Why New York Needs Federal Funding For Water Infrastructure

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 2

WATER

Why New York Needs Federal


Funding for Water Infrastructure
Fact Sheet • April 2009

O ur nation’s water infrastructure and economy are bound together. Aiding


the former will help the latter. Unfortunately, these days, both are treading
troubled waters.

In communities in New York and across the country,


drinking water and sewerage systems are straining under
the weight of decades of federal government underinvest-
ment. In recent years, the State Revolving Funds were
financed at some of the lowest levels in history. For fiscal
year 2008, New York received only $112 million, a mere
1.7 percent of the $6.6 billion that the state’s water and
sewer systems need.1

As the troubles with our water infrastructure mount,


the country’s economy slides deeper into recession. New
York’s January 2009 unemployment rate reached 7.0
percent, or about 675,200 people, up from 4.7 percent a
year earlier. Nearly one in 14 people in the labor force are
now unemployed.2

Investing now in water and sewer systems to gener-


ate solid economic growth can lead the state out of the
recession. Every federal dollar invested in infrastructure
yields a $1.59 return to our states.3 The National Utility
Contractors Association estimates that for every $1 bil-
lion spent on water infrastructure, nearly 27,000 jobs are
created.4

The economic stimulus legislation passed by Congress in projects at a total cost of at least $2.0 billion.5 In 2008,
February 2009 provides more money to water infrastruc- the state received only $36.3 million in federal funding6
ture than the country has seen in recent years, but this — enough to finance 1/55th of its needs.
one-time allotment cannot cure the problems plaguing
many communities. In fact, the bill provides water and Federal contributions to New York’s drinking water
sewer systems with less than one-third of what the Envi- funding efforts have decreased by 38.7 percent since the
ronmental Protection Agency estimates we should spend Drinking Water SRF was implemented in fiscal 1997 and
each year just to maintain them. 54.3 percent when adjusted for inflation.7

New York’s Water Infrastructure Funding Gap: For the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program,
New York’s water needs outpace its current ability to fund which goes toward wastewater infrastructure, the state’s
projects by a large margin. most recent Intended Use Plan lists 412 projects at a total
cost of $4.6 billion.8 In 2008, the state received $75.1 mil-
For the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) pro- lion in federal funding9 — enough to finance 1.6 percent
gram, the state’s most recent Intended Use Plan lists 555 of its needs.
Federal contributions to New York’s wastewater funding
efforts have decreased by 66.8 percent since the Clean
Water SRF was fully implemented in fiscal 1991 and 79.0
percent when adjusted for inflation.10

Job Creation: Fully addressing New York’s currently


listed water needs of $6.6 billion would spur 174,893
employment opportunities, according to National Utility
Contractors Association estimates for job creation from
water infrastructure investments. That could put back
to work more than a quarter of the state’s unemployed
people.

Water Quality: According to EPA’s 2006 National


Water Quality Inventory assessments, 78 percent of the
state’s lake waters, 60 percent of its bays and estuaries Endnotes
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
and 89 percent of its wetlands are impaired, as is all of its “Tentative distribution of Drinking Water State Revolving
Great Lakes shoreline.11 Fund appropriation for fiscal year 2008.” May 19, 2008; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. “FY 2008
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Title VI Allotments.” January
Beach Closings: A report by the Natural Resources 28, 2008; Department of Health and Environmental Facilities
Defense Council shows that New York experienced 1,547 Corporation, “Final Intended Use Plan Drinking Water State
beach closing/advisory days lasting six weeks or less Revolving Fund.” September 30, 2008 at 28; Department of
Environmental Conservation and Environmental Facilities
in 2007, an increase of 21 percent from the number in Corporation. “Final Intended Use Plan Clean Water State
2006. Aging and poorly designed sewage and stormwater Revolving Fund for Water Pollution Control Federal Fiscal Year
systems cause many beach closures.12 2009.” September 2008 at A-14.
2 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
[Press Release]. “Regional and state employment and
Legislative Solutions: A comprehensive, long-term unemployment: January 2009.” March 11, 2009.
solution is a dedicated source of public funding for water 3 Schwartz, Bernard L. and Schwenninger, Sherle R. “A Public
Infrastructure–-Led Economic Recovery Program.” December
infrastructure. This would help communities in New 4, 2008; Zandi, Mark. Chief economist and co-founder, Moody’s
York and across America keep their water clean, safe Economy.com. Testimony on Economic Stimulus For Small
and affordable. It would unburden overtaxed state and Business: A Look Back and Assessing Need For Additional Relief.
U.S. House Committee on Small Business. July 24, 2008.
municipal governments of the cost of water infrastructure 4 National Utility Contractors Association. [Press Release]. “New
repairs. Such an investment also would create employ- CWC Report Demonstrates Immediate Economic Impact of
ment opportunities and give our economy a much-needed Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Investment?” January 28,
2009.
boost. Two legislative solutions exist. 5 Department of Health and Environmental Facilities Corporation,
September 30, 2008 at 28.
Clean Water Trust Fund: A federal water infra- 6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 19, 2008.
7 Ibid; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
structure trust fund bill will be introduced during “Distribution of DWSRF funds.” June 23, 2006; Sahr, Robert C.
the current legislative session. As with the trust fund “Inflation conversion factors for years 1774 to estimated 2019.”
for highways and airports, we should have a Clean Oregon State University, Political Science Department. January
16, 2009.
Water Trust Fund to provide municipalities with the 8 Department of Environmental Conservation and Environmental
funding they need to keep our water safe and clean Facilities Corporation. September 2008 at A-14.
for future generations. The trust fund should distrib- 9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, January 28, 2008.
10 Ibid; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
ute money to publicly owned water and wastewater “Clean Water State Revolving Fund Allotments.” April 4, 2007;
systems. It also should ensure that funds be made Sahr, 2009.
available for research and implementation of green 11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water. National
Assessment Database. Available at www.epa.gov/waters/305b/,
infrastructure and conservation practices. accessed February 6, 2009.
12 Dorfman, Mark and Kristen Sinclair Rosselot. National Resources
National Infrastructure Bank: Related to the Defense Council “Testing the Waters 2008: A Guide to Water
Quality at Vacation Beaches.” National Resources Defense
trust fund is a proposed national infrastructure Council. 2008 at 76.
bank to raise and distribute the money necessary
to upgrade drinking water and wastewater systems,
highways and other underpinnings of our nation’s
prosperity. Policy-makers should strictly limit private For more information:
sector involvement in water infrastructure to financ- web: www.foodandwaterwatch.org
ing only. The public should maintain ownership and email: info@fwwatch.org
control of public water and sewer utilities because it phone: (202) 683-2500 (DC) • (415) 293-9900 (CA)
does a far better job of management and operation.
Copyright © April 2009 Food & Water Watch

You might also like