|
|
Welcome to Green Speech, a conversation about Connecticut's environment
 Click here to send an email to the contact person for this article.
We must take advantage of our state's leadership role in new energy technology to build a stable foundation for businesses to flourish and jobs to grow. We must take advantage of federal funding to ensure the health and safety of our waterways and protect the once-thriving Long Island Sound economy. We must invest in public transit to ensure we can move people and engage efficiently in global commerce.
Connecticut doesn't have to choose between protecting the environment and the encouraging economic growth; we can and must do both if we want to expand jobs and position the state as a first-string player in the new economy.
Dolphins in the Sound July 22, 2009
Taxing Bus Riders – Who's Next? June 13, 2009
Protecting Connecticut's Rivers, May 26, 2009
Transforming Pink Slips into Green Growth, March 13, 2009
Analyzing the Governor's Budget for Green Economic Recovery, February 5, 2009
Reviewing the Governor's Budget, February 3, 2009
Transforming Fear into Economic Recovery, February 3, 2009
Dolphins in the Sound July 22, 2009
For the first time in decades there are Dolphins in Long Island Sound this summer! A large pod of dolphins! Hundreds of people saw them in Huntington, New Rochelle, Hempstead and Larchmont harbors and offshore as far east as Branford, Connecticut. Seeing them again in the Sound brings us to a place of wonder – graceful dives and streamlined play. What kid hasn't dreamed of swimming with them or for a moment hasn't transformed themselves into a porpoise as they dive under water?
Dolphins returning are another sign of hope for the present condition and future of Long Island Sound. It bodes well for our future relationships with all of the finned, winged, and legged friends who share the Sound. Seeing dolphins excites us and reminds us that our collective investment in Long Island Sound and marine conservation is paying off. The dolphins are following a welcome trend lead by seals, which are returning in larger numbers each winter to the Sound. They are also following a food source, showing us that our conservation efforts to protect bunker fish may be working. Perhaps the marked increase in stripped bass numbers has helped. What we know is that Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection's fisheries data show that total numbers of fish in the Sound has been holding steady.
The dolphins are also a symbol of thanks: a thank you to all the people who work to restore the Sound, and especially to our New York and Connecticut congressmen and senators. Our congressional representatives fight for our fair share of environmental funds every year. They have tried to bring the needed dollars for clean water and habitat restoration to the Sound, but it's always a struggle. The 2010 federal budget cycle proposes $12 million in additional funding to expand the Sound restoration efforts coordinated by the Long Island Sound Study Office. That is a respectable starting sum for an estuary of national significance, with one out of ten people in this country living within 50 miles of its shores.
With this federal money sewage treatment plants around the Sound will be improved and will flow cleaner as a result. Fish, like us, need clean water. Several rivers will be opened up to fish runs so they can once again travel ancient routes to breeding grounds, allowing herring and alewife numbers to breed and increase. These fish are the dolphin's meat and potatoes. Dolphins need clean, fish filled waters if we hope they return every summer.
This funding will also be used to acquire and improve the last remaining coastal sites around the Sound, so more of us can get to and enjoy the Sound's beautiful shoreline and to provide more habitat for the birds and wildlife we love to see. Now we look to our Senators to "bring home the herring", so to speak from that proposed budget.
For those of us who remember an encounter with a dolphin on the Sound from decades gone by, take heart. Wander down to the shore. If you can, hop on a boat. Explore, enjoy. And if you are lucky enough, once again hear the ancient bellows of their breath.
Taxing Bus Riders – Who's Next??
So it's come to this... The Governor is proposing a 40% increase in bus fares. With no proposed increase in public transit or bus service. At a time when diesel prices are half of what they were a year ago. And while we wait for about 200 new super clean, high efficiency new buses paid for entirely by the federal government (thanks President Obama and your stimulus program).
This translates into a tax increase through bus fares. This is the worst kind of tax (highly regressive) at the worst time possible (during a recession). The Governor's own Department of Labor has conducted extensive surveys of working families. The bread winners in these struggling families repeatedly tell us that the single biggest impediment they face in achieving the American Dream is lack of quality public transportation. So when jobs are scarcer, and public transportation is more important than ever to reach a changing job market, we are going to raise bus fares from $1.25 to $1.75 and not improve service one iota? Bad idea. And a bad tax.
If we need to raise taxes to deal with the worst fiscal the state has faced in a quarter century, so be it. But let's be honest about it. And debate it openly. In an open debate, anyone who suggested raising taxes by increasing bus fares for those who can least afford it and absolutely need clean bus service to get to work would be laughed off the stage. But this is not an open debate. It is one of a few stealth taxes included in the Governor's budget.
Another includes a plan for next June (2010) to "securitize" the renewable energy and energy efficiency funds we all pay into monthly through our electric bill surcharge. This is a fancy way of saying she proposes to basically steal half of these funds for the following decade and direct them into the general fund (think tax) to make up the deficit. A tax on clean energy and renewable energy. Bad idea. Let's be honest. If we need new taxes, let's look at better alternatives.
Riverfront Protection – HB 5934 – Must Pass This Year
Clean flowing streams and rivers. Unpolluted drinking water reservoirs. Flood protection. Every one of us wants and deserves these basics. How do we make these benefits a reality?
We asked this question to Connecticut's leading river scientists. And they were unanimous – you keep Connecticut's streams and rivers flowing clean and blue by protecting the forests and shrubs along their banks. Such vegetation is the natural filter that purifies our drinking water by preventing polluted runoff from reaching our streams. These trees and shrubs also slow down flood waters, thereby protecting homeowners and businesses downstream. When trees and shrubs are ripped up, developed over or converted to lawn, the filter is also destroyed. Runoff pollutes our rivers and reservoirs. Flood waters flow faster and higher. It's that simple.
The scientists told us that increasing protections in the first 100 feet of riverfront area is a compromise that will provide the most value for rivers while minimizing disruptions to development.
That is why a broad coalition of seventeen environmental, fishing and watershed groups is calling for the passage of HB 5934 this year. It has passed the Environment and Planning & Development Committees. It is waiting to be re-drafted and for House and Senate action.
Our coalition tried to work out compromise language with the Home Builders Association. We met with them several times along with the leadership of Senator Meyer, Representative Roy, Representative Mushinsky and Representative Willis. At our meeting on May 11, the Home Builders stated they would not agree to any language that in any way increased protection of vegetation near rivers and streams. Nor could they identify any kind of trade-off they might consider.
In spite of our best good-faith efforts at compromise, we can't force agreement from parties unwilling to negotiate, so we have continued to work with our legislative leaders to do what's right for clean water. We are confident that our proposed language is both protective of natural vegetation within 100 feet of rivers and wetlands, and is also flexible in protecting legitimate property rights. We await the re-draft. And we ask all of you to support this balanced approach to keep our rivers running clean and cool, all the way to the Sound!
Transforming Pink Slips into Green Growth
March 13, 2009
President Obama's stimulus and proposed budget speak loud and clear. Now is the time to invest in a new energy efficiency future, create renewables and grow green jobs. The perfect stimulus – an investment to expand new green industries, green jobs and save the planet...Not to mention reducing Connecticut smog and soot pollution by thousands of tons annually to let our families breathe healthier. The recently passed stimulus package promises to pump tens of millions of dollars into a green energy future here in Connecticut. So we're in great shape right?
Wrong – If the legislature follows the Governor's proposed budget reduction, it will place in jeopardy around $40 million in federal stimulus designed to augment and build our state efficiency and renewable programs. In this worst case scenario, we could see pink slips for at least 750 Connecticut energy efficiency, solar and fuel cell jobs – a great leap backward.
The choice is clear. By simply keeping our existing Connecticut energy efficiency and clean energy funding intact, we can harness the federal stimulus to create unprecedented job training and green job expansion potential here in Connecticut. Combining our state funding level with the federal stimulus could create well over 1,000 new green jobs.
A little known secret is that Connecticut has been very effectively investing $120 million each year in green energy. This year we invested in energy efficiency ($90 million in our energy efficiency and load management fund) and renewable energy ($30 million through our clean energy fund). These funds are paid for through a small fee on each electric bill. And they have performed well. The efficiency fund has created a green collar workforce of over 1,000 non-utility employees. In 2007, these folks helped a total of 7,000 small businesses and residents of all income levels save over $120,000 in electricity bills in that year alone. The program provides full energy audits; cost-benefit analysis, on the job retrofits and contractor/material coordination and material subsidies to make it easy and affordable for residents and businesses to save up to 40% of their energy costs. The solar electric program has been so successful that it is way overbooked and is now closed to new commercial applications. These funds have received national recognition. Last August our state energy efficiency program was ranked third best in the nation by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. Just this past January, our clean energy fund received another national award.
The Governor's large proposed cuts place Connecticut's share of state green energy stimulus in jeopardy. Her budget proposes is to eliminate about $50 million per year annually from these two state funds. The clear intent of the federal stimulus bill is for states to use their green energy funds to expand on existing state energy efficiency investments. Language in both the stimulus and underlying energy bill require the state to certify that the funds will be used to augment existing state energy efficiency and renewable energy investments. Thus, eliminating nearly half of our Connecticut investment in green energy funding would place another $40 million in federal funding in legal jeopardy. The chart below illustrates the point.
The "flat funding" scenario illustrates a decision not to raid the existing two green energy funds, which are made up of the current combined funding of $120 million for both the energy efficiency and clean energy funds. With that decision, Connecticut would clearly be eligible to access an estimate $45 million of federal stimulus dollars directed toward the state's energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.
The "cuts impact" illustrates the impact of the Governor's proposal to raid, or re-direct approximately $50 million of this funding stream to the general fund. As described earlier, such a major reduction places Connecticut's share of federal stimulus for our state energy efficiency and renewable energy programs in jeopardy. If Connecticut were to become disqualified to receive this funding, the total impact would be a combined green energy funding loss of about $90 million when compared to the flat funding scenario. Instead of a major stimulus effect, we would lose existing jobs, create massive uncertainly in our growing energy efficiency and green energy industries and cede leadership in yet another area to competing states, such as Massachusetts and New York, who are actively growing these green job creation industries as we speak.
Analyzing the Governor's Budget for Green Economic Recovery
February 5, 2009
Yesterday we said we would look at the Governor's proposed budget and determine whether it spurs green economic recovery or furthers the tailspin. The results are mixed.
Reviewing the Governor's budget
This budget address was a lesson in subtext. On the one hand, the Governor made the right arguments about environmental initiatives being part of a larger economic recovery, but then she proposed cuts that, if enacted, will jeopardize hundreds of existing high quality green jobs by securitizing and raiding the clean energy funds. At a time when national attention is focused on energy efficiency as a way of spurring job creation, the Governor is ceding our leadership position on the issue and failing to position the state to take off in the recovery.
In order to be competitive in the new economy, resources need to be dedicated to increasing energy efficiency, alternative energy development, clean water investments and transit infrastructure improvement. The Governor does seem to approach environmental initiatives as a critical part of a larger economic recovery, but questions remain.
The Issues
1. Green energy jobs and investments.
Both Connecticut's energy efficiency and clean energy funds won national recognition in the past few months. These programs pumped $120 million of effective energy efficiency and renewable energy investments into our state economy last year. They support well over 1,000 private sector green jobs, helped over 7,000 residents or businesses save on energy bills and create at least $5 of long term savings to our local economies for every $1 invested.
The Governor's green energy budget grade: Poor
The Governor's proposal appears to raid $92 million out of this $120 million annual energy efficiency and clean energy investment during the next two years. She first proposes to "intercept" $52 million dollars per year for ten years out of these funds in order to provide a one time securitized payment of $350 million to the general fund. Second, she proposes to raid an additional $40 million from the energy efficiency fund each of the next two years and direct it to the general fund.
The impacts of this combined raiding are enormous. First, it's a proposal to disinvest three out of four dollars from our nationally recognized energy efficiency and clean energy programs. This would translate into the direct loss of at least 750 existing solid private sector clean energy jobs now supported by these funds – from energy auditors to insulators; and from solar installers to fuel cell manufacturers. As importantly, it will mean a loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in energy savings to consumers – savings that directly boost our Connecticut economy. Finally, it amounts to a new general fund tax on electricity customers. The funds are supported by a small (combined $4MM) surcharge on electricity usage. She is proposing that most of this charge become in effect, a general fund tax.
2. Clean Water and a Long Island Sound Investment
After years of neglect, the General Assembly invested $595 million in solid clean water infrastructure projects over the past two years through a combination of general obligation and revenue bonds. Fortunately, the Governor has been on-board with this investment, and these funds are now creating thousands of needed construction jobs.
By increasing this State capital investment further, and capturing an anticipated significant influx of federal stimulus for water and habitat restoration projects, we can accelerate a comprehensive investment in Long Island Sound recovery and create or support 9,000 jobs – and over 8,000 of them high quality construction jobs here in the state.
Long Island Sound Recovery Investment grade: Fair
The Governor is proposing to continue the pace of Connecticut capital spending on Long Island Sound projects at approximately existing levels: She proposes an annual $90 million general obligation bond investment and corresponding $175 million revenue bond allocation for clean water projects. This could and should be expanded modestly to expand high quality infrastructure construction jobs and spur further economic recovery.
The biggest Long Island Sound budget disappointment is that she proposes to eliminate the very successful lobster notch program that currently keeps 13 lobster boats working, and involves scores of high school students. Other stimulus opportunities not mentioned in the budget include habitat restoration and oyster bed reclamation to restore the oyster industry and the ecological health of the Sound.
3. Increasing Transit Investment
ConnDOT Commissioner Marie has repeatedly stated that Connecticut has built half of our transportation system (roadways), and now it is time to build the transit side to support smart growth. We could not agree more. Specifically, we support the Commissioner's priorities of investing in both the New Haven to Springfield commuter rail line, constructing the bus rapid transit system between New Britain and Hartford and modestly expanding bus service statewide.
Transit investment grade: operational side: good capital investment side: fair
The good news is that the budget appears to recognize the importance of modestly expanding transit operational dollars for both rail and bus. She proposes to increase both bus and rail operational support by $12 million next year and $16 million the following year.
The more troubling news is on the capital side of the transit budget. While every highway, road or bridge capital project recommended by ConnDOT received support for full state capital funding, this budget proposes to fund approximately one-tenth of the capital transit funding requested by ConnDOT. Over the next two years, ConnDOT requested $709 million in state funds for transit investments. In contrast, only $80 million of total transit capital is being recommended for these two years (outside of the effort to fund the New Haven rail maintenance facility). It becomes hard to see how a major transit improvement, like the New Haven to Springfield commuter rail system could be built on a $40 million proposed capital budget.
4. DEP's Operational Budget
Suffice it to say that DEP could have been devastated in this process. OPM knew the tool box and dimensions to achieve the grade, and the Governor recognized the differential disadvantage that DEP has going into this budget cycle.
DEP investment grade: Fair
DEP went into this budget cycle at great risk. It is clear that the Governor and OPM recognized this risk and treated the agency fairly. Scores of staff previously supported by special funds will now be supported by an increase in proposed general fund support. The budget calls for a reduction of a total of only six staff. It could have been orders of magnitude worse. The biggest remaining concern is whether DEP will be able to hire the hundreds of seasonal employees that we depend on to keep our parks and forests open and safe – this hiring previously was supported by special funds that are being proposed to be swept into the general fund.
Those of us who care about sound environmental policy and accountability should be appalled by the proposal to eliminate funding for the Council on Environmental Policy.
The CEQ has, for over thirty years, acted as an environmental policy watchdog for Connecticut. With a tiny budget and two staffers, they have consistently put out a clear, independent vision for innovation in environmental protection. They started the clarion call for open space and farmland funding in the '90's. They have reminded us of the link between brownfields and economic development. Last year CEQ laid a blueprint for DEP and green infrastructure investment. In losing the CEQ as a separate entity that operates under DEP's roof, we lose an important piece of long term environmental intellectual infrastructure and gain very little cost savings.
The proposal to zero out both the open space matching grant program and the DEP land acquisition program are poor choices. Our state park system has suffered from decades of neglect. While the concept of a Connecticut Civilian Conservation Corps is intriguing, at its proposed funding level ($7.5 million) it is likely to create no more than 100 jobs. It is questionable whether this limited labor pool can make a significant impact on the backlog of park improvement needs without a significant capital investment effort to provide the heavy equipment, material and trained contracting know-how necessary to complete the major park improvements needed in our neglected system.
The Governor provided no capital dollars for improving parks, despite a $28 million request from the DEP. While the farmland protection program is slated to receive a modest $5 million in bonding, the state matching grants-in-aid to farmers is zeroed out as well.
Reviewing the Governor's budget, February 3, 2009
Here's what we will be looking at to review the Governor's budget:
1. Green energy jobs and investments.
Both Connecticut's energy efficiency and clean energy funds won national recognition in the past few months. They pumped $200 million of effective energy efficiency and renewable energy investments into our state economy last year. They support well over 1,000 private sector green jobs, helped over 7,000 residents or businesses save on energy bills and create at least $5 of long term savings to our local economies for every $1 invested.
Examining the Governor's green energy budget:
Excellent:
For including a budget plan to expand energy efficiency and renewable CT industries by leveraging the existing CT energy fund investment (anticipated at about $200 million for next year) with an anticipated range of $25 to $75 millions of green energy federal stimulus dollars and RGGI auction proceeds. Creative financing could combine our existing funding stream with these new streams to double energy efficiency investments, creating large economic recovery and job creation;
Good:
Status quo: funds are allowed to continue their current high quality operations, using the existing small clean energy electricity billing surcharge. RGGI proceeds are directed toward energy efficiency, as required by the existing legal framework;
Poor:
Any proposal to steal or sweep any portion of these funds into the general fund; Such a proposal will amount to a disinvestment in green recovery. It will also amount to a new general fund tax on electric customers. Watch carefully – the Governor proposed this approach in her mid January deficit reduction package. It was defeated by strong Democratic House and bipartisan Senate leadership;
Terrible:
A proposal to sweep all $200 million from the two green energy funds, and RGGI auction proceeds into the general fund. With CT's share of federal green energy stimulus at probably less than one-third of our total state investment (based on House version of stimulus) this would amount to a massive net disinvestment, result in a direct loss of at least 1,000 green jobs, and cripple the long term viability of our energy efficiency, solar and fuel cell industries.
2. Clean Water and a Long Island Sound Investment
After years of neglect, the General Assembly invested $595 million in solid clean water infrastructure projects over the past two years through a combination of general obligation and revenue bonds. Fortunately, the Governor has been on-board with this investment, and these funds are now creating thousands of needed construction jobs.
By increasing this State capital investment further, and capturing an anticipated significant influx of federal stimulus for water and habitat restoration projects, we can accelerate a comprehensive investment in Long Island Sound recovery and create or support 9,000 jobs – and over 8,000 of them high quality construction jobs here in the state.
Grading the Long Island Sound Recovery Investment
Excellent:
Proposal to increase total capital spending on Long Island Sound projects to $354.6 million, which includes an increase from $90 million/year of general obligation bonds for clean water projects to $130 million/year of general obligation bonds, and additional state money for wildlife habitat restoration, restoration of the lobster and oyster industry, access to recreational and commercial harbors, and improvements to state stewardship sites. This would expand the benefits of the approximately $70 million plus of federal stimulus money anticipated under the Congressional House bill;
Fair:
Keep Connecticut capital spending on Long Island Sound projects at existing levels: A $90 million general obligation bond investment and corresponding $415 million revenue bond allocation for clean water projects, plus a small allotment for the lobster v-notch program and local dredging projects;
Terrible:
Cutting, or worse eliminating, Connecticut's LIS and clean water funding. This would result in a massive disinvestment in clean water, habitat restoration, lobster and oyster industry preservation while also failing to put new jobs into the economy pipeline.
3. Increasing Transit Investment
ConnDOT Commissioner Marie has repeatedly stated that Connecticut has built half of our transportation system (roadways), and now it is time to build the transit side to support smart growth. We could not agree more. Specifically, we support the Commissioner's priorities of investing in both the New Haven to Springfield commuter rail line, constructing the bus rapid transit system between New Britain and Hartford and modestly expanding bus service statewide.
Grading transit investment:
Excellent:
For a budget that includes expanding Connecticut's transit capital investment by at least $100 million, to support the transit investments identified above. The Governor could choose to direct federal stimulus funding to transit. This must be matched by a significant increase (at least $15 million) in transit operating expenses to allow for New Haven to Springfield service to begin and for a modest bus expansion;
Fair:
For static state capital and operational dollars coupled with a commitment to utilize the federal stimulus dollars to leverage transit investments;
Terrible:
For any decrease in operational dollars. This will require transit service elimination.
4. DEP's Operational Budget
Suffice it to say that DEP could be devastated in this process. OPM knows the tool box and dimensions to achieve the grade.
Grading investment in the DEP
Excellent: resources dedicated to overburdened agency;
Fair: treated equally compared to other state agencies;
Terrible: completely neglected
Transforming Fear into Economic Recovery, February 3, 2009
What we know:
- Our economy continues to crash after the fed set interest as low as they can go. The fed policy of the last 30 years is not enough;
- This leaves the government as investor of last resort to stimulate the Connecticut economy out of free fall;
- Connecticut government must focus federal stimulus on green recovery projects to create excellent jobs, stimulates recovery, expands green industry and create a healthier, safer Connecticut and planet;
- Our state government's role is critical to the recovery. Targeting and leveraging federal stimulus with modest increases in state capital investment will create excellent recovery and position us for a smart growth economic recovery.
Hacking Connecticut energy and capital funding will take away more than the stimulus adds, which would accelerate and deepen Connecticut's economic tailspin. |
|
