>> In tonight's look ahead, there are still
a lot of unanswered questions about the Foxconn deal,
including what it means for the environment.
Sarah Geers is staff attorney
for Midwest Environmental Advocates.
Thanks for joining us today.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> The special session bill is eliminating a lot of the up front
environmental reporting like the agency environmental impact statements.
What do we learn from an impact statement?
>> They're critically important.
They're the main tool in the Wisconsin Environmental Policy
Act that the agencies use to insure that their decisions
fulfill the mandate that the state put environmental
protection at the forefront of government decisions.
They put all of the information about potential environmental
impacts in one place for agency decision makers who may be
siloed into narrow permitting programs themselves.
And also make that information digestible for the public.
>> Is it a big loss not to have one?
>> It certainly is.
We've seen erosions to the Wisconsin Environmental Policy
Act and environmental impact statements over the years,
but we've never seen this type of exemption.
>> What do we know about Foxconn's environmental
practices overseas?
Are they able, ready and willing
to follow Wisconsin and U.S. law?
>> They've certainly stated they are
willing to follow state laws.
But I'm not sure if they have experience
complying with the environmental laws in the United States.
In their plants in China, they have had extensive environmental
pollution issues, regarding pollution of China's rivers as
well as air pollution.
And we certainly have higher environmental standards than
they've been used to in China.
>> Even though Foxconn is getting this expedited
permitting and being allowed to fill in state wetlands,
DNR says they'll still enforce Wisconsin's pollution laws.
Do you have faith in the DNR's ability and willingness
to do that?
>> I certainly have faith in the DNR staff
that we work with frequently.
They're very dedicated professionals.
But we've seen the DNR's funding and staff authority
eroded over the years.
And they are currently underfunded
and not given the authority they need to do their jobs.
So it'll be critically important for the public to watch dog the
permitting processes that haven't been touched by this
bill, which include the air quality and water quality
programs.
>> You mentioned DNR staff.
What about the political appointees that run the agency
and determine how they respond, whether they prosecute a
violation or a warning?
>> I'm glad you caught on to that distinction
because it's one that I make often.
We've certainly seen a lot of political influence
by the top levels of DNR.
We're concerned that the type of influence that lead to the
environmental exemptions in the Foxconn bill would be carried
through other environmental decisions at the DNR level.
>> Do you expect any third party testing or monitoring,
independent groups deciding we're going to put our money
and effort to make sure that they're following the law?
>> Certainly we see that all over the state.
There are citizen monitors trained by the DNR that do water
quality testing to supplement the state's program.
We also urge individuals that get drinking water
from private wells to do their own, essentially,
groundwater quality testing.
>> You described Midwest Environmental Advocates
as an environmental law firm.
Do you expect lawsuits to be filed ahead of this process?
>> There are certainly some potential constitutional issues
associated with this bill.
I can't say for certain we or another organization would bring
a challenge to the bill before we even know where the site is
going to be located.
But there's certainly that possibility.
And it's something we're looking into.
Additionally the exemptions that this bill creates have really
made a more complicated and burdensome process
for the company to follow
by making divergent federal and state programs.
And there again, it's another opportunity for litigation.
>> Now, do you have to have harm done
before you can have cause to file a suit?
Could you file a suit and a judge throws it out saying they
haven't done anything wrong yet?
How can you sue them?
>> Yeah, that's always a balance.
And so that would be one of the issues we would look at in terms
of when a challenge to the bill could be brought forward.
However once the legislature acts to take away these
environmental protections, that may have serious implications
for constitutional protections under the public trust doctrine.
>> Once a place this big, with this many employees,
is up and running, is that too late to do much to change how
they act?
>> It certainly would be difficult for example
at that point to get a court to reverse a decision
on a wetland fill permit, for example.
That would be something that likely concerned citizens
or environmental organizations would have to pursue shortly
after that permit was issued.
>> Only less than a minute left.
In your opinion, can this type of manufacturing be done
environmentally friendly or are there issues with all
manufacturing of this type?
>> I don't know enough about LCD manufacturing to say they would
all have environmental compliance problems.
I do know there are issues that this industry like others have
to contend with.
One of them is water usage.
Another is the use of heavy metals in its processing that
can cause water pollution.
And those are some of the issues we've seen in China.
Certainly just like any other industry,
they have the capacity to comply but there are certainly some
challenges and hurdles they'd have to overcome.
>> Sarah Geers, thank you for your time.
You'll keep watching it. So will we.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks.