Re: Brownfields, lotteries and equity

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

If the system works, then the principal source of Brownfields
remediation funding should come from the surplus generated by reuse.
That is, if there is a way to borrow against the revenues to be
generated by the future use, then some of that money can be used for
cleanup (as well as planning, infratructure, and development) to get the
property back to where it can bring in sales, rents, and taxes. This can
be done through private loans, tax-increment financing, and possibly
other mechanisms.

This won't work everywhere. Some properties may be located where revenue
streams are likely to be small. And parks don't usually generate much
income.

By "if the system works," I mean that the costs of site characterization
and remediation are commensurate with the level of contamination, and
that there are no irrational bureaucratic obstacles. That is, the
cleanup process should be streamlined and cost-effective, but hazards
should be treated or removed.

Lenny
-- 


Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 222B View St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/968-1126
lsiegel@cpeo.org
(PLEASE NOTE THAT WE ARE PHASING OUT
MY OLD E-MAIL ADDRESS: lsiegel@igc.org)
http://www.cpeo.org