By Fred Lebrun

When the term “crumbling infrastructure” comes up in connection with cities in old Rust Belt states like New York, don’t think of roads, think of sewers. Not a delicate thought perhaps, but on point.

Many of the sewer systems in our state were constructed back when little regard was given to keeping pollution out of rivers. Combined sewer and storm water systems that can overflow and put pure sewage into our rivers are common in our region to this day, and appalling. They are totally out of keeping with our modern sense of good public health and environmentalism, not to mention out of compliance with the federal Clean Water Act. It’s got to change. The feds are onto us.

These combined sewer systems are also staggeringly expensive to fix, retrofit, modify or do whatever is required to bring them into compliance. One estimate by the state Department of Environmental Conservation puts the statewide bill at more than $50 billion to make them right.

By 2009 and by acting together for planning purposes, the cities of Albany, Cohoes, Rensselaer, Troy and Watervliet and the village of Green Island hope to have a clear idea of just what each contributes to fouling the Hudson River.

A $5.3 million study to be ready by September 2009 will quantify under all sorts of circumstances and situations what each community adds to the bacteria count of the last section of the Hudson where swimming is still not allowed by the state Health Department. It’s been known for years, of course, that the antiquated systems in these communities created problems. The details, however, were never explored.

The state is paying $3 million and the affected communities are paying the balance of the study’s cost. These communities are banking on the fact the federal Environmental Protection Agency will like the combined long-term remediation plan that comes out of this enough to keep compliance from becoming a legal issue.

Regardless, once there’s a plan, the fun only begins. Who will pay for the actual work that needs doing? No one has a clue.

Nor can anyone even wildly guess what the various corrective measures will cost just for the six “Albany Pool Communities,” as they call themselves.

There’s little money to be had these days from federal sources, which used to cover the bulk of water and sewer costs. It’s one more thing we can thank the Bush administration for. State resources are being pulled in a dozen directions at once, and unsexy sewers just aren’t a priority. Yet affected communities simply cannot foot the onerous bill by themselves, but that’s what looms.

A great fear exists that should it fall to the taxpayer mostly, many residents will vote with their feet and leave, rather than pay astronomical water and sewer bills. Irate residents abandoning those “crumbling infrastructures” will only make the situation worse. As Rocky Ferraro, head of the Capital District Regional Planning Commission, observes, it doesn’t matter if half the population of Albany takes to the hills, the work will still have to be done and somebody found to pay for it. Except that we will also have to contend with the consequences of sprawl created by those fleeing the cities, which, as Ferraro also points out, is even more expensive than the original problem.
It’s a vicious, expensive cycle we’re in over fixing sewers.

Jim Tierney, who heads the DEC’s division of water, says the federal government has pretty much abandoned the states on this issue. Back in the 1970s, the feds paid 75 percent of sewer and water infrastructure work, while the state paid 12.5 percent. That left communities with 12.5 percent, but often in-kind services were accepted from the local side rather than hard cash. In the 1990s, the feds went to a revolving low-interest loan program. But during the George W. Bush years, the revolving loan fund has shrunk next to nothing.

Tierney says we need a revitalized federal revolving loan program, plus an outright federal grants program for struggling cities, and what cities are struggling?

In terms of a stateside commitment, it seems to me another environmental bond act, this one focusing on sewer and water needs, is a necessity. Considering how long a bond act takes to formulate and promote, the Paterson administration should begin talking it up now for next year.

Because there is no way around the rock and hard place we’re in. We have to fix our sewer systems. The cost is prohibitive. Government has to step up here. A plan to clean up the Hudson is worthless if there’s no money to implement it.