Advocates say environmental fund is near insolvency
By MICHAEL VIRTANEN, Associated Press WriterALBANY - Environmentalists say the state conservation fund dedicated to preserving open space and keeping water clean is virtually insolvent after having been drained by the Paterson administration to offset other spending.
In a letter to Budget Director Laura Anglin, Environmental Advocates said nearly $500 million had been ''swept'' from the fund since it was established in 1993, including $125 million this fiscal year with another $50 million authorized. Meanwhile, authorized contracts and payments have been delayed.
''Projects ranging from initiatives that provide clean water, protect open space and support local governments' environmental efforts are now in jeopardy,'' wrote Robert Moore, executive director of Environmental Advocates. ''New York must honor its commitments to nonprofit organizations, municipalities and businesses. Delayed payments or failure to honor the state's commitments will force such entities to fire employees and exacerbate New York's economic troubles.''
Moore urged Anglin not to take $50 million more from the fund as authorized by the recent Deficit Reduction Bill.
''It's virtually insolvent,'' said David Gahl, policy director for the nonprofit organization, noting the combination of projected fund disbursements, deposits, balance and sweeps.
''Botanical gardens and aquariums, they're owed money now. They're not getting it 'til next August,'' said Alison Jenkins, the group's fiscal policy director. Many environmental organizations are feeling the pinch, but they don't want to say so publicly, fearing there might be repercussions, Gahl and Jenkins said.
With the state government facing a massive deficit, Budget Division spokesman Matt Anderson said new spending controls are affecting every aspect of its spending. While he acknowledged $497 million has been transferred altogether out of the environmental fund, he said its spending this fiscal year on environmental projects is projected to reach a record $190 million, up from $153.3 million the previous year.
''We are prudently managing expenses within the EPF, but all individuals or groups who have contracts with the state or have performed work on behalf of the state will ultimately receive payment,'' Anderson said.
The Environmental Protection Fund is primarily financed by the real estate transfer tax, though the Paterson administration proposed ending that next year, and substituting unclaimed bottle deposits, with mandatory recycling expanded to include non-carbonated beverages.
The fund provides money for recycling, landfill closure, urban parks, farmland preservation, smart growth, open space, water quality, pollution prevention and a range of environmental programs administered by the Department of Environmental Conservation, the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, and the Department of Agriculture and Markets.
The fund was authorized at $255 million this year. In January, it was drawn down to $3 million, its lowest level since the Nature Conservancy has been watching it, said Jessica Ottney, the conservancy's director of state government relations. ''Operationally it's empty,'' she said. ''Most of the new money that comes into the fund will be swept into the general fund.''
At a Senate Environmental Conservation Committee hearing earlier Wednesday on expanding the bottle bill, Chairman Antoine Thompson, a Buffalo Democrat, said many senators were opposed to ending EPF funding from the real estate transfer tax, something he noted the environmentalists also don't want.
State Sen. Carl Marcellino, a Long Island Republican, said there's a provision in the law for returning the money to EPF from the general fund. ''It's never been put back,'' he said.
''The governor's not enthusiastic about sweeping the EPF,'' said Judith Enck, Gov. David Paterson's chief environmental adviser who urged lawmakers to pass expanded recycling to keep tons of discarded bottles from the waste stream. ''The reason is we have a $13 billion budget deficit.''
|
Fifthgenerationnative
|
|
|---|---|
|
03-05-09 1:59 PM
|
By the way, I read an artical in the NY Times that was saying how NYS is looking at repealing the Rockafeller drug laws of the early '70s. Seems to me that the APA is another Rockafeller policy that was'nt a good idea then and now. I agree, lets really trim some fat and pare down governmental agencies that are'nt needed. The APA would be a start and then the top heavy DEC would be a logical second step. It amazes me just how much money is wasted in the name of the environment. The people of the North Country have a long history of being environmental stewards.
|
|
iamamom
|
|
|
03-05-09 11:46 AM
|
Lets get rid of the APA also. Lots of fat there to trim! Time to let Towns and Villages in this area determine what happens in their own back yard. And it is time for all of us to take personal and social responsibility for our actions and keep our area clean and do our part.
|