Lead is a dangerous environmental toxin and exposure to it can cause irreparable neurological and behavioral health consequences, especially in children. Before New York City’s ban on lead paint in 1960, this type of paint was commonly used and it can still be found in old buildings. The City has continued to tackle this public health issue and enacted Local Law 1 of 2004 to hold landlords accountable for addressing lead hazards in their buildings, which helped bring about a decline in childhood lead exposure.

According to the NYC Department of Health, the most commonly identified source of lead poisoning for children in New York City is lead paint and its dust, which significant exposure to can cause elevated blood lead levels in children. The most common pathway is from peeling lead paint and by inhaling lead dust. Other potential exposures include eating or drinking lead-contaminated food or drinks, playing with toys that contain lead paint, or using dishes that contain lead.  

There has been a considerable amount of recent news regarding the enforcement of lead poisoning prevention laws in NYC. Over 900 classrooms for the City’s youngest students were recently found to have been contaminated with peeling lead paint, which the Department of Education worked to remediate and a recent report by Comptroller Scott Stringer found that the City did not conduct lead testing in thousands of old residential buildings, where they knew lead paint to be present in other units.

Since removing toxins from our environment is one of NYLCV/EF’s top priorities and was included in our 2019-2020 NYC Policy Agenda, we teamed up with New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation, Cooper Square Committee, and WE ACT for Environmental Justice to publish a report on inadequate enforcement of the lead dust standards in LL1. This report follows our 2018 report showing inadequate enforcement of the primary prevention measures in Local Law 1, which are intended to ensure lead hazards are identified and abated before children are exposed. These primary prevention measures are mandates that every child occupied dwelling in buildings built before 1960, 1) landlords annually inspect the units for signs of peeling paint and 2) landlords fully abate the lead paint on friction surfaces when there is a turnover between tenants.

These two reports highlight how the under-enforcement of Local Law 1 continues to put New York children’s health at risk. 

The new report, titled Collecting Dust, shows that there are gaps in the enforcement of Local Law 1’s safe work practice regulations that protect against lead dust exposure. We found that the City is collecting penalties for lead-safe work practices violations at a significantly lower rate than other health areas it enforces. 

The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) is the primary agency that enforces Local Law 1 and is responsible for ensuring safe work practices during construction and renovation in buildings with the presumption of lead paint- buildings that were built before 1960. DOHMH is also responsible for investigating complaints and assessing penalties. 

The report looked at publicly available data from the NYC Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) for violations of safe work practices for construction in buildings with lead paint. If not properly controlled, construction in buildings with lead paint can leave residents and workers exposed to lead dust. 

In the 15 years since LL1 went into effect, just under $2 million penalties have been assessed for failure to use Safe Work Practices to protect tenants from lead dust. Of that $2 million, the City collected only 0.5% of the total amount of penalties assessed– a shockingly low rate of enforcement. Since Local Law 1 was enacted, just 12 penalties have been collected. 

In contrast, DOHMH imposed 21 times the amount of penalties for mobile food vending violations than it did for lead-related violations, collecting $5 million from street vendors for violations such as “cart touching or leaning against a building.” over the same time period.

At a recent City Council oversight hearing on lead poisoning prevention, the de Blasio Administration testified that there may be modestly more enforcement. We look forward to working with them to ensure improved enforcement of these laws.

The report provided detailed recommendations for improving accountability: fully enforce the existing law and vigorously seek and collect penalties; break down government silos; and increase transparency to create more public accountability. By implementing our recommendations, the City would be able to proactively eliminate lead poisoning.

We believe with meaningful enforcement of Local Law 1, the city will be able to protect the health and safety of all New Yorkers, especially children. We will keep advocating for policies that prevent lead poisoning and protect our children’s health. 

With Zero Major Wind and Solar Projects Breaking Ground Since 2011, Report Outlines Series of Recommendations to Improve Community Engagement and Expedite Siting

Today, we released Breaking Down the Barriers to Renewable Energy Siting: Recommendations Report identifying recommendations to reform Article 10 and site large-scale renewable energy projects in New York State. The report, released at the Alliance for Clean Energy New York’s Clean Energy Fall Reception, builds on our background paper about the barriers to siting renewable energy released earlier this year.

The report comes on the heels of the passage of the landmark Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which mandates net-zero gas emissions across the economy by 2050. The only way to meet this ambitious standard is to expand and expedite the siting of renewable projects. With more than 40 projects initiating the Article 10 process and zero projects breaking ground under the law since its inception in 2011, the new report outlines a series of recommendations to streamline the siting of onshore wind and solar projects and help the state achieve its ambitious goals.  

The report includes a series of regulatory, budgetary and legislative recommendations to increase community engagement and participation, incentivize creative and flexible local funding arrangements, and expedite the permitting process. The recommendations build on the work of environmental and energy advocates in finding solutions that benefit all parties in the state’s transition to renewable energy.

Specific recommendations include:

• Calling on DPS to audit Article 10 regulations and make updates that streamline and improve the process.
• Excluding funds a municipality may receive from a renewable energy project from the state’s 2% property tax cap, so that communities have more freedom to negotiate successful and creative benefit agreements.
• Ensuring local appointments are made to Siting Board by enabling the local executive or supervisor to make them if the Governor and the Legislature fail to act.
• Establishing a fund or bank to mitigate or otherwise offset any impact a project might have on a threatened or endangered species or sensitive habitat.
• Dedicating $1 million in funding for staff at the state’s nine regional planning boards to assist municipalities with planning.
• Adding more staffing at the state Department of Public Service (DPS), the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), and the Department of Agriculture and Markets (DAM) to account for the increase in Article 10 applications, including adding a staff member dedicated to ensuring the agencies are communicating and coordinating efficiently.
• Amending the regulations for wetland delineation range from 500 feet to 100 feet to align with regulations for other state wetland development projects.
• Offering more incentives to local communities to host renewable energy projects. 

This report follows four stakeholder roundtables we convened this year in Albany, Buffalo, Long Island and Syracuse. These meetings brought together thought leaders, state decision-makers, local government representatives, renewable energy developers, environmental organizations, regional planning groups, and others with the goals of identifying ways to streamline the siting process and improving engagement with local communities. 

The also report stresses the importance of proactive and early engagement in the siting process to build relationships with local leaders, address community concerns, and get ahead of any misinformation that may develop.

Next, we will work with the State and partners to develop strategies for how to move forward with these recommendations.

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.

School buses are the largest form of mass transit in the United States, and they desperately need an upgrade. Emissions from diesel school buses are linked to asthma, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, cancers, and even higher mortality rates. No one should have to breathe in dangerous pollutants while riding the bus, especially when cleaner, safer alternatives, such as all-electric school buses, are available.

We held a policy forum about the negative impacts of diesel school buses and pathways to transitioning to an electric school bus fleet. Read the background paper here. Read a recap of the forum here.

We were joined by a panel of experts and local activists:

Peggy Shepard, WE ACT for Environmental Justice
Matt Casale, US PIRG
Adam Armstrong, Resilient Red Hook
Tevin C.S. Grant, Esq., Electric School Bus Campaign
Kevin Cromar, NYU Marron Institute of Urban Management
Zachary Lerner, ALIGN NY

This policy forum focused on the economic, social, and environmental benefits of green infrastructure (GI) as an approach to managing stormwater. We brought together expert speakers and panelists to provide an overview of green infrastructure vs. traditional gray approaches and how it can be used to protect and restore water quality in the Delaware River Watershed region. From innovative examples to barriers and opportunities, this policy forum helped to equip local landowners and municipal leaders with the information and tools needed to get involved and bring more GI to their communities. Read the background paper here.

Speakers/Panelists

• George Schuler, The Nature Conservancy
• Freda Eisenberg, Commissioner, Sullivan County Department of Planning 
• Paul Beyer, Director of Smart Growth, NY State Dept. of State
• Stephanie P. Dalke, Pinchot Institute for Conservation
• Bryan Quinn, Environmental Entrepreneur, founder and principal of One Nature
• Jeff Skelding, Executive Director of Friends of the Upper Delaware River
• Molly Oliver, Delaware County Department of Watershed Affairs
• Diana Weiner, Sullivan Renaissance

Children’s products sold in the United States are presumed to be safe by parents but recent studies have proven otherwise. Since 2014, NYLCVEF has worked with its partners to raise awareness about the issue throughout the state and encourage action by state and local governments.

In 2014 and 2015, we conducted tests in stores throughout the state and released six reports showing that dangerous chemicals were present in children's jewelry, toy cars, clothing, and more. To produce these reports, NYLCVEF partnered with Clean and Healthy New York to analyze popular toys in area stores for toxic chemicals and heavy metals. Results of this test found products containing antimony, arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, lead, and mercury.

Toxic Toys in Albany County
Toxic Toys in Erie County
Toxic Toys on Long Island
Toxic Toys in Monroe County
Toxic Toys in Onondaga County
Toxic Toys in Westchester County

Many of the chemicals we found are known carcinogens and can lead to serious developmental disorders in children. Even with a federal law on the books, it's hard for anyone to know exactly what chemicals are present in the item they're buying. Thanks to the support of various foundations, we reached more people than ever about this issue by reaching out to new members from across the state. We even got Santa Claus into the action around the holidays to help educate even more people about these dangerous chemicals.

After the release of our reports and our grassroots advocacy, state and local lawmakers sprung into action:

• New York State introduced the Child Safe Products Act  identified and eliminated the most dangerous chemicals currently present in children's products sold throughout New York State.
• Albany becomes the first county in New York State to enact legislation protecting children from toxic toys in January.
• Westchester County executive signs bill to ban toxic toys from store shelves in May.
• Suffolk County becomes third to take action on toxic toys in June.
• Also in June of 2015, New York City introduced a bill that would ban hazardous chemicals from children's toys and clothes
• Rockland County unanimously passed legislation in July 2015.

In 2017, our statewide efforts continued with the introduction of the Toxic Show and Tell Act, a bill that would require children's product makers to disclose the presence of a set of chemicals of concern to children's health in the products they make.

In 2018, NYLCVEF and its partner Clean and Healthy New York teamed up again to produce a new report, "Tell Me More: Missing Information on Harmful Chemicals in Children's Products" that screened children’s products purchased on Long Island, in Westchester County and Albany finding heavy metals, such as cadmium and antimony, and flame retardants. The report also includes findings of chemicals of concern in children's products that was conducted and published in peer-reviewed journals by researchers from the New York State Department of Health’s Wadsworth Laboratory.

While we continue to work on a statewide solution, our local work will continue in New York City and other counties to protect children from toxic toys.

Interested in learning more about our Toxic Toys campaign?

• Report: Arsenic, Mercury, Lead Found in Toys Sold at Low to High-Endtores
• Environmental group identifies Dirty Dozen of toys
• Coalition works to push for state laws restricting chemicals in toys
• Supporters see progress on child-products regulation
• Report: Toxic toys being sold in Erie County
• Clean & Healthy NY, League of Conservation Voters, Poloncarz release 'Toxic Toys in Erie County' report
• Groups urge passage of toxic-toy law
• Round Two for the Child Safe Products Act
• Report Finds Toxic Chemicals in Albany Toys
• New Westchester Report Finds Toxic Toys Throughout County
• New Report Shows Toxic Toys in Long Island Stores
  

Many thanks to League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, Passport Capital, Myron Blumenfeld/ the Macy’s Foundation, and the Seventh Generation Foundation for their generous support.

On April 27, 2018, together with our partners at Sustainable Westchester, we hosted a policy forum on electric vehicles. Bringing together state and local lawmakers, industry experts, community partners, and more, this policy forum looked at the current status of EVs and EV infrastructure in Westchester County. We discussed what local leaders can do to increase the use of EVs at the personal, municipal, and commercial levels. We also talked about what challenges we face in fleet adoption, and what policies or mechanisms we can leverage to increase EV use in the county.

View the full program here. 

Achieving Our Goals

As a follow-up from the policy forum, we've put together a list of policy recommendations for how we can achieve our goals of transitioning municipal fleets, coordinating a plan for infrastructure, and getting an EV in every garage. Released jointly with Sustainable Westchester, these recommendations lay out specific ways for how we can increase the use of EVs in Westchester and achieve our goals. Check them out here. 

Get Involved by Taking a Pledge Today

Help us achieve our goal of getting an EV in every garage by pledging to test drive an EV and see if it's right for your family and by pledging to tell your decision-makers to electrify your local fleet. Contact list for municipal elected officials can be found here.

Thank you to our generous supporter.

The Town of East Hampton has a long record of sustainability leadership, particularly on the issue of open space. But there are many steps the town can take to continue to improve its environmental performance–and the town’s elected leaders will play a critical role in this effort.]

For this reason, the New York League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, on behalf of the East Hampton Environmental Coalition is pleased to present the East Hampton Green Guide as a resource for all candidates running for town office in 2017.

The East Hampton Green Guide is a one-stop-shop for candidates, policy makers and current elected officials to learn about new opportunities and approaches to persistent sustainability challenges.

On September 25, 2017 members of the EHEC gathered to announce the release of the Green Guide

Members of the EHEC also had a chance to meet with the candidates for town board and to brief them on the important issues articulated in the Green Guide.

NYLCVEF would like to thank the following groups who contributed content for the guide and are supportive the overall goals:
CONTRIBUTORS: Accabonac Protection Committee, Amagansett Springs Aquifer Protection, Concerned Citizens of Montauk, International Dark Sky Association – New York Chapter, Long Island, Businesses for Responsible Energy (LIBFRE), New York League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, Northwest Alliance, Renewable Energy Long Island, Quiet Skies Coalition
SUPPORTERS: Defend H2O, Ditch Plains Association, Friends of Georgica Pond Foundation, Group for the East End, Peconic Baykeeper, Perfect Earth Project, Surfrider Foundation: Eastern Long Island Chapter, Third House Nature Center

Click here to download the 2017 East Hampton Green Guide