prepared by: center for justice, tolerance & community university of california – santa cruz...
TRANSCRIPT
Prepared by:
Center for Justice, Tolerance & CommunityUniversity of California – Santa Cruz
Waste Facilities, Environmental Justice,Waste Facilities, Environmental Justice, and Community Participation: and Community Participation:
Environmental Justice Opportunity Assessment and Analysis
CJTC Presentation of Final Report
June, 2004
PURPOSE of today’s session:
Review review final report and recommendations
Acknowledgements
Collaboration of Researchers
Input and Time of Community
Feedback from Cal EPA and CIWMB Staff
Contract Objectives
An analysis of the Environmental Justice (EJ) context for its decision-making, examples of strategies to increase public participation and community input, and recommendations as to how the Board might effectively address EJ through its programs and activities.
Elements and Organization of Report
Executive Summary Introduction and Context Environmental Justice and the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)
Community Issues and Perceptions Effective Community Competent Participation
Strategies: Five Key Building Blocks/Categories
Best Practices: Community Approaches and Tools
Recommendations and Conclusion
Appendices
Context
• California in a leadership role in environmental justice policymaking nationally
• Active organizing by environmental justice organizations and a growing body of research
• There is an established pattern of inequity by race and income for various environmental “negatives” in California
• Cal/EPA Advisory Committee on Environmental Justice that were finalized in September 2003
• EJ groups and their governmental counterparts have begun to create tools for equitable public health protection and public participation.
$
#·
%[Recycling Center& Transfer Station
Bay Tire Salvage& Supply Inc
Census Tract (CT) 3090.00Block Group (BG) 2
CT 3090.00BG 1
CT 3100.00BG 3 CT 3100.00
BG 2CT 3100.00BG 1
Census Tract (CT) 3090.00Block Group (BG) 3
CT 3110.00BG 2
CT 3110.00BG 3
CT 3141.02BG 3
CT 3110.00BG 1 CT 3120.00
BG 1
CT 3132.01BG 4
CT 3132.01BG 3
CT 3132.01BG 2 CT 3132.01
BG 1
CT 3131.00BG 3
CT 3131.01BG 2
Keller Canyon Landfill
CT 3141.02BG 1
0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Miles
Scale equals: 1 to 45,563d:/data/GISCA/ca_ej_02.apr - field: Census block groups 2000 - view: Buffer Analysis - Teale Albers - Active EJ Sites - layout: 11 Buffer Analysis - One Mile Buffer Zone Intersected with Census Block Geography and With the Water Clipped Out, version 2
View of One Mile Buffer Zone Intersected withCensus Block Geography and With the Water Clipped Out
The Distribution of CIWMB-regulated Facilities
$
$$$
$
$$
$
$
$ $ $
$
$
$
$ $$
$
$
$
$
$$
$$
$
$$
$$
$$
$
$
$ $
$
$
$
$ $
$
$$$
$
$$$$
$
$
$ $$
$
$
$$ $$
$$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$$
$
$
$
$
$$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$$
$
$$ $
$
$$
$$
$$
$
$
$$
$
$$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$$
$
$
$$
$$
$
$$
$$
$
$
$
$
$ $$$
$$
$ $$
$$ $
$
$$
$$
$
$
$
$
$
$$
$
$$
$$
$
Ke lle r C an yo n La nd fill
Scale equals: 1 to 5,257,3590 40 80 Miles
S
N
EW
d:/data/GISCA/cal_ej.apr - field: Ppnhw - view: CA California View - Teale Alberslayout: California - Disposal Sites & %Tract Pop. NHW 2000, Ppnhw
Active and Permitted Disposal Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census Tractthat is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California
CENTER FOR JUSTICE, TOLERANCE AND COMMUNITY - http://cjtc.ucsc.edu/
% Pop. NHW 2000less than %2020% - 40%40% - 60%60% - 80%greater than 80%
County Boundaries$ Disposal Sites
%[%[%[
%[%[%[
%[%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[ %[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[ %[%[
%[%[%[
%[%[%[%[%[%[
%[%[
%[%[%[%[
%[ %[%[
%[%[
%[%[%[%[
%[
%[%[%[%[
%[%[%[%[
%[ %[%[ %[%[
%[%[%[
%[
%[ %[%[%[%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[ %[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[%[
%[ %[
%[
%[%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[%[%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[ %[
%[%[%[%[%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[%[%[%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[ %[%[
%[
%[%[
%[%[ %[%[
%[
%[%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[
%[ %[
%[
%[
%[
Scale equals: 1 to 5,257,3590 40 80 Miles
S
N
EW
d:/data/GISCA/cal_ej.apr - field: Ppnhw - view: CA California View - Teale Alberslayout: California - Transfer Sites & %Tract Pop. NHW 2000, Ppnhw
Active and Permitted Transfer Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census Tractthat is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California
CENTER FOR JUSTICE, TOLERANCE AND COMMUNITY - http://cjtc.ucsc.edu/
% Pop. NHW 2000less than %2020% - 40%40% - 60%60% - 80%greater than 80%
County Boundaries%[ Transfer Sites
#·#·#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·#·#· #·
#·
#·
#·
#·#·
#·
#·#·#· #·
#·
#·#· #·#·
#·#· #·#·#· #·
#·
#·
#·#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·
#·#·
#·
#·
#·#·
#·
Ba y T ire S alv ag e& S up p ly Inc
Scale equals: 1 to 5,257,3590 40 80 Miles
S
N
EW
d:/data/GISCA/cal_ej.apr - field: Ppnhw - view: CA California View - Teale Alberslayout: California - Waste Tire Sites & %Tract Pop. NHW 2000, Ppnhw
Active and Permitted Waste Tire Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census Tractthat is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California
CENTER FOR JUSTICE, TOLERANCE AND COMMUNITY - http://cjtc.ucsc.edu/
% Pop. NHW 2000less than %2020% - 40%40% - 60%60% - 80%greater than 80%
County Boundaries#· Waste Tire Sites
The Distribution of CIWMB-regulated Facilities
Landfills: Do not seem to be disproportionately sited near minority or low-income areas but once one controls for nearby population density and whether the area is rural, there is some evidence of disproportionate proximity to these socially vulnerable communities.
The Distribution of CIWMB-regulated Facilities
Transfer stations and waste tire sites:
Are more clearly located near minority and low-income areas, and this pattern persists even when one introduces proper statistical controls with regard to degree of urbanization and population density.
Key Recommendationsfrom Quantitative Data Collected
Making statewide data more easily accessible, more easily understood, and more amenable to geographic mapping and analysis might be helpful for both :
The public perception of CIWMB and
The facilitation of community voice in meetings and other forums.
Key Recommendationsfrom Quantitative Data Collected
Developing an ongoing capacity for staff and outside researchers to conduct further research and evaluate the degree of demographic disparity in facilities and permitting decisions might:
Provide targets for improvement
Build trust in the directions being taken, and
Provide measures for evaluation and accountability.
An Afterthought Community Input Sought After
REACTIVE ROLE PROACTIVE ROLE
Industry /Government Community Involvement driven continually from the start
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
COMMUNITY INPUT COMMUNITY USE
Involvement in processes Program Utilization
InformationCapacityConnectedEngagement
Community Issues and Perceptions
To address community concerns, community leaders and best practices research suggest that CIWMB and LEAs:
Partner with community-based organizations, through the provision of small grants, can aid in outreach and building technical capacity.
Community Issues and Perceptions
To address community concerns, community leaders and best practices research suggest that CIWMB and LEAs:
Continue staff training on environmental justice issues and designate an environmental justice-focused staff position within the CIWMB.
Community Issues and Perceptions
To address community concerns, community leaders and best practices research suggest that CIWMB and LEAs:
Develop a statewide complaint resolution protocol in collaboration with community leaders
Community Issues and Perceptions
To address community concerns, community leaders and best practices research suggest that CIWMB and LEAs:
Institutionalize a process by which a report or memo is drafted after a decision has been made to identify where public input has been incorporated
Community Competency Recommendations
• Allocate adequate funds for all Cal/EPA agencies to implement EJ policy action items.
• Community competence training should be provided for all staff, administrators and board.
Community Competency Recommendations
Community collaborations and partnerships should be pursued by working with natural, formal and informal networks within diverse communities.
• In addition to mainstream environmental groups, include diverse EJ groups in CIWMB planning processes.
Best Practices RecommendationsPolicy
• Provide guidelines to encourage practices for enhancing public participation and addressing EJ.
• Prioritize communities that meet specific EJ criteria—some states have used anti-concentration policies to address disproportionate and cumulative exposures
Best Practices RecommendationsPolicy
• A statewide complaint resolution protocol including: standard response time, method for receiving complaints, documentation, investigative procedure, feedback and CIWMB/LEA interaction.
• Mechanisms created to inform communities about technical assistance opportunities and options.
Best Practices RecommendationsEducation and Capacity Building
Capacity building initiatives to be encouraged and supported by incorporating:
• the use of regional resource providers,
• community-generated tools and solutions,
• accessible information materials and toolkits,
• and community-led assessment and research.
Best Practices RecommendationsEducation and Capacity Building
• Consult with other agencies with experience on educating staff on public participation and environmental justice.
• Educational workshops for LEA officials should be provided for coaching and introducing new formats for public participation.
Best Practices RecommendationsMarketing and Communication Strategies
• Website should be designed to be more accessible to a wide public audience with different literacy and language abilities.
• We also reiterate the need to think about non-traditional meeting techniques to ensure conversation and consensus rather than the public stand-offs often characteristic of more formal processes.
Best Practices RecommendationsMarketing and Communication Strategies
• Develop a comprehensive public participation guidebook that clarifies the structure and jurisdiction of the Board and LEAs, and aids community members through the public participation process.
• A comprehensive public participation manual should be developed that coaches staff in effective methods and process.
Best Practices RecommendationsEvaluation and Accountability
• Standards for public participation evaluation should be instituted which include: baseline assessment, a public participation plan, feedback tools, and accountability.
• A statewide public participation evaluation designed and implemented to establish a baseline and monitors progress over a specified time period.
Best Practices RecommendationsEvaluation and Accountability
• Guidelines for successful outreach should be developed, including expanded requirements for meeting and permitting notification, and agreed-on measures of success.
• Consider creating diverse and representative stakeholder advisory committees, including site- or area- or issue-based pilot projects, the use of surveys, and ongoing evaluation.
Final Thoughts
• Designation of an office or an individual to take leadership in developing and implementing an advanced participation plan
• Continued research and collaboration with CIWMB staff to establish empirical baseline.
• Distributing resources amongst the tools in a way that will maximize community participation.
• Developing an assessment of the baseline of current practices in order to be able to measure progress.
• Conflict and collaboration go hand-in-hand – consistent interaction can lead to sustainable and mutually rewarding relationships between communities and agencies
• Representatives who have the first contact with the community should anticipate some misperceptions and confusion that will be the source of frustration and even misinformation.
• Because building community participation evolves over the longer term, achieving change requires time, training, and patience.
Final Thoughts
Questions?