|
The Columbus Dispatch
www.dispatch.com
Critics blast Issue 1's plan for cleaning polluted
sites
Michael Hawthorne
Monday, October 16, 2000
It's tough for environmentalists to argue against
a group called "Citizens for a Clean Ohio,'' but some
groups are giving it a try.
A Republican consultant coined the image-conscious
name for a group pitching a $400 million state bond issue
to clean up abandoned industrial sites, preserve farmland
and purchase green spaces.
Led by Gov. Bob Taft and former U.S. Sen. John Glenn,
the group has lined up groups across the political spectrum
to urge a "yes'' vote on the initiative, which will
appear as Issue 1 on the Nov. 7 ballot.
Supporters say the bond issue would encourage economic
development, protect the environment and promote outdoor
recreation. Among other things, the money would be used
to revive the state's effort to clean up polluted sites,
known as brownfields.
"We must take steps today to protect our water
sources, preserve wildlife habitats and clean up urban areas,''
Taft said in late August before he and Glenn shot a television
ad on the shore of Hoover Reservoir for their low- key campaign.
"Don't wait; it may be too late,'' added Glenn,
who wore a khaki safari shirt, Jack Hanna-style.
If voters approve, half of the money borrowed by
the state would be used for local efforts to preserve green
space and farmland, protect streams and provide nature trails.
The other $200 million would be used to clean up brownfields.
In campaign stops around the state, Taft has stressed
repeatedly that taxes wouldn't be raised to pay off the
bonds.
But the proposal wouldn't be cheap. Ohioans would
pay $212 million in interest on top of the $400 million
in principal by the time the bonds are paid off in 2018,
according to the nonpartisan Legislative Budget Office.
Some of the state's leading environmental groups
think Taft and Glenn are overselling the issue, which started
as a campaign promise Taft made in 1998 to pump more money
into preserving green space.
A year after Taft took office, his administration
added the brownfields proposal to the mix, forcing environmentalists
into an uncomfortable choice: Either tacitly support a brownfields
program they detest, or line up against a multimillion-dollar
plan to protect the environment.
Noting that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
has refused to sign off on Ohio's brownfields program, critics
contend the bond issue would amount to a bailout of an initiative
that both environmentalists and business leaders agree has
been ineffective.
"The current program does not adequately protect
the neighbors and allows contamination to remain on the
properties,'' said Sandy Buchanan, executive director of
Ohio Citizen Action. "If the federal government doesn't
have any confidence in the Ohio EPA program, why should
Ohio taxpayers rush in to pay for it?''
State officials predicted during the summer that
the Ohio EPA would broker a deal with the federal EPA on
the brownfields program by Election Day, but Taft acknowledged
last week that isn't likely to happen.
Known as the Voluntary Action Program, or VAP, the
state plan allows property owners to investigate and clean
polluted sites without informing the public. The cleanups
are conducted under a sliding scale of standards based on
whether the property will be used for homes, businesses
or industries.
If independent contractors determine the state's
guidelines have been followed, the state grants property
owners a "covenant not to sue,'' protecting them from
civil liability.
Backers predicted the program would result in 200
cleanups a year, but the program has been hampered by the
U.S. EPA's unwillingness to grant owners immunity from federal
lawsuits.
Businesses and local governments have cleaned up
54 sites during the past four years, including property
in Columbus now occupied by the Miranova housing and office
complex. An additional 1,200 contaminated sites are scattered
throughout the state.
"To even remotely suggest that Issue 1 is going
to revitalize cities is bogus,'' said Marc Conte, lobbyist
for the Ohio chapter of the Sierra Club. "The money
they want to spend will not fundamentally change land use
in Ohio. And as long as the money goes through the VAP,
we will remain opposed to it.''
One compromise under consideration by the U.S. EPA
would create a separate program that would offer federal
immunity if property owners agreed to citizen involvement
in cleanup plans and greater oversight by state regulators.
Echoing business groups, Taft said he would consider
requiring more public input during cleanups under certain
circumstances -- "as long as it's not a delaying tactic.''
Other environmental groups are backing Issue 1, including
the Ohio Environmental Council, the Audubon Society, the
Nature Conservancy and the National Wildlife Federation.
Those groups also have reservations about the proposal.
They wanted more specifics written into the ballot language
about how the money would be spent.
"This sounds great, but the devil is in the
details,'' said Jack Shaner, spokesman for the environmental
council.
Taft said that if Issue 1 is approved, he will propose
the following division of funds: $200 million for brownfields,
$100 million for green space, $50 million for stream and
watershed protection, and $25 million each for farmland
preservation and development of recreational trails.
But like other special interests, environmentalists
are wary of the new generation of lawmakers being ushered
into the General Assembly by term limits. They note that
some lawmakers tried unsuccessfully to strip farmland preservation
from the bond issue at the behest of developers.
"It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look
around and see how fast our important lands are disappearing,''
said David Weekes, executive director of the Ohio chapter
of the Nature Conservancy. "We need to make sure that
what comes out on the other end is what Ohio deserves.''
|
