Re: [CPEO-BIF] How frequently should the NationalBrownfieldsConference take place?

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org>]

Submitted by Gladys House <Gcarpetdepot@aol.com> in response to my
(Lenny Siegel's) comments:

June 16, 2005   

I concur but must be more harsh. 

The annual conference made me aware of the multi-billion dollar industry
in brownfield clean up. Which helped prove my point before Houston's
city council and legal department. However, this is a one-woman's battle
because no support has come from the EPA or EJ. 

The annual conference serves "for the record" that it has "reached out"
to the grassroot stakeholders when in fact we are actually worse off.
Since my outspoken position at the last conference, not one grant
proposal has been funded by EPA that our nonprofit submitted. And the
paper presented to EPA to serious correct the shortfalls of its
existence regarding grassroot communities, has been totally ignored. Why
can't grassroot reps. serve on the boards and committees that have
oversight on funding and policy that affect their communities and tax
dollars? Why can't we be empowered to direct clean ups and development
of our own neighborhoods?

One proposal EPA denied was based on the lie that our grassroot
community and organization "did not work with the Houston EPA office."
No, the Houston EPA office refused repeatedly to work with us. In fact,
that office is so negative that we had to involve Region VI to obtain
basic information on our behalf. And had it not been for the invitation
of Shirley Augerson, we would have not known that the Houston EPA office
existed. You certainly cannot get any response from its director or her
staff so Ms. Augerson is always our point of information along with
Arthur Warren.   When will change ever happen for our benefit?   

Peace out.   
Gladys House 
Freedman's Town, Houston, Texas



  


Lenny Siegel wrote:
> 
> I'm waiting to hear what others have to say before "voting" for a
> particular frequency for EPA's national Brownfields conference, but I'd
> like to stimulate some discussion by offering a couple of observations
> about the value of the conference.
> 
> First, the annual conferences do more than promote the objectives of
> U.S. EPA's Brownfields program itself. They provide a forum that
> supports the missions of a broad range of EPA programs. They bring
> together state and federal regulators, other federal agencies, official
> and unofficial representatives of local communities, academia, and a
> wide variety of private sector interests to discuss openly issues that
> go far beyond property revitalization. Some of the best discussions of
> topics such as vapor intrusion, smart growth, institutional controls,
> etc. take place at the Brownfields meetings.
> 
> Former EPA Assistant Administrator Marianne Lamont Horinko promoted the
> "one cleanup program" concept, which sought to integrate Brownfields,
> Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, Underground Storage Tanks, etc. I was
> never fully comfortable with that approach, because it was accompanied
> by the de-funding of Superfund. I, like many other environmentalists,
> feared that the most serious contamination sites in the country would be
> forced into the lowest common denominator of "voluntary," "risk-based" cleanups.
> 
> Still, because the Brownfields program had the energy, attention, and
> legislative support that many other EPA programs lack, its conference
> brought in stakeholders working on other, related cleanup programs. The
> discussion on Brownfields topics, therefore, served much more than the
> narrowly defined Brownfields program. It's difficult for auditors to
> credit such cooperation, or the leveraging of resources in one account
> to serve broader interests, but the Brownfields conferences have
> consistently achieved that objective.
> 
> Second, however, the national Brownfields conference has never fully
> served the interests of the environmental justice, environmental, and
> other community groups that participate. As an educational opportunity,
> it's excellent, but as an opportunity to share lessons and ideas, the
> conference is limited. Activists feel swallowed up in the sea of
> officials and deal-makers.
> 
> CPEO has for several years convened the Environmental Justice/Community
> Caucus at the Brownfields meetings. For two sessions that usually last
> for two hours at the end of long, busy days, we bring together a
> collection of activists. The meetings are useful, but each year
> participants leave frustrated because we never have enough time to
> develop a common program or strategy.
> 
> In 1997 we found the funding to bring together part of the caucus
> between conferences. That's when we developed the ten "Recommendations
> for Responsive Brownfields Revitalization" - a statement of principles
> that remains relevant today. It's likely that the groups and individuals
> that take part in the caucus would be better served by another mid-year
> two-day meeting, to develop a similar report or perhaps even a common
> strategy, but the cost of such a get-together would make little
> difference to the continuation of the annual conferences. That is, a
> mid-year caucus session would likely complement, not replace, the larger
> event as a forum for promoting community interests.
> 
> Lenny Siegel
> 
> --
> 
> Lenny Siegel
> Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
> c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
> Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
> Fax: 650/961-8918
> <lsiegel@cpeo.org>
> http://www.cpeo.org
> _______________________________________________
> Brownfields mailing list
> Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
> http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields

-- 


Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
<lsiegel@cpeo.org>
http://www.cpeo.org
_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields