on Brownfields
Dear Messrs. DiNapoli and Schimminger:
I am an environmental attorney whose experience over the past 30 years includes: · being an environmental advocate in charge of the National Wildlife Federation’s national program on pollution & toxic substances (1973-1985); · serving on Maryland Governor Glendening’s Voluntary Cleanup Program Task Force (1996-1997) which helped design the Brownfields program adopted by that State’s Legislature in 1998; · serving (2000-present), while a member of Broome County’s Environmental Management Council, as Chair of the EMC’s Brownfields Subcommittee (and as a member of the management team overseeing implementation of Broome County’s Brownfields Pilot Program grant from U.S. EPA); and · being Director of Legal Affairs for Newman Development Group, LLC (1997-present), which has developed numerous successful shopping centers on Brownfield sites throughout Broome County and in many other locations.
Throughout this period I have been convinced, both as an environmental advocate and as an attorney for a developer, that promoting the beneficial reuse of Brownfield sites is a win-win opportunity for both the economy and the environment. Unfortunately, the current regulatory regime in New York State is so onerous and oppressive that developers are driven away from purchasing or redeveloping Brownfield sites. The cleanup and reuse of privately owned Brownfield sites under DEC’s administrative Voluntary Cleanup Program depends on “volunteers” being willing to come forward. By treating low-risk Brownfields the same as high-hazard Superfund sites, and by not differentiating between innocent volunteers and original polluters, DEC has succeeded in driving volunteers away from the program. The result is equally disastrous for the economy and the environment. New development is discouraged and contaminated sites continue to fester as blights on the landscape. The Legislature has not fared much better than DEC. In 1996 it established an Environmental Restoration Program for municipally-owned Brownfields under the Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act and imbued it with $200 million in funding. Now, 7 years later, nearly $180 million remains in the Fund because the onerous remediation requirements imposed by the legislation require million-dollar cleanups for low-hazard sites. So, even with the State picking up 75% of the cleanup costs, municipalities have been unable or unwilling to come up with the remaining 25%.
New York State remains one of the few states without a statutory Voluntary Cleanup Program. (I enclose a published article which compares New York’s VCP to those of five other states—MD, MA, MI, NJ, and PA. Suffice it say, we don’t measure up very well.) Assemblyman Schimminger, you were correct in May 2000, when you were quoted as follows (in a Press Release supporting a Brownfields Bill generated by the broad-based Brownfields Coalition): “Too many of our older urban areas contain brownfield parcels that lie dormant, while greenspaces in suburban and exurban areas are used for new development. These dormant sites represent both lost economic development opportunities and continuing environmental problems…. We cannot afford to simply maintain the status quo and continue to miss the opportunities to reuse brownfield sites and create jobs, not only in upstate, but throughout our great Empire State.” Assemblyman DiNapoli, I feel certain you share this concern.
The 2003 Legislative Session, in this period of fiscal austerity and a stagnant economy, affords a tremendous opportunity to adopt meaningful Brownfields reform—to bolster the economy and stimulate the cleanup of festering Brownfields site—at NO COST TO THE STATE. All that is needed is a flexible, user-friendly regulatory program that protects public health and the environment, but without tying up prospective purchasers and would-be developers in endless red tape. A similar approach to relaxing red tape in the already amply-funded municipal brownfields program would work wonders in encouraging municipalities to actually utilize the program.
In order to advance the ball on this critical issue, I respectfully urge you to convene JOINT HEARINGs to ensure that solutions are structured which appropriately address both the economic development and environmental implications thereof. I stand ready and willing to be of what assistance I can in promoting appropriate forward motion on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Kenneth S. Kamlet Director of Legal Affairs
Enclosure |