|
 |
By Rep. Mike R. Turner |
Throughout America, in every community, there are abandoned buildings and land,
marring the faces of our cities and towns. Behind rusted chain link fences are
broken windows and crumbling buildings. Beneath the surface there are substances
contaminating the local environment, robbing the communities of new jobs and
economic vitality.
Cities are hindered by the very thing that makes them unique: density. The availability
of land is an enormous impediment to the renewal of cities. All urban development
is redevelopment. And yet, there is a solution to this predicament. American
cities hold acres of abandoned land that could and should be redeveloped as
the key ingredient to urban recovery. You know these sites as brownfields.
Estimates range from 450,000 to 1 million brownfield sites nationwide, covering at least 178,000 acres, roughly the combined land areas of Atlanta, Seattle and San Francisco. These sites are missed economic development opportunities when left abandoned. When restored to productive use they offer hope and economic opportunity to many of America’s most distressed cities, and a much-needed boost to their declining tax revenues.
Why Are Brownfields Abandoned?
Local officials, developers and environmentalists consider brownfields a federally
created problem. Current federal law triggers liability for remediation of contaminated
properties once landowners have knowledge of the contamination. If redevelopment
begins and contamination is discovered, the owner may be liable for remediation
costs. If the owner abandons the property without disturbing the contamination,
remediation costs may be avoided.
While well meant, one unintended consequence of the so-called “polluter pays” principle is that properties with suspected contamination are abandoned to avoid potential liability for high cleanup costs. Lenders are reluctant to finance projects in areas that might reveal contamination, fearing liability and devaluation of collateral. This, coupled with the high cost of cleanup, has resulted in brownfield sites remaining abandoned and the land devalued.
Solutions to Brownfield Problems
If we are to achieve our goal of restoring brownfields to productive use and
redeveloping them into centers of economic and community vitality, we must craft
a federal response to a federally created problem. Redevelopment of brownfields
will create jobs, new living and shopping options, and spur the improvement
or development of transportation and infrastructure solutions. If we make redevelopment
of brownfields more attractive, we can also help reduce urban sprawl and save
green space.
Last year I, along with Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis (R-VA), requested that the GAO study the status of brownfield redevelopment across the nation. GAO’s report shows that stakeholders are generally positive about EPA’s brownfield program but that additional incentives, such as a tax credit, are needed to spur further redevelopment and make a significant difference in communities across the country.
In addition to the GAO, studies by HUD and EPA, as well as a U.S. Conference of Mayors survey, all acknowledge the roles that liability risk and the high cost of cleanup play in discouraging lenders, developers and property owners from undertaking brownfield projects. Cleanup costs and liability concerns are the greatest obstacles to brownfield redevelopment. The Brownfield Revitalization Act is the next important step — and addresses both cost and liability issues.
The Brownfield Revitalization Act
Last year, I introduced HR 4480, the “Brownfields Revitalization Act of
2004,” to address these two greatest impediments to redevelopment —
liability and redevelopment costs. The bill proposed a tax credit of up to 50
percent for qualified remediation expenses of brownfields in certain poverty-rated
areas. Specifically, credits are available to redevelopment projects where the
local government entity includes a census tract with poverty in excess of 20
percent, although the project need not be located within that tract.
The Brownfield Revitalization Act also provides additional liability relief by allowing potentially responsible parties that contribute at least 25 percent of remediation costs to receive liability release for 100 percent of the approved remediation plan and demolition costs.
I plan to reintroduce this bill in the near future with a few key improvements. The revised bill will clarify these liability provisions, making clear that the relief is limited to the approved remediation plan, while liability for other types of claims, such as liability to adjacent property owners or for outstanding health complaints, is unaffected. It also clarifies the roles of a state development agency versus a state environmental agency.
This program would constitute a powerful incentive for cities, developers and parties facing brownfield liability to transform derelict sites into job-producing economic development. Without a federally created program, brownfields will remain, marring the face of U.S. cities. These abandoned sites cannot remain as decaying monuments to their once productive past. Redeveloping brownfields will revitalize our cities, returning to them the life and vitality once seen when these sites provided jobs and were anchors for our communities.
The bill has ben endorsed by member trade organizations such as The American Council of Engineering Companies, The U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Home Builders. You can help by getting your member trade organization to support and endorse the legislation. Please contact your congressional representative and ask them to sign on as a co-sponsor of the Brownfields Revitalization Act. BFN
Congressman Mike R. Turner serves Ohio’s 3rd District in the U.S. House of Representatives.