BY DAN VALENTI

Today, we present the views of city councilors on the three “show stopping” questions that should, and will, if common sense and wise care have anything to do with it, become enormously important in municipal Campaign 2011.

To recap and as a continuation of the discussions initiated on and by The Planet, we polled each of the 11 city councilors in Pittsfield for their views on:

(1) PCB cleanup

(2) Hill 78

(3) $331 million in unfunded liabilities that taxpayers in Pittsfield must eventually pay

Our purpose was to get councilors on the record, to establish a benchmark of positions as we move forward this year. On behalf of constituents, taxpayers, residents, citiznes, and Little Guys — the Joe and Mary Jane Kapanskis of Pittsfield — the Planet won a majority. Six of the 11 councilors responded. We will not judge or comment on views. Our job today is merely to serve as a conduit of information on these three vital topics.

The Planet expresses profound thanks to councilors Peter White, Mike Ward, John Krol, Joe Nichols, Melissa Mazzeo, and Kevin Sherman. As you will read, they gave serious thought to our queries. Similarly, The Planet expresses profound contempt to Christine Yon, Paul Capitanio, Jonathan Lothrup, Gerry Lee, and Peter Marchetti for snubbing We The People. The recalcitrant five, to use the term of one of our posters, turned “coward” when asked to share their views. We know, because of the traction this website continues to gain every day, that this affect outcomes in November.

JOHN KROL, WARD 6

(1) Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

Not being a scientist, I have to rely on the feedback from the EPA, DEP, and our environmental community. With that said, doing nothing (low impact) through the entire Rest of River is not an option. If there are certain collection points with greater levels of PCBs we should address those areas aggressively. In lower level areas, we may have the opportunity to be more sensitive. We need to take a reasonable approach and, as others have wisely stated, be open to any and all new technologies that can address PCBs. In addition to funding the cleanup, we should challenge GE to provide research and dollars for these types of technologies that can be developed in Pittsfield, which can ultimately create new opportunities and jobs in an effort to address GE’s devastating environmental legacy in Pittsfield and beyond.

(2) Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

Hill 78 is one of the truly unfortunate results of the consent decree. However, I believe that the potential environmental hazards presented by moving the contaminated material far outweigh the risk of leaving Hill 78 where it is today. I am not a scientist, nor a physician, so I have to rely on the data that is provided by the EPA and regular reports of the Board of Health. As chairman of the Public Health & Safety Committee, I hope that you will attend or view the committee’s meeting on Monday, March 21, when Board of Health Chairman Dr. Phil Adamo will present the latest update on PCB testing at and around Hill 78.

(3) Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

Asking whether unfunded liabilities “should be addressed immediately or not” is the wrong question. It is important to understand that many of us have our own “unfunded liabilities” in the form of a mortgage – owing significantly more money than what we own in assets. While you may see the statement that shows you owe hundreds of thousands of dollars (which you may not be able to pay off today), there is a set plan of paying that debt over the long term. So, in the city’s case, the right question is “What is the plan to address this over the long term?” To give the city credit, there have been some things done already to reduce the burden on taxpayers by asking employees and retirees to contribute more to the cost of health insurance throughout negotiations and the by entering the Group Insurance Commission. As you know, the skyrocketing cost of health insurance is one of the major challenges that contribute to the city’s long-term debt. While we’ve all heard quite a bit in the national dialogue focusing on cuts, cuts, cuts. I would warn against this mantra. Just like in the federal budget, there are cuts that can be made that are visible and symbolic but do not address the real issue. Short-term budget slashing of important services (for instance) will not make a dent in the long-range debt. Before taking knee-jerk actions to numbers like $331 million, I suggest putting it into perspective, hearing what the city has (or has not) done in recent years to address the issue, and examine what options we have. This is an excellent higher-level discussion particularly for the mayor’s campaign, as it will be the mayor who will need to understand these complexities to move forward with a budgetary plan that will ensure the city’s long-term sustainability.

———————————————————

MIKE WARD, WARD 4

(1) Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

Technically there is no “full removal,” option so I advocate partial removal.  Even the most aggressive plans discussed (including some that would take decades to accomplish) constitute a partial removal.  The reason that bank stabilization (stones) was used in the first phase of the cleanup was to prevent the river from eroding, as rivers do, past the “clean zone” and releasing PCBs.  It is understood that PCBs still exist in the soil beyond a certain depth of clean fill.

My job as an elected official is to represent the opinion of the majority of my constituents, and this has proven difficult because no unified opinion has emerged on this subject, perhaps because it requires a huge investment of time to learn all the facets of this debate.  Perhaps this is the case because people have faith that the EPA will hold GE’s feet to the fire.

I’ve spent a lot of time on the subject, and I now know how much I don’t know.  Yes, I think a cleanup is necessary.  But what constitutes a “smart cleanup” for me?  I have plenty of opinions but not necessarily answers.  I saw a number of things in the 2008 CMS that I didn’t agree with.  For starters, I don’t believe in committing to a multi-decade plan that would prevent us from adopting new technologies as they become available.  I don’t believe in spending a ton of money to dredge the river and dump the mud in a newly created Hill 79.  In other words I don’t believe in simply moving the PCBs around Pittsfield like a shell game.  An acceptable plan, for me, must eliminate PCBs.  If we’re going to make the effort to dig up all that sediment I would rather see the PCBs removed and the sediment returned to the riverbed.  To me that makes much more sense than having a million truck trips through our community.  However, I am dubious about the thermal desorption treatment option because I don’t trust that it won’t poison the air.  So what does that leave for treatment options?  Maybe chemical extraction, or mechanical washing, or one of the newfangled methods of separating PCBs or rendering them inert.

(2) Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

Sure, I’d like to see Hill 78 gone, but that’s a lot like being in favor of the Pittsfield bypass.  That ship has sailed.  Some say that re-opening the consent decree is impossible and others claim that it’s as easy as opening a box of Cracker Jack.  I have no legal expertise to offer an opinion on that, but you might end up spending more money on lawyers than the remediation would cost.

While I wasn’t privy to the consent decree negotiations, I do think that letting GE get away with an unlined landfill (especially one with some particularly nasty stuff at the bottom) was a huge concession on our part for a $10 million dollar settlement.  Ecuador recently fined Chevron $8 billion (with a “B”) for polluting the Amazon.  Just an observation.

(3) Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

Ultimately this is a question for Joe Nichols and Pete Marchetti because it’s a budget decision to be made by the corner office.  As mayor, you could fix the roads or you could pay down the debt.  Which do you think is more appealing to voters?  That’s right, the situation creates short-term leadership.  The sacrifices necessary to get us back on track would probably make anyone a one-term mayor.  So what’s the solution?  Perhaps an amendment to the city charter codifying a certain level of funding for long-term liabilities in our annual budget.

———————————————

PETE WHITE, WARD 2

1. Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

I think that the PCB cleanup of the Housatonic River should start at the beginning of the contaminated area and take a microhabitat approach. This microhabitat approach would take small sections of the river and use scientific knowledge to not destroy the habitat for the plants, birds and animals but still cleanup the worst areas. There are areas of the river that should be completely cleaned, but I don’t agree with destroying the entire river ecosystems. I also do not agree with the leave alone approach, I feel that something must be done.

The areas that are most contaminated should be cleaned to the fullest extent that the current methods will accomplish. So partial removal is what I would advocate for now, but I think a fund needs to be set up to address the PCBs that still remain. As technology advances this fund should be available to attempt full cleanup overtime and also to continue to cleanup Woods Pond where the PCBs seem to settle in higher concentration. At Woods Pond aggressive cleanup should be conducted once the microhabitat approach has been completed. Regular monitoring and cleanup when part per million levels rise to unacceptable levels should be written into any agreement before it is signed. We need to strike a balance between the potential health hazards and the ecosystem of the river. We also need to be careful that not all scientists will agree and that we need to listen to all sides before making final decisions.

The Housatonic River is special to me because I am a kayaker. I spend quite a bit of my free time on the Housatonic and I would hate to see the wildlife displaced by a full dredging. One weekend I counted between 150 to 200 turtles, countless birds, 8 beavers and other wildlife that call the banks of the Housatonic home. We need to think of them as well as humans in any cleanup plan.

2. Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

I encourage your readers to attend the next City Council Public Health and Safety subcommittee meeting this coming Monday at 7:30 pm. At this meeting Dr. Adamo will be giving a presentation on the status of Hill 78 and monitoring.

I do favor the full removal of Hill 78 and Building 71 from their present locations, to locations out of the City, however I do not think that is a realistic option at this time. We must always keep communication channels open if one day becomes an option. With that said I think that G.E. and the EPA are doing a great job of monitoring and reporting on the safety of Hill 78 and Building 71. Hill 78 is a capped PCB landfill that has safety measures in place that include ground water, air and leaching system monitoring. The Pittsfield Board of Health, the EPA and GE has representatives meet throughout the year to discuss ongoing monitoring. The reports that I have read have the monitoring within accepted levels. It is important that this monitoring remains in place and that the public has access to it.

I understand the uneasiness of the location of Hill 78 and Building 71, in regards to the school and neighborhood, but I am confident that the proper monitoring is in place. I am open minded to any ideas that present themselves for removal in the future, but for now I am confident in the monitoring that is taking place. Please remember that the Pittsfield Board of Health is an autonomous resource available to all citizens if they have further questions.

Here are some links that may give your readers more information. Allendale School property PCB air sampling results for 2010 is available at the EPA web site at:

http://www.epa.gov/region01/ge/thesite/allendale/reports/474451.pdf

Comparison of 2010 EPA and GE OPCA Replicate PCB Air Sampling Results is

available at the EPA web site at:

http://www.epa.gov/region01/ge/thesite/opca/reports/474452.pdf

GE’s 2010 PCB Air Sampling Results for the Hill 78/Building 71 OPCAs is

available at the EPA web site at:

http://www.epa.gov/region01/ge/thesite/opca/reports/474453.pdf

3. Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

I do think that we need to address unfunded liabilities. This needs to be done through communication with the Massachusetts Municipal Association, the Berkshire Delegation, City Council, Mayor, Unions and other affected parties. I do not think that this is something that I as a City Councilor with solve in a response to the Planet, however I do want to thank you for making people aware of the issue. I hope that this will start community dialogue that will lead to an eventual plan. I think that during this economy we should be focused on reducing future unfunded liabilities, but I am not afraid to say that I do not have the answer to this but will participate in the dialogue that will hopefully find a solution.

http://www.epa.gov/region0

1/ge/thesite/allendale/rep

orts/474451.pdf

www.epa.gov

—————————————————

JOE NICHOLS, WARD 7

(1) Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

I believe the PCBs should be removed from the river and everywhere else in Pittsfield at GE’s expense, not the taxpayers’ expense.

(2) Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

Hill 78 should be moved by GE away from Pittsfield. Until it is, the school should be closed with the children moved to a safer location.  Why have they not moved the children already?  This is unforgivable.

(3) Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

I will address the unfunded liability as mayor.  Unfunded pensions no longer exist for the private sector, and they should not exist at all as they are unsustainable.  We need to put a halt on them. [One solution is to] grandfather those who have them but stop taking on anymore so that the liability begins decreasing from that point forward.  Certain measures must be taken to begin from scratch with our public work force and the negotiations, which take place in a completely irresponsible manner.  What were they thinking?

——————————————————

KEVIN SHERMAN, AT LARGE

(1) Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

First, I stand by my position following the previous Corrective Measures Study in 2007/2008. I do not support any plan that includes so-called “upland storage facilities.” I made this clear at that time when Councilor Ward and I filed a petition asking our colleagues to go on record against that plan.  The petition passed unanimously.  If any dredging is to be done, it is not acceptable for any removed toxic sediment to placed on Pittsfield’s soil or any soil of our neighboring communities.  I’m told there are areas of the country that hold large reservoirs of the waste, and that’s where it needs to go.  By truck, by rail, by hook, or by crook.  It’s got to go.

My preference would be to begin the removal of highly concentrated areas while concurrently establishing the PCB Remediation Facility at the William Stanely Business Park.  This R and D facility could use the Housatonic River as a living classroom to develop more scientific methods of destroying the toxins.  GE would provide the funds, the EPA and scientists would provide the knowledge, and the City of Pittsfield would provide the labor.  How we get this to happen is a larger question, but this would be my ideal preference.

(2) Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

I favor the removal provided we have assurances that the moving of the sediment would not spread the toxins and there is a specified, appropriate location outside of Berkshire County to which the sediment can be transported. I know Dr. Adamo and the Board of Health have gone to great lengths to monitor the levels and that the school and parents have been communicated with at regular intervals by the Board and the EPA.  However, that in and of itself does not excuse the fact that if the Hill sediment can be moved, it should [be moved].  Another issue other than the proximity of the school is the neighborhood in general.  Having lived on California Avenue, I know that the PCB issue can be prevalent when buying and selling a home.  Removing the large shadow of the “Hill” would go a long way in eradicating concerns or questions.

(3) Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

If by “address immediately” you mean the $331 million be raised and put in a reserve account today, my answer is no, and I don’t see that as a reality.  What I see are future payments for obligations made through prior negotiation and bargaining.  As Tim Bartini noted on the pages of The Planet, one’s mortgage could be considered an unfunded liability, as could other items such as automobile loans.  The bills are not coming due today, but you understand what obligations you have in the future and you adjust accordingly.  When non-cash items are negotiated in the future, the estimated cost must be considered.  The council has no say in negotiations, but it’s my hope that whoever is in the room, on both sides, carries a reasonableness that is necessary not to turn over blank checks.

Thanks for the questions.  Positions and ideas are arbitrary without the ability to respectfully communicate and cooperate with many interested parties.  I regret that I don’t have a magic arrow in my quiver as I sit here on Saturday night watching a “Band of Brothers” marathon, but I do recognize the enormity of the issues you’ve presented and hope to be part of the solutions going forward.

—————————————

MELISSA MAZZEO, AT-LARGE

1. Regarding PCBs and other toxins in the Housatonic River put there and throughout the city by GE, what do you advocate — removal, partial removal, or leave alone.

I will support the full removal of all PCBs from the Housatonic River. I have read many articles and letters from people far more knowledgeable than me and they clearly say that only full removal of the toxins in the river will save it. In addition, I have had a hard time believing the data given by those who did the polluting and are now responsible for the cleanup. We have seen the removal done on other parts of the river, so just keep going and stop wasting time.

(2) Do you favor removal of Hill 78 from its present location and out of the city?

I have never been comfortable with Hill 78. I think there was a huge disservice to the citizens of Pittsfield when all these decisions were made between GE and City/State Officials.  More should have been done to better involve the residents of Pittsfield to weigh in on the issues of the Hill or the consent decree for that matter. The proximity to the school is mind-boggling, and as a parent, I would have concerns if my child had to attend this School. The notion that because it is capped and no toxins are floating around is absurd. The hill is not lined, and we all know that leaching will happen if it hasn’t already. This hill can be removed just as it was put in place, truckload by truckload. Extreme caution needs to be used when they uncover the hill and start the removal. Allendale School should be closed during this process. There are unused school buildings that could house students temporarily during the removal.  And, let’s not forget during the elementary school renovations of the 90s and early 2000s, we did place our kids in unused or under-used schools.

(3) Do you think unfunded liabilities (currently $331 million facing city taxpayers) should be addressed immediately or not?

Dan, you have written a lot about Unfunded Liabilities on your website over the last few weeks and posted links to some good articles to help support your concern about this issue. You now want members of the council to explain what they would do to help resolve this crisis. The hard part here is that after reading all of these articles and looking at the data collected from all over the country (this is not a Pittsfield only problem, unlike the PCBs, and if anything is what could potentially bring down the Federal government) even the so-called experts do not have the answers as to how to fix this problem. They point out that this is a “kick the can down the road” and “let the next group of elected officials” deal with it problem that time is catching up to. If I’m correct in reading some of the data, we may only have 10-20 years left before we run out of money to pay for these liabilities.  I am in no position to solely fix this problem, but what I do suggest is that we form a task force ASAP to look at the following:

1. What do we owe right now in unfunded Liabilities (the real numbers for the city and what do those numbers represent)?

2. What monies have we been putting aside to pay for them (we obviously know that our problem isn’t that we haven’t put aside enough)?

3. When will we run out of money if nothing changes right now?

4. How do we stop adding to the problem now, while we work on fixing what we have already done?

5. What is the state of muni bonds right now for short-term and long-term debt?

6. What are our options if we are not able to pay when due…declare bankruptcy? government bailouts?

7. Discussions with the public as to the problem and what it will take to fix it…higher taxes, cuts in services, etc.

8. Bring in outside help to facilitate public discussions and the task force to keep us completely aware of any new options that other municipalities may be using.

Dan, in no way do I mean to sound like I’m skirting the question, but until you began bringing this issue to my attention, I hadn’t done enough research and I am now doing that.  The only way I see to gain knowledge and get insight into this is to start right away with a group of elected officials, financial advisors, union members, the business community, retired pensioners and tax-paying residents who ALL have a stake in how we clean up this mess that maybe we didn’t create, but it falls on us to rectify.  I’m sure I will be sharing more as the campaign season takes off but hope this helps in the meantime.

————————————————–