Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Borough President Markowitz Weighs In (???) On Gowanus Superfund Designation

BP Marty Markowitz and his staff

Do you remember, dear Reader, that I attended the Blogger Breakfast last week hosted by BP Markowitz? Over coffee and bagels, a lively discussion ensued regarding what role blogs play in covering the news in Brooklyn. Markowitz and his staff told the bloggers in attendance that he will gladly extend access to his office for information and statements.
Of course, I asked for a statement on the Gowanus Canal's nomination as a Superfund site by the EPA.
Mark Zustovich, the Borough President's Press Secretary, sent the statement to me the following day. Here it is.

“I am committed to the restoration of the Gowanus Canal into an absolute asset to Brooklyn, our economy, arts and culture scene, and the well-being of neighboring communities. Of course, a clean environment is critical to our borough’s physical and economic health, and I look forward to working with the city, state and federal government, the community and all its elected officials to find the best way to move forward and ensure that the best days of a thriving Gowanus Canal lie ahead.”

——Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz

I thought the statement was just a tad vague, so I asked Mr. Zustovich for clarification. Is the BP for or against the Superfund Designation?
Mr. Zustovich's answer:

"No opinion either way at this point – our office is looking into what the Superfund designation would mean for the Gowanus Canal and the proposed development."

So there
you have it, dear reader. What do you say?

Related Reading:

Blogger Breakfast With BP Markowitz And Staff

For Home Page, click Pardon Me For Asking


Anonymous said...

No opinion? His aide John Heyer, who is running for City Council in the 39th district, mentioned cancer and miscarriages last Saturday. Then he said today he still was not afraid to live near the canal. And, a few short weeks ago, the EPA explained the toxicity of the canal thoroughly and offered to help with federal monies. And Markowitz has no opinion? Why am I not surprised? Almost sounds like DeBlasio's rhetorical BS sent out to the public today. Shame on Marty. Shame on Bill. And shame on Bloomie. These three are truly ghastly as far as electeds and Brooklyn go!!!! We need a sea change in our representation. One hopes the public can wake up and use their voting power to SuperClean these political offices! (And RINSE these guys away too).

Plow to Plate said...

I looked up the word political to try to get a window into how politicians can be so wishy washy so that you can't know what they are really saying unless you pressure them. One meaning I got was "4. Politic; wise; also, artful. [Obs.] --Sterne
Politicians try to appear "wise" while artfully practicing the art of evasion and hiding their true motives and intentions.
Superfunding the Gowanus Canal is the only reasonable way to go if you really want that canal cleaned up, Mr. Markowitz.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Markowitz only cares about himself. He's real loud obnoxious pol. If Park Slope had a toxic condition you know damn well it wouuld be his priority to clean it up! Ditto for DeBlasio.

Anonymous said...

Translation: unlike his back room deals on Atlantic Yards, if there's no dollar $igns involved, Markowitz isn't interested.

Anonymous said...

Is this a disagreement-free zone, or do you recognize that reasonable people might disagree on Superfund designation for the canal? And would you rather have your elected officials jump to conclusions, or study the ramifications of a complex issue before making their decisions?

Anonymous said...

The politicians didn't study the ramifications of the piece-meal clean-up efforts and studies of the last few years. They just sat back and ignored the community's requests to adopt a comprehensive clean-up approach. They did not put pressure on the city or the state to do more. How can we trust them to do the right thing now? Bill de Blasio wasn't even at the EPA presentation meeting! Had he been he would have heard the EPA address most of the questions he asked in his letter to the EPA. Anyone could've come up with those questions. They are not even designed to elicit answers, just to try to pretend that he's on the ball and doing due diligence. And he isn't, otherwise he would not have been behind the spot-rezoning that screwed the Gowanus community.

The politicians waited until their palms were greased before deciding they decided to "study" a complex issue.

What I don't get is that we heard from some of the best environmental engineers in the country, or their spokespersons, who broke down all the dangers, specific pollutants, pollutant analysis, and the remediation process. Who would I rather listen to, the engineers or the politicians?


Unknown said...

Here, Here, 12:19! Thank you.