We're all walking on clouds after finally winning our legal action to
stop the huge expansion of this toxic sludge dump offshore from Bay Beach
Amusement Park in the waters of Green Bay.
Brown County and the U.S. Army Corps have announced they won't appeal
the decision. They are finally looking for alternative disposal methods
for contaminated sediments dredged from the Green Bay Harbor shipping channel.
13 Year Struggle
The battle began in 1984 with the release of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' Environmental Impact Statement for the expansion, which was
criticized as grossly inadequate by many natural resource agencies (including
DNR, EPA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).
For a few years, as the Corps applied for permits, it seemed DNR was
certain to deny the project, but the political winds changed, Gov. Thompson
was elected in the fall of 1996, and DNR caved in.
After 13 years, the project supporters were still proposing the same
old island design, and still could not answer basic questions about a final
land-use plan for the island, long-term care costs, contingency plans in
the event of major storms, how they intended to monitor for leakage, or
what they would do when leakage is detected. (...not if ---
when...)
The DNR's wastewater discharge permit for the island proposed to allow
the expansion and then see if it could meet permit limits, because DNR
wasn't at all sure the island could meet state standards.
We weren't allowed to challenge the solid waste permit, or the wastewater
discharge permit, but we did challenge the Water Quality Certification
permit --- and this was enough.
Judge Agreed Water Quality Could Be Threatened
Judge Jeffrey Boldt confirmed that the project supporters couldn't prove
that water quality would be protected to state standards if the island
were tripled in size. The oxygen levels in the water could drop below
healthy levels --- because the expansion would block the river currents
flowing into the bay, creating pockets of stagnation along the East Shore.
Second Time Around
This is the same case which citizens had already won back in 1988, through
the leadership and hard work of attorney Thomas Dawson, former Wisconsin
Public Intervenor, back in 1988. In court, during cross-examination,
Dawson exposed an effort by several high-level DNR staff to knowingly
use faulty calculations to claim the island was safe.
The DNR used the same key staff person to issue the new permit last
year and to testify in court as an "expert." The judge wouldn't allow
us to challenge his trustworthiness during the trial, but the judge's decision
comments were critical of the agency's actions in this case.
Wasted Money and Time
This case provides another example of the Department of Defense's wasteful
habits and mismanagement. It's rumored that the Corps wasted over
1 million dollars developing the new, highly complex computer model and
extensive reports on water currents and chemistry around the island, but
they refused to calibrate and verify the model with real-life data from
the Bay. Our expert said the model was much more complex
than necessary and the Corps should have focussed more on actual water
quality and current measurements. The data which did exist showed
the Bay is already having dissolved oxygen problems and the island could
make it worse.
The Corps also spent scads of money flying a lawyer and experts in
from all over the country to oppose us in our trial. One of their
experts was irate, because they didn't even use her once they got her here.
It would be interesting to know how many taxdollars were wasted on misguided
staff promotion of this boondoggle over the past 13 years.
Sour Grapes
Now, the County and Corps are trying to make the public think that just
a small group of extremist environmentalists blocked a wonderful and essential
project, and this will cost Brown County taxpayers dearly. It's odd
how they can turn an issue on its head.
We proved in court twice that 3 government agencies can't be
trusted to abide by the law and protect water quality --- yet they make
it seem the fault of "environmentalists."
They're ignoring the thousands of petition signatures, letters, yard
signs, and testimony from ordinary local citizens who could never be described
as radicals.
Costly Stubbornness
The truth is that the inflexibility of these government agencies led
to high costs and years of delay. For 13 years, local citizens and
the Intervenor office urged the Corps and County to look for alternatives,
but it seemed that pure stubbornness and pride kept them locked into only
this project --- at all costs.
The Corps never seriously tried to move the $20 million in federal
funds from the island expansion to any other alternative project.
They simply dug in their heels and refused to budge for 13 years.
If this means that Brown County taxpayers will have to pay more for harbor
maintenance, the Corps and County are responsible, not "environmentalists."
Our Congressional representatives should demand an investigation
of the Corps' behavior. County voters should demand a hard look at
the Brown County Harbor Commission.
It's a Mistake to Ignore Citizen Concerns
In addition, the agencies refused to hold public hearings to allow citizens
to express their strong opposition. Years of effort and millions
of dollars could have been saved, if the agencies had simply been more
open to public discussion and more responsive to local voters.
Unfortunately, they are continuing bad behavior patterns, with the
creation of a "Citizen Advisory Committee" which County officials have
stacked with hand-picked people they are comfortable with.
Such committees are no substitute for a public hearing and true community
outreach efforts. The County could easily spend a lot of money and
time on a proposed land-use plan for the existing island, only to be shocked
later to discover that this "Citizen Advisory Committee" does NOT represent
the full range of strong concerns in the community.
This is foolish, and leads to the kind of waste and confusion we frequently
see in our government.
Polluters Should Pay
Another annoying aspect of the County and Corps claims is that they're
essentially blaming "environmentalists" (i.e.: local citizens) for the
high cost of sediment disposal for maintaining the Harbor.
First, they claim taxpayers will have to pick up the costs because
the Federal dollars won't be as available --- but the Federal dollars are
our taxdollars too. This is like taking money out of one pocket to
compensate the other pocket of the same pants.
Second, they keep ignoring the fact that "environmentalists" aren't
responsible for causing the sediment disposal problem. The polluting
industries along the Fox River are responsible. The polluters should
be paying every penny required to clean-up the Harbor sediments.
Taxpayers shouldn't get stuck with this unfair cost.
In fact, Brown County and federal taxpayers should be reimbursed for
all the extra costs they've already experienced over the past 30 years
due to the pollution.
Third, County officials have been unwilling to conduct a comprehensive
cost-benefit analysis to determine whether it even makes sense to continue
maintaining this port at current operation levels.
If industries like Fort Howard Corporation are so dependent on this
harbor for their survival, let them pay for cleaning up the toxic chemicals
they dumped which have damaged their Harbor. They soiled their own
nest.
Corps Data Unreliable
An interesting sidelight of a recent public presentation by Fox River
clean-up parties, were some extremely blunt comments made by a DNR sediment
expert concerning the Corps' chemical analysis of harbor sediments.
The Corps and County have been claiming recently that environmentalists
are exaggerating the toxic dangers of the channel dredgings. The
Corps claims sediments are much cleaner now --- yet the DNR's expert on
sediment announced that the Corps' data was highly questionable and unreliable.
It's unfortunate DNR couldn't have said this during our Kidney Island
trial --- the DNR attorney was too busy defending the Corps against citizens.
But at least this reinforces our arguments about the need for better scrutiny
of Corps projects and careful handling of the sediments.
Now that two demonstration projects are planned next summer up-river,
it's possible that some hotspot sediments may be disturbed to flow downstream.
This may result in some temporarily higher readings in the channel, requiring
careful disposal of dredgings.
Many groups and individuals helped us win the Kidney Island case,
and we want to acknowledge them:
