|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
Excerpts from the Book Following the introductory section of the book (Chapters One and Two), Part One provides the background readers need to comprehend the specific political arena in which the dynamics of larger theoretical import occur. Chapter Three thus introduces the specific local Ashbury context of recent decades in order to clarify its own political regime transitions, land-use planning practice, and the presence of alternative community voices. The chapter also presents the main forces behind the Wal-Mart project as well as their commercial development predecessors at the same site. It addresses the overall origin, purpose and statutory framework of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), its relationship to the similar federal NEPA and other states' "little NEPAs," and general trends in its impact on land-use planning within New York state. Part Two concerns agenda-making, the first stage of environmental impact assessment and the first stage in any public policy review. Chapter Four establishes the implicit and explicit political nature of this process, including basic ideological contestations, as the developer, town planning officials, the latter's consultants and the mobilized public all articulate and pressure for initial definitions of a proper environmental impact review and the role of the public within it. Chapter Five describes the specific agenda-setting arena of the scoping process, the first formal stage for assessment definitions once the decision is made for an environmental impact statement (EIS). Within this stage, the political stance of each actor becomes more explicit. Chapter Six examines the appropriation of scientific and technical discourse by the developer in advancing the merits of its project in a draft EIS. Chapter Seven explains how confrontation on the specific land-use policy at hand escalates to the point where the community movement must challenge the very legitimacy, by democratic and ethical criteria, of the existing local regime. Chapter Eight demonstrates how the voice of the grassroots public comes to be clearly articulated through both expert and lay discourse within the officially-legitimized context of the EIS public hearing. Part Three explains the equally politicized stage in which specific environmental and economic impacts of the megamall proposal were researched and analyzed, following the official conclusion of the agenda-setting stage. Chapter Nine discusses the procedural standards followed by the planning board and continually contested by the activist public in order to establish a level playing field for fair consideration of substantive evidence presented. Chapter Ten describes critical substantive issues themselves in the realms of stormwater, water quality, traffic and economic impact, as well as the basis for alternative analytical methodologies and interpretations of actual impact significance. Chapter Eleven presents external non-impact review challenges to the project through tax-abatement policy, litigation, street demonstrations and the electoral arena, all employed by community activists to enhance their influence in the face of the flawed "participatory democratic" and biased EIS review. Part Four sets forth the final stage of environmental impact review, in which the planning board came to determine the fate of the Wal-Mart megamall. Chapter Twelve describes how the planning board arrived at a summary of its own research of substantive impact issues in a "comments-responses" document. Chapter Thirteen articulates the politicized struggle within the planning board as demonstrated in alternative impact "findings" statements, as well as new efforts by activists to influence the process even at this late stage. Chapter Fourteen presents the final phase of procedural maneuvers and dramatic decisions to conclude the environmental impact review process, alongside the larger context of an electoral challenge to the existing local governing regime. Part Five provides a more extensive theoretical framework within which to analyze the deeper political dynamics and significance of the case-study experience as well as their ultimate implications for American politics more generally. Chapter Fifteen follows major actors of the local struggle during ensuing months and years in order to help evaluate the deeper local impact of the overall environmental impact review process and ultimate decision. Chapter Sixteen identifies essential traits of progressive urban regimes and moderate participatory democracy and the implications of both for local participatory political culture. Chapter Seventeen employs this analytical framework to develop a deeper understanding of the dynamics and more basic political meanings of the case-study and larger SEQRA experience. On the basis of the two previous chapters, Chapter Eighteen critiques the limitations of the theoretical models of progressive urban regimes and moderate participatory democracy and suggests broader implications for the future of American politics. From Chapter 6: At least 50 observers attended the planning board meeting of December 5th. Alerted especially through ACT's public meeting of December 1st, community people (including many from Ashbury businesses) recognized that Marvell's preliminary economic impact report would potentially be decisive in affecting the megamall outcome and the well-being of Ashbury generally. By the time Marvell presented his first few statements, the tone and ultimate conclusion of the report became clear. Marvell saw the mall in positive economic terms as an advantage to the town and compatible with existing businesses. The report anticipated a modest growth of the local economy, saw the project construction phase and new jobs as welcome additional stimuli, stated that there was ample consumer demand presently unfulfilled by local retailers and promised that the project would have minimal impact on local retailers. In any case, "the heightened competition among the [local] retailers will make the consumers of Ashbury the clear winner from the project." He further assured the board and audience that Wal-Marts in places like Huntington, Long Island, Detroit and Atlanta had not hurt local business... The audience was stunned and outraged and broke into laughter at this
one-sided presentation which sounded more pro-Moselle Plaza than the report
by Magellan Construction itself. While Marvell's brief discussion was
vulnerable to critics in its gaps of research topics as well as for what it
asserted, it was especially discouraging to activists that the
"independent" perspective so strongly fought for had ultimately accepted so
fully the framework Magellan had presented months before. While analytical
sections within the brief report were of questionable scientific validity,
the overall aura of "objectivity" was especially alarming. Many activists
left the meeting assuming that Marvell and Renwick Brothers had simply
assessed their future prospects and decided that, as Reynolds had
emphasized, since Magellan was "the largest developer outside of New York
City" within the state, it was no trifle to risk angering. As demonstrated in our account, the discourses of law, science and
economics were equally intimidating to lay members of the planning board
itself. This fact could be used as a rationalization for "common-sense"
interpretations all the way around, thereby reverting simply to the balance
of power of land-use ideologies on the board and exposing the underlying
reality of the decision-making process as an arena of political conflict.
To the extent that, simultaneously, the illusion of bureaucratic neutrality
was maintained through the use of "objective" discourses of legal
liberalism, science and commerce, the oppositional lay public experienced a
truly Kafkaesque nightmare of apparently constantly shifting targets of
authority and accountability. |