% AND COME TO SOME COMPROMISE
% POSITION IF THEY CAN'T.
% >> Frederica: WITH THE
% UNPRECEDENTED PROJECTED BUDGET
% SURPLUS THE JOCKEYING IS
% UNDERWAY FOR HOW MUCH TO SPEND
% FUNDING CRITICAL NEEDS.
% AMONG THEM, CLEANING UP FOREVER
% CHEMICALS FOR PFAS CONTAMINATION
% ACROSS WISCONSIN.
% INCLUDING IN THE TINY TOWN OF
% STELLA NEAR RHINELANDER WHERE
% RESIDENTS ARE NOW SUPPLIED
% BOTTLED WATER BECAUSE TESTING IN
% WELLS FOUND SKY HIGH LEVELS OF
% THE DANGEROUS PFAS.
% THE WORSE CONTAMINATION IN
% WISCONSIN.
% SOME OF THE SURPLUS COULD BE
% USED FOR REMEDIATION.
% WE SPOIK WITH MARY FELZKOWSKI AT
% HER OFFICE.
% FIRST, THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS.
% >> YOU'RE WELCOME.
% >> SO YOU HAVE SAID THAT PFAS
% CONTAMINATION AND MITIGATION IS
% NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE.
% IT CERTAINLY SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN
% IN THE RECENT PAST BUT WHAT HAS
% CHANGED NOW?
% >> I WOULD DISAGREE IT'S BEEN A
% PARTISAN ISSUE.
% I THINK THERE'S BEEN MAYBE SOME
% DIFFERENT OPINIONS WHETHER 20 OR
% 70 PARTS PER TRILLION.
% AND I THINK THE REPUBLICANS
% STANCE IS LET'S NOT GET AHEAD OF
% TECHNOLOGY.
% YOU CAN SET A PFAS LEVEL LOW BUT
% IF WE DON'T HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY
% TO GET THERE, WHY WOULD YOU DO
% THAT.
% >> Frederica: DO YOU FEEL AS
% THOUGH WE HAVE MORE TIME WHEN
% WE'RE DEALING WITH THE FOREVER
% CHEMICALS.%>> WE DON'T HAVE A
NY TIME.
% >> Frederica: WHEN WE'RE TALKING
% ABOUT PEOPLE'S HOUSE WE HAVE TO
% BE REALSISTIC.
% TECHNOLOGY IS MOVING AT AN
% ACCELERATED RATE AND HAVE TO
% HAVE ATTAINABLE LEVELS.
% >> Frederica: DO YOU HAVE AN
% IDEA WHAT LEVEL YOU THINK IT
% SHOULD BE?
% >> WHEN YOU TALK TO EPA THEY
% WERE AT 70 PARTS PER TRILLION
% AND WISCONSIN WAS PUSHING FOR
% LEVELS AT 20 PARTS PER TRILLION.
% IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT EPA
% IS MOVING TOWARDS 20 PARTS PER
% TRILLION ALSO.
% >> Frederica: MEANWHILE IN THE
% TOWN OF STELLA, RESIDENTS WITH
% PRIVATE WELLS ARE SEEING THE
% HIGHEST WELLS OF THE FOREVER
% CHEMICALS ANYWHERE ACROSS THE
% STATE AND WHAT IS IT 50
% HOUSEHOLDS ARE NOW BEING GIVEN
% DRINKING WATER.
% WHAT YOUR MESSAGE TO THESE
% PEOPLE IN YOUR DISTRICT?
% >> I WENT TO THE MEETING IN
% STELLA WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING
% AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WAS
% THERE AND SOME WELLS ARE COMING
% IN AT 46 MILLION PARTS PER
% TRILLION.
% AND WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S
% COMING FROM BUT PFAS HAS A
% FINGERPRINT SO WHEN THEY START
% TESTING THE CHEMICALS IT WILL
% HAVE A DISTINCT FINGERPRINT, SO
% TO SPEAK AND I KNOW IT'S NOT A
% GOOD SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION BUT
% THEY'LL BE ABLE TO TRACE IT BACK
% TO ITS SOURCE.
% RIGHT NOW I THINK WHAT WE'RE
% DOING AS FAR AS MAKING SURE THEY
% HAVE CLEAN DRINKING WATER, I
% CAN'T IMAGINE BEING SOMEONE IN
% THE TOWN OF STELLA, IT'S NOT
% ONLY YOUR LIFE BUT NOW WE HAVE A
% DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES.
% EVERYTHING THERE HAS NO ANSWERS.
% >> Frederica: CAN TILL THE
% PEOPLE IN STELLA AND WHERE ELSE
% ACROSS THE STATE THAT THE
% CALVARY IS NOW COMING BECAUSE
% BUDGET RIDERS WILL BE ABLE TO
% WORK WITH MORE THAN $7 BILLION
% SURPLUS TO ADDRESS PFAS
% CONTAMINATION?%>> THE SURPLUS
WE'RE GOING PAUSE
% ON THAT.
% $4.5 BILLION IS ONE-TIME MONEY.
% IT'S NOT FOREVER MONEY OVER
% YEAR.%THE BUREAU ESTIMATES T
HE SURPLUS
% THAT WILL BE A CONTINUING
% SURPLUS IS ABOUT $2.9 MILLION.
% SO A LARGE SURPLUS IS ONE-TIME
% MONEY BUT IN MY WORLD THIS WOULD
% BE GREAT START FOR ONE-TIME
% MONEY.
% I SUPPORT THE GOVERNOR PUTTING
% $100 MILLION IN THERE AND WOULD
% LIKE TO LOOK AT THE PROGRAMS.
% WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT WELL
% COMPENSATION FUND AND THAT MIGHT
% NOT BE STRUCTURED PERFECTLY FOR
% THE PEOPLE DEALING WITH PFAS.
% WE NEED A LOT MORE KNOWLEDGE
% WHERE IT CAME FROM AND HOW TO
% CLEAN IT UP.
% >> Frederica: DO YOU BELIEVE THE
% REPUBLICAN MAJORITY AND BUDGET
% RIDERS WILL ALSO SAY THAT THEY
% LIKE THE $100 MILLION THE
% GOVERNOR IS TALKING ABOUT?
% >> WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE
% CONVERSATIONS YET SO I CAN'T SAY
% BUT I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES ARE
% CONCERNED WITH THIS AND THAT WE
% WILL ADDRESS IT.
% I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE ELSE
% AND THE LEVEL OF COMMITMENT ON
% THAT.
% >> Frederica: WHY SHOULDN'T
% BUSINESSES THAT CAUSED THIS
% CONTAMINATION HAVE TO SPAY FOR
% THE REMEDIATION?
% >> I DO BELIEVE ANY TYPE OF
% REMEDIATION WILL BE A PUBLIC
% PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BOUGHT WE
% HAVE A CHEMICAL DEVELOPED,
% STUDIED BY THE EPA AND GIVEN A
% STAMP OF APPROVAL BY THE
% GOVERNMENT THAT SAID THIS IS A
% GOOD CHEMICAL, GO AHEAD AND USE
% IT.%WE USE IT IN MEDICAL DEV
ICES.
% WE USE IT IN FOOD.
% WE USE IT IN WATER-PROOFING
% CLOTHING.
% WE USE IT IN FIRE FIGHTING FOAM.
% THE RHINELANDER AIRPORT IS BEING
% SUED BECAUSE FOR BEING A PFAS
% CONNECT
% CONNECTITAMINATOR AND ARE WITH
% TO BANKRUPT A COMPANY THAT WAS
% GIVEN A GOVERNMENT-APPROVED
% CHEMICAL AND TOLD IT WAS SAFE TO
% USE IF WE DO THAT, I THINK IT
% CAN BE PART OF THE SOLUTION BUT
% NOT THE FULL SOLUTION.
% TOUGH QUESTIONS.
% >> Frederica: WITH THAT TOUGH
% QUESTION WE NEED TO LEAVE IT,