We began our journey at the Duwamish Longhouse, this area of waterfront was the site of long houses along the shoreline where the tribe used to fish. Now we look out at the cleanup efforts and industrial uses The Community Engagement and Outreach Manager for the Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition, Paulina Lopez gave us a tour of her community in Southpark. A skatepark was built in attempt to help the community but is now seldom used because the graffiti has made the concrete too slippery to skate on. Stepping out of the skate park a mural that says “home” in 5 different languages representing the major demographics that comprise the Southpark community.
"White settlers came to the Seattle area in 1851, establishing a townsite they first called New York, and then, adding a word from the Chinook jargon meaning "by-and-by," New York-Alki.” -Seattle Municipal Archives
Discovering Seattle's deep history of industry, economic and community development put into perspective the complex issues revolving around development in both long and short term thinking. This past weekend I could see clearly how the past is still very present in today's world. The Duwamish River was a great example of this continued impact, for example the profound injustices demonstrated by the commandeering of the Duwamish tribe's land, to the negative effect the Superfund site has had on the health and safety of South Park's citizens. Although people have tried to control, utilize or tame the waters of the Duwamish, the problems morphed into systemic problems that possibly stemmed from the rivers complex history. -Katie Brief History of Seattle. Retrieved from http://www.seattle.gov/cityarchives/seattle-facts/brief-history-of-seattle
0 Comments
Of all of the interesting perspectives that were voiced and all that I saw and learned, one part of our trip to Seattle stood out to me: just how industrial the Duwamish River is. Compared to the Willamette River in Portland, the Duwamish seemed much more like an “economic engine.” The amount of industry on the Duwamish and its importance to the city, makes the conversation about the Superfund site different than the one being had in Portland. In Seattle all parties accept that the river will continue to be primarily for industrial use, and that all other uses will be secondary. B.J. Cummings and the representative from the Duwamish Tribe both acknowledged this on our trip.
In class we discussed the role of nature in our largely urban society. In Seattle the citizen’s access to the Duwamish as a natural feature is not as much of a possibility as it is on the Willamette. In Portland it is less clear what the primary functions of the river will be into the future. With the Superfund cleanup in Portland we have the option of increasing the relatively small amount of industry on the river. We also have the opportunity to possibly make it a natural retreat in the heart of our city. A place to be in “nature” and to benefit from it as a food source as well. From all of the readings on the cleanup that we have explored thus far in the course it appears likely that the end result of the cleanup will be a mix of these. The Duwamish cleanup in Seattle holds many lessons for us here in Portland, but it is remarkably different in this way. It will be fascinating to see how industry and nature are balanced in the final plan of the cleanup and how it is brought into reality. Kirk Last Monday, our class had the chance to visit Port of Portland Terminal 4. We learned from Port of Portland staff about the Portland Harbor Superfund site from their perspective. It was very interesting to learn about how the Port has been proactive in the cleanup process. To them, they view the superfund site as an embarrassment that has been put off for far too long. They became involved with other polluters to create the Lower Willamette Group in order to begin the process of determining a Superfund ruling. The Port has also been active in early restoration, and they showed us some of the work they had completed on Wheeler Bay by dredging contaminated sludge and stabilizing the bank. Pictures from the bay can be seen below: We had a short discussion about public engagement with Port of Portland staff. Not much has been done to engage the public so far, but they hope to hit the ground running once the proposal is released. After that, the public has 60 days to comment before the final decision is made. I believe Port of Portland will want community participation since they are a public entity, and part of the cost of cleanup will have to come from the public. As the Port of Portland develops public participation strategies, I hope they keep in mind the following: higher levels of participation empower the public, planners should stay engaged with the community for a long period of time in order to see effective change, and that information on the superfund process should be easily accessible and paired with community information so that those affected have the information they need to participate in the decision-making process.
Level of Public Participation Public participation in a decision-making process can range from non-participation methods such as manipulation and therapy, to higher degrees of citizen power such as partnership, delegated power, and citizen control (Arnstein, 1969). I hope that public participation on the Portland Harbor Superfund site is in the higher degrees of citizen power range. In order for this to be accomplished, citizens should be able to negotiate with the main decision-makers, and they should include a large part of the vote on the decision (Arnstein, 1969). It Takes Time… When Norman Krumholz reflected on his work as a planner in Cleveland, Ohio in the 70s, he concluded that certain skills and ideas were necessary for planners to use to create effective, equitable change (Krumholz, 1982). One of Krumholz’s conclusionary remarks was that in order to be an effective part of the decision making process, planners must participate in an issue for a relatively long period of time (Krumholz, 1982). Many of his cases evolved over a period of five to ten years (Krumholz, 1982). I became involved with Portland Harbor Community Coalition and my spokesperson there shared the same remarks on decision-making processes: it takes time. It takes time for planners and community groups to build the relationships needed to create consensus-based change in which all parties are in favor of the decision. It takes time to ensure that those involved have the resources they need--policy documents on how to clean up a superfund site are not easy reads. It also takes time within the EPA’s framework to go from listing a site as a Superfund site to the actual cleanup process. During that time, it is common to see community groups become exhausted of their time and members--they are often being involved on their own time while staffed positions are getting paid to be involved. I hope the Port of Portland recognizes that this time is a huge commitment for the public, and helps out by providing resources for technical information as well as reimbursement for those missing work or needing childcare to be involved. Street Knowledge Referring back to technical documents, it is important for the Port to be aware that the process of getting involved through the EPA’s framework isn’t a friendly process. This is often one of the tensions between communities and professionals. On the highest rungs of the public involvement ladder, the public is equipped with the resources they need to hire their own technical support in translating these documents to a more public-friendly format (Arnstein, 1969). One method of sharing information used by community groups is popular education--in which community members tap their own experiences and expertise to inform each other (Corburn, 2005). Another method to bridge the power gap between professionals and community members is street science, in which the technical science is paired with the community’s own knowledge and investigations (Corburn, 2005). I hope to see some of these considerations in practice once the superfund report is released. -Kristen Sources: Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224. Krumholz, N. (1982). A retrospective view of equity planning Cleveland 1969–1979. Journal of the American Planning Association, 48(2), 163-174. Corburn, J. (2005). Street Science, Local Knowledge in Environmental Health Policy At the Port of Portland I was primarily interested in understanding what type of entity the Port is. It was hard for me to grasp at first whether it was a geographical area, a governmental agency, or something entirely different. By asking several of our guides I feel like I now have a better idea of what the Port of Portland does. I am still curious about how they are beholden to the community. The Port is a semi-public entity, but people (myself included) know very little about it or how we can influence it. As described in the “Local Knowledge in Environmental Health Policy” chapter, combining technical expertise with local knowledge is extremely powerful. It is also difficult, and for entities like the Port of Portland in this situation, it requires work and a level of humility. To do successful outreach they will need to fully accept that they do not have all of the answers. If done right, true partnerships must be forged; a message this chapter conveys throughout. Arnstein in her “Ladder of Citizen Participation” shows that the partnership must be established in a timely manner, at a point in the process where the public’s contribution can be effective. The ideal (top rung) would be the communities affected by the river cleanup process would be in complete control of the process with support from the Port. There is however, a major hangup embedded in this ideal as it applies to this and other situations. It requires those with power to relinquish some of that power to the disenfranchised. To claim they have adequately involved the public in this process the Port must: involve the public at the right time, show a willingness to share power, and eventually ride shotgun, not drive. A set of lengthy podcasts buried on their website will not suffice as public involvement. Kirk Arnstein, S. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners. 35:4, 216-224. Corburn, J. (2005). Street Science, Local Knowledge in Environmental Health Policy This article told the story of Rob Bilott, an attorney who usually defended large chemical companies, taking a stance against DuPont (Rich, 2016). He was fighting them over a chemical called Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), found to have negative health effects on humans (Rich, 2016). Bilott fought an uphill battle over 16 years to have DuPont cease production of PFOA and pay for the harm they had caused (Rich, 2016). Now, DuPont is settling personal injury lawsuits at a rate of four cases a year, and they have ceased production of PFOA in 2013 (Rich, 2016). PFOA is a chemical found in teflon, a material used to coat pots and pans (Rich, 2016). This reading was especially jarring for me since I had just recycled some non-stick pots and pans earlier that week because the teflon coating was chipping off.
The New York Times article “The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare,” tells the story of a corporate lawyer, Rob Bilott, who takes on an unlikely case for a small scale cattle farmer against one of the largest chemical corporations, DuPont. The case is unlikely not because it was doomed to fail, but because neither Bilott nor his corporate defense firm, Taft Stettinius & Hollister, had ever represented an individual, against a large corporation such as DuPont. Taft is known, instead, for defending these corporations from such lawsuits. Bilott became passionate about the case. He learned from DuPont’s own documents that for decades they had been hiding the knowledge that Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a chemical they profit billions of dollars from is highly toxic. They had been researching PFOA in secret for many years but decided not to use an alternative even after they discovered PFOA caused multiple health problems for their employees and the animals DuPont tested it on. Bilott has since devoted his career to representing people harmed by PFOA after he filed a class action lawsuit for 70,000 people affected by PFOA tainted water (Rich 2016). The largest problem with PFOA, is that it, along with 60,000 other chemicals, was not regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Chemicals are treated as innocent until proven guilty, as if they were people with inherent goodness. Furthermore, the process by which the EPA creates regulations for toxic substances is so specific and rigid that it regularly eliminates studies that are not done by the industry that seeks to profit from the substances they submit studies for, clearly exhibiting conflicts of interest (Boone et al 2015). Similarly, in Superfund site cleanup projects, the EPA reviews studies on remediation options that are prepared by the companies responsible for the contamination, as is the case with the Remedial Investigation Report (RI) and Feasibility Study (FS) for the Portland Harbor Superfund. The RI and FS were contracted by the Lower Willamette Group, which is comprised of ten of the 142 potential responsible parties for contamination at this site (Sunding and Buck 2012). It brings to question, for me, the legitimacy of such reports that are prepared or commissioned by companies seeking to profit from or limit their costs in such cleanup projects, and thereby potential rulings by the EPA.
-Lola Boone MD, Bishop CA, Boswell LA, Brodman RD, Burger J, et al 2014. Pesticide Regulation Amid the Influence of Industry. BioScience 64: 917-922. Rich Nathaniel 2016. The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare. The New York Times Magazine. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/magazine/the-lawyer-who-became-duponts-worst-nightmare.html?_r=1 Sunding, David and Buck, Steven 2012. Economic Impacts of Remediating the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. The Brattle Group. |
AuthorsWe are Portland State students who care about the urban rivers of the Pacific Northwest. Archives
May 2018
Categories
All
|