Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Filtration Avoidance Determination renewal and land acquisition efforts
1:34:57
ยท
8 min
Council Member Restler inquires about the progress of land acquisition in the Kensico Basin for the Filtration Avoidance Determination (FAD) renewal. Commissioner Aggarwala and Deputy Commissioner Rush provide updates on ongoing efforts and challenges.
- DEP is still in contract for a significant property of about 30-50 acres in the Kensico Basin
- Land in the Kensico area is very expensive, making acquisitions challenging
- DEP is focusing on scientifically important land as they prepare for FAD renewal in 2027
- Estimated cost of losing FAD could be significantly more than $6 billion (based on a 2009 estimate)
- DEP is working on a new, fit-for-purpose FAD to address evolving threats to water quality
Lincoln Restler
1:34:57
Okay.
1:34:58
Fair.
1:34:59
I'd like to do a couple questions on the FAD, on the filtration avoidance determination.
1:35:09
Back in October when you testified, we came we understood that there were approximately a thousand acres of eligible vacant land in the Kensico Basin, I'm saying that right, and 375 acres had been purchased and another 60 acres were under contract.
1:35:29
Could you give us an update on those 60 acres and additional plans to obtain more land so that we can ensure the area is appropriately protected?
Rohit Aggarwala
1:35:41
Actually, maybe Paul, can you tell remind me where the Knights property stands?
1:35:46
Come on up come up up, please.
1:35:48
So I'll I'll ask deputy commissioner Rush to give us a status update.
1:35:54
There there's one particular parcel.
1:35:57
I think it's 12 acres.
1:35:59
Is that
UNKNOWN
1:36:00
Hi.
1:36:00
Sorry.
1:36:01
I'm gonna need to swear you in first.
UNKNOWN
1:36:03
Raise your right Do
UNKNOWN
1:36:05
you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before this committee and to respond honestly to council member questions?
Paul Rush
1:36:11
I do.
UNKNOWN
1:36:11
Thank you.
1:36:12
You may begin when you're ready.
Paul Rush
1:36:15
My name is Paul Rush.
1:36:16
I'm deputy commissioner for the Bureau of Water Supply.
1:36:19
So the question is regarding land purchases in the Kensco Basin.
1:36:25
There's a small basin compared to our larger unfiltered supply in the Catskills.
1:36:30
There's one significant property we've been working on for years that we're currently still in contract that we have not yet closed on.
1:36:38
The acreage of that property, I believe the portion we're after right now is somewhat less.
1:36:44
It's about 50 to 30 acres.
1:36:47
I believe the I don't know if you have the numbers right in front of us.
1:36:49
It's right in that in that range.
1:36:50
It's a large property that we're still in contract.
Lincoln Restler
1:36:54
So still in contract on that?
Paul Rush
1:36:57
We haven't closed on the property yet.
Lincoln Restler
1:36:59
Right.
1:37:00
And are we did I did I is my question was my framing accurate that of there was approximately a thousand acres of eligible vacant land that you were considering or exploring purchasing, 375 have been secured.
1:37:15
This is the next chunk that you're looking at.
1:37:17
Is there a plan to try and secure the full thousand acres?
Rohit Aggarwala
1:37:21
Look, I could, I think securing the full thousand acres may or may not be possible.
1:37:26
As I mentioned, one of the so first of all, the land in the Kensco area, of course, that is Central Westchester, that is very high value property.
1:37:39
It is not one order of magnitude more expensive than land in Delaware County.
1:37:44
It's two orders of magnitude more expensive.
1:37:47
And that's one of the reasons that that we made the decision, for example, to suspend the purchases of the really remote land that's far from our reservoirs in the West Of Hudson, basins in order to really focus on some land in the West Of Hudson that's directly adjacent to our reservoirs but also to the Kensico.
1:38:07
I think one of the realities that we face in Kensico is is that that land is sticky, right, just because it's fewer acres, it's higher value.
1:38:16
Some people aren't going to want to give it up.
1:38:18
Some people own it with the hopes of developing on it.
1:38:22
And so that's why as as Paul was just saying, we have our eye and have conversations going on.
1:38:28
Sometimes these acquisitions take years and years.
1:38:30
But I think what what I will say is we are increasingly focused based on the science on the land that is most important to us and particularly as we move towards a proposed renewal of the fad.
1:38:49
The kind of thinking that you're prompting is going to be something the kind of thing that we are are doing more of.
Lincoln Restler
1:38:55
And is do are you feeling do you believe that we need to execute to close on this purchase in particular and other purchases to improve our chances of renewal of the fad?
Rohit Aggarwala
1:39:07
Well, look, I think what we are doing and and what under Paul's leadership we've actually been working on for more than a year now is really beginning our thinking on what a new fit for purpose fad will look like.
1:39:22
And so that's something that over the next year or so we intend to get our own thoughts together.
1:39:28
We've begun conversations with advocates.
1:39:30
We've started a conversation with the state DEC actually more than a year ago now about what a new fad might look like.
1:39:39
And as I testified last year, it's it's in response to the fact that the threats to water quality are no longer the same as they were in the nineteen nineties.
1:39:50
And so if we just do the same thing that we've been doing for thirty years, we're gonna fly this plane into a mountain.
1:39:56
Right?
1:39:57
But what I want to do is make sure we don't come up with knee jerk reactions, but really focus very much on the science of where the threats are in our entire system, what the potential interventions might be, and approach that right now with kind of a scientifically appropriate open mind.
Lincoln Restler
1:40:16
And the estimates that we've seen are that, you know, should the fad not be renewed, we'd be looking at an estimate of potentially $6,000,000,000 in costs.
1:40:24
Is that the right back of the envelope math?
Rohit Aggarwala
1:40:28
Well, $6,000,000,000 is an estimate from, I think, 02/2009.
Lincoln Restler
1:40:32
Oh, okay.
Rohit Aggarwala
1:40:33
So it is likely significantly more than that, but the only number we have right now is 6,000,000,000.
Lincoln Restler
1:40:40
And as we look toward 2027 and the renewal, are there ways in which the council can be supportive or helpful to DEP to ensure that you have the support and resources you need to increase the likelihood of FAD renewal?
1:40:56
I
Rohit Aggarwala
1:40:57
I think in terms of resources right now, we Paul's Paul's recruited a new assistant commissioner to lead that effort, and I think her team is is reasonably well staffed.
Paul Rush
1:41:11
Yeah.
1:41:11
I think we are reasonably well staffed to be able to take on the challenges for the FAD in the future.
1:41:17
We're doing the planning to understand, you the threats of change as the commissioner testified to.
1:41:22
They're different than they were back in the nineties when we first received a filtration avoidance waiver from EPA.
1:41:29
And with that changing regulatory landscape and the changing climate, there are different items that that are concerned than they were back then.
1:41:37
And I think we're in a good position.
1:41:38
We need to still go back, study, and understand what we need to do in terms of focusing you know, land acquisition was in the nineties, but really stewarding our land, doing a better job and a good job in understanding the best ways to really take care of that land to provide a high quality water for the people of the City Of New York for a long term.
Rohit Aggarwala
1:41:58
And if and if I could council member, you know, and I I'm grateful for your question about what the council can do.
1:42:04
You know, I think in the council's oversight role, I think the questions to be asking about the next fad are, is the fad designed to protect water quality and will it be successful over the long term?
1:42:19
Now the reality is some of the residents of the Watershed look at the fad as, and in some cases, a negative economic impact.
1:42:27
Right?
1:42:28
Oh, these land purchases and constraints on what we do with our property, that's hurting our economy.
1:42:34
I don't think that's accurate because we are the largest employer, we're the largest taxpayer in all the Western Hudson Counties, etcetera.
1:42:41
But there are some people in the in the Watershed who view the fad through an economic development lens.
1:42:47
I'd argue there are some advocates who view the fad primarily as a way to expand the state park system or have more recreational benefits.
1:42:55
And we are super excited about making our property available for recreation, but recreation is not the purpose of New Yorkers water bills.
1:43:05
Right?
1:43:05
And and so what we are trying to do is really focus on the science and come up with our own thinking and we will be open about this, we will we will be collaborative about this.
1:43:14
But I think the questions I'd ask the council to be asking are, is it fit for the primary purpose of protecting water quality?
Lincoln Restler
1:43:21
That's helpful.