Thank You, Congresswoman Velázquez!
Velázquez has been an outspoken supporter of the EPA Superfund designation for the Gowanus Canal. She was also the first representative who put in question the feasibility and funding sources for the City's Alternative plan.
In this op-ed piece she clearly asks for the Gowanus Canal to be listed.
(Hear that, Congresswoman Clarke?)
OP-ED: Gowanus needs Superfund status to ensure restoration
New York Daily News – Brooklyn Insert
December 8, 2009
by Rep. Nydia Velázquez
The Gowanus Canal has earned its place in the pages of Brooklyn history. First a creek and later expanding into a canal, it served as a hub for New York’s Industrial Revolution.
Even today, Gowanus stands at the core of local industry. It is an integral thread in the fabric of our community, and has been referred to as "the Jewel of Brooklyn."
Neighborhoods like Park Slope and Carroll Gardens could not have been built without its waters, which ferried wood, brick and brownstone from New Jersey and the Upper Hudson. With its location just steps away from the homes of thousands of New York families, it is critically important that we protect the canal and restore integrity to its waters.
Pollution within Gowanus is not a new problem. Brooklynites have been calling for its cleanup since the 1880’s and, by 1911, Mayor William Jay Gaynor activated a flushing tunnel.
Today, several suggestions have been made for its remediation.
One proposal by the Mayor’s office, which came to light after the EPA’s Superfund nomination, would use federal funding through the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). But those dollars are already vastly overextended.
In fact, the Army Corps of Engineers has a WRDA backlog of more than 1,000 projects, totaling $61 billion. Gowanus, if approved for WRDA funding, would go straight to the back of that 1,000 project line.
The canal wasn’t contaminated overnight, and it won’t be cleaned overnight, either.In reversing decades of pollution, there is no such thing as a quick fix solution. At this point, the best thing we can do is identify a timely, effective plan moving forward--a plan that ensures a clean future for South Brooklyn, and requires polluting parties to pay their share of remediation.
That’s why I worked to secure funding for a study to identify methods for restoring the canal. And that’s why I am calling upon the EPA to designate Gowanus as a Superfund site.
The Superfund program was established as a means for cleaning the country’s most hazardous waste sites. Since its inception, it has helped restore many of our nation’s most polluted areas. With $1.89 billion in authorized funding for 2009, the Superfund budget dwarfs that of the Army Corps. And, unlike WRDA, EPA resources don’t depend on tax payer dollars alone.
Rather, the agency has the authority to recoup costs from polluters. That means the large corporations that contributed to Gowanus’s contamination will help pay for its remediation. That seems fair.
Despite its clear benefits, not everyone is in favor of Superfund status. Real Estate developers argue that the term "Superfund" carries too much of a stigma. They are worried that the name alone will curb consumers’ appetite for luxury condos in South Brooklyn.
But is a Superfund site, by any other name, less polluted? The fact of the matter is, Gowanus Canal is toxic--whether it’s deemed a Superfund or not. As New Yorkers, we need to be focused on restoring Gowanus and protecting Brooklyn families, not bickering over semantics.
With the comment period for Superfund status now closed, the EPA has an opportunity to complete its review. I urge the agency to make the right decision and designate Gowanus a Superfund site. Doing so will ensure the canal is cleaned up in a safe, timely, cost effective manner.
Brooklyn deserves no less.
.JPG)
5 comments:
Pardon me,
Instead of "large corporations" the Congresswoman meant to say "the US Navy, NYC and our gas company". Those costs will be passed on to businesses and residents via taxes and utility bills.
Thank You Nydia!
Brava, Congresswoman Velazquez! And Thank you for supporting the health and welfare of your constituency. Also thank you to Dan Wiley!
Thank you Congresswoman Velazquez.
Congresswoman Velazquez and state Senator Montgomery have been the only elected officials to state a clear and the only logical position on this issue. While other electeds have supported the superfund their statements were wishy washy in so far as their support was conditioned on the designation not quelling development. The Congresswoman has taken an appropriate long term view. Those that are trying to cram through development seem to be relying on an illusion of safety because who in their right mind would spend close to a million dollars to live in a luxury development built next to and atop a toxic site.
Both Congresswoman Velazquez and state Senator Montgomery should be commended for listening to their current constituents especially those who live close to the canal and have little faith that the City will implement a clean up in the safest manner for current Gowanus residents. Certainly developers don't care about the safety of the current residents.
Congresswoman Yvette Clarke has done everything she can to avoid stating a position to the point where it has become laughable and predictable. She would be wise to defer to Congresswoman Velazquez.
The EPA and the Congresswoman should start evicting the +500 people living between Nevins-3rd and Union-Carroll. How can the EPA allow them to continue living near the toxic (XXX) Gowanus Canal?!
3:23 Some more fear-mongering. Get a life, and get it straight.
Post a Comment