[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 8, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E44-E45]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     INTRODUCTION OF THE BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. GARY G. MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, January 8, 2003

  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to 
reintroduce the Brownfields Redevelopment Enhancement Act, to provide 
communities with new options when it comes to financing Brownfields 
redevelopment projects. This legislation gives local communities a 
valuable tool to address blight, create new jobs, and expand their tax 
base. Last Congress, identical language passed the House unanimously on 
June 4, 2002. I would like to thank the following Members who join me 
in introducing this important legislation today: Ms. Maloney, Chairman 
Oxley, Mr. Kanjorski, Mr. Leach, Ms. Kelly, Mr. McHugh, Mr. Toomey, Mr. 
Souder, and Ms. Hart.
  The EPA defines Brownfields as ``abandoned, idled, or under-used 
industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment 
is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination.'' It 
is estimated

[[Page E45]]

that there are over 500,000 Brownfield sites across the country in need 
of cleanup and remediation. Brownfields represent more than just 
eyesores blighting individual communities. They threaten our 
groundwater supply, cost our local communities jobs and revenue, and 
contribute to urban sprawl.
  Unfortunately, the largest obstacle cities face when redeveloping 
Brownfields sites is the lack of capital needed to carry out essential 
early-stage activities such as site-assessment, remediation planning, 
and actual clean-up. Because private financiers are often unwilling or 
unable to provide the funding to take a site through the full 
redevelopment cycle, local municipalities and local leaders find 
themselves confronted with the complex task of redevelopment. The 
Brownfield Economic Development Initiative or BEDI grant program was 
designed to help cities overcome this challenge. The HUD program was 
created in 1998 to provide flexible funds for any stage of the 
revitalization process, from site assessment and clean up to economic 
development.
  Current law makes the BEDI grant difficult to utilize. If a local 
community wishes to pursue clean-up and redevelopment funds from HUD, 
they must first apply for a Section 108 loan. In order to secure this 
loan, they are required to put up a portion of their Community 
Development Block Grant (CDBG) money as collateral. Few cities are 
willing to tie up these funds on a loan guarantee--especially in the 
early stages of a Brownfields redevelopment. Tying up CDBG funds means 
a city may be forced to discontinue other programs which benefit low to 
moderate-income residents in order to pursue a riskier redevelopment 
project. For instance, CDBG funds are used to provide important 
community services such as Meals on Wheels and child care programs. 
Without the Section 108 loan guarantee, cities are effectively locked 
out of the BEDI grant.
  The Brownfields Redevelopment Enhancement Act remedies this problem 
by de-linking the BEDI grant program from the Section 108 loan 
guarantee and clarifying that CDBG funds may be used for Brownfields 
redevelopment. In addition, the bill creates a pilot program for a 
revolving loan pool for Brownfields redevelopment. As a result, cities 
will have new options--they can proceed, as under current law, by 
applying for a Section 108 loan, to be secured by a portion of their 
CDBG funds, and then apply for a BEDI grant; they can simply apply for 
a BEDI grant; they can apply for pilot program funds; or they can use 
any combination of the above which best meets their project needs. With 
the flexible access to such government funding, we can help revitalize 
Brownfields sites across the country.
  It is important to point out the benefits cities will receive under 
this legislation. First, there will be a direct, positive effect on the 
environment when the sites are cleaned up. Second, cities have an 
opportunity to minimize urban sprawl and preserve existing green space 
by working with local developers and builders to utilize previously 
developed properties. Due to the liability associated with Brownfields, 
many developers currently opt to purchase and plan projects on open 
space. This bill will empower cities to take ownership of their 
Brownfields and work with their development community to design 
projects that utilize existing infrastructure. Most importantly, it is 
estimated that up to $2.4 billion in new tax revenues can be generated 
through Brownfields redevelopment.
  The goal of H.R. 2941 is to make two existing HUD programs work 
better for the communities they are intended to serve. In speaking with 
my local mayors, I learned that communities in my district are 
currently locked out of the BEDI grant program. The city manager of the 
City of La Habra, California, which is in my district, has stated that 
this bill ``would only further assist the City's efforts in pursing the 
clean-up of environmentally contaminated sites.'' I assure you that 
many of my colleagues will hear similar sentiments from community 
leaders in their districts.
  Let's give cities access to the up-front financing they need to clean 
up Brownfields sites. I urge expeditious consideration of this crucial 
legislation.

                          ____________________