Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

City Turns Deaf Ear to Noisy Neighbors


Photo (cc) anthonylibrarian

Teens living above an East Village woman laughed at her when she asked them to stop running and jumping all night while her family tried to sleep. An actor in Harlem lived peacefully in his apartment for 10 years until a new renovation left him hearing every tread, scrape and footfall, interrupting his sleep. And a senior citizen with a heart condition in the Upper West Side was called senile and visited by mental health professionals after she repeatedly complained about a next-door neighbor who plays her stereo all night long.

Over 65,000 people complained to the city's 311 line about noisy neighbors in fiscal year 2009, making it the number one noise complaint in the city. This is four times as many as the next most common complaint, street noise, and ten times the number of complaints about noise from a club or bar. And yet, although the city’s vaunted noise code addresses the latter two issues, it offers no provisions to deal with noisy neighbors. Sleep-deprived, frustrated and feeling helpless, those afflicted by loud, uncooperative neighbors often find they have almost nowhere to turn.

"Cities from all over the country quote our noise code," said Arline Bronzaft, an environmental psychologist and chair of the Noise Committee at the Council on the Environment of New York City, "but New York City is in the dark ages when it comes to neighbor noise."

Public Noise, Public Health

New York City’s updated noise code, which went into effect in 2007, addresses many nuisances outside the home — car stereos and alarms, clubs and bars, barking dogs and construction noise — and calls for enforcement by the city's Department of Environmental Protection or the police department. But the internal din of urban dwellings continues, eroding the quality of life.

Most New Yorkers live in apartment buildings, old and new, that act like finely tuned instruments transmitting the sound of every footfall, toilet flush, dropped object and vibrating appliance — not to mention loud arguments, children playing, pets, musical instruments and, yes, sex noise. Add to that the rumble of modern entertainment systems, manufactured and advertised to maximize bass frequencies that can penetrate nearly any building material. Modern work life exacerbates the tension over noise, as many New Yorkers work at night and sleep in the day or work from home -- and so need quiet during noisy daytime hours.

Studies have found noise to be more than a nuisance. In its Guidelines for Community Noise, the World Health Organization writes, "Noise pollution continues to grow" and "involves direct, as well as cumulative, adverse health effects."

The organization identifies broad categories of negative health effects from unwanted noise including interference with speech and learning, sleep disturbances, cardiovascular and physiological effects, mental health effects, effects on performance and productivity at school and work, and effects on residential behavior and annoyance.

"People say you should just get used to it," said Richard Tur, a New York City resident and founder of NoiseOFF.org. "What’s been lost is that noise pollution is a public health issue."

Nowhere to Turn

On a volunteer basis Bronzaft counsels people with neighbor noise problems. Most have approached raucous neighbors who have been unresponsive or downright hostile.

"The country's founders passed a bill of rights," said Bronzaft, "but not a bill of responsibilities."

Calls to 311 are referred to the police for non-emergency response, but the police cannot do much, since there are no specific laws about making a racket in one's own apartment. Officers often arrive on the scene hours after the disturbance, and the most they usually can do is ask the offender to turn the volume down -- and the person can turn it back up when the police leave.

People find themselves rearranging their lives to avoid noise. The actor in Harlem, who asked not to be named because he is taking his landlord to housing court, has curtailed his social life to get to bed earlier. Lu works from home and now breaks up her workday with naps.

Lu said her youngest daughter would wake up crying about monsters upstairs and had a hard time waking up for school.

"I shouldn’t have to schedule my things around the noise and make my sleeping time accommodate the noise," said Lu. "There should be some kind of agency you can go complain to about this kind of noise. We don’t know where we should go."

Looking for Answers

Under current law, Lu and others like her have few alternatives. But those involved with the issue see a number of avenues the city could pursue to quiet noisy neighbors.

Bronzaft thinks the onus is on landlords to provide a noise-free living environment under a lease’s warranty of habitability. If a tenant gets to the point of suing, she said, the complaint should be against the landlord and not the other tenant. She also thinks that the city or state government should require that the warranty of habitability in leases specifically promises a residence free from noise.

New York City Councilmember Daniel Garodnick agrees that explicit provisions dealing with noisy neighbors in standard leases would be a useful tool but questions whether the impetus for such a change should come from the city.

"It happens to be in the best interests of landlords and tenants to explicitly set out rights and privileges of every apartment at the outset," said Garodnick. "That route could be done independently of government.”

But in the absence of neighbor noise laws, landlords have fewer tools to try to quiet things down.

"[Noise] is one of the most difficult complaints for a landlord to deal with," said Elizabeth Crane, a landlord with nearly 1,000 tenants, mostly in the Bronx.

Crane says she gets noise complaints all the time and always addresses them because she does not want to lose good tenants to noise. She starts out with gentle letters but it can end up in a court action costing her thousands of dollars in legal fees and lost rent.

The Law of Common Sense

"Your right to make noise stops at my ears," said Bronzaft. The problem, she said, is that "you can't legislate decency."

Many cities try. Los Angeles, Dallas, Atlanta, San Francisco, Boston and Detroit all have laws against high volume neighbors. Usually the laws give some decibel threshold, and set fines for offenders. In London, England an individual fine for making too much noise can go up to 5,000 pounds.

"The issue with decibel measurement," said Tur of NoiseOFF, "is that the real question is what effect is the noise having on a person's life. If you can't enjoy your apartment or sleep at night, it's hard to put a number on that."

Tur wants New York City’s noise code to address neighbor noise and provide enforcement power to police.

"If it can be proved a neighbor is causing noise," said Tur, "police should have enforcement by way of police summonses or fines. I think that's reasonable."

Louis Hagler, a retired physician who has written extensively on the health effects of noise, goes further. "If [a neighbor's noise] comes into my residence," said Hagler, "it’s a criminal assault and should be treated that way."

Garodnick said he is interested in exploring whether neighbor noise should be included in a law passed by the city. But he cautioned that violations can be difficult to substantiate.

"You still need a ticket writing authority to be there to experience it," he said.

Vibrating Buildings

And what about those unintentional everyday living sounds that drive New York City apartment dwellers crazy?

"I can’t tell people to take off their shoes or not to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night, or not to move a chair," said landlord Elizabeth Crane.

How a building is constructed has a lot to do with how it conducts sound. Sound transmission class (STC) is a method for measuring how much sound a barrier, such as a wall, blocks. STC ratings have to do with the types of construction techniques and materials used in buildings. In a survey of residents of row houses and apartments, the National Research Council of Canada found that annoyance over neighbor noise dropped when walls had an STC of 50 or above and stopped completely at 60.

New York City's updated building code requires a minimum STC for airborne sound of 50 in dwelling units, but it only applies to new construction. Research by Quiet Solution, a company that manufactures soundproofing materials, has found that dampening the sound of a medium-size home theater requires an STC of 60.

"The building code could be another route to addressing these issues, and that would most certainly be within the city’s jurisdiction," said Garodnick.

Let’s Talk This Through

Short of such changes, the solution to all-out neighbor wars over noise can be quite simple — laying carpet, wearing headphones, moving the TV or, in one of Bronzaft’s cases, painting a line on a radio's volume knob — if the parties are able to talk to one another.

"A noise dispute is really an interpersonal issue," said Melissa Appleton of the Manhattan Mediation Center at Safe Horizon.

Noise disputes account for some of the center’s most common cases. Residents can call 311 for a referral to their mediation services. If the other party won’t participate, Safe Horizon will work with complainants to help them communicate with their neighbor.

"If people were more aware of mediation before conflicts escalated," said Appleton, "it might effectively change the number of lingering and protracted noise disputes in the city."

But some residents say they might have to take more draconian steps and move. The senior citizen on the Upper West Side does not want to leave the home where she feels safe and knows people. But she believes she has tried everything else she can think of to deal with the noise.

"No one has helped me," she said. "Not a soul."

Famed Scout Camp Threatened by Public, Private Budget Crisis


Anne Schwartz
Boats on Lake Ohrbach

On a freezing Saturday in January, six troops of Boy Scouts camped out in cabins next to a silvery lake forming a skin of ice, surrounded by dense stands of bare trees as far as the eye could see. The boys, who had come from New York City and the surrounding suburbs to learn how to make a fire and use an ax while building lifelong values and friendships, might have been in a forest in the Catskills. The actual location: Staten Island.

They were spending the weekend at 143-acre Pouch Camp, the largest parcel within the Staten Island Greenbelt and one of the only privately owned ones. All together, the greenbelt preserves 2,800 contiguous acres of parks, natural areas and golf courses under city and state ownership in a teardrop-shaped swath of green at the island’s center. The camp is beloved by generations of Boy Scouts throughout the metropolitan region whose childhoods revolved around weekends and summers there, as well as by Staten Islanders who grew up exploring the adjacent woods, fishing in its Lake Ohrbach, and attending dances and parties at its picturesque lodge.

But now, the financially troubled Greater New York Councils, Boy Scouts of America, the owner of the camp, has announced it is considering putting the land up for sale. If funds can’t be found to save the camp, luxury housing could replace lean-tos, eliminating scout camping programs within New York City and diminishing the Greenbelt forever.

Funds for Land

For a number of years, the Greater New York Councils has been in discussions about selling a conservation easement (essentially the development rights) on the property to the city, state or an environmental group. Such a sale would preserve the landscape while allowing the scouts to retain ownership and continue its camping program. Press reports put the most recent asking price for an easement at $30 million. Talks appeared to stall, though, and just before Thanksgiving, the Boy Scout organization said that it was exploring the sale of all or part of the property.

Although land use issues are often contentious in Staten Island, politicians from both sides of the aisle, local scout volunteers, and environmental and civic groups have been working together to find a way to save the land and the camp program in the most difficult economic climate in decades. .

The Pouch Camp situation is a perfect example of why state legislatures, including New York's, have created dedicated accounts to provide a steady stream of funding for conservation and other environmental needs, advocates say. Although spending on conservation is minuscule compared to other areas, it is often perceived as expendable and so is among the first things cut by governments looking to save money.

In New York state, the Environmental Protection Fund, financed largely by a portion of the receipts from the real estate transfer tax, was created so there would be a stable source of money to preserve land and fund other environmental projects. In recent years, the state has used money from this source (and a now-depleted bond act) to preserve open space in Staten Island and elsewhere in the city. Pouch Camp is listed on the state’s Open Space Conservation Plan as a priority for preservation in New York City .

State legislation passed in 2007 called for increasing the fund to $300 million by 2010, and last year’s budget allocated $222 million, with $60 million for land conservation. But governors and legislators find it difficult to resist raiding the fund to balance the budget and have "borrowed" $500 million in recent years. Now, the state is facing an $8.2 billion deficit, and the governor wants to sweep more money from the fund for unrelated purposes; slash allocations from the fund by a third -- one of the largest cuts to any major program; and place a moratorium on all land conservation purchases.

Lean-tos in the woods
Anne Schwartz
 

Over the years, the city has preserved much of the greenbelt as parkland, and Mayor Michael Bloomberg has staked his legacy on greening the city, setting aside capital dollars for parks under PlaNYC2030. In a recent letter to Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe, New Yorkers for Parks, the citywide parks advocacy group, asked the parks department to incorporate the camp property into its system. But the city has its own fiscal difficulties and has reduced capital budgets by 30 percent. Benepe told the New York Times that it was highly unlikely that the parks department would be able to buy the property.

Nature's Last Stand

The Greenbelt is a link to Staten Island’s not-so-distant rural past, before the tsunami of development unleashed by the opening of the Verrazano Bridge in 1964. Efforts to create the linear park began in the 1960s, with the purchase of what is now High Rock Park and a years-long battle by civic and conservation groups to prevent Robert Moses from blasting a highway through the borough’s hilly wooded center.

There are now seven city parks in the Greenbelt, as well as parcels the state owns or protects through conservation easements. Thirty-five miles of hiking trails meander through its woods, meadows and wetlands. One of the largest natural areas in New York City, it supports a diversity of native flora and fauna, including 50 species of nesting birds as well as 150 species of birds that migrate through the city along the Atlantic flyway in the spring and fall.

Within the greenbelt, Pouch Camp is considered the crown jewel. While it is not open to the public (although fishing permits are issued and hikers can request permission to walk through), trails through the greenbelt run along its edge, overlooking the camp's native hardwood forest and understory dotted with glacial kettle ponds, streams and swamps. "In the spring, it is beautiful because of all the different wildflowers,” said Dominick D’Urso, who leads the annual 10-mile greenbelt hike for Protectors of Pine Oak Woods, the borough’s 30-year-old land conservation organization.

"It's the heart and soul and lungs of the greenbelt," said Kathleen Vorwick, president of the Greenbelt Conservancy, a nonprofit that partners with the parks department in operating and supporting the park. Just a ferry and bus ride from Manhattan, that part of the greenbelt is "the last remaining area of that size in New York City where people can be totally away from noise and light pollution," she said.

"It’s someplace that’s very, very special. You have to see it to believe it exists in New York City," said Staten Island Borough President James P. Molinaro.

The Cost of Development

Most of Pouch Camp is not suitable for housing, with its steep slopes, lake and numerous streams and wetlands. But building on even part of the property would fragment the native forest and put luxury housing in the wildest part of the greenbelt.

Development would fray the ecological fabric of parkland well beyond the camp's borders. Slicing the forest into smaller pieces and increasing the amount of "edge" would make the entire greenbelt less habitable for native animals that need larger areas of interior forest to survive. Construction, roads and houses, along with lawns and gardens, would give invasive species a foothold and affect the larger watershed: .Heavy rains and snowmelt would wash soil, pesticides and other pollutants into Lake Ohrbach, which floods into streams and wetlands in High Rock Park below and on down through Richmondtown and into Richmond Creek.

"The concept of this 2,800-acre greenbelt, mostly in a natural state, would just be destroyed. It would be cut into little boxes," said Vorwick. "There's a very small piece of God's creation here on central Staten Island, and it would be destroyed if any portion of Pouch Camp were to be developed."

To many Staten Islanders, especially people involved in scouting, closing the camp would be the biggest loss of all. The camp is heavily used -- both for summer camps and weekend activities year round -- by many of the 52,000 Boy Scouts in the metropolitan region as well as troops from other parts of the country who stay there while they explore New York City. There is also a summer YMCA day camp on the grounds.

"My fondest scouting memories from my childhood are all based around Camp Pouch," said Jim Falcone, the cubmaster at Pack 36 on Staten Island, whose father was also scoutmaster. "It gives kids a real sense of adventure to be out there. I was born and raised in Bensonhurst. My dad took us camping there and I didn’t even realize that it was just a stone's throw over the bridge. It's where my kids slept outside in a tent the first time. Every one of my sons caught their first fish in Lake Ohrbach."

Breaking with Tradition?

People involved in scouting on Staten Island say the sale of the camp would betray the Boy Scout's 100-year tradition of building skills, character and values in young men through camping, nature study and outdoor adventure and its goal of teaching youths to be good stewards of the environment. "Selling the camp goes against Boy Scout values," said Dominic R. DeRubbio, an Eagle Scout and public safety consultant who helped organize a rally attended by 1,500 people on a chilly December evening and a petition drive that has collected more than 10,000 signatures so far.

The proposed sale has increased scrutiny of the expenses of the Greater New York Councils, which has its offices in the Empire State Building. It has also renewed criticism of the Boy Scouts of America's corporate-style management and high salaries for a nonprofit.

Assemblymembers Michael Cusick and Louis Tobacco held a press conference in early February suggesting that the organization lower costs by moving its headquarters to Staten Island. According to the Staten Island Advance, financial filings show that in 2008 the organization paid $2 million for occupancy costs, much of it in rent.

"We have made drastic reductions, reduced staff by 40 percent, reduced office space by 60 percent, driving down operating costs dramatically," said William Kelly, spokesman for the Greater New York Councils. "We are looking at all of the assets to figure out the best way to remain relevant to scouts in New York City." He noted that the organization operates three camping facilities, including one upstate and one in Alpine, N.J., across the George Washington Bridge from the city, with Pouch being the smallest.

Elsewhere in the country, Boy Scout councils have been criticized for logging or selling off forested camps to developers in disregard for the environment, according to a scathing investigative report last year by Hearst newspapers. The Boy Scouts of America, which is celebrating its 100th anniversary this month, responded with a public letter saying, in part, "local executive boards have the duty to use all council assets in the best interests of scouting -- which might include the sale of properties," to support its mission of preparing young people "to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes."

Looking for a Savior

In terms of Pouch Camp, Kelly said that the Greater New York Councils has brought in the international commercial real estate firm Jones Lang LaSalle to figure out "the best way to use that property in the best interest of New York City kids."

"We want to have a conservation easement that preserves the ownership to the Greater New York Councils, with the primary purpose being scouting programs," he said. "If an easement isn't going to be worked out, other options include a full or partial sale."

Discussions of public ownership of Pouch Camp go back as far as 1985, as documents posted on the Save William H. Pouch Scout Camp website show.

Most recently, the Greater New York Councils had been in discussions with The Trust for Public Land, the national land conservation organization that helps negotiate land preservation deals with the ultimate goal of transferring the property to public ownership. In New York City, the organization has helped protect nearly 620 acres of open space, including Staten Island's Mt. Loretto in 2000.

Leslie Wright, director of the New York State program at The Trust for Public Land, said the group would "like to do everything we can that's reasonable to preserve" Pouch Camp. "It’s a beautiful piece of property. It has a huge natural resource value, both in terms of itself and how it links up with other protected properties," Wright said.

The Staten Island Advance reported on two proposals to save the camp -- a complicated land swap involving the adjacent Richmond County Country Club or using mitigation funding from the proposed expansion of the New York Container Terminal into Arlington Marsh on the North Shore -- but both face a number of objections.

Borough President Molinaro said, "We are researching every possibility of saving it in every possible way you can think of." He continued, "Every elected official on Staten Island, regardless of political philosophy or affiliation, is working together and knows it is a necessity to save Pouch Camp, and I am confident that we will save it."

In the meantime, environmental groups are lobbying to keep state funding for the environment, parks and land conservation. They argue that investing in the environment pays dividends in clean water and air, quality of life, public health and economic benefits and jobs in tourism, recreation, and natural resource management.

"Americans, and New Yorkers, understand that economic growth and conservation are mutually reinforcing goals," said Paul Hartman, director of government relations for The Nature Conservancy in New York, in testimony before a joint legislative hearing on Gov. David Paterson’s proposed budget. He cited recent polling by The Nature Conservancy showing that voters strongly support public investment in protecting natural areas, support that has held steady despite the economic downturn.

Advocates for conservation funding point out that the recession offers a rare opportunity to acquire lands important for watershed protection, wildlife and recreation. "Halting land purchases that protect public health and drinking water when prices are at their lowest and there are willing sellers is, at best, unwise," wrote Assemblymember Steve Englebright of Long Island, chair of the Assembly Committee on Tourism, Parks, Arts and Sports Development, in a letter published in the Albany Times Union.

"Parks even in New York City have always been the low man on the totem pole, I guess because people perceive them as discretionary," said Vorwick. “But to a lot of people they aren’t discretionary -- they are the only outlet you have for recreation. To spend millions of dollars fighting childhood obesity and then cut your parks budget makes no sense."

Staten Islanders have fought long and hard to preserve the swath of green in the middle of the island. In the current economic crisis, can the city or state can find a way to save the last, most crucial piece?

"If you lose it, you’re not getting this back, especially in New York City," Molinaro warned. "It’s irreplaceable."

Anne Schwartz, in charge of the parks topic page since its inception in 1999, is a journalist who specializes in environmental issues.

Pioneering E-Waste Bill Remains Stuck in Legal Limbo


photo flckr

In 2008, New York City enacted a pioneering electronics waste law, becoming the first city in the nation to do so. But the law never went into effect and now the city government and manufacturers are locked in a contentious legal battle over whether producers should take a lion's share of responsibility for collecting discarded electronics.

Before the law could go into effect last July, the Consumer Electronics Association and the Information Technology Industry Council and ITAC Systems, Inc. filed a lawsuit to block it. The New York City Law Department and the National Resources Defense Counci are defending the law.

Oral arguments have been postponed three times since the fall as the two sides try to negotiate a settlement. The case is being heard by Judge William H. Pauley of Federal Court for the Southern District of New York.

"The stakes are high on this," said Barbara Kyle, national coordinator for the Electronics Take Back Coalition. "If the plaintiffs prevail on this, it can call into question legislation on a whole range of products where states are holding manufacturers responsible." For the city -- where only 10 percent of discarded electronics are recycled -- a plaintiffs' victory would add to the growing list of environmental reforms that failed, stalled, or were drastically revised. Manufacturers fear that, if they lose, they will have to comply with a law that they say imposes unreasonable burdens and enormous costs.

Picking Up the Pieces

The proposed law requires manufacturers to plan for and pay the full cost of collecting discarded electronics. Manufacturers must submit an e-waste plan detailing "convenient" methods by which consumers can return items. Manufacturers can be penalized $1,000 for each day the plan is past due, while city residents can be fined $100 for each improperly disposed item. The law covers computers, televisions, computer printers, and i-Pods, but not cell phones or household appliances.

The most controversial provision of the city's plan requires that manufacturers collect items over 15 pounds directly from consumers' residences. Items under 15 pounds can be mailed or dropped off at a collection point. The direct collection requirement -- which no state has -- was not part of the City Council legislation but a regulation from the Department of Sanitation, which governs how the law is administered.

Other highly contested elements of the law include an orphan waste rule, which requires manufacturers to take back certain electronics made by producers that no longer exist, and a performance standard, which sets minimums on how much must be collected.

The plaintiffs point out that Mayor Michael Bloomberg vetoed the performance standards component of the e-waste plan, which City Council passed in a separate bill in 2008. But the mayor did sign the bill containing all other aspect of the e-waste recycling plan, and the council later overrode the mayor's veto of the performance standard.

A Mountain of E-Waste

This law was prompted by an exponential growth in electronic waste and a growing awareness of its dangers.

Junked electronics are the fastest growing kind of waste in the U.S. Americans, who own over 2 billion pieces of high-tech electronics, discard over 3 million tons of them each year according to a 2007 report by the Environmental Protection Agency. Public Advocate Bill De Blasio, a longstanding proponent of the bill during his tenure in City Council, has written that the city spends over $6.4 million a year to export the nearly 30,000 tons of e-waste that travel through its waste stream.

Electronics contain lead, cadmium, mercury, all of which are dangerous when released into the environment, according to the city's brief. Such toxins can leach into groundwater from improperly contained landfills or be released into the air when crushed by compactors or burned in incinerators.

Plaintiffs say the law is unconstitutional, alleging, among other claims, that it would impede interstate commerce and violate the equal protection clause and due process.

But their essential problem with the law is cost. They claim that the city has "devised a program this is in order of magnitude more costly than any other E-waste program in the world."

"The city’s program costs six to eight times more than any other state program, and these excessive costs will be passed back to consumers in the form of higher prices," said Parker Brugge, vice president of environmental affairs for the Consumer Electronics Association. Brugge said that the association estimates the proposed law would cost manufacturers about $200 million annually.

Paying for Pick-up

Direct collection alone, according to the Consumer Electronics Association and other plaintiffs, "will cost manufacturers approximately $121, and potentially more, per pick-up from a city residence." James Slaughter, attorney for the plaintiffs, said direct collection is particularly expensive because whenever a customer calls to dispose an electronic item, "we have to come get it."

But the city and the Natural Resources Defense Council dispute the plaintiffs' cost estimates. Kate Sinding, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that the plaintiffs' estimates are based on the most inconvenient ways of complying with the law. She said that in reality, "competition and the drive for efficiency would lead manufacturers to find the least costly option for compliance."

In support of this position, Jay Shepherd, a policy advisor from Washington State Department of Ecology, filed written testimony indicating that companies in his state have pooled resources and worked together to come up with cost effective ways of complying the state's e-waste laws.

The city and NRDC also indicate that direct collection is not the expensive, come and get it kind of rule the plaintiffs make it to be. And on the law's face, this is true. The regulation states that for items over 15 pounds, "convenient collection from a resident shall mean direct collection from a resident's home." Slaughter said this implies an on-demand pickup, but Sinding said the regulation is flexible, allowing companies to come out to collect every few weeks or so. The plaintiffs "interpret the direct collection requirement as being an on demand pickup requirement, but there is absolutely nothing in the regulations, or the law, that would compel anything like that," Sinding said.

The city also indicates that direct collection is "narrowly tailored" to New York City, where many residents do not own cars. Without cars, people would have to lug heavy items on mass transit.

Jennifer Carela, a Chelsea resident who hauls her out-of-use electronics on the subway to city-run collection programs, likes the proposed law for its convenience to city residents. "I've used the electronic drop off sites but it's always a production to plan your schedule around them, and I don't think most people care enough to lug their keyboards, CPUs, and TVs downtown to have them disposed of properly," she said.

Sharing the Burden?

The manufacturers also complain that the law shifts all responsibility to them, and that is what makes it particularly unfair. In California, consumers pay a fee at the time of sale. "There needs to be a shared responsibility among various stakeholders," Brugge said.

However, the city argues in its brief that one rationale for increasing manufacturer responsibility is that "requiring manufacturers to internalize the costs of recycling covered electronic equipment gives those manufacturers an incentive to reduce or remove toxic materials from products at the time that the products are first manufactured." Eighteen of the nineteen states with e-waste laws have enacted legislation that shifts burdens toward the producer, and such laws have come to be known as producer responsibility laws.

Elizabeth Grossman, whose 2006 book High Tech Trash chronicled how severely production and disposal of electronics affect the environment, said, "If you require a company to take physical and fiscal responsibility of their obsolete products, they've got a whole lot more incentive to make them easier to recycle and last longer."

Nili Belkin, a Park Slope resident, would like to see that happen. She recently got rid of her computer printer merely because the small roller that feeds through paper would have cost her nearly as much as a new printer. She hopes the law will encourage longer lasting, less disposable products.

City, State or Federal?

For now, only 19 states regulate e-waste. The number is likely to grow, according to experts.

The industry has said this matter should not be left to cities and states.

"We believe that electronics recycling is a national issue that requires a federal solution" said Brugge. "It is not feasible for manufacturers to comply with a unique recycling scheme for every municipality in the country."

Kyle noted, though, that what she considers a sound, comprehensive, proposal at the federal level never got off the ground, leaving states to take things in their own hands.

"This is really a fight about state's rights and city's rights," said Kyle.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years