All Things Political: Climate change — proactive vs. reactive problem solving in government

Adam Haber
Adam Haber, a member of the Roslyn School Board

Last Saturday’s front-page headline in the NY Times read, “U.S. Climate Study Has Grim Warnings of Economic Risks.” The article, summarizing scientific reports from 13 federal agencies, lists numerous horrific events resulting from climate change. Some of these negative consequences include wildfires, crop failures, coastline flooding and a 10 percent reduction in the Gross National Product by the year 2100.

Our President, in response to the recent frigid November temperatures in the Northeast, tweeted, “Whatever happened to global warming?” Trump’s tweet is something you’d expect out of a “Saturday Night Live” skit. Sadly, he wasn’t joking.

Of the last 18 years, 17 are the warmest recorded global temperatures since 1880, when record keeping of temperatures began. The data does not lie, but rather highlights climate change is happening right now.

Here’s another sad truth: if our federal government continues to deny the devastating effects of climate change predicted in the Federal Report, the window of opportunity to create proactive policies to mitigate climate change will surely close. With a President who thinks Global Warming is a hoax, it is up to individual states to come up with policies that can be emulated and adopted across the nation.

Unfortunately, it’s typical for government operations to be reactive instead of proactive. As an example, when Suffolk County was rapidly developed from the 1950s to the 1980s, sewers were costly to install, so septic systems were usually used instead.

Now it will cost substantially more to clean up the ground water and install sewage infrastructure, because there is water pollution from nitrates and sewage caused by the abundance of septic systems. This is a classic example of pay now or pay more later, reactive versus proactive government.

The LIRR and MTA have been falling into disrepair for decades. Instead of proactively updating subway technology, such as switches and relays from the 1930s (that’s not a typo), or the LIRR’s aging track switches, each successive New York City mayor and governor kicked the can down the road. The cost to fix subway and train infrastructure will be several times what proactive regular upgrades and maintenance would have cost.

With over a decade of involvement in the public sector, I have learned, politically, if you do nothing, it’s hard to be blamed for failure. However, if you are the first to try something new and fail, you are roundly criticized.

Political rewards for proactive policy don’t outweigh the risks. Unfortunately, this mindset will cost us dearly unless local and state governments work together to fight the naysayers and aggressively create policy to mitigate global warming.

In my capacity as deputy chief of staff of economic development and government efficiency for the Town of Hempstead, I have spent the last six months speaking and meeting with New York state Assembly persons and senators, town supervisors and their staff, village mayors and trustees, and members of BOCES throughout Long Island.

The purpose of these conversations is to foster support for a Long Island wide public school solar grant program. There is widespread support for a $10 million New York state grant to encourage Long Island’s 125 public school districts to invest in solar energy.

This proposal provides a $200,000 grant for the first 50 school districts to install solar energy (competition breeds action and an incentive to act quickly). Passing this proposal is a great start to fighting climate change on Long Island, and will let the community know a Democratic majority in the New York state Senate won’t focus solely on NYC, which has been a concern.

Solar panels pay for themselves within 18 years through their savings in electricity. The cost to build out a solar system is bonded, and paid with those electricity savings, so there is no additional expense to taxpayers.

There is already state aid in place, for any school district who installs solar; therefore, going solar is a positive revenue source for cash strapped districts. The New York state 2018-2019 budget is $168 billion and has plenty of room for a mere $10 million Long Island Public School Solar Initiative to create a green, global warming fighting model that can easily be replicated nationwide.

Kudos to Long Beach public schools, who went all in for going solar, and will be receiving over $100,000 per year in state aid for 15 years. The first $200,000 grant check should go to Long Beach to reward them for being a proactive trailblazer.

Long Islanders don’t have the option to stick our heads in the sand, and hope climate change isn’t real. Our local politicians need to be proactive and immediately try to fight global warming before it’s too late. Our children are depending on them.

Share this Article