|
I retired from the Oregon DEQ two years ago. One of my last tasks was helping with the National Brownfield Conference held in Portland, Oregon in 2003. Prior to the national conference in 2003, Oregon had a State Brownfields Conference for 5 years running. A perennial question was always, "Is this conference worth doing/attending?"
As the "brownfields coordinator" and cleanup policy wonk, I thought that both a national conference and local/state/regional conference were worth doing. For many years the question of Superfund reauthorization drew people to the national conference and people were always seeking the federal pot of gold or the newest regulatory wrinkle to do their particular thing. The local/state/regional conference seemed to be equally important for working on small projects and understanding how the state cleanup programs worked and how they differed from the federal Superfund (most state programs were cleanup programs that typically lacked funding). Oregon started its annual conference focusing on rural brownfields.
With each brownfield conference I had/have the concern that the Brownfield tail was wagging the cleanup dog. But, the idea of "putting land back into productive use" is so appealing that Brownfields did become an industry unto itself. The idea that people could actually make some money (or lose less) in conjunction with a cleanup has much more staying power and appeal than working forever and spending vast amounts of dollars to have a marginally cleaner site as is the case at Superfund sites.
My former law school (Lewis & Clark) used to have an annual Hazardous Material Law Conference but as RCRA and CERCLA became more settled (or more impenetrable and complex), the school discontinued the series because there wasn't that much new under the sun that would appeal to a broad base. It seems like the Brownfield Conferences are falling into the same trap. Brownfields are a small niche in a broad field and only the sub-specialties talk to one another and even they are saying their needs are not being met. Techno-geeks cannot sell their newest gizmos; property owners cannot make deals; communities feel they are being sold down the river; regulators are mired down in obscure, but critical, policy issues; and everyone attends (or skips) interminably-long, self-congratulatory plenary sessions. All the while, more and more contaminated sites are created and only the least contaminated of these sites are converted into productive re-use and then only with a huge public subsidy.
I think having both national and local/state/regional annual Brownfield Conferences is still worth doing, but I have the fear that Brownfields are becoming the grand distraction and more significant and important cleanup issues are falling off the plate. I'm probably part of the old guard that still sticks with the "polluter pays" concept and expects a cleanup to actually clean up a site rather than paper it with unenforceable institutional controls. I think the Brownfield proponents are often bending over backwards; offering subsidies; and allowing non-protective cleanups just to make any cleanup project palatable. Most brownfield projects are already skimming the cream off the top of marginally contaminated sites. I'd like to see Brownfields to continue to operate in its narrow niche, but I'd like to see significant changes in the federal Superfund and state cleanup programs that result in protective, long-lasting cleanups rather than questionable, superficial, paper cleanups that might be profitable for a few.
Keep having annual conferences, but let's keep our collective eye on the cleanup prize -- protective remedies paid for by the polluters.
--
Brooks Koenig
Veritas, Vizslas, & Velos
2833 SE Harrison St.
Portland, OR 97214
-------------- Original message --------------
Of course there is another office within EPA that facilitates the bringing together of roughly 1000 Smart Growth practitioners together every year as part of the National New Partners for SG conference?and those speakers and participants spend three days discussing best practices, planning, and development tools and strategies to level that playing field. However, only a very small part of that professional universe cross over and attend the annual BFs conference and I imagine it?s the same on the flip side?few BFs Conference practitioners attend/participate in the annual SG conference.
Joe Schilling
Phone-703-706-8102
From: Ignacio Dayrit [mailto:idayrit@ci.emeryville.ca.us]
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 1:52 PM
To: Joe Schilling; Jody Kass; Charlie Bartsch; lsiegel@cpeo.org; Brownfields Internet Forum
Subject: RE: [CPEO-BIF] How frequently shouldtheNationalBrownfieldsConferencetake place?
Thanks for all you insights.
In thinking of brownfields as an industry, you have to consider that it competes with greenfields/sprawl, and that we are all trying to protect currently undeveloped areas as we revitalize our inner cities. We have only begun to address that connection, by bringing Smart Growth into the discussion.
In many markets, no amount on incentives to infill (brownfields and smart growth) will sway growth in that direction. The pull of greenfields development - because it is cheaper, easier, quicker, more desireable, perceived as safer and having better schools - is difficult to overcome. The entire development process, tax and regulatory structure tacitly favors sprawl. However, if infill is supported to the level that sprawl development is, then it levels the playing field. The current conference format/frequency/strategy are not conducive to those discussions. We have been discussing how to tweak and work within the system, rather that taking a reassessment on how this country can continue to grow, and how the system has to adapt. It involves bringing in a whole host of stakeholders and disciplines that are not yet in the discussion.
I think this calls for both intense discussions both at the national and regional levels, even if it may not be appropriate for EPA to sponsor all these activities.
Ignacio Dayrit
--- Begin Message ---
_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields
|