Background and Context on the Roof Depot Controversy

>> Eric: IT'S A COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL STORY THAT GOES BACK ANY YEARS IN THE EAST PHILLIPS NEIGHBORHOOD OF MINNEAPOLIS.

THE STORY CENTEREDS AROUND THE LONG VACANT ROOF DEPOT PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN A SOURCE OF DEADLY INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION.

NOW, THE CITY WANTS TO REDEVELOP THE SITE FOR A PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY.

THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ADVOCATED FOR AN URBAN FARM PROJECT ON THE SITE.

THE FIGHT HAS LANDED IN COURT AND LAST MONTH THERE WAS A HEATED CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHERE COMMUNITY ADVOCATES TRIED AND FAILED TO RESCIND THE CITY'S DECISION TO GO AHEAD WITH PLANS FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT.

>> THERE HAS BEEN TENSION AROUND THIS PROJECT FOR YEARS AND IT'S CLEARLY STATED THAT MY COMMUNITY IS IN FEAR AND IS RIGHTFULLY FRUSTRATED.

I AM USING THE LAST TWO LEGISLATIVE TOOLS AT MY DISPOSAL TO PROTECT MY COMMUNITY.

THE COMMUNITY I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN AS A CHILD OF EAST FILL AILIPS TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM LITTLE EARTH.

>> I STAND WITH YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CHAVEZ AND I STAND WITH YOU IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND IT'S OKAY.

YOU CAN LEARN.

YOU CAN LEARN.

YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR VOTE.

IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

>> THERE ARE SIX AYES AND SIX NAYS.

>> THAT ITEM FAILS.

>> THIS WAS IN YOUR BACKYARD, WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS, ANDREA?

>> YES, MA'AM.

YES, MA'AM, I WOULD.

I WOULD IMPROVE MY COMMUNITY.

>> THIS IS IN YOUR BACKYARD!

[ SHOUTING ] [ Banging Gavel ] >> PLEASE.

[ CROWD CHANTING ] >> COLLEAGUES, WE WILL RECESS UNTIL E CLEAR THIS MEETING SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE OUR MEETING.

>> Eric: NOW, AFTER THE MEETING THREE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FILING POLICE COMPLAINTS SAYING THEY WERE HARASSED BY PROTESTERS.

ANDREW HAZZARD HAS BEEN COVERING THIS FOR AHAN JOURNAL AND WE'VE ASKED HIM TO HELP US COVER THIS COMPLEX STORY.

>> SO THE EAST PHILLIPS NEIGHBORHOOD IN SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS IS HISTORICALLY AN INDUSTRIAL PART OF THE CITY THAT DEVELOPED IN THE EARLY YEARS OF MINNEAPOLIS.

AND SINCE THEN IT BECAME AN AREA THAT IS POLLUTED, THAT HAD INDUSTRIAL SOURCES, HIGHWAYS CUTTING THROUGH IT.

94 CUTS ACROSS THIS AREA, 55/HIAWATHA CUTS ACROSS THIS AREA.

AND NOT COINCIDENTALLY IT BECAME AN AREA INHABITED BY RECENT IMMIGRANTS, IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES, THE LITTLE EARTH TRIBE HOUSING COMMUNITY IS THERE.

IT'S A WORKING CLASS AREA AND AREA WITH HEAVY POLLUTION.

THERE WAS A SUPERFUND SITE THERE.

THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF TONS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL HAS BEEN BROUGHT OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IN 2008 THE STATE PASSED LAW SAYING THIS IS A POLLUTED NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S A PROTECTED NEIGHBORHOOD.

MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL PUT IN THE SOUTH SIDE GREEN ZONE WHICH MEANS WE KNOW WHAT THE HISTORY IS HERE AND WE WANT TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY A CHANCE TO IMPROVE ITSELF.

>> Cathy: AND OF COURSE WE SHOULD SAY THE POLLUTION IS ARSENIC AND THAT HAS CAUSED SERIOUS PROBLEMS FOR MANY MANY YEARS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

THEY CALL THE ARSENIC TRIANGLE.

THE ROOF DEPOT IS RIGHT NEXT TO AN OLD FACTORY THAT PRODUCED IT.

AND THEREFORE PEOPLE IN THIS AREA HAVE HIGHER LEVELS OF HYPERTENSION, HIGHER LEVELS OF ASTHMA AND TONS OF HEALTH RELATED ISSUES THAT THE STATE HAS DOCUMENTED.

THESE ARE REAL FACTS THAT THE STATE HAS DOCUMENTS THAT EOPLE IN THIS AREA FACE MORE HEALTH ISSUES.

>> Eric: ADVOCATES WANTED AN URBAN FARM?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> Eric: TELL BUS THAT PROJECT.

>> WHAT THIS GROUP, THE EAST PHILLIPS NEIGHBORHOOD INSTITUTE IS A NON-PROFIT THAT EMERGED.

THIS HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE BEFORE THE NON-PROFIT.

BASICALLY THE IDEA IS WE HAVE THIS OLD SEERS WAREHOUSE HERE, 260,000 SQUARE FEET, THEY WANT TO TAKE THAT FACILITY, RENOVATE IT AND PUT IN AN INDOOR URBAN FARM AND THAT HAS HYDROPONIC FARM.

THEY COULD FARM WALLEYE THERE, PLANTS THERE, THEY WANT TO PUT A BIG COMMUNITY SOLAR GARDEN ON THE ROOF, THEY COULD PUT HOUSING THERE.

THIS HAS REAL ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, IN FACT THEY HAVE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS PAID FOR BY THE STATE IN 2016.

SO THIS IS, THEY HAVE AN ACTUAL PLAN.

>> WHY CAN'T THE TWO SIDES GET TOGETHER?

>> BASICALLY -- THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

BASICALLY THE CITY HAS BEEN SEEKING THIS FACILITY FOR A LONG IME.

THERE ARE DOCUMENTS BACK TO THE '90S THAT SAY WE WANT TO EXPAND OUR PUBLIC WORKS SITE HERE.

THERE IS A BIG PUBLIC WORKS SITE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS.

IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN ON THE SABO BRIDGE OVERLOOKING THE GREENWAY YOU'VE SEEN THIS.

THEY HAVE ALWAYS WANTED TO CONSOLIDATE THE CITY SERVICES THERE, THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY VALUABLE SERVICES PROVIDED OUT OF THERE.

THERE'S A 1 WATERYARD ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN AND THEY WANT TO MOVE THAT OVER HERE AND THEY SAY IT'S BETTER TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN THE MODERN AREA.

>> Cathy: DO THEY WORRY ABOUT ONCE YOU START DIGGING UP BUILDINGS AND TEARING THEM DOWN THERE'S PROBABLY ASBESTOS IN THESE BUILDINGS AND I'M SURE THE GROUNDWATER IS POLLUTED.

THAT'S GOING TO COST A LOT TO MITIGATE THAT, RIGHT?

>> THAT IS TRUE.

THERE IS ASBESTOS IN THE BUILDING THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN REMEDIATED.

THERE'S ALSO A LARGE TOXIC ARSENIC PLUME IN THE GROUNDWATER UNDERNEATH THERE.

THEY SAY THEY HAVE A PLAN AND THEY DO HAVE A PLAN APPROVED BY ENGINEERING FIRMS TO DO THIS SAFELY.

AND THAT THEY BELIEVE HAT THEY CAN REMEDIATE THE GROUND SOIL IN THE AREA AS PART OF THIS DEMOLITION.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A BIG BOOM-STYLE DEMOLITION, IT'S GOING TO BE A SLOW BREAKDOWN OF THE BUILDING THAT IS HAULED OFF INTO TRUCKS THAT ARE GOING TO REMOVE SOIL.

THEY THEY CAN DO THIS SAFELY AND THEY MAY VERY WELL BE ABLE TO DO THAT SAFELY.

BUT UNDERSTANDABLY PEOPLE ARE HESITANT TO BELIEVE REGULARITIES AND CONTRACTORS THAT SAY THEY CAN DO PROJECTS SAFELY WHEN WE HAVE A HISTORY OF THAT NOT BEING THE CASE ESPECIALLY IN DIVERSE LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES.

>> Cathy: BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO EVEN IF THE URBAN FARM IS IN THAT AREA THEY'D STILL HAVE TO MITIGATE THIS POLLUTION, RIGHT?

THERE WOULD STILL BE A DANGER.

>> SO, YES, IN THEORY THAT'S TRUE.

BUT RIGHT NOW THE BUILDING ITSELF IS ESSENTIALLY CAPPING WHAT IS UNDERNEATH THE GROUND SO THAT INCLUDES THAT GROUND AWATER PLUME WHICH IS NOT, YOU KNOW, GOING ANYWHERE.

IT JUST EXISTS AND HAT INCLUDED ARSENIC LADEN SOIL IN THE AREA.

IT IS ALL CURRENTLY CAPPED UNDERNEATH THIS BUILDING AND SO THE CONCERN IS IF THEY REMOVE THE BUILDING THAT THEY WILL OBVIOUSLY ALSO NEED TO REMOVE SOME OF THE SOIL AND, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON HOW SAFELY THAT WILL BE DONE.

THE CITY, TO BE FAIR, DOES HAVE A PLAN TO DO THAT.

>> Eric: AND NEXT STEPS, WHERE ARE WE IN THE PROCESS, WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

>> WELL, AS WE'VE SEEN THIS IS A VERY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE.

THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT IS NOW IN THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF A LOT OF PEOPLE IN AND AROUND THE CITY IN DIFFERENT POLITICAL MOVEMENTS, IN DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONAL MOVEMENTS.

RIGHT NOW THIS IS TIED UP IN COURT, RIGHT?

SO THE CITY THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO BE DEMOLISHING THIS BUILDING TWO WEEKS AGO.

THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN BECAUSE A JUDGE ISSUED A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION TO ALLOW THE COURT OF APPEALS TO RULE ON WHETHER OR NOT DEMOLISHING THIS BUILDING WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE HARM TO THE COMMUNITY.

THERE IS A SEPARATE LAWSUIT THAT THE EAST PHILLIPS NEIGHBORHOOD INSTITUTE HAS THEY ARE PETITIONING TO THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THEY LOST IN THE COURT OF APPEALS EARLIER.

BUT THEY ARE SEEKING HIGHER ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS THAN THAT THE STATE IS CURRENTLY GIVING BASED ON THIS 2008 LAW.

THEY SAY THAT THE STATE NEEDS TO DO MORE, THAT THE STATE NEEDS TO DEMONSTRATE THIS WILL BE SAFE AND THEY WANT TO SEE THE SUPREME COURT COME UP AND ESTABLISH STRONGER PROTECTIONS FOR THESE KINDS OF COMMUNITIES.

>> Eric: REALLY HELPS US UNDERSTAND THIS, ANDREW.