Better Solutions Through Public Involvement

Salt Lake City, Utah -- Lawsuits against big highways in fast-growing cities generate controversy. The Sierra Club's eight-year struggle to find a better solution than the proposed billion-dollar Legacy Highway to Salt Lake City's traffic woes was no exception. At various times the Utah legislature actually threatened to hold the Club responsible for all the costs of delays and, during the passage of the recent Highway bill, the last issue to be resolved was an effort by Senator Orrin Hatch to exempt the highway project from all environmental reviews.

But public involvement works. At hearing after hearing, local residents by the hundreds (over 1,000 on one occasion), showed up to tell the Utah Transportation Department: "We want something better." The Legacy Highway would have paved over vital habitat for migratory waterfowl, and it would have taken and destroyed farms that had been in the same families for four and even five generations. After a slow and painful process, with the federal courts repeatedly saying that the state and the U.S. Department of Transportation had not complied with basic environmental requirements, the better solution that the citizens demanded has finally emerged.

In the years since the campaign to come up with a better solution began, some real progress had already been made. A new light-rail system (TRAX) has been constructed, and it currently carries more than 44,000 riders a day. Four additional light-rail lines, one of which has just had a draft environmental impact statement completed for it, are set for the first phase of Salt Lake City's new Long Range Plan. A commuter rail line from Salt Lake City to Ogden (along the Legacy corridor) has recently broken ground for construction and will be operational by 2007.

But the Utah Department of Transportation (DOT) kept saying, "We need Legacy." So the Sierra Club's Utah Chapter designed a "Smart Growth" citizen's alternative. It involved adding to the commuter rail system; bus rapid transit to southern Davis County; converting an adjacent freeway, Interstate 15, to peak-direction reversible lanes; and constructing a four-lane extension of an existing surface road, Redwood Road, east of the Legacy corridor. The Utah Chapter's alternative meets the traffic needs better than Legacy. Finally, the Utah DOT, fearing that federal courts would not approve Legacy
when a much better idea was on the table, agreed to a hybrid plan that
included basic elements of the Smart Growth Alternative along with a much
more environmentally friendly parkway instead of a 300-foot wide high-speed
freeway.

The result: Hundreds of millions of dollars have been saved for mass transit; wetlands and farms have been saved; and the residents of Salt Lake City area have been given real transportation options.

The story is similar in Las Vegas. There the Sierra Club sued to insist that, before widening I-95, the state should deal with the health impacts of that widening on the schools and neighborhoods along the way. Again, the lawsuit was widely vilified as obstructionist. But we kept on saying, "You can't solve gridlock just by paving. You need to have an intelligent and diverse solution. That's what we haven't been able to get from the Federal Highway Administration."

Earlier this summer, we reached a settlement. On its face, we didn't win much -- just some mitigation for the schools along the corridor. But along the way, we won much more -- Las Vegas got the point. As a recent article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal said, the "Sierra Club lawsuit transformed region's mass transit plans.... In short, the holistic, long-range transportation planning the Sierra Club was demanding through its lawsuit is starting to occur." It had occurred before we settled the lawsuit -- that's what made it possible for us to settle the lawsuit. But the lawsuit, combined with community education, is what started it happening.

Comments

[James H. baker]

Carl,Great post. Now, in order to get that public involvement, we as citizens must increase our democracy by changing the mindset of our citizen boards and elected representatives regarding the time that they have their meetings. Look at Memphis, TN for an example of some of the meeting times that effectively shuts out participation by members of the working public. Other obstacles do exist, but most are easily overcome. However, no obstacle has a greater bearing on how our democracy is supposed to work than the meeting times. Air Quality:The last two recorded meetings of the Air Quality Control Board have been at 1:30PM on a Friday.Water Quality:Memphis Light, Gas, and Water Division Board meetings are the first and third Thursdays at 1:30PM. The Shelby County Groundwater Control Board meets the third Tuesday of each month at 3PM.Land-Use Planning:The Land Use Control Board meeting starts at 10AM on the second Thursday of the month.Meetings of elected representatives:The Memphis City Council meets on the first and third Tuesdays at 3:30PM. The Shelby County Commission meets on the second and fourth Tuesdays at 1:30PM.Perhaps it is time to have a "civic plaza" constructed in the geographical center of Memphis, accessible by public transit, and require all the above meetings to occur in the evenings and on weekends at this plaza.James H. BakerConservation Chair-Chickasaw Group of the TN Chapter-Sierra Club

[Glenn Hurowitz]

DATE:9/24/2005 08:14:00 AM
Republican Leadership Proposes Selling National ParksOn another important matter - Republican leadership is now proposing to pay for Hurricane Katrina by selling 15 national parks, including Theodore Roosevelt Island in the Potomac River in DC, as well as opening offshore areas around the country to oil drilling and letting companies like ExxonMobil drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. See the below story from Energy and Environment Daily - I hope Sierra Club and others will publicize this more - it's a scandal. From Energy and Environment Daily:Pombo proposes selling 15 parks, expanding offshore leases, drilling ANWRBen Geman, Dan Berman and Allison Freeman E&E Daily reportersDraft House Resources Committee legislation would put 15 national parks up for sale, allow offshore oil and gas drilling in now-restricted waters and open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to petroleum exploration, according to a copy of the measure obtained by E&E Daily. A section of the 285-page bill addressing outer continental shelf drilling -- called the "offshore state options act of 2005" -- would allow states to petition for withdrawal from coastal leasing bans and in return receive substantial revenues from royalties. The bill also includes options for natural gas only leasing. The chairman of the Resources panel, California Republican Richard Pombo, is a vocal advocate of increasing domestic energy production. Under the opt-out idea, waters more than 25 miles off the coast of a neighboring state could be opened for gas-only leasing, while oil and gas leasing would be allowed if the area is more than 50 miles from a neighboring state. Leasing could be closer if the neighboring state concurs. Oil could be pumped from gas-only leases if state officials agree. Neighboring states would also have to agree if the lease tract is within 50 miles of their coasts. Existing federal leasing restrictions have prevented states from "being sufficiently involved in decisions regarding the allowance of mineral resource development, and have been harmful to the national interest," the proposal says. The legislation would open for leasing a swath of the central Gulf of Mexico, the lease sale 181 area, which is coveted by industry. The bill would also allow states to extend the time of the executive leasing withdrawal within 125 miles of its coast. Pombo has negotiated with Florida Republican lawmakers who have considered allowing leasing in the farther-out 181 area in return for increased coastal protections. The bill would repeal laws that prohibit federal funds from being spent on offshore leasing. Congress renews offshore drilling bans each year through the appropriations process. Congressional moratoria and presidential withdrawals in place through 2012 prevent leasing on both coasts and much of the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Brian Kennedy, a Pombo spokesman, said the language was just one option under consideration. "No final decisions have been made," he said today, calling the draft the "biggest, broadest spectrum of options" for the committee's budget reconciliation language. "Call it a brainstorm of all the possible alternatives," he added. Reconciliation has been delayed until late next month in both chambers. The Resources panel must find $2.4 billion in savings, which is about the amount the committee anticipates from ANWR leasing. Kennedy estimated the entire legislative package would raise about $6 billion. Drilling plan quickly comes under fire Environmentalists quickly criticized the drilling plan. "Any kind of provision that would allow states to opt-out or natural gas-only leasing are absolutely unacceptable. That entails weakening the moratorium," said the Sierra Club's Debbie Boger. "This really shows the agenda of the oil and gas industry. They want to say no place is off limits." But Kennedy said the language would aid domestic production to address economic harm caused by high natural gas prices. Several industries -- such as chemical manufacturers -- have argued that high natural gas are harming competitiveness and driving jobs overseas. "It is crippling when it comes to the job market in the U.S. and it is crippling when it comes to our economy," Kennedy said. "The demand for natural gas in the last decade or more has gone through the roof because natural gas is one of the most environmentally friendly fuels. The problem is that environmentalists who pushed to have more natural gas-fired power plants .... oppose producing more natural gas in America." The plan also drew a harsh response from another California lawmaker, Democrat Rep. Lois Capps. "Chairman Pombo's proposal means new drilling in areas of the U.S. where there isn't a whole lot of oil and gas and where tens of millions of our citizens have made it clear that they don't want any more drilling. This is going to be opposed by the people of California, Florida, North Carolina, New Jersey and other coastal states," she said in a statement. Proposals for selling parks, attracting commercial sponsors The legislation would sell Theodore Roosevelt Island in the Potomac River, and 14 other National Park Service properties from California to Massachusetts. The draft proposes removing the 91-acre Theodore Roosevelt Island from the park system and selling it to commercial or residential developers, as well as requiring land be made available for a vehicle bridge to the George Washington Memorial Parkway. The island is in the Potomac River between Washington, D.C., and Arlington, Va. The draft proposes selling 15 parks "for energy or commercial development" if they receive fewer than 10,000 visitors a year. They are: Alibates Flint Quarries National Monument, Texas. Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Alaska. Bering Land Bridge National Preserve, Alaska. Cape Krusenstern National Monument, Alaska. Eugene O'Neill National Historic Site, California. Fort Bowie National Historic Site, Arizona. Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site, Massachusetts. Kobuk Valley National Park, Alaska. Lake Clark National Park, Alaska. Mary McLeod Bethune Council House, Washington, D.C. Minute Man Missile National Historic Site, South Dakota. Noatak National Preserve, Alaska. Thaddeus Kosciuszko National Monument, Pennsylvania. Thomas Stone National Historic Site, Maryland. Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve, Alaska. Other revenue-raising proposals include mandated sales of advertisements on official Park Service maps and guides and on the inside and outside of all NPS buses, shuttles, vans, trams and passenger ferries. The Interior Department would also be required to solicit and sell commercial sponsorship of park visitors and education centers, museums, trails, auditoriums and theaters. An exception would be made for those already named after individuals. The scope of the legislation shocked park advocates. "I have no idea what they could be thinking putting together a proposal this extreme," said Craig Obey of the National Park Conservation Association. "There are certain people who will never be satisfied until you can sell advertisements and reap commercial profit from the national parks and this is that kind of proposal." Mining fund, marine mammal law proposals The draft budget reconciliation package also includes language to reauthorize the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Abandoned Mine Land Fund. The mine fund collects a tax from active mining companies for cleaning up abandoned mine sites and providing benefits for retired miners. Coal companies must currently undertake a full array of reclamation measures when they finish mining before they can receive their bonds back. But prior to the 1970s, some mining companies abandoned their mines without any reclamation, leaving behind a legacy of old burning slag piles, gaping holes in the ground and areas with acid drainage. An estimated $7 billion in unfunded coal reclamation projects remain. Of that, about $3 billion are for sites with significant health and safety problems, according to the Office of Surface Mining. AML was originally set to expire last year, but has received a series of short-term extensions through appropriations bills, currently through June 2006. Part of the problem in reauthorization has been a struggle between Eastern and Western states in how to distribute the funds. The budget language would extend the program another 15 years and lower the taxes on coal companies. The taxes are currently 10 cents to 35 cents per ton, and the proposal would bring them down to 8 cents to 28 cents per ton. The proposal would allow a state with an approved abandoned mine program to retain up to 30 percent of the grants each year, as long as the money is kept for cleaning acid runoff. The marine-mammal proposal is similar to H.R. 2130, a bill from Fisheries Subcommittee Chairman Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.) that the Resources Committee approved last spring. Some Democrats objected to the bill at that time. The 1972 Marine Mammals Protection Act established a moratorium, with certain exceptions, on "taking" marine mammals in U.S. waters and the high seas, as well as on importing marine mammals and marine mammal products. The reauthorization language would add several provisions to the act -- including authorization for research grants on marine mammals and fishing bycatch -- and broaden its oversight for take reduction plans in fisheries. Previous MMPA reauthorization efforts have been hung up by inability of members to agree on a definition of "harassment" caused by Navy sonar equipment, among other disputes. Southern Nevada land sale plan resurfaces A proposal to redistribute revenues from the proceeds of Southern Nevada land sales has resurfaced in the draft reconciliation package. The draft would divert 40 percent of future proceeds from federal land sales under the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act to the U.S. Treasury, 35 percent to the state's General Education Fund, 10 percent to the Southern Nevada Water Authority for treatment and transmission infrastructure and 15 percent for Interior Department land improvement projects. BLM has generated nearly $2 billion from land auctions mandated by the 1998 Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, but the land sales were expected to bring in only $70 million per year, according to the administration, and the Interior Department has not been able to spend the money as quickly as it comes in. "We've built every visitor center you can build in that area," said Interior Secretary Gale Norton on the Feb. 14 edition of E&ETV's OnPoint (E&E Daily, March 10) The law currently directs Interior to use the proceeds to acquire environmentally sensitive land and pay for capital improvement projects on federal areas in the state, with 5 percent of proceeds directed to the education fund and 10 percent to the water authority. The Bush administration in February proposed diverting 70 percent of revenues back to the federal treasury, leaving 5 percent for education, 10 percent for water and 15 percent left over for the land acquisition and capital improvement fund. That proposal was killed after strong opposition from Nevada Sens. Harry Reid (D) and John Ensign (R). Click here for a copy of the legislation.