Brownfields are properties that stand idle due to contamination or the fear thereof, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields Program makes grants of $200,000-$600,000 per project to assess and clean up these properties. Studies show that every dollar of EPA grant funding leverages another $18 in private investment. These grants have an outsized impact in economically depressed communities.
President Donald Trump’s budget proposes to cut the Brownfields Program from $153.3 million to $118.5 million, a $34.8 million decrease that amounts to 23 percent of current funding. Using the $18:$1 leverage figure given above, that translates to over $626 million in potential foregone investment in the communities that need it most.
A cut to the Brownfields Program stands in direct opposition to the president’s stated economic goals of creating jobs and restoring economic vitality to communities across the country. Many of the places that voted for Trump, and on whom his economic policy is supposedly centered, are deindustrialized places that suffer the dual burden of economic disinvestment and environmental contamination.
You can see the impact locally. In Anchorage, the EPA brownfields program is helping the Cook Inlet Housing Authority and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation remediate contamination from an old gas station to revitalize the Spenard neighborhood. The communities of Palmer and Mat-Su borough are also investigating the transformation of idled lands into productive uses. By proposing to decimate the federal grant funds that are helping these communities, the president’s budget proposal places short-sighted, ideologically driven objectives above the long-term economic and health interests of neighborhoods and municipalities.
Studies estimate that every acre of brownfield redeveloped produces an estimated 10 jobs and saves 4.5 acres of open space. Especially following the president’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords, it bears noting that brownfields redevelopment makes important contributions to climate change mitigation and adaptation: numerous studies have documented that cleaning contaminated sites protects our drinking water and reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
Few investments enjoy a leverage rate like brownfields redevelopment, and it has traditionally been a bipartisan issue because both parties recognize the value of jobs and health. The president’s budget proposal stands in opposition to his larger economic goals and to the healthy futures of communities around the country. It is up to members of Congress to recognize the value that these programs provide, and protect this critical funding.
• Sarah Sieloff is the Executive Director of the Center for Creative Land Recycling, a national nonprofit based in Oakland, California that works with communities across Alaska. No federal funding is used for CCLR’s advocacy work, including this opinion piece.