Last Night's C.G.N.A. meeting at the Hannah Senesh School
Maria Pagano, C.G.N.A. President
Caswell Holloway, Chief of Staff for Deputy Mayor Schyler
Joshua Verleun, Staff Attorney and Investigator for Riverkeeper, Inc.
Lauren Collins, Acting Director of the Gowanus Canal Conservancy
Buddy Scotto
David Von Spreckelsen ( Foreground) Toll Brothers' V.P. who is lobbying the city to reject the Superfund.
For the last two weeks, our electeds have been 'spinning' and closing ranks as fast as they can in regards to the Gowanus Canal Superfund nomination. Mayor Bloomberg had been the first to announce that he is against the nomination. Councilman Bill DeBlasio was right behind him. Others, such as Assemblywoman Joan Millman, have been sitting on the fence ever since. Most surprisingly, State Senator Daniel Squadron, who had shown such promise as a forward thinking politician, willing to engage and to listen to his constituents, failed to show any leadership in this matter. What a great disappointment.Gowanus Superfund: City Official Taking Questions
Jim Vogel, Spokesperson for State Senator Velmanette Montgomery
Thank goodness the EPA will either designate the Gowanus Canal as a Superfund site or not purely based on science, because if the agency could be influenced by our elected officials, we would all literally be up shit creek.
The sole politician who came out in favor of Superfund has been State Senator Velmanette Montgomery. Her willingness to follow her conscience is admirable.
Speaking as one, those less courageous politicians have been advertising an alternative plan to EPA's Superfund designation for the Gowanus Canal. What exactly this alternative plan entailed was not revealed to the community until last night, when Caswell Holloway, Chief of Staff for Deputy Mayor Schyler finally 'enlightened' the community at the Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association meeting on Monday evening.
So what is this plan? Simply speaking, it entails a "faster, more efficient clean-up" which is up to EPA's standard, without the stigma associated with the Superfund name. The only difference I could detect between the city's proposal and the EPA's
Superfund program seemed to be the way responsible polluters would be brought to task for the clean-up. The city's plan would ask the polluters to come to the table 'voluntarily,' Mr. Holloway stated. The other difference, of course, is in the name Superfund.
It was clear from many of the questions asked by the audience, that there is much scepticism that the city can get the canal cleaned as thoroughly as the EPA.
Someone in the audience wanted to know why the city was mirroring the efforts of the EPA instead of letting the agency handle the clean-up. Another wanted to know why the city had neglected the canal for so many decades, just to be playing catch-up to the EPA now. Yet another asked Mr. Holloway if the city would still go forward with a clean-up even if the Gowanus area's rezoning from industrial to residential may not.
One thing became incredibly clear to me while I listened to Mr. Holloway. Before the EPA stepped forward with their Superfund proposal for the canal, the city was going to do the very least it could do to clean the polluted waterway before allowing residential housing to be built on its shore. And that seemed to be all right with our elected officials.
Shame on them. They collectively failed to represent this community.
Lets all remember that when they want to get re-elected.
They owe the residents of Carroll Gardens and Greater Gowanus an apology.
More video to come as it uploads.
For Home Page, click Pardon Me For Asking
.JPG)
15 comments:
Bravo Katia enough of this rhetoric!!!! Its time to call a spade a spade. I'm glad Jim Vogel shed some light on this process and thank goodness for Senator Montgomery and her stand on this subject. The city has been dragging its feet for the last 40 years and I can't believe they will be any
swifter now just to avoid superfund status. Empty promises is what we're getting
I know what the plan is. The plan is to come up with a plan. On my walk home Caswell Holloway was talking with the woman that was part of their group and he was telling they need to keep their heads down for the next few weeks and work on a plan. I think the city knows they are not capable and even if they are I do not believe they will follow through.
Scyler lost his credibility early on when he stated that the City Plan could get the job done faster because they were using the study done by the Army Corps of Engineers and that the Superfund plan could not begin until funds were collected from the Polluters. At the EPA Presentation it was clearly stated by Mr. Mugdin that one third of the work was already completed by the Army Corps and that work would commence with allotments from the Trust Fund before Polluters were approached. Explain that one, Mr. Schyler.
The second half of this posting attributes statements to a "Mr. Schyler". Cas Holloway did most of the talking for the City. Edward Skyler, the Deputy Mayor for Operations, did not attend this meeting.
Just let the EPA do it already..sheesh!
If we can't trust the city to do something about our subways why should we trust them with one of the most polluted waterway in america?
Thank you Senator Montgomery and Jim Vogel.
For a moment I feared for Tom Gray's safety when he asked why the epa is now trying to "cram the superfund down our throats." It was clear that the majority of attendees welcome the epa's involvement.
I suppose that Squadron is huddling with the city to see if they will come up with a viable plan that he can spin and support. Since, according to Coswell Holloway, they won't have a finished plan prior to the close of the comment period it might be difficult to form an informed judgment. Daniel Squadron is turning out to be another political disappointment.
Another important point that was made last night is that the city is not improving the flushing tunnel out of any goodwill or concern for the community but rather because they are obligated to pursuant to a consent order.
I also applaud my neighbors for their well informed and cogent questions and for refusing to put up with any more BS.
And thank you to Joshua Verleun.
To Commenter 9:51,
Thanks for pointing the mistake out.
I of course meant to say Mr. Holloway, chief-of staff to Deputy Mayor Schyler
The City, local politicians and community leaders opposing EPA are facing tremendous distrust by many in the local community. They need to look at why this is. Most importantly they need to get the community excited and feeling optimistic again about the canal clean up and eventual development. This was how Buddy Scotto achieved all that he has for us to this point. Hard work and large dose of enthusiasm was always my impression of Buddy and how he got things done and he did. Somewhere along the way however there grew a tremendous distrust of the motives of the city by many in the community, me included. Many feel the spot zoning for Toll with the tall buildings was not in the interest of the community. Especially since CG did not get there zoning quickly enough and to the lower height levels requested. The very unfair decision by the BSA on 360 Smith after so much, “hard work and enthusiasm” by the community in getting the wide street amendment done. Gowanus Green/ Public Place touted by local POLS as an outcome of community involvement in planning was a shame. The appearance of favoritism toward developers and the exclusion of thoroughly cleaning the canal adequately is another. Not to mention the years of total neglect of the area till wealthy developers appeared salivating for more land to turn a big buck on. These real estate developments of course excluded community ideas and therefore enthusiasm for the projects. If the city want us to give them a fair hearing on this they need to get the community excited about their motives for us and make us optimistic about the canal development. So far, by everything the city has done, we are the big losers.
Vince
The City appears to be working very hard under great time constraints to develop an alternative plan which would result in as rigorous an evaluation and remediation as would occur under Superfund but that would be faster, more efficient, and would not be accompanied by the stigma of a Superfund designation. Wow, that sounds great. Mr. Calloway suggested that a “superfund alternative” approach is one that is under consideration by the City. Superfund alternative sites do not have a track record of being completed any faster or more efficiently than Superfund sites and they do not appear to have any different level of “stigma.” On the St. Lawrence River in upstate NY, there are three sites that were proposed for listing; one was listed and two are being handled as alternative sites; no notable difference in speed, efficiency, or stigma at the three sites. The Gowanus Canal has had a “stigma” associated with it for as far back as any of us can remember – it’s unclear how the infusion of federal authorities and capabilities to clean it up could make things worse. If the City has a plan that can get the potentially responsible parties to enter into a binding agreement within this 90 day comment period to thoroughly evaluate and remediate the Canal sediments and sources in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment, I’m all for it. Short of that, I’d prefer to have the backing of the U.S. Department of Justice to ensure that the polluters pay for their contamination of the Canal. Meanwhile, all these City employees are spending an awful lot of our tax dollars during this comment period scrambling to assemble a plan that they say will essentially mimic the one the EPA has proposed. I sure hope the Toll Brothers intend to reimburse us for that cost.
It's so revealing that the city is only now making the effort to put together a sincere cleanup plan for the Gowanus. Two months ago they weren't even considering thinks like taping the funding under the River's Program for the Gowanus.
This is the same city administration that was moving forward to rezone the Gowanus to allow for thousands of additional unites of housing here, without any of the level of cleanup that they now say they will achieve under son alternate superfund cleanup.
I've been trying to learn about both sides of this issue and decide what is really best for the Canal and the neighborhood around it. While I agree that the City is late to the game, why all of a sudden do people trust the EPA to do this properly?
Why do we have reason to believe that much has changed since this article was published?
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/06/us/epa-superfund-at-13-a-white-knight-tarnished.html
Dear 5:06,
Your NY Times link is from 1993. Is this the best you can do to try to discredit the Superfund process? How long did it take you to dig up this 16 year old article? Who are you really, a "consultant" perhaps? Were you at the EPA's presentation? I figure that you were but you are not listening with open ears, brain, or heart, only an open wallet.
Were you at last night's CGNA "I hope you indulge us" while we come up with a plan meeting (quote from Coswell Holloway, Chief-of staff to Deputy Mayor Schyler). While Mr. Holloway is paid well by us for his efforts I felt sorry for him trying to spin lines like:
"We are working with the EPA."
"We are not at odds with the EPA."
"The City doesn't have a fund".
"The City thinks we can do it a different way - we are developing the plan during the comment period".
"We think we can".
Indulgence is a key word to focus on. The City has indulged developers who don't care that they are setting up hundreds of families for exposure to toxins for profit, without regard to health. Mr Holloway did not once utter the word SCIENCE but somehow we are supposed to trust them to think. The city thinks indulged developers will voluntarily pay for cleanup. If the city had been sincere in the "if they build it it will get cleaned up" concept they would certainly have looked at best practices before spot zoning the canal for over-sized buildings.
The EPA's presentation clearly stated that they have learned much over the years, and again 5:06, if a 16 year old Times article is the best you can come up you should start looking for another job. Mr. Holloway stated last night that he "knew very little about Superfund before now". Pathetic.
We were told there's a "new Office of Environmental Remediation". Focus on the word: NEW. Means the focus wasn't on remediation until the State asked the Feds for help because they knew there was no other way to fix things and now the City is really scrambling for control. The City has no credibility. None!
The Mayor views all development as good, regardless of the consequences. As the richest man in New York, he's used to throwing money and power around to control what happens and take care of "our middle class", as his TV ads say over and over, as if we're his little puppies. Is fear of the Mayor's wrath the reason that Daniel Squadron, Yvette Clark, and Joan Millman have not taken a stance? Daniel, I am so disappointed in you.
We have asked for leadership from our elected officials, and I applaud Senator Velmanette Montgomery for her support. To the rest of you: quit hiding. This is divisive and unhealthy for our community. We are paying attention to your action and inaction.
SUPERFUND ME!
"Before the EPA stepped forward with their Superfund proposal for the canal, the city was going to do the very least it could do to clean the polluted waterway before allowing residential housing to be built on its shore. And that seemed to be all right with our elected officials."
Katia this is the real reason the people in this community are in such an uproar! It is clear so clear our electeds were going to LET THE BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT PRECEDE PUBLIC SAFETY! It has been obvious for months that these shameful electeds who are PIAD BY US!are without soul, without conscience, and without constituents. They are Bloomberg puppets and should be hung out to dry in the next election.
LETS ALL MAKE SURE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM LOSES HIS/HER JOB in the next election. Shame on them. It is disgusting. What is so scary is that PUBLIC PLACE IS EQUALLY contaminated.
How all this development was greased thru the city government has got to be the corruption story of the year for some investigative journalists. Any investigative journalists out there?
Meanwhile back at de BALHHHH's spin factory (office) the staff tried to spin out a "post CGNA disaster meeting" email today, pretending the CGNA ran a great Bloomberg sponsored alternate plan show. (ahem ahem) The recipients include Corcoran Realty! Is Maria happier now? Did anyone tell her she forgot to invite the EPA to her show? That was in such poor taste! Alas, the City had no idea what it was doing, and was ill equipped to handle the questions, poor us (and poor future Canal residents). Someone better call the President PRONTO! as this Bloomie administration is one sick and corrupt puppy.
By the way, speaking of dredging up old articles about cleanups, I was wondering if the 5:06 pm poster had been able to "find" the recent articles in the Daily News about how NYC admits that public schools have elevated levels of PCBs in the BUILDING MATERIAL used in the schools, but does not plan on doing anything about it. I guess that was before this great "new" office of environmental remediation opened. See: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/bronx/2009/04/28/2009-04-28_city_admits_19_schools_toxic_no_cleanup_planned.html
Who do you trust: EPA, which is a federal program, funded through congressional appropriations, or New York City, which has no money and has neither the interest, ability, or political will to accomplish a thorough cleanup that will be protective of human health and the environment.
If Daniel Squadron has done anything for us it is to show that incumbents can be primaried. Perhaps our local electeds would be wise not to become too complacent.
I can't wait to hear the City's rationalization if Bloomberg comes out in favor of Newtown Creek being declared a superfund.
Post a Comment