Comments on: Senate Requires Environmental Approval For Stimulus Projects

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:43:12 +0000

WE ARE THE NEPA POLICE….. WE THE PEOPLE!

WE DECLARE APPROVALS INVALID IF SOME ASPECT OF THE PROCESS WAS NOT FOLLOWED…..

US, THE PEOPLE NEED TO GET MORE INVOLVED BECAUSE THEY WILL DO WHAT EVER THEY WANT TO AS LONG AS WEEEEEE LET THEM!

Look at Benton Harbor Michigan, where “they” are bulldozing through SACRED LAND in the name of “Progress” “Jobs” “Infrastructure” All along knowing that they can’t say the truth “It’s for the Money” or “For complete corporate control of the land” And “we the corporations are entitled to the most valuable commodity the (poor & minority people)have.
Why they don’t deserve it, they are just poor black people.
I still can’t get my mind around building a golf course in the dune and on the beach front to create “Green Space”. Well, the school system sucks in Benton Harbor, but WE KNOW BETTER THAN THAT.

By: James

James — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:48:11 +0000

The issue with NEPA, CEQR, SEQR, and all the rest is that they are self-policing. There is no “NEPA Police” who can come and declare approvals invalid if some aspect of the process was not followed as much as it could have been or should have been.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:41:09 +0000

Does NEPA really have teeth? It hasn’t succeeding in stopping any number of terrible freeway and housing projects over the last 30 years.

By: rex

rex — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:55:08 +0000

The federal NEPA is significantly different from the California version of it. Fed NEPA has a checklist provision, at the conclusion of the checklist you can conclude that impacts are de minimus and proceed with the project, or you can conclude that an EIS is required. The CA regulation has lots of BS about orientating a project toward the evaluation to traffic flow, which is why the SF bike plan got effed up. Many federal projects are a go/no go based on the results of the checklist. If the stimulus package has to be about “shovel ready” projects, then I would much prefer that NEPA not be suspended. Even if I don’t get what I want. I opted out of NY environmental engineering a long time ago, if someone has the straight poop on NY’s EIS requirement, I would love to hear about it.

By: I \v/ NY

I \v/ NY — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:00:31 +0000

i agree we need to cut red tape with infrastructure in america, it shouldnt take 30 years to open a subway line that has local funding secured (cough cough Wilshire subway).

but at the same time, the last thing that should get smooth sailing is new megalane expressways which you know will be the biggest benefactors of any transportation red tape cutting policies. there is little transportation infrastructure that has more negative impacts than a 20 lane freeway.

all we need is common sense with environmental reviews, if there is a big impact no matter what it is, environmental review is essential, but for little or no impacts it is ridiculous to have these projects get tied up.

By: I \v/ NY

I \v/ NY — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 00:51:27 +0000

wow trying to exempt new highway projects from environmental review and at the same time tying up in environmental review the painting some bike lanes on existing streets, thats some real looney stuff… sounds like typical american transportation policy.

By: jmc

jmc — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 23:13:36 +0000

Somehow I doubt this is good news for any projects. Obstructionists can use environmental impact shenanigans to delay the construction of new transit systems as well (oh , but what about the snails!).