Author: Shachar Sharon

NYLCVEF released a white paper on the barriers to siting renewable energy in New York and possible approaches to overcoming these obstacles. New York State has committed to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change and increasing renewable energy is a central component of this plan. In 2016, the state adopted an ambitious Clean Energy Standard (CES), which requires renewables to provide 50% of the state’s electricity by 2030. More recently, in December 2018, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo pledged to transition the state to 100% clean energy by 2040. This formidable goal will require a rapid and comprehensive transition to renewable energy generation statewide, one that will necessitate cooperation and collaboration between private and public entities, and local communities.

However, a number of barriers exist that make it difficult to site wind and solar projects in New York State. Often, localities have local laws and ordinances that impede development of wind and solar projects. For example, moratoria on development of renewables, which are intended to give localities more time to develop regulations, often delay development and dissuade potential investments in renewables. In addition, for large-scale installations (over 25 MW), Article 10 of New York State’s Public Service Law requires developers to engage in a lengthy and complex permitting process that, as of December 2018, has only resulted in full certification for one project.

Transmission of renewable energy provides an additional barrier: currently, New York does not have enough existing transmission capacity to support its clean energy goals. Further, developing new transmission lines and expanding existing infrastructure is expensive and complex, and not progressing fast enough to meet the CES deadlines. Finally, public opposition to large scale renewable projects has slowed their expansion statewide. Communities have voiced concerns with the environmental and economic impacts of proposed installations, which often require a large amount of land and are not always compatible with existing land uses.

NYLCVEF’s report describes these barriers in detail and proposes five preliminary policy recommendations for addressing siting challenges. First, the cumbersome Article 10 process should be reformed to facilitate permitting of large-scale renewable projects. Doing so should include clarifying provisions and procedures within the Article, such as the definition of what constitutes an “unreasonably burdensome” local law, and streamlining the overall process for developers. In addition, the report recommends that localities incorporate large-scale renewable development into their long-term land-use planning. For example, previously disturbed areas such as brownfields and landfills may serve as optimal locations for solar installations, but local policies are needed to encourage development in these areas.

Similarly, developers and state agencies are encouraged to engage communities early in the siting process, so that residents can voice their concerns and collaborate to advance renewable projects. Educating the public about the benefits of renewable energy will serve this goal, and should be a priority among state agencies and interested stakeholders involved in renewable energy siting. Finally, developers and host communities are encouraged to explore options to ensure municipalities benefit from renewable installations. Investing back into communities will provide co-benefits for developers, investors, and localities, and ultimately accelerate the adoption of renewable energy in a way that can be sustained over the long term.

NYLCVEF is holding a series of rountables across the state to discuss the barriers to siting renewable energy projects. Through convening a range of stakeholders, including community groups, developers, environmental organizations, local governments, and state agencies in productive conversations, our goal is to identify specific recommendations for each location, incorporate them into an advocacy campaign, and help New York achieve its ambitious renewable energy goals.

By Talia Sechley

Editors Note: An update to this paper, NYLCVEF’s Recommendations Report, was released in September 2019.

Lead is a highly toxic metal that can have irreversible health impacts, especially on children, causing permanent injuries to their developing brains and bodies. Lead-based paint in homes and buildings is the primary cause of childhood lead poisoning in New York City.

In the past few months, we have seen a considerable amount of news bringing NYC’s lead poisoning problem into the spotlight, whether it’s contaminated school drinking water or lead-based paint in homes. Earlier in the summer, New York Comptroller Scott Stringer officially announced an investigation into the agencies responsible for covering-up the lead crisis in NYC’s public housing.

Because removing toxins from our environment is one of the top priorities in our NYC Policy Agenda, we teamed up with New York Lawyers for the Public Interest and other partners to draft a report on the negative health impacts of lead poisoning in NYC and review the city’s enforcement of its lead poisoning prevention law.

In 2004, NYC enacted Local Law 1 (LL1), which created the country’s most protective measures to identify and remediate housing-based lead hazards and aimed to eliminate childhood lead poisoning by 2010. The law includes proactive lead poisoning prevention measures including mandating that landlords conduct regular inspections and abate lead paint in old apartments (built before 1960) during a vacancy.

The report found that lead paint in homes remains the primary source of lead poisoning today. Because children’s brains and bodies are very susceptible to lead poisoning, they can suffer from acute and chronic injuries caused by elevated blood lead levels such as decreased intelligence, behavioral difficulties, impaired kidney function, and cognitive dysfunction.

We also examined the prevention provisions of LL1, enforcement, and the loopholes that exist in the law. The report found that landlords are, in practice, not being held accountable for non-compliance with the law and that relevant city agencies have largely failed to enforce the primary prevention measures of LL1 since it was enacted. The Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) enforcement data indicates that New York City has never taken any enforcement action against a single landlord for failing to conduct the mandated annual inspections in the 14 years since the law went into effect.

Landlords are also not facing any consequences for failing to provide the required documents indicating that the buildings have been abated before new tenants move in. HPD has only issued 2 violations for the failure to comply with mandatory lead abatements at turnover.

Without meaningful enforcement and engagement with landlords, LL1 will continue to be a complaint-driven system rather than the proactive prevention law it was designed and envisioned to be.

The report also provided detailed recommendations for improving accountability. We included specific recommendations: enforcement of landlord’s annual inquiry and inspection obligations; enforcement of the requirement to eliminate certain lead hazards as soon as an apartment is vacant; safe work practices; and additional data reporting. By implementing our recommendations, the city would be able to proactively eliminate lead poisoning.

We believe that with a clear understanding of the flaws in the current law, the city will be able to strengthen the enforcement efforts of LL1, assuring compliance and transparency among landlords. We will continue to spread awareness about policies that combat lead poisoning.