Studer Community Institute

RESTORE committee faces weighty decision

February 17, 2015
/ William Rabb
/ economy

A large part of Pensacola's environmental and economic future could be decided this week, as a group of nine citizens finalize the criteria that will govern how as much as $200 million will be spent in the next decade. The Escambia County RESTORE Advisory Committee, appointed in 2012 in the wake of the BP Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, will meet Wednesday for what could be its final and most critical time. [sidebar] RESTORE Advisory Committee meeting When: Wednesday, Feb. 18, 5 p.m. Where: Escambia County Central Office Complex, 3363 W. Park Place, Room 104. [/sidebar] On the agenda is weighting criteria by which projects will be judged for funding from the RESTORE act windfall. The goal is to ensure that projects that get RESTORE money will benefit the oil-damaged environment and some of the neediest neighborhoods in the area, committee members said. After Wednesday, the committee could turn its recommendations over to Escambia County Commissioners, which may tweak the criteria. By this summer, the commissioners are expected to release the final requirements and begin soliciting project proposals. Participants say it's an unprecedented chance to correct some problems and make the community better able to withstand rising seas, powerful storms and economic downturns for decades to come. “I couldn't be more pleased with the way the process has gone so far,” said Christian Wagley, the only RESTORE Committee member appointed to represent local environment groups. “We've spent a year and a half listening to the community, and we've heard a lot of good ideas, and we've been able to build trust with the community.” [sidebar] The committee is named after the federal law (the Resources, Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act, passed in 2012). It was set up to make recommendations to the county commission after it became clear that the companies involved in the oil spill, including the British petroleum giant known as BP, would likely be required by a federal court to pay more than $1 billion in civil fines because of their roles in the disaster. Under a complicated formula established by the law, that penalty money is being split among the states and counties most affected by the oil, which fouled beaches and waterways from Louisiana to the Panhandle. Together, Panhandle counties stand to gain as much as $300 million from the payments, with the bulk of that going to hardest-hit Escambia. [/sidebar] A federal judge is expected to rule this spring on the final amount of penalties BP must pay, but payouts could take months or years to reach local communities. The task that the RESTORE Committee faces Wednesday is how to weight criteria. Categories include environmental, infrastructure and economic needs. The committee's timeline requires it to finish the weighting process by this week, and committee chair Bentina Terry thinks the group can meet the deadline. Wagley believes it may take longer. “This is too important; there's no need to rush it right here at the end,” he said. Some citizens at the committee meetings have argued for more emphasis on environmental restoration and protection. Others have said social and infrastructure needs in the city must take top billing. “As this was an environmental disaster that eventually impacted us economically, I would like to see selection weighted towards projects that focus on the ecological restoration of our natural resources, starting with the areas that were most heavily impacted – our seagrasses, marsh grasses, water quality, aquatic species, etc,” said Mary Gutierrez, an environmental scientist and director of Earth Ethics Inc., a Pensacola-based environmental group that has kept an eye on the RESTORE Committee process. Weighty decisions Under draft criteria established with Dewberry, the committee's consultant, purely environmental projects may not score that highly. [sidebar] What are the RESTORE Committee’s criteria for projects? Baseline:

Meets all local, state and federal building codes and regulations.
Plans must include reasonable costs and completion timeframe.
Includes long-range monitoring and maintenance plans.

Environmental: Restores habitat, removes non-native species.

Improves water quality.
Enhances natural systems' resiliency, including shoreline stabilization.

Economic:

Increases tourism with marketing efforts or improvements to existing fishing and waterfront access; promotes consumption of local seafood.
Creates jobs, with emphasis on targeted industries.
Expands local high-tech industry, including renewable energy.
Enhances workforce development, including training for “at-risk” groups and in areas facing worker shortages.

Infrastructure:

Improves transportation networks, including roads and bridges, bicycle and pedestrian paths, mass transit.
Reduces flooding and enhances stormwater management.
Upgrades infrastructure to improve resiliency during and after disasters.

Bonus:

Benefits under-served and low-income areas.
Improves community health, including improving access to health services and healthful food.
Increases affordable housing and reduces crime.
Utilizes local labor and promotes small, local businesses.
Is consistent with previously established environment and land-use plans.
Utilizes best practices, including energy efficient and water-saving designs.
Provides for matching funds, so that oil money can be leveraged and stretched further.
[/sidebar]

Even though it was the country's dependence on oil that led to the Gulf oil spill in 2010, a local project that would simply purchase fleets of electric cars for city or county crews, for example, probably wouldn't get that far, Terry said. “The RESTORE Act is not really intended to do that,” said Terry, who is also vice president of customer service for Gulf Power Co. If a project to build a solar-power farm showed it could create jobs, provide cutting-edge training for the workforce, power electric cars, and benefit an under-served part of town, it might score highly. Projects that score points across several of the criteria likely will be funded, committee members said. Friction may surface at Wednesday's meeting when it comes to the age-old debate of weighting new development vs. redevelopment of needy neighborhoods. Wagley hopes the committee will give extra weight to criteria that encourage rejuvenation of economically struggling neighborhoods, such as Brownsville and Warrington on the west side of Pensacola. Instead of contributing to sprawl by building new roads and destroying forests and wetlands in rural areas outside the city, RESTORE projects should focus on restoring infrastructure, transportation, stormwater management, and social and educational needs in blighted urban areas, said Wagley, who runs Sustainable Town Concepts, a green-building consulting firm. “The last thing we want to do is further our dependence on driving and fossil fuels,” he said. The RESTORE Act does not allow for direct funding of purely social or educational needs, but Wagley said those needs can be a component of a project's larger goals. By meeting mass-transportation needs, for example, a community reduces its carbon footprint. After much discussion last fall, committee members added a bonus criteria section, which now includes points for projects that serve disabled persons; provide job creation for minority and low-income groups; improve community health services; boost early childhood education; and encourage green-building design. One-time bonus, long-term impact

Another point of contention could be the issue of using the money to fund recurring expenses. At one recent RESTORE Committee meeting, a Pensacola city official urged committee members to weight criteria to encourage replacement of aging natural-gas lines under city streets, a huge expense facing the city-owned gas utility. Wagley argued that would be an inappropriate use of the oil spill funds. “That type of work can be funded through ratepayers or other sources,” Wagley says. “It's going to have to happen, so it will get funded.” County officials may find it easier to manage a few big infrastructure-type projects, but 20 to 30 smaller ideas may prove to have a broader impact on both the environment and average citizens, Wagley and Gutierrez said. Gutierrez, who also heads the city-county stormwater advisory team, suggested low-cost projects such as a 24-hour hotline so people can report water-quality violations; funding for groups such as the Bream Fishermen's Association, which regularly samples water quality in waterways; planting of shoreline vegetation where appropriate to limit erosion and provide habitat; and community centers to teach skills, help students in school and help adults find work. The public’s voice Wagley said that throughout the long process, he was struck by the amount of input from average citizens and community groups. While communities in coastal Alabama, for example, have been criticized for using some of the oil money for expensive tourism projects that don't protect the environment, Pensacola business leaders and developers barely made an appearance at committee meetings, members said. That level of public engagement may make it difficult for commissioners to significantly alter the RESTORE Committee's recommendations, Wagley said. “If the commissioners change too much, the public's going to rebel,” Wagley said.

Back to Blogs

RESTORE committee faces weighty decision

Recent Posts