ePluribus Media Community || citizen journalism, for the people, by the people

Threat to Chesapeake Bay Being Buried

by NotFuzzy

Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 11:13:14 AM EST

Update [2005-8-2 13:38:32 by standingup]: Promoted to the Front Page

This is the first in a series of articles. See Part II and Part III.

Sometimes press makes all the difference. Sometimes it doesn't. Maybe you can help....

On June 30, 2005, a "Guest Column" I co-authored with a friend who happens to be a Ph.D. stream ecologist was published in the Washington Post, Fairfax Extra, concerning a potentially grave threat to the Chesapeake Bay:

The blemished underbelly of a key environmental policy has been exposed in Fairfax County. Streams feeding into Chesapeake Bay are protected by sound scientific and legal regimens to shield them from contamination -- except when it conflicts with development interests. An extensive, science-based process defines which streams should be protected. A comprehensive legal framework ensures that development avoids these streams. But Fairfax County officials recently confirmed that this protection can be removed irreversibly and without public input at the behest of developers using only "eyeball" evidence. As a stream ecologist and an environmental lawyer, respectively, we are greatly concerned about this lack of parity and its potential consequences for the bay

The column is no longer current on WaPo, but is available at our local website (see Washington Post Guest Column in left-pane index).

commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!

The basis of our concern was the fact that, while Fairfax County in Virginia has actually adopted a very robust scientific protocol to establish environmentally sensitive buffer areas along perennial waterways (which cannot be disturbed by development), these buffers can be eliminated in developing areas based simply on a developer's visual observations of a purportedly "dry" stream. While the protocol includes 26 hydrological, physical and biological characteristics that decades of scientific inquiry have shown mark the critical features of a perennial stream, the "declassification" of a perennial stream just looks at one of those: visual evidence of above-streambed flow.

This is particularly insidious, because water moves through the sediments of a streambed even when it is not visible. As my friend wrote in our column:

This flowing water, often less than an inch out of sight, supports aquatic life and can certainly carry pollutants toward the bay. A number of the protocol's 26 factors can signal the likely presence of such below-streambed flow: seeps and springs, for example, or aquatic creatures that require running water to live. Flowing streams also write their signatures on the landscape, as meandering channels with a sequence of riffles and pools. The protocol accordingly cautions that visual "flow may stop at a point and begin again some distance downstream," and the simple observation of flow by human eyes or lack thereof is not determinative. In other words, appearances can be deceiving.

After our article was published, we "piled on", sending letter after letter after letter after letter after letter after letter from respected stream ecologists - some nationally and even world renowned - to the Fairfax Board of Supervisors. The particular stream being stripped of protection, on a property the subject of a hotly-disputed proposed development, was the very first to be taken out of protected status. Our point was "Measure Twice; Cut Once". Each and every one of the scientists writing to the Board praised the protocol used to classify protected streams, and descried the use of eye-ball evidence to cancel out such protection. Even the Potomac Conservancy weighed in with a great letter challenging the legal basis for doing this. My own legal analysis had already been submitted to the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, as well as the Board. (See 4th item in index: "Letter to VA DCR")

On July 11th, however, the Board of Supervisors smiled nicely at the dozens of us who came to testify and wave all these letters, and promptly stripped the stream of protection, without more than cursory discussion and without even blinking. Well, truth to tell, the ten of them had enjoyed over a quarter-million dollars in campaign contributions from developers. Really, what were we thinking?

But what was truly amazing was the fact that the press, even after being alerted to what was going on by the June 30th Guest Column -- and the campaign contribution expose by the bitsy local newspaper -- just passed this right on by. Even the Virginia agencies charged with administering the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act so far seem willing to let the local jurisdictions play havoc with the law if it furthers development interests.

So, we're organizing in Fairfax County, joining together various citizen groups all concerned about runaway development in Fairfax, but who have seldom worked together in the past. Our new website, FairGrowthNetwork.org, is not quite done yet, but it is accessible. I posted a blog there yesterday about what happened with our Board of Supervisors.

Anyone here care to help ferret out more about what is going on here, or contribute to public pressure to make sure that the Chesapeake Bay - a full THIRD of which is already a "dead zone" - doesn't pay the price for this perfidy? If you are local to Virginia or to any community near the Bay, you can find addresses to write to here. Or write to our local newspapers:Write to your local newspapers:

The Washington Post - letters@washpost.com
The Washington Post Fairfax Extra - fxextra@washpost.com
Sun Gazette - letters@sun-gazette.com
The Connection - Fairfax@connectionnewspapers.com
Fairfax Times - scahill@timespapers.com
The Examiner - http://www.dcexaminer.com/threads/

Let's up the ante.

Threat to Chesapeake Bay Being Buried | 20 comments (20 topical, 0 hidden)

Great post (5.00 / 1) (#1)

I am sending my buddy in Fairfax a link to this commentary..

Thanks for alerting us ...

Txj -- if you are online -- is this issue in your domain of interest?

by Cho on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 11:17:47 AM EST

Thanks for Spreading the Word! (5.00 / 1) (#4)

Thanks to both you and standingup for passing on my message!! Public pressure is the key now, and we know from experience what can happen when you reach that "threshold" level.

FYI, I do environmental enforcement for DOJ, but my involvement here is as a private citizen. And, boy, am I involved now....

by NotFuzzy on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 12:12:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My friend sent back word... (none / 0) (#10)

...that he in turn mailed the link to your commentary here to everyone on his listserv... which includes gobs of folks living in the Alexandria, Fairfax, DC area.

Hope it helps, NotFUzzy.

by Cho on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 09:33:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

: Please convey my great gratitude!! (none / 0) (#13)

and please ask him/her to register at FairGrowthNetwork.org and let his friends know about that also. The time of functioning as isolated community groups struggling to figure out the rules and players is coming to an end. There is tremendous talent and commitment in some of these groups -- and a burgeoning anger. We plan to work together now!

by NotFuzzy on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 10:45:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The price we pay... (5.00 / 1) (#2)

for deregulation.

But what was truly amazing was the fact that the press, even after being alerted to what was going on by the June 30th Guest Column -- and the campaign contribution expose by the bitsy local newspaper -- just passed this right on by. Even the Virginia agencies charged with administering the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act so far seem willing to let the local jurisdictions play havoc with the law if it furthers development interests.

by FOS on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 11:32:52 AM EST

Thanks NotFuzzy (5.00 / 1) (#3)

I have relatives who live on the bay. I will pass this along to them and hope they can pass it on to others in the area.

by standingup on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 11:46:26 AM EST

Have you tried posting this (5.00 / 1) (#5)

at the investigation site- epluribus investigates? Forgive me if you already have, I have been away for a bit. But if not maybe we can dig more up to get more media attention?
We have the best internet sleuths on the net there.
Nice article btw!!!

by ricardo4 on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 12:33:17 PM EST

YES! I Posted it There First Actually (5.00 / 1) (#6)

But then it gave me a great excuse to dive back into things here!

by NotFuzzy on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 12:42:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

actually I need to amend that (none / 0) (#7)

it's also posted at dkos -- if there is another ePluribus site I should post at, please direct me!!!!

by NotFuzzy on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 01:02:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: did you post it here? (none / 0) (#8)

http://www.epluribusinvestigates.org/
This is our investigation site..you should check it out if you haven't already.

by ricardo4 on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 01:34:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Election Reform (5.00 / 1) (#9)

It is amazing that there is a square inch of Fairfax County left undeveloped! That county serves as a cautionary tale for every other boom town county across the country. First developers move in and buy the influence of the governing bodies then set about overdeveloping every plot of land with reckless disregard for infrastructure demands and insult to the environment. Fairfax County, like my county here in NC, was one of the most beautiful places with gentle rolling countryside dotted with quaint farms and horses. Now it is a nightmare of consumer greed,traffic, noise and air pollution, and groaning with the weight of all that development. It is no coincidence that many of the movers and shakers in the Bush administration live in that area. Even the press is in the pocket of the developers because they smell the money. All for the love of money. Election reform must have built in safeguards preventing the wholesale auctioning off of the environment. They may own the land but they should not be allowed to own the commonstream, visible to the eye or not. Thanks for your fight.

by DEFuning on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 01:56:30 PM EST

A quick look at Connolly - County Supervisor (5.00 / 2) (#11)

I did a quick look at Connolly - the Board Supervisor. Do you think the reason that you can't get any press on him is because he is a local media darling? Am I reading this right that he made his campaign against his challenger in the last election about her conservative views on education? That was a dodge.
Looks like he has higher political aspirations. Maybe if more is brought out about him and the rest of the board it will help.

Here is what I have found so far:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 9, 2002
Fairfax County Supervisor Gerald E. Connolly Joins SAIC
(MCLEAN, VA) - Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) today announced that Fairfax County Supervisor Gerald E. Connolly has joined the company as Director for Community Relations to further strengthen SAIC's commitment to business growth and community involvement in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Connolly brings with him more than 30 years of experience in international relations, legislative affairs and public policy.
Connolly also serves as supervisor for the Providence District in Fairfax County, and represents 110,000 citizens including the entire business district of Tysons Corner, Northern Virginia's largest commercial center. Connolly also chairs the Reorganization, Legislative Affairs, and Procedures Committees in Fairfax County.
"Gerry's extensive experience in both the government and business communities will contribute to SAIC's growing presence in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area," said Duane Andrews, SAIC corporate executive vice president. "SAIC remains committed to strengthening our relationships with our customers and the various communities where we reside. We look forward to having someone of Gerry's caliber help take our local government and community relations efforts to new levels."

from
link

SAIC worries me a little. Also he certainly has placed himself strategically in postitions of power.

This is from his official bio

Connolly serves as the chairman of the County's Legislative Committee, the Fairfax City/County Interjurisdictional Committee, the Board's Procedures Committee, the Government Reorganization Committee, and is vice chair of the Economic Advisory Committee. Connolly is also a member on the boards of the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission (NVTC), the Northern Virginia Regional Commission (NVRC), and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) where he is past chairman and has served as a key member of the region's Emergency Preparedness Taskforce. Connolly represents Fairfax County on the Board of the Virginia Association of Counties (VaCo) where he is president-elect.

.
See link

His fundraising was described in an old Washpo article
link

Hours before the annual $35-a-head fundraiser, the County Board of Supervisors chairman shared filet mignon and cabernet sauvignon with 120 corporate titans and other high rollers at the swish Tower Club, the top-floor, members-only restaurant with a sweeping view of Tysons Corner. The lunch donors wrote checks for $1,000 and up. Connolly (D) said he expects to collect a total of $130,000 from both events, boosting his campaign war chest to close to $270,000 two years before his race for reelection.
SNIP
Connolly has been a prodigious fundraiser since his days as supervisor in the Providence district, where he drew heavily from builders, developers, real estate agents and technology firms in Tysons. He also enjoys strong support from the firefighters union, which bought a table at the Tower Club fundraiser this year. And he notes his small donations from Democratic activists. More than 300 supporters showed up at Kena Temple in Mantua for this year's St. Patrick's Day fete.

He has gotten alot of press for his Telecommuting project and for a Wind Power Project.
Sometimes the press portrays races as all black and white for the drama. But this guy's hat isn't exactly spotless more grey. He is a formidible fellow.

by ricardo4 on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 10:19:28 AM EST

SAIC (none / 0) (#12)

It is my understanding that SAIC has some sort of ownership interest in Tysons Corner redevelopment -- HUGE bucks involved. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10721-2005Apr22.html

I haven't explored whether there may be a conflict of interest here, but there may be.....

by NotFuzzy on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 10:42:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

looks like we may want to follow the money (none / 0) (#14)

Maybe an all out research project on who is involved in the project compared to donations to Connolly and company?

by ricardo4 on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 11:39:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There are literally billions of dollars involved (5.00 / 1) (#15)

Tysons is either the #1 or #2 largest shopping mecca in the nation. Just to give you a sense of all the salivation going on in industry, last week a consortium of private companies offered a BILLION dollars to acquire all the rights to tolls from the Dulles Access Road, a county profit center currently generating over $28M/year. That money is attractive to the County, despite the loss of future income, because the cost of the planned extension of the Metro rail system to Tysons just ballooned to $2.4 billion JUST for the first phase. link, and line. Even the Washington Post has reservations - see editorial here.

In addition, my little town of Vienna, just awarded the title of #4 best town in the country to live in by Money Magazine, link, and the main street of which is Route 123, a MAJOR thoroughfare to Tysons, has been denied a seat at the table to talk about the future of Tysons. The County is closely cabining these talks among "friendly" interests.

So much so that, although an April "Town Hall" sponsored by a number of community groups concerned about runaway development in the County attracted over 600 local residents on a weekday evening, all but one of our ten Supervisors spurned their invitations in favor of a meeting with sponsors of the the proposed Tysons development. Even the former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Jack Herrity, was enraged. His letter to the editor of one of our local papers is here

So, yes, our local government's ties to the big business literally drooling over the development dollars at Tysons is a very big issue. While protecting Chesapeake tributary streams itself is not a "Tysons" issue, keeping the developers happy by getting rid of inconvenient stream buffers, seems, from our point of view, to be part and parcel of the toadying to developers in light of the big money stakes down the road (literally).

by NotFuzzy on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 03:02:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what if we work from the other direction? (5.00 / 1) (#16)

Look at SAIC if Connolly is still working there.
Look at each donor to his last campaign.
This should be a smaller set of individuals.
I was really interested in your comment on possible conflict of interest with SAIC. The article you just posted on his meeting with developpers instead of citizens indicates an arrogance that is amazing.

by ricardo4 on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 07:34:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: We would love any and all help! (5.00 / 1) (#17)

Ricardo -- from what I understand, SAIC is set up so that everyone owns part of the company, and the company is a landowner likely to profit big-time in the re-development. If so, there is quite a case to be made that GC as Chairman is setting things up to profit himself. This is the sort of conflict that lay-people can clearly understand! With your investigative help maybe we can make some headway. (of course, I'm sure some county officials are now reading this!)

by NotFuzzy on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 03:21:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

New Washington Post article (5.00 / 1) (#18)

out today has disappointing news on the dissolved oxygen levels in the Bay.

The scientists found last month that 6.7 percent of the bay's main section is anoxic, meaning it contains no more than 0.2 milligrams of dissolved oxygen per liter and, therefore, is lethal to almost all fish and shellfish.
The forecast was issued in early May by researchers working with the Chesapeake Bay Program, a restoration effort that includes federal and state agencies and other partners. They predicted that, in terms of anoxia, this summer would rank among the five worst in the past 20 years and that it would mirror the summer of 1998 for the level of anoxic water.
Indeed, the level detected during a survey July 11-15 was greater than in comparable July surveys in all but three of the past 20 years. The numbers are "definitely not good," said David Jasinski, a data analyst with the Chesapeake Bay Program. "But our prediction basically said this was not going to be a good year for dissolved oxygen."
He and others said the ability to forecast conditions in the bay might one day help guide restoration efforts. For now, they said, the forecast's accuracy merely demonstrated a central truth in dramatic fashion: Low oxygen levels in the summer are linked to the amount of pollution flowing into the bay in the spring.
Bay Scientists Chagrined At Being Right

by standingup on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 05:21:57 PM EST

Now the Article is Out in Print (8/11) (5.00 / 1) (#19)

Notably, the title in hard copy has been changed: "Scentists Successfully Predict Bay Problems". The on-line link (see above) yields a similar but still different new title.

I wonder if this had anything to do with my unpublished LTE criticizing the title, and most of all the late coverage and misplacement of the story in the Fairfax Extra?

The good news is that I later got a call from a Post reporter, asking questions about the specific development that prompted our interest in County stream declassification procedures, and about the new FairGrowth Network. There should be an article out on that next week....

by NotFuzzy on Thu Aug 11, 2005 at 06:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]