In today’s Wisconsin State Journal article by Chris Hubbuch, city hydrogeologist Brynn Bemis was quoted saying that the Hartmeyer land, where coal was stored and fuel oil spilled–and just feet from the highly contaminated abandoned Kraft Heinz-Oscar Mayer factory–is “cleaner” than contaminated areas on the Isthmus.
“If anything this is cleaner than what we’re finding on Cap East … I think also many of the Downtown developments had more complicated contamination — more significant contamination than what we see here,” Bemis said.
After hearing Bemis’ bold assertions last night, Plan Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the conditional use for the housing–almost completely ignoring numerous passionate testimonies by the Sherman Neighborhood Association and other North Side residents, and many written comments submitted by community members opposing the project.
Yet Bemis’ statements are unsupported–and, in fact, can’t be backed by data because the needed data doesn’t exist. There is some data on existing contamination at Hartmeyer, and it indicates problematic levels, but as openly admitted at the Plan Commission meeting, full environmental investigations of the Hartmeyer site haven’t yet been done (or if they have, are not publicly available). Full environmental investigations are among the key “asks” of the Sherman Neighborhood Association, other community members, and MEJO.
Without this information, how can Bemis make these comparisons? We have no idea whether “complicated” and “significant” contamination similar to what she says is at “Cap East” on the Isthmus exists at Hartmeyer, because it hasn’t been even remotely fully characterized (as we wrote here and here).
Bemis also told commissioners that much of the Isthmus and east side land is “fill” (including residential wastes and coal ash) placed there to fill in wetlands for development. This is correct. She also noted that there are landfills all over the east side, which we are well aware of and have written about extensively. She brought this up to make the argument that these filled areas are just as contaminated as the Hartmeyer land, if not more so.
But she provided no data from filled (or landfilled) areas to support her claim that these areas are as or more contaminated than the Hartmeyer site. (Were these filled Isthmus areas and landfills remediated? No. They were mostly just covered up with “clean” soils. Just like Hartmeyer will be).
Further, her comparison is also dubious because most areas on the Isthmus (with the exception of areas near MGE) weren’t covered in coal piles for decades, nor did they have huge fuel oil spills on them, as Hartmeyer land did (right where the highest contamination levels were found).
More importantly, most of the Isthmus is not (as Hartmeyer is) just feet from a factory that for decades not only used and burned huge quantities of coal and other fossil fuels, but also manufactured pesticides, pharmaceuticals, plastics, and other toxic chemicals–and had a sewage plant, incinerator, and power plant. The Oscar Mayer site also has several significant plumes of chlorinated solvents, which can spread for miles underground. Almost none of this has been cleaned up. It is still there, right next to where the city wants to locate 550+ units of low income and senior housing.
There is no doubt that contaminants from these activities spilled onto Hartmeyer–via surface runoff, groundwater, and air. But other than some petroleum compounds and metals (and only sparse measurement of chlorinated compounds), nobody has measured most of them.
Maybe Isthmus dwellers and eastsiders should be worried?
Even if Bemis’ statement is correct, does this mean the contamination at Hartmeyer is nothing to worry about? The Isthmus is contaminated too, so that makes the Hartmeyer contamination OK? What kind of logic is this?
Moreover, if Bemis’ claim is true, then shouldn’t we be concerned about health risks to Isthmus dwellers and other eastsiders? As Hubbuch reported, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) concluded that levels of contaminants at the Hartmeyer site pose elevated cancer risks, and nobody should be digging in these soils. As we wrote here, this was certainly an underestimation of the risks, because only two contaminants were considered (when many are there), and other reasons.
If areas of the Isthmus have even more “complicated” and “significant” pollution buried beneath them than the carcinogens found at Hartmeyer, as Bemis says, has anyone warned people living there of the risks? Were these contaminants thoroughly investigated and cleaned up–or just buried? Do people know what poisons are buried beneath their homes? Should they garden there? Should their children dig in the dirt? Were people living in these neighborhoods engaged in decisions about these risks? What happens when it floods, as it did in 2018 and will again? Are these contaminants rising up into their basements?
As for Hartmeyer, Bemis (whose job as city staff is to help facilitate city developments) of course assures us there is nothing to worry about. “We have complete confidence in this site being cleaned up,” she said. Who will assure that? DNR, she believes.
Ironically, the article then says DNR’s Aquino “agrees that capping is a viable solution.” The plan is, in fact, mostly to cap the contamination. Who will assure that soil at the site is managed safely (per the DNR’s “Materials Management Plan”) and the cap is maintained “in perpetuity” as the developer’s consultant told the community in October? The development company in Santa Monica California!
Promises versus reality
“Lincoln Avenue Capital is responsible for reporting to DNR on the material management activities at the conclusion of the project – documenting the extent of remaining soil and groundwater contamination, and maintaining a cap over the remaining areas of shallow soil contamination.”
So we are to believe that a development company in Santa Monica California is going to diligently monitor the Hartmeyer construction site as workers move soil around, honestly document the extent of the remaining contamination and make sure that information is publicly accessible, and then later assure that the cap is maintained “in perpetuity,” as Oelkers told the community?
Right.
For a taste of how this goes in reality–which we have witnessed numerous times at many sites around Madison–read the saga of how this north side site, a couple blocks from my house, was “cleaned up” before developing it with low income and senior housing.
Well, NO. The contamination was simply moved around and covered up. Stormwater detention ponds and utilities were dug through contaminated soils that were then moved all over the place and sediments draining into sewers. Maintaining a “cap”? Haha. There wasn’t even a pretense of trying. I talked to construction workers who said they found strange vials and other weird objects while digging. Did they report it to DNR? Of course not.
Now, kids play there, splash in the ponds. People garden. Nobody knows what they are digging up and playing in. Nobody is paying any attention. Not the city or DNR or DHS or PHMDC. Most in the neighborhood have no clue what might be buried under that site.
Again, the question I have repeated at least 100 times on this post in the last couple decades: Does anyone care? In particular, do any city officials and leaders care? Public health officials?
If so, we have seen little evidence of it. Apparently these officials would rather stay in la-la land, pretending our government regulatory system is working, when it is clearly beyond broken. It serves polluters, developers and capitalism, not people and the environment.
~~~
What contaminants might be oozing, draining, moving underground, etc. from the Oscar Mayer site next to the proposed Hartmeyer housing (which will be where the red “3” is)?
Figure from Wisconsin State Journal
