Your analysis of the need for a need environmental bond act is timely and important. I disagree, however, with your view on bond act funding for brownfields.
The Environmental Restoration Program, created in the 1996 environmental bond act, was an undeniable success. Our struggling upstate cities are often stuck with abandoned properties but don't have the means to remove the blight. Through this program, municipalities restored brownfields to active use, increased jobs and the local tax base, and mitigated public health and safety concerns.
The $200 million provided by the bond act paid off in big ways for cities across the state. In Rochester, a toxic dump was replaced with attractive housing, raising property values and improving quality of life. In the Village of Adams, a former assemblage of abandoned gas stations has been transformed into attractive municipal offices. And, in Albany's Sound End, a 100-year-old factory was cleaned up for the development of town houses, blending in with historic residences. In all, 75 brownfields were cleaned up in our urban centers, drawing new development to old neighborhoods. Another 127 sites are in the process of investigation or cleanup.
Our cities have daunting environmental problems, as you have forcefully pointed out. One of the most daunting is the existence of toxic contamination, which stands as an impediment to urban health and prosperity. A new bond act should include money to refund the now expended Environmental Restoration Program.
Dale Desnoyers
Glenmont