Pall-Gelman Objects to Allocations

PalI-Gel man objects to allocations

OCT 27 1998

■ Government attorneys contend no law broken since no money has been dispensed in cleanup dispute.

By CHONG W. PYEN

NEWS STAFF REPORTER

The $10,000 allocation each by Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County and Scio Township to combat Pall-Gelman Sciences’s bid for lenient standards for cleanup of contaminated groundwater is illegal, the firm’s attorney says.

In a letter delivered to the government bodies, Richard Connors contends that the $30,000 appropriation of public funds intended to support an intergovernmental effort to stiffen Gelman Sciences’ discharge permit violates state laws.

Municipal attorneys said no law has been broken because no money has been dispensed for that purpose.

At issue is a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s permit for the Scio Township medical filter maker to discharge 10 parts per billion of 1,4-dioxane into Honey Creek on a monthly average. The daily maximum can fluctuate up to 30 parts per billion.

The local government units and a citizens’ lobby are seeking to toughen the discharge limit to 3 ppb using the best available technology.

But Gelman Sciences is appealing the 10-30 ppb standards, seeking up to 100 ppb in the water it treats and dumps into Honey Creek, a Huron River tributary.

A hearing was scheduled today in Lansing before an administrative law judge on petitions by individual citizens and Scio Residents for Safe Water contesting the 10-30 ppb limit.

Connors noted that since none of
the government entities is party to the appeal, they cannot appropriate tax money to support the cause. The only exception is for a government body to contract with a private entity to provide service.

Citing a 1977 attorney general’s ruling, Connors said: “A public body corporate may not appropriate or contribute public funds to private nonprofit corporation even though the private nonprofit corporation is performing activities for the public benefit...”

Curtis Hedger, county corporation counsel, said he could not comment on the specifics of the complaint because he needed more time to study it. But he said it is not uncommon for the county board to appropriate public funds to a private entity on a contractual basis. In this case, no contract has been drawn up and no checks have been issued, he said.

“The county board resolution simply authorizes the county administrator to appropriate, but we’re not just going to give this money to this project,” he said.

Thomas Blessing, Ann Arbor’s chief assistant city attorney, echoed Hedger’s position that the $10,000 allocation by the City Council is like setting an annual budget.

“It’s not the same as expending,” he said. “At this point, we’re only going through the first part of the legal process (of fund appropriation).”

Chong W. Pyen covers Washtenaw County government, the environment and regional news. He can be reached at (734) 994-6828.