Sunday, September 24, 2006

"Arsenic and Old Lace," Developers and Desuetude

Why Did City of St. Augustine Rush to Annex Arsenic-Contaminated Land and Why Should We Designate It a "Brownfield" Now?

This is another beautiful day in a beautiful place, a small seaside city in Northeast Florida, one which we all love and seek to preserve, protect and defend against rapacious developers.

It now appears that our City government hastily annexed an arsenic-contaminated site for residential housing -- hundreds of acres -- ignoring citizen concerns and expert testimony by Dr. Alfred Hirsch, a geologist and expert on arsenic and pollution.

The contaminated site is the Old Ponce de Leon Golf Course, operated from 1916-2003. The major contaminant is arsenic, but other contaminants have not been adequately documented by the developer, CHESTER STOKES.

Where else in the world does a City annex a contaminated site, knowing it to be contaminated, planning to put housing on it (increasing the City population by 10%), without proper environmental studies?

You tell me.

Current City of St. Augustine City Commissioners ERROL JONES and DONALD CRICHLOW (and then-Commissioner WILLIAM LENNON), voted for the annexation and development of a contaminated site, knowing it was contaminated. Commissioners said they trusted federal and state regulators to do the right thing.

The contamination issue has been only partially addressed (due to lack of complete data from the developer). Read for yourself the report of the Florida Department of Health (DOH), working with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the Center for Disease Control (CDC). http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/Ponce%20de%20Leon%20Golf%20Course/PonceDeLeonGolfCoursePHA012606.pdf

State and federal environmental regulators
have waited several years for the developer's studies.

Those regulators
have found that the site has not yet been completely or properly studied, including January 23, 2006 DOH/ATSDR findings that:
1. The annexed property is an "indeterminate public health hazard." (Page 17).
2. "For purposes of public health assessment, site owners have not adequately characterized surface water quality." (Page 10).
3. "Future residents could theoretically breathe contaminated soil and sediment, if these media are not adequately characterized and remediated." (Page 18).
4. "...site developers have not adequately characterized the extent of contamination of environmental media... (page 18)
5. "DEP will not be able to accept a remedial action plan until the information requested for the Contamination Assessment Report has been provided." (Page 50).
6. The developer did not provide information on sample locations for all of its tests. (Pages 12, 54).
7. "The quality of these reports is not what DEP and DOH are accustomed to receiving." (Page 50).
8. There may be more contamination, including "forgotten or buried dumps." (Page 12).
9. There may be a need for deed restrictive covenants against digging, shallow groundwater use and other actions that may expose people to arsenic. (Pages 5,
10. 800 tons of contaminated soil has already been removed, with more removal (and capping with dirt) likely to be required.
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/HAC/pha/Ponce%20de%20Leon%20Golf%20Course/PonceDeLeonGolfCoursePHA012606.pdf
Large contaminated site now in City limits: Some 71% -- 284 of 400 acres -- may now be designated as a "brownfield," the St. Augustine Record reports, see below.

The City and developer have not explained what advantage there is for our City to designate the golf course as a "brownfield."

"Brownfield" designation could confer financial benefits on the developer, but efforts to learn why the City would want to make the "brownfield" designation have thus far been unavailing. We will quote CHESTER STOKES' answer here.

See straw public opinion poll, collection of St. Augustine Record articles and letters at http://www.staugustine.com/pageone/poncegolf.shtml (and City Commission minute excerpts, below).

Residents, children and pets could be at risk from this "indeterminate public health hazard," the Florida Department of Health says, with the developer not having done all of the testing that should have been done to date.

Current Commissioners ERROLL JONES and DONALD CRICHLOW fell meekly in line behind controversial City MANAGER WILLIAM B. HARRISS in support of the developer, CHESTER STOKES.

HARRISS and Commissioners should apologize and hold their heads in shame at the environmental hazard (five feet above sea level) which they have exacerbated and created by proposing to build some 749 homes on top of arsenic-contaminated soil, without due diligence before their annexation.

Dr. Alfred Hirsch, a geologist and expert on arsenic and pollution, testified before City Commissioners on October 13, 2003 -- excerpts from the City minutes appear below.

The "brownfield" issue is expected to be addressed at the September 25, 2006 St. Augustine City Commission meeting and at a meeting the developer is holding at Casa Monica Hotel on September 26, 2006.

Citizens are expected to closely question officials what benefit there is to our City from the "brownfield" designation and whether the area should be de-annexed from our City.

You've really got to hand it to the lackluster leadership of the municipal government of the City of St. Augustine, Florida.

Not only has our City government, behind closed doors, taken the entire contents of the old illegal city landfill
(30 million pounds of contaminants) and dumped it into the Old City Reservoir (with Mayor George Gardner erroneously told by City Manager WILLIAM B. HARRIS that it was "clean fill." (Of course, as a retired EPA regulator told me, "there are no bedsprings in clean fill." See below).

Perhaps even worse is our City government's documented insouciance about arsenic-contaminated land being used for hundreds of homes -- a plan to add 10% to our City's population.

What's going on here?

Does our Nation's Oldest City have the government our people and history deserve?

Is it time for EPA to take the lead on this site, with sampling and investigation by the EPA's SESD laboratory in Athens, Georgia -- instead of fox-in-charge-of-the-henhouse self-monitoring by the developer's hired guns, whose inaccurate data was blasted by DOH/ATSDR/CDC.

What do you think?

No comments: