ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE AND TRANSPORTATION:
BUILDING MODEL PARTNERSHIPS
PROCEEDINGS DOCUMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE AND TRANSPORTATION:
BUILDING MODEL PARTNERSHIPS
PROCEEDINGS DOCUMENT
table of contentsChapter 1: Building Partnerships
Conference Overview, Robert D. Bullard
Welcoming Address, The Honorable Mayor Bill Campbell
Greetings from the Religious Community, Reverend Dr. Susan Newman
Greetings from the Networks, Teresa Cordova
Keynote Address, Administrator Rodney Slater
Summit Archive Ceremony, Charles Lee and Bernice Powell JacksonChapter 2: Environmental Principles in Transportation
Greetings from the Office of the Secretary, Antonio J. Califa
Reflections from the Deep South, Beverly Wright
Commitment of FTA, Administrator Gordon Linton
Georgia DOT's Action Plan, Commissioner Wayne Shackleford
Programs of FRA, Deputy Administrator Donald ItzkoffChapter 3: Environmental Justice, Civil Rights, and NEPA Guidance
Reflections from Atlanta, Commissioner Emma Darnell
NEPA, Civil Rights Statutes, and Equal Protection, Deeohn Ferris
Civil Rights Remedies for Environmental Justice, Bill Lee
Making NEPA Responsive to Communities, Bradley Campbell
Environmental Justice Transportation: From Rhetoric to Reality, Eugene CleckleyChapter 4: Transportation Approaches: Grassroots Initiatives
Grassroots Approaches in James City, North Carolina, Paul Sonn
Public Transit in Los Angeles, Martin Hernandez
The Case of Macon; Bibb County, Georgia, David Oedell
Grassroots Initiatives in Chicago, Jacky GrimshawChapter 5: Empowerment and Enterprise Zones
Rebuilding Sustainable Communities, John L Perry
Building Partnerships through Communication, Barbara Smith
The Case of West Harlem, Vernice Miller
Detroit's Empowerment Zone, Elizabeth Toomer
Atlanta's Empowerment Zone, Hakim YamineChapter 6: Breakout Group Sessions: Part I
Group A: The Proposed DOT Order
Group B: Health and Community Impacts
Group C: Public Involvement and Outreach
Group D: Research Needs
Group E: NEPA, Environmental Justice, and Civil Rights
Group F: Transport of Hazardous and Radioactive MaterialsChapter 7: Breakout Group Sessions: Part II
Group G: Empowerment and Enterprise Zones
Group H: Transportation Decision Making
Group I: Training Needs
Group J: Rural Transportation Needs
Group K: Native American and Indigenous Issues
Group L: Equity Implications of Pricing and Operational StrategiesChapter 8: Conference Closing- The Road Ahead
Government Response, Gloria Jeff
Next Steps and Follow-up Actions, Robert D. BullardCHAPTER 1: BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS
Robert D. Bullard, Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia
Honorable Bill Campbell, Mayor of Atlanta, Georgia
Reverend Dr. Susan Newman, First Congressional United Church of Christ, Atlanta, Georgia
Teresa Cordova, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Administrator Rodney Slater, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
Charles Lee, UCC Commission for Racial Justice, New York, New York
Reverend Dr. Bernie Powell Jackson, UCC Commission for Racial Justice, Cleveland, OhioCONFERENCE OPENING
Dr. Robert Bullard, Director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center, opened the reception by extending his thanks to all attendees. He explained that the conference, "Environmental Justice and Transportation: Building Model Partnerships," is a follow-up to the January 20th meeting held in Atlanta to address DOT's plans and draft strategies to implement the Executive Order on Environmental Justice. He noted, "The purpose of the conference is to build workable partnerships and strategies with grassroots groups, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, state-wide DOTs, and the federal DOT. I am pleased that Clark Atlanta University was selected to host the conference and bring together stakeholders from communities that are in rural areas,communities that are on Native American reservations, and communities that are geographically isolated."
Dr. Bullard stated that he was pleased to be working with the U.S. Department of Transportation and people who are concerned about making sure that transportation is an issue of fairness, equity, and justice. He noted that the Environmental Justice/DOT Conference was designed to bring about dialogue, creative thinking, and positive application. "We have twelve breakout sessions," Dr. Bullard explained to participants. "We have plenary sessions and that are designed to be thought-provoking. In some cases, there will be individuals presenting cases that are controversial. However, we are not here to be controversial. These are real cases, and we are talking about learning from real examples. In looking at the overview, the objectives of the conference are clear. We have gathered in Atlanta to bring about participation, to bring people into the process." In closing, Dr. Bullard urged all participants to be creative and focus on solutions that will begin to put the American people first.
The Honorable Mayor Bill Campbell, of the City of Atlanta, welcomed the participants to Atlanta from many cities around the country. He confirmed Atlanta's commitment to environmental justice issues. He began by stating, "Whatever our race, religion, national origin, or where we live, one thing we have in common is that we all throw trash away, and that trash must go someplace. Building model partnerships is about making sure there is equity in deciding where the trash will go."
Mayor Campbell suggested a need for change. He emphasized that trash has historically gone where the people were too poor and too uneducated to fight. As a result, all across this country there are a disproportionate number of trash dumps in minority and low-income communities. In closing, the Mayor emphasized the need for environmental equity. "If a community disposes of its waste, we must find a way to dispose of it within the corridors of where it is created."
Reverend Susan Newman provided the invocation and extended warm greetings on behalf of the First Congregational United Church of Christ (UCC). Reverend Newman agreed with Dr. Bullard's statement that it is good that Clark Atlanta University was selected to host the conference. She noted, "It is very fitting that Clark Atlanta University would partner with the Commission of Racial Justice of the United Church of Christ and the Department of Transportation to do this work. Atlanta University was founded in the basement of UCC, and UCC has been involved in justice and peace issues for quite a while." Reverend Newman left the attendees with the following message: "Building model partnerships means all people working at the table together."
Dr. Teresa Cordova, a professor at the University of New Mexico, stated she was honored and privileged to represent the Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice. She noted, "It is very important to recognize people from the environmental and economic justice network. We owe the signing of the Executive Order and our presence here today to the very committed people who are dealing with the real impacts from the kinds of inequalities and disproportionate injustices in their communities and in our communities."
The keynote address was given by Administrator Rodney Slater of the Federal Highway Administration. Administrator Slater was appointed by the President to serve as Administrator in early 1993. During his address, he emphasized the importance of the Environmental Justice and Transportation Conference to future generations. "The future of our children and our children's children is now, and if we are to move America forward, this conference on environmental justice must be successful."
Administrator Slater urged people involved in transportation to stop thinking about roads, cars, buses, and trains, and to start thinking about how transportation impacts people&emdash;individuals whom those in transportation have the privilege to serve. He specifically addressed the following principles of environmental justice:
· Environmental justice demands that public policy be based on mutual respect and justice for all people, free from any form of discrimination or bias.
· Environmental justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making, including needs-assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement, and evaluation. It means being there at the beginning. It means being there throughout the process. It means being there at the moment decisions are made.
· Environmental justice calls for the education of present and future generations, with emphasis on social and environmental issues, based on our experiences and an appreciation for the diversity that is the character of America.
Mr. Rodney Slater stressed the importance of public participation, so that those in transportation can come up with the best solutions. He noted, "It is time for us to sit at the table for discussion and to debate decisions. Transportation is too important to leave the public's voice unheard." Administrator Slater emphasized that in signing the Executive Order on Environmental Justice, President Clinton has told those in government that they no longer isolate themselves from the public. He expressed the need for governmental sensitivity to the perspectives of those who will be impacted by governmental decisions, saying, "We must hear their voices, and we must become more sensitive to those who must contend with the consequences of our decisions. We at DOT have heard the challenge, and together with Secretary Peña, we have developed a strategic plan to put people first as we embark on a new era of public involvement in transportation." He closed by asking for comments and input regarding the proposed DOT Order on Environmental Justice, which was unveiled for the first time at this conference. He stated, "We have our mission, we have our vision, and we have our means for getting there, but we need your input."
Mr. Charles Lee, Director of Research for the Commission of Racial Justice, focused his comments on the environmental justice movement. He noted that the environmental justice movement has already made history. He pointed out the important role that the 1991 First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit played in the making of history. Charles Lee noted that it was because of this history that the decision was made to house the archives from the 1991 First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit at the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University.
Reverend Bernice Powell Jackson, Executive Director for the Commission of Racial Justice, and Mr. Charles Lee presented Dr. Bullard with a plaque which reads, United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice is proud to present the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University the archives from the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, May 11, 1995.
Dr. Robert Bullard concluded the dinner reception by challenging agencies to bring stakeholders to the table. He noted, "Stakeholders must be brought to the table to be fed, and they must be served real meals."
CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PRINCIPLES IN TRANSPORTATION
PLENARY PANEL
Moderator: Robert D. Bullard, Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Antonio J. Califa, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
Beverly Wright, Xavier University, New Orleans, Louisiana
Gorton Linton, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC
Wayne Shackleford, Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, Georgia
Donald Itzkoff, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, DCGREETINGS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Antonio J. Califa
Office of Civil Rights for the Department of Transportation, Washington, DCAntonio J. Califa, Director of the Office of Civil Rights for the Department of Transportation, delivered personal greetings from the Department of Transportation, Secretary Frederico Peña. Mr. Califa confirmed Secretary Peña's commitment to environmental justice issues. "Based on personal experience and knowledge, I know the Secretary's commitment to environmental justice is not just in response to the latest "politically correct" outcry. As a lawyer, Mayor, and now as Secretary, Secretary Peña wants to insure that all Americans have a place at the table."
Mr. Califa stressed that President Clinton has affirmed his administration's unwavering commitment to both social and environmental equity. On February 11, 1994, he issued Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations." The Executive Order clearly states, "...Each federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission..." Under the Secretary's leadership, the Department of Transportation has developed a formal strategy for achieving environmental justice as it relates to transportation services and systems. Mr. Califa noted that the Department's strategy demands that no departmental program or activity is to be carried out in opposition to the Executive Order. In closing, Mr. Califa stated that he hoped all would be inspired to open an honest dialogue about these issues and be encouraged to share views, knowledge, and experiences.
REFLECTIONS FROM THE DEEP SOUTH
Beverly Wright
Xavier University, New Orleans, LouisianaDr. Beverly Wright, Director of the Deep South Environmental Justice Resource Center at Xavier University, commented on growing up in New Orleans during the time of segregation. She shared her memories of the "colored" signs, and she also remembered internalizing the concept of Jim Crow and segregation while riding the bus. "It is ironic," said Dr. Wright, "that the bus, which became the symbol of struggle for civil rights in the South, is now the symbol of despair for many communities across this nation."
Dr. Wright shared her own personal story of how transportation-related decisions impacted her family and her community. She talked about the development of Interstate 10, which disproportionately burdened small pockets of the communities in New Orleans. Dr. Wright explained that in her opinion, the most disturbing aspect of the interstate construction was that nearby community residents were unaware that the interstate was coming. She stated, "The interstate came through and destroyed a solid African American neighborhood. My community did not survive." This story has repeated itself around the country. When Dr. Wright moved to North Carolina, she encountered other incidents of environmental injustice. "I thought this was my story," Dr. Wright told conference participants, "I thought that transportation decisions that negatively impact communities did not happen anyplace else. Over the years, I have found that it repeats itself. I was amazed when I moved to Winston Salem, North Carolina that the same kind of transportation decisions impacted this really small town."
In closing, Dr. Wright stressed the need to address some additional issues, including public participation and urban sprawl. "Poor people who tend not to have automobiles are being moved out to the suburbs where transportation systems are inadequate. I believe it is important and necessary to consider and include poor people, working people, and people of color into transportation decision-making."
COMMITMENT OF FEDERAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Administrator Gordon Linton
Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DCAdministrator Gordon Linton also remembered growing up in the South during the time of segregation. "While visiting my grandmother in South Carolina, I remember riding some of the buses," said Administer Linton, "and I now take great pride in the liberation efforts that took place around transportation." Administrator Linton stressed his commitment to his position and expressed a desire to improve the lives of the people in this country. He noted, "I take what I do seriously. I am as committed as when I was the Chairman of the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus and when I fought to keep dumps out of neighborhoods and communities where people live and children grow up."
Mr. Linton talked about his House and Senate Budget Committee meetings, where plans were discussed to eliminate all federal funds for operating assistance for public transportation. He indicated that statistically, if funds are eliminated, it will impact those who need public transportation to get to work, education, employment programs, and to health care providers.
He further discussed some of the Livable Community Initiatives that are being implemented during his administration at the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). These initiatives include:
· Rebuilding communities
· Allowing transportation to be a bridge, not a barrier
· Integrating transportation into the lives of the people who live in the communities
· Engaging the people who use the services and who are impacted by the services when projects are first initiated
Mr. Linton reported that FTA provided livable community grants to communities throughout America, including Oakland, California, Chester, Pennsylvania, and Atlanta, Georgia. In the City of Atlanta, a $3 million grant was provided to Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) to develop a project which would connect the historically black Atlanta University Center (AUC) to MARTA rail stations. He stated, "When building livable communities, the rail systems must provide safe passenger walkways, bike paths, lighting, circulation, and must include the public housing projects."
Administrator Linton closed with the following statement: "The kind of legacy I would like to leave when my tenure is up, is one in which transportation has begun to build bridges and rebuild America by connecting people to opportunities."
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S ACTION PLAN
Commissioner Wayne Shackleford
Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, GeorgiaCommissioner Wayne Shackleford urged all participants to concentrate on issues discussed during the conference. He commented on his trip to Washington, D.C. in which discussions were held around reducing transit by 40% in the next budget year, eliminating entities, and making zero allowance for transit operating assistance in a two- to three-year period.
Commissioner Shackleford discussed procedures that are in place at the Georgia Department of Transportation (GADOT) to insure compliance with the environmental justice principles. The GADOT is required by the NEPA process and the Georgia Department Policy Act to conduct environmental analysis of proposed transportation projects. The GADOT environmental office is responsible for analyzing how projects will impact nearby residences and businesses, minority and elderly populations, plant and animal life, land use, air quality, noise impact, wetland, flood plains, water quality, retail sales, park lands, historic and archeological sites, and community life centers. He informed the group that GADOT recently increased emphasis on the importance of community impact.
The Commissioner addressed the fact that although highways are considered America's life line, many highways are considered unwanted land use (LULU). He stated: "The Executive Order for Environmental Justice was written to prevent exclusively locating transportation facilities and other LULU's in low-income and minority communities. No longer will state and federal agencies be allowed to locate landfills, incinerators, sewerage plants, toxic waste dumps, rail switching yards, freeways, airports, and other facilities in economically disadvantaged areas without considering other locations."
Commissioner Shackleford shared a lesson that was learned by the GADOT during the original construction of the downtown Atlanta connector. Prior to the enactment of NEPA, the construction of the downtown connector displaced some well-established Atlanta communities. This situation was identified early as having some inequities. Improvements were made on the downtown connector in the eighties. Remembering the original problems, the GADOT created a community liaison position to work with the community at the start of the project. Commissioner Shackleford emphasized that by involving the community at the very start, the process ran much smoother.
The Commissioner noted some of the accomplishments that were made once the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) was passed and transferability was available in the state of Georgia. He reported that the first expenditure of funds in Georgia was used to provide buses in Athens, Georgia. Since then, buses have been purchased in Savannah and Atlanta. Money was also spent to conduct a commuter rail study. Additionally, the "Transportation 2000" project was initiated. This project was developed to promote dialogue around transportation issues throughout the state and the GADOT. The GADOT conducted fifteen sessions throughout the state, with the Atlanta session largely represented by people who are blind, in wheelchairs, and the bicycle group. Commissioner Shackleford indicated that he attended 13 of the 15 sessions because he wanted to hear the needs of people across the state. He concluded by stating, "Transportation must be responsive to the needs of all Georgians and all Americans."
PROGRAMS OF FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
Donald Itzkoff
Deputy Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, DCDonald Itzkoff began by stating that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is committed to the goals of the Executive Order 12898, issued by President Clinton. By working with the other administrations within the Department, FRA has contributed to the draft DOT Order and Strategy on Environmental Justice. The FRA will be reviewing its programs and policies pursuant to the DOT Order to insure that those programs do not result in any disproportionate effects on minority or low-income communities. Mr. Itzkoff indicated that FRA is working to strengthen rail passenger, rail freight, and other intermodal options, because rail contributes to the development of sustainable communities with benefits to all sectors. He explained that rail offers an environmentally attractive, economical, and efficient transportation solution, especially in densely traveled corridors. Rail is important because it offers fewer emissions, it is energy efficient, has tracks already in place, enhances safety issues, and relieves congestion. He emphasized that rail offers mobility to populations that would not have access by other modes of transportation. "Rail can provide economic opportunities," asserted Mr. Itzkoff. "We believe that strengthening rail can enhance the promotion of environmental justice in a broad way."
Although FTA does not have extensive grant programs similar to those available through FHWA and FTA, Mr. Itzkoff listed FRA activities that have benefits for minority and low-income populations. Some of the FRA programs and activities are:
· Work to support the Secretary's role in promoting the development of inter-city rail passenger service through AMTRAK.
· In FY 96, FRA is proposing to spend over one billion dollars to support inter-city passenger rail service.
· The "Swift Rail Development Act," enacted by Congress last year, enables FRA to move forward on an aggressive research and development program to develop a non-eclectic, light-weight locomotive for use outside the northeast corridor.
· FRA is working with FTA and FHWA to develop new environmental procedures. Environmental justice concerns are being addressed in these procedures.
· Conversion of the Farley Post Office in New York to a major inner-city train station.
· FRA is working with FHWA to develop the environmental impact statement for the development of rail service between Los Angeles and Long Beach.
· Work with states to address environmental issues and rail- related projects.
Mr. Itzkoff explained that most recently, FRA has devoted a significant amount of time to reviewing environmental issues along the Northeast Corridor Electrification Program, a project designed to provide three-hour rail service between New York and Boston. Out of the twenty-five electrification facilities, Mr. Itzkoff reported that only two are proposed to be constructed in predominantly low-income areas.
The principle mission of FRA is to develop and enhance rail safety. Mr. Itzkoff explained that the transport of hazardous materials is governed by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Hazardous Materials Regulations, and FRA vigorously enforces these regulations as applied to railroads and rail shippers. He pointed out that since 1980, only one death has occurred as a result of the release of a hazardous material in a train accident. To minimize risk of accidents, FRA has launched a multi-media campaign to educate people about the dangers at highway-rail grade crossings, and FRA implemented Operation Respond, a program geared to getting local emergency railroad people working together to minimize the effects of hazardous material accidents.
CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, CIVIL RIGHTS
AND NEPA GUIDANCE
PLENARY PANEL
Moderator: Commissioner Emma Darnell, Fulton County Commission, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Deeohn Ferris, Washington Office on Environmental Justice, Washington, DC
Bill Lee, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Los Angeles, California
Bradley Campbell, Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, DC
Eugene Cleckley, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DCREFLECTIONS FROM ATLANTA
Emma Darnell
Fulton County Commission, Atlanta, GeorgiaCommissioner Emma Darnell expressed her support of the recent focus and emphasis on building partnerships, developing interagency cooperation, and involving grassroots organizations in an effort to solve this extremely serious and critical problem of environmental inequities.
She shared a story of a woman who participated in the Montgomery bus boycott. The woman refused to ride the bus for 18 months. For this Montgomery woman and her colleagues, the bus and access to transportation were intertwined with their struggle for basic civil rights and social justice.
The district represented by Commissioner Darnell is referred to by some reporters as the "black middle class district." The Commissioner noted that even though the people in her district are educated and employed, they are nonetheless negatively impacted by transportation-related decisions. She spoke about the Charlie Brown Airport, a major airport to be used for corporate air travel during the 1996 Olympic games in Atlanta. The number of flights per day at this airport is expected to increase from its present average of 150 each day to about 300 flights per day. Commissioner Darnell was concerned that in spite of the projected increase in air traffic, no plans had been made to assist neighboring communities in dealing with associated traffic congestion during the Olympic games. Commissioner Darnell closed by urging participants to remember the investment made in Metropolitan Atlanta's Rapid Transit System (MARTA) twenty years ago. She noted, "This is the same transit system that has stopped short of meeting its commitment to our community."
NEPA, CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTES, AND EQUAL PROTECTION
Deeohn Ferris
Washington Office on Environmental Justice, Washington, DCDeeohn Ferris urged conference participants to read the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). "It is important that you understand what NEPA means if you are to reform the Department of Transportation and work on issues that impact people of color and low-income communities," she noted. "NEPA sets the framework for discussions on human rights."
Ms. Ferris pointed out that socioeconomic factors should be an equal trigger to the kind of analysis of situations that will yield equal protection under the law. She outlined the six basic standards to be accomplished under NEPA:
· Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustees of the environment for succeeding generations.
· Insure, for all Americans, safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings.
· Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risks to health and safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.
· Preserve important cultural and natural aspects of natural heritage, and maintain wherever possible an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choices.
· Achieve balance between population and resources to permit high standards of living and wide sharing of life's amenities.
· Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum obtainable recycling of depletable resources.
Ms. Ferris suggested that the language in NEPA attempts to elevate social considerations and social values to the same level as conventional values. The difference between conventional definitions of environment, and the definitions provided by environmental justice activists is that the activists point of view is more holistic. She stated, "Environment does not stop at the door of the home, but it's where people live, work, and play."
Ms. Ferris noted that the Department of Transportation's Environmental Justice Strategy is not about attending a hearing in a big room at an hour that is generally inconvenient working people and at a location that is probably hard to get to. She pointed out that environmental justice, as it relates to transportation issues, is about addressing transportation barriers: policy decisions that limit public access to services and impact the successful penetration of job markets, encourage suburban flight, encourage sprawl, encourage migration of jobs into the greenbelt, and that result in no transit, limited transit, or transit that is unsafe. Ms. Ferris stated, "There is a need for the federal government to intervene in the way decisions are made, especially when there are few or no community people on any of the planning agencies. Historically, state and local governments have not involved community people in the decision-making process."
Ms. Ferris urged conference participants to examine the land-use question, considering that the federal government has traditionally interpreted land-use as a local decision-making issue; however, she asserted that there are situations which require federal government intervention into local decision-making to insure all people equal protection under law.
In closing, Ms. Ferris stated, "We must reinvent government and provide a meaningful opportunity for people to partner in a process, share responsibility in a process, and create outcomes that are beneficial to all people, especially those who so often bear the burden of transportation decisions."
CIVIL RIGHTS REMEDIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Bill Lee
NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Los Angeles, CaliforniaBill Lee began by placing the Executive Order on Environmental Justice in historical context. The Order seeks to implement principles that were articulated decades ago, he noted. Mr. Lee emphasized that the remedies available under the civil rights acts are exactly the same remedies that are available under the environmental laws. "All of the things you are discussing through the civil rights laws, you can also attack through the environmental statues," he told conference participants.
Mr. Lee referenced his document, "Civil Rights Remedies for Environmental Injustice" (Appendix E). This document addresses administrative charges, not just law suits. He noted that administrative charges present a way for communities to get to the federal agencies and to the states, since the federal government is obligated under the civil rights laws and regulations to deal with all complaints. Complaints can be filed under general laws, but Mr. Lee pointed out that Title VI opens a way to get the complaint inside an organized process.
Mr. Lee defined several important terms, disparate impact and cumulative effects, that are often used. He suggested that disparate impact means one does not have to show intentional discrimination against African Americans, Latinos, Asians, Native Americans, disabled people, or any other protected group, in order to seek protection by civil rights laws. Community groups do not have to prove intent, but rather, just show disparate impact. Cumulative effects are discussed in the Executive Order, and this is a very important concept. "We all have heard stories about communities imposed upon time after time. There are cases about impositions going back hundreds of years," said Mr. Lee. He stated that if a minority community is being imposed upon, someone expert, someone neutral, has to conduct a study that justifies the action.
If the action proves to be a business necessity, the agencies must look at nondiscriminatory and/or less discriminatory alternatives. Mr. Lee pointed out that civil rights lawyers generally handle cases involving employment and housing discrimination or school desegregation. However, within the last two years lawyers have begun to focus more on environmental injustice. Mr. Lee stated, "We have recently begun to accept cases with grassroots groups. We are no longer dealing only with agencies like the EEO, but we have also begun to deal with outfits like the EPA and the DOT."
Mr. Lee left the audience with the following words: "Now is the time in our history where there is a tremendous opportunity to make a difference. We have heard from high-level federal officials who say they are committed to environmental justice. It is time for community groups to get out and hold government accountable. The intention of the Executive Order is to put federal agencies on the same side of the table with minority communities."
MAKING NEPA RESPONSIVE TO COMMUNITIES
Bradley Campbell
Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, DCBradley Campbell stressed that transportation policy is critical to the issue of environmental justice. Mr. Campbell stated, "Low-income and minority communities have more than their share of transportation routes and highways. Minorities often have to suffer the environmental impacts of transportation routes and transportation distribution." He remembered how slow the educational process was within federal, state, and local governments during the early days of NEPA and other environmental statutes. Over time, agencies learned how to incorporate the conventional definition of environment into their planning, into their thinking and into their decision-making. He expressed a belief that the Executive Order on Environmental Justice offers a second opportunity for people in government to be educated and sensitized around the issue of environmental justice. Mr. Campbell noted, "We must look at socioeconomic impacts and cumulative impacts. We can no longer look at an individual action, but we must look at what a community has been asked to bear over the course of time and how similar actions can be avoided."
The development of environmental justice over the last couple of years has taught agencies a lot about how to do outreach. However, many communities still complain that they are not consulted. Mr. Campbell emphasized that merely sending out notices is not good enough. "The CEQ will be addressing the need for effective communication and outreach. Individual agency strategies should also address this need. Guidance from the CEQ on NEPA will provide some effective outreach methods," he said. He suggested that non-traditional outreach methods such as ethnic radio stations and black newspapers should be considered.
In closing, Mr. Campbell described today's climate of government funding cuts and little policy enforcement. He stressed his belief that the requirements put forth by NEPA and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act can be met only if the resources are there and the enforcement tools are available.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN TRANSPORTATION: FROM RHETORIC TO REALITY
Eugene Cleckley
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DCEugene Cleckley informed conference participants that they were all hand-selected to attend this very important conference on environmental justice. This was done consciously, he said, so that grassroots people could interface with the federal government, and more importantly, with local and state officials from their respective states.
Mr. Cleckley talked about the transition in government. He urged participants to go into the breakout groups with the purpose of developing model partnerships. Mr. Cleckley stated, "We must go beyond the intellectual conceptualization point, the political correctness point, and the legal theory point, to try and make these partnerships work. We must look at these issues in the problem-solving mode, because none of us are experts. We are all learning."
Mr. Cleckley explained that Environmental Justice, the Executive Order, and Title VI all address the disproportionate impact of transportation decisions and how these decisions impact the health and environment of minorities and low-income populations. There is a legislative requirement for people in the Department of Transportation to look at the social and economic impacts in transportation programs, like community cohesion, availability of public facilities and services, people impact, and tax base impacts. According to Mr. Cleckley, this connection cannot be found in the generic NEPA process. "Under the generic process," he explained, "people impacts do not trigger environmental impact statements (EIS). If an EIS is not generated, then public involvement is not required, and litigation becomes relatively impossible."
Mr. Cleckley asked the audience the question, "Does an adverse impact on a minority population necessarily mean discrimination or disproportionate impact?" He suggested that the answer is "no." He pointed out that there is a perception, however, that any time there is an adverse impact on a minority group or population, it is automatically considered by many people to be discrimination or a disproportionate impact. His argument is that before drawing conclusions, one must go through the process of getting people involved, looking at different alternatives, and considering avoidance. He noted, "If the NEPA process is properly applied and social, economic, and environmental impacts are identified, then the presumption is that the decision-makers will do the right thing. If alternatives to a project have been considered, if the experts have been involved, and if the public has been encouraged to participate, then community reaction to projects will be positive." In closing, Mr. Cleckley urged grassroots leaders to go back to their respective states and work with state and local transportation officials to solve problems.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION APPROACHES&emdash;GRASSROOTS INITIATIVES
PLENARY PANEL
Moderator: Orin Williams, People for Community Recovery, Chicago, Illinois
Panelists:
Paul Sonn, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York, New York
Martin Hernandez, Labor Community Strategy Center, Los Angeles, California
David Oedell, Mercer University Law School, Macon, Georgia
Jackie Grimshaw, Center for Neighborhood Technology, Chicago, IllinoisPaul Sonn
NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, New York, New YorkPaul Sonn presented the case study of James City, a small African American community of approximately 800, located in eastern North Carolina. Mr. Sonn stated that James City has endured a long cycle of repeated attacks on the physical integrity and historical heritage of this community, and on the well-being of its residents. The most recent episode in this cycle, he said, concerns a plan by the state highway department to locate a large highway interchange and bridge complex at a location within James City. The community has been resisting this effort. As partof their campaign, the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund was enlisted to file an environmental justice complaint on their behalf against the Federal Highway Administration, which is providing assistance for the construction project. The aim of the complaint is to have federal aid suspended until environmental concerns are incorporated into the planning and implementation of this project.
Mr. Sonn shared information on the history of discriminatory assaults against James City. The community was initially set up as a refugee camp for freed blacks in 1862 when the Union Armyoccupied New Bern. The community developed into a small but vibrant regional economic center. Unfortunately, soon after Reconstruction ended, the former white landowners began legal action to try to evict the residents. The community fought this vigorously. In fact, they foughtall the way to the North Carolina Supreme Court. In the 1890's they lost that battle and were evicted from their land. They migrated a short distance south to where the current community is located. Mr. Sonn said that over the course of the twentieth century, a series of unfair sitings of highway and other infrastructure in James City has destroyed homes, divided communities, and destroyed historically important land. In 1950, Route 70 was built; in the 1970's, a by-pass was added to Route 70; and in 1991, the local Craven County Regional Airport devised a plan to extend the runway. In 1991, James City residents organized to oppose this project and enlisted the NAACP Legal Defense Fund for help in filing an environmental justice complaint with the Federal Aviation Administration, which was funding the airport. Through the community's efforts, they were able to negotiate a settlement, although they were not able to stop the project.
Mr. Sonn also spoke about a current project, the Neuse River Bridge Project. The Neuse River Project proposes to construct a bridge to replace an existing bridge. When the state first announced plans for this project, the original plan was to site it in the middle of James City. Mr. Sonn considered this a classic case of cumulative effects. The community responded to this threat by a vigorous organizing campaign. They wrote complaints, attended meetings, and they made their views known. Unfortunately, the community was not able to stop the highway plans. Mr. Sonn reported that the James City community is continuing to resist the siting project and will continue to pursue their administrative complaint against the Federal Highway Administration. The community is also considering suing under NEPA in the federal courts.
In closing, Mr. Sonn expressed a realization there will be times when non-discriminatory routes cannot be found and the only feasible routes will be those that negatively impact a minority community; however, he pointed out that under Title VI and the Executive Order onEnvironmental Justice, the state highway planners' responsibility does not end at this point. He noted, "There is a duty to adopt less discriminatory alternatives that are available through the implementation of mitigation measures."
PUBLIC TRANSIT IN LOS ANGELES
Martin Hernandez
Labor Community Strategy Center, Los Angeles, CaliforniaMartin Hernandez began by stating, "The environmental justice movement is the result of the failure of federal, state, and local governments to address the policies that sited toxic dumps in communities of color, put highways through communities of color and low-income areas, and that allow corporations to profit at the cost of public health." Mr. Hernandez believes this attitude is prevalent in the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), because its board of directors are appointed elected officials from various entities in the Los Angeles area, including the board of supervisors, the mayor's office, and city council members. Mr. Hernandez indicatedthat the board of directors' priority is to build a costly light rail system at the expense of the bus-riding public, who are usually low-income, working-class people, people of color, the disabled, blind, students, senior citizens, and people who have no other choice but to ride the bus.
Mr. Hernandez discussed the MTA's elimination of the $42 bus pass and an increase in bus fare. He said the pass was needed most by low-income people. He explained that these measures took care of the $123 million deficit. However, one week later, the board voted to construct a $123 million rail line in Pasadena, which is a suburban, mostly white enclave. Mr. Hernandez stated, "When poor or minority people ask for buses, they get buses that are dilapidated, falling apart, crowded, and urine-smelling. Transportation that is sleek, clean, and highly-secured are supplied to affluent communities." Mr. Hernandez said that as a result of these issues, the Labor Community Strategy Center contacted the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and filed a lawsuit charging the MTA with violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Along with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Labor Community Strategy Center has worked with the American Civil Liberties Union, local organizations such as the Crowee Immigration Workers, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in Los Angeles, and the Bus Riders Union.
Mr. Hernandez closed by stating that the Labor Community Strategy Center's primary goals for 1995 and 1996 include a dramatic increase in the size and power of the growing constituency for a bus-centered, zero-emission transit system in Los Angeles, and to continue the search for creative alliances of transit users.
REPORT ON STUDY OF SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS WITH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN MACON; BIBB COUNTY, GA
David Oedell
Mercer University Law School, Macon, GeorgiaProfessor David Oedell described the transportation system in Macon, Georgia and grassroots initiatives. He told conference participants that during the 1950's, many citizens rode buses, and the buses were then a profit-making business. Since then, the government has increasingly subsidized roads, streets, highways, and cheap gas. Meanwhile many Americans have grown more affluent, bought cars, and moved to the suburbs. Bus systems in cities like Montgomery, Alabama and Macon, Georgia have become disfavored and are used only by the poorest of people. Today, bus riders are left with a disproportionately small share of public funds while most of the funds are spent on other types of transportation, mainly roads and highways.
Mr. Oedell outlined a study that explored the systemic problems associated with public transportation in Macon, Bibb County. The study concluded that the inadequate service provided by the Macon Transit Service appears to be indirectly attributable to discrimination against the transit system's primary rider ship, low-income African Americans. He offered the following information on Macon's transportation system:
· 89% of riders in Macon are poor African Americans.
· 50% of Macon's population is African American, 50% is white.
· In 1993, about 28% of African American households were carless, while 6% of white households were carless.
· 74% of households without cars in Bibb County are African American.
· The bus system basically serves the African American community in the inner-city area.
· There is no Sunday service, and services are reduced on Saturday.
· 14% of people in Macon are without cars; however only 4% of public funds in Macon are going towards public transit.
Mr. Oedell explained that the unsatisfactory state of the Macon Transit Authority service is mostly attributable to inadequate funding. The Macon Transit Authority receives less in public funds per inhabitant than any other surveyed city in Georgia. On the average, the other transit authorities in Georgia receive $37.34 per inhabitant in public funds annually. He told conference participants that in Macon, the Transit Authority receives only $8.88 per inhabitant in public funds. Mr. Oedell found it startling that the Macon Transit Authority refuses to accept funds authorized for the Transit Authority by Congress, the President, and the federal and state transportation agencies. The Transit Authority's refusal to accept funds has resulted in the loss of many millions of dollars over the years. In stark contrast, Bibb County and Macon have actively solicited federal funding for road, highway, and airport transportation that services the predominantly white population. He suggested that we must begin to look at transportation issues as constitutional issues. Mr. Oedell stated, "Agencies must look within themselves to solve the issue around fairness and planning. I am optimistic that we can all work together, but its going to take a lot of work."
GRASSROOTS INITIATIVES IN CHICAGO
Jackie Grimshaw
Center for Neighborhood Technology, Chicago, IllinoisJackie Grimshaw began by addressing the Chicago Transit Authority's (CTA) planned closure of the Lake Street rapid transit line, Green Line, on the west side of the City of Chicago. In order to stop the closure, community residents formed the Lake Street El Coalition. The line provided vital access for residents to get to their jobs and educational institutions as well as medical and other services. Ms. Grimshaw explained that the CTA made the decision to discontinue service because the investment needed to maintain the line could not be justified based on rider ship figures. During the peak year of 1970, there were about 37,000 riders a day on the Green Line. When the line closed in 1994, there were only about 15,000 riders. Ms. Grimshaw noted, "In spite of the disinvestment, there was still a need for poor people to have access to public transportation. In some cases, this is their only means of transportation."
The Lake Street El Coalition asked the Center for Neighborhood Technology to assist them develop strategies to prevent the CTA from closing the line. The Center for Neighborhood Technology suggested the use of transit-oriented development as a way to address not only the transit issue, but also the community and economic-development issues. In addition, air quality analysis was conducted, and results indicated that increased rider ship would render beneficial results. Ms. Grimshaw reported that after the community, the Coalition, and the Center for Neighborhood Technology unveiled their plans, the CTA announced that they would not shut down the line, but instead would invest $323 million to rehabilitate it. In January 1994, the line was temporarily closed to undergo construction. It is scheduled to reopen in March 1996, three months later than originally planned.
The Center for Neighborhood Technology also worked with the CTA to develop a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) proposal. Ms. Grimshaw noted that although CTA insisted that the City of Chicago sponsor the project, the funds have not been released.
The Coalition and its advisors linked transportation with neighborhood revitalization, home ownership, and reversing flight from the city. They used existing requirements under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act to make their voices heard. Other Chicago-based community groups have focused their attention on the positive effects of a new superstation.
Not only did the Coalition members achieve success in stopping the permanent closure of the Green Line, but they also demonstrated that transit-oriented development can have a positive spill over effect in rebuilding the central city. With an infusion of $100 million dollars for Chicago's Enterprise Zone, there is great potential for improving public transit and life in low-income neighborhoods.
CHAPTER 5: EMPOWERMENT AND ENTERPRISE ZONES
PLENARY PANEL
Moderator: John L. Perry, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Barbara Smith, Philadelphia Jobs With Peace Program, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Vernice Miller, Natural Resources Defense Council, New York, New York
Elizabeth Toomer, Southeastern Michigan Coalition on Occupational Safety and Health, Detroit, Michigan Hakim Yamine, Empowerment Zone Corporation of Atlanta, Atlanta, GeorgiaREBUILDING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
John L. Perry
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Atlanta, GeorgiaJohn L. Perry opened his discussion by stating, "The Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community Program is designed to empower people and communities all across this country. It was created to pull together within the communities jobs and opportunities." He noted that in December of last year, the President announced the designation of six urban empowerment zones, two supplemental zones, four enhanced enterprise communities, and sixty urban enterprise communities. In addition, three rural empowerment zones and thirty rural enterprise communities were designated. This designation means additional funding, tax credits, and significant opportunities for those areas designated.
Mr. Perry outlined four principles that guided the designation of an area as an empowerment zone, and these principles represent the key steps in rebuilding a community:
· Economic Opportunity&emdash;Creating jobs, attracting private investments, expanding jobs for residences.
· Sustainable Community Development&emdash;Once you get the job, how do you keep it going? How do you make change in a community? How do you involve the physical and human developments that are necessary: safe streets, clean air, and commitment to the community?
· Community-Based Partnerships&emdash;It cannot be a federal or city downward plan. It must involve the participation of the entire community. It must be a partnership, involving community residents, community groups, private and non-profit sectors, education and religious institutions, and local and state government. It has to be a holistic approach.
· Strategic Vision &emdash;The rebuilding effort must include a vision of what the community is to become.
These four principles became the foundation for what is referred to as the strategic plan to create job opportunities and to carry out sustainable community development. The empowerment zones target low-income areas that suffer from pervasive poverty and also have serious problems with environmental infrastructure and affordable housing. A majority of the zones also cited land contamination and lead-base paint as serious impediments to urban redevelopment
Mr. Perry discussed HUD's strategy on environmental justice. He stated, "The strategy outlines HUD's priorities and the direction it wants to go as it relates to environmental justice. It includes discussions on the empowerment zones, the prevention of childhood lead poisoning, the greening of urban Brownfields, and the revitalization of distressed rural communities along the U.S./Mexican border. The strategy identifies the environmental issues confronting the communities, evaluates their difference today, and proposes a series of next steps to insure implementation of priorities."
BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS THROUGH COMMUNICATION
Barbara Smith
Philadelphia Jobs With Peace Program, Philadelphia, PennsylvaniaBarbara Smith spoke about her involvement with Jobs With Peace and the Healthy Start Program. Ms. Smith indicated that she was the first African American woman in the state of Pennsylvania to lead a peace campaign. Jobs With Peace, in response to decreased funding for advocacy programs, decided to put most of its resources into a neighborhood located in Mansfield, West Philadelphia. It is a neighborhood where Ms. Smith once lived and worked, and is presently home to approximately 25,000 African Americans. Difficulties faced by this community include a 70% unemployment rate. The city has one of the highest infant mortality rate in the nation. Ms. Smith told conference participants that the only supermarket in the neighborhood burned down three summers ago. There is no drug store or clinic in this West Philadelphia neighborhood.
The Mansfield neighborhood borders Philadelphia's empowerment zone. Ms. Smith stressed, however, that for a community to be selected as an empowerment zone is not enough, but rather, people must build trust to be able to communicate effectively and establish good working partnerships. She stated, "In order to build effective partnerships across class and race, we have to factor in transportation and government sensitivity workshops."
Ms. Smith also suggested that America must begin to appreciate the inner-city, particularly the African American and Latino American males. "We must not put them down. We must not continue to build prison systems while our school systems are decaying. We must connect youth programs with transit systems and other empowerment zone initiatives." Ms. Smith went on to suggest that newspapers be encouraged to balance negative issues with positive stories. In closing, Ms. Smith suggested that we begin to communicate and listen to communities. "Our coalitions must be coordinated to meet with communities on issues that communities identify."
THE CASE OF WEST HARLEM
Vernice Miller
Natural Resources Defense Council, New York, New YorkVernice Miller reported that transportation is a huge issue in New York City, particularly in the greater Harlem community. "All of the mass transportation systems and bus lines will take you through Harlem," Ms. Miller said. She explained that after Harlem became a majority African American and Latino community, the land-use policy of New York City sited seven of the eight municipal bus depots in the Harlem community. These bus depots have very significant environmental impacts on the community. In addition, Ms. Miller stated that Harlem is dissected by hazardous waste transportation routes, encircled by highways, and surrounded by twenty-seven environmentally undesirable facilities.
Ms. Miller spoke about the Harlem North River Sewage Treatment Plant, which happens to be across the street from her home. Community efforts around this issue resulted in the formation of the West Harlem Environmental Action. Another issue that West Harlem Environmental Action organized to fight was the siting of the seventh municipal bus depot in West Harlem. A law suit was filed in the bus depot siting issue, but New York Supreme Court sided with the New York City Mass Transit Authority. The MTA prevailed, and an environmental impact statement was not performed before building the depot. Now the new bus depot is on line across the street from the sewage plant and across a street from a junior high school and a 18,000 unit, federally-subsidized apartment complex.
Ms. Miller explained that West Harlem Environmental Action was successful in blocking a proposed project called Harlem on the Hudson. This project was sponsored by the Harlem Development Corporation, a subsidiary of the New York State Urban Development Corporation. The Harlem Development Corporation was founded to build low- and moderate-income housing in Harlem. The plan included building large housing projects, as opposed to its chartered mission of developing low-income, moderate housing. The ground floor of Harlem on the Hudson would be the roof of a bus depot, and low- and moderate-income housing and senior citizen housing would occupy the first four floors of the structure. "We filed a lawsuit," Ms. Miller said, "and even the judge could see this was not putting land to good use. The Harlem on the Hudson project was thrown out."
Ms. Miller indicated that she was surprised and pleased when the MTA asked that she and Peggy Shepard, the Director of West Harlem Environmental Action, served as co-chair of the Environmental Working Group of the Empowerment Zone. Ms. Miller noted, "I think we were selected because of the work we have done and because we have been the driving force around the argument and debate concerning land-use, environmental quality, and racial justice."
DETROIT'S EMPOWERMENT ZONE
Elizabeth Toomer
Southeastern Michigan Coalition on Occupational Safety and Health, Detroit, MichiganElizabeth Toomer began by indicating that not only has her Detroit community been denied access to the table, but the young people have been completely left out. She emphasized that young people have been forced to deal with problems that were created by prior generations. Ms. Toomer suggested involving even elementary school students in the decision-making process. "Older people believe they know what is best for us," stated Ms. Toomer. "But young people also have something to say about what is going on in their communities."
She offered statistics which demonstrated the plight of Detroit's youth:
· Eighty percent of the children in Michigan that are lead-poisoned live in Detroit.
· Detroit has the highest infant mortality rate in the country. The rate is higher than 16 underdeveloped countries.
· 50% of the young people unemployed.
· There is a 30% dropout rate in schools.
· Out of 22 high schools in Detroit, colleges recruit at only three schools.
· Only 700 out of 22,000 students who graduate can compete at a college level.
Ms. Toomer reported that 70% of the wastes from Michigan is sent to Detroit and Wayne County, where there exists the highest rate of asthma and respiratory infections. She expressed concern that in the one-square mile area of Harper-Vandyke neighborhood, there are three recycling companies, three chemical companies, six steel processing companies, and twohazardous waste facilities, in addition to Chrysler and General Motors plants located in the community. In closing, she noted, "We have the interstates, the freeways, and the roads that carry people from the suburbs through our communities. We have to save the whales, but what about people? Saving the whale and the Spotted Owl is important, but what about black men and Native Americans? They are endangered species too."
ATLANTA'S EMPOWERMENT ZONE
Hakim Yamine
Empowerment Zone Corporation of Atlanta, Atlanta, GeorgiaHakim Yamine relayed to the audience that in the fall of 1993, President Bill Clinton unveiled the Empowerment Zone program, a critical element in the nation's strategy to revitalize urban communities. Under the program, six designated Empowerment Zones will receive substantial Federal grants and tax benefits and will gain access to other federal programs. The designation as a Federal Empowerment Zone is a result of partnerships between the affected community, businesses, government, and educational institutions committed to the city's vision of revitalizing inner-city neighborhoods.
As the Chair of Community Advisory Board for Atlanta's Empowerment Zone, Mr. Yamine emphasized the need for citizen input in all phases of planning and decision-making. Atlanta's Empowerment Zone consists of one interconnected area of a six square mile radius located south, east, and west of the central business district, consisting of thirty neighborhoods with more than 49,000 residents. Representatives from these thirty neighborhoods and six adjoining neighborhoods make up the Community Empowerment Advisory Board, which will offer community advice to the Empowerment Zone Corporation Executive Board on the distribution of funds. The Atlanta Empowerment Zone is targeted to receive more than $250 million in grants and tax incentives to revitalize the area. Funds will be distributed based on the priorities identified in the Strategic Plan submitted to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In Atlanta, the funding is aimed at developing affordable housing and supplying social services such as day care, aiding in the development of new businesses, and creating safe and livable communities.
Mr. Yamine welcomed the conference participants on behalf of the Empowerment Zone Corporation. In addition, he acknowledged Connie Tucker and Sulaiman Mahdi, Jane Fonda of the Turner Foundation, and the 50,000 people he works with every day. Mr. Yamine pointed out that environmental justice is a global issue, not just a local call to action. "We are called to do a task," he said, "and our task is to use our imaginations to create for human beings a new structure in which to exist."
CHAPTER 6: BREAKOUT GROUP SESSIONS - PART I
GROUP A: THE PROPOSED DOT ORDER
Moderator: Charles Lee, Commission for Racial Justice, New York, New York
Panelists:
Eugene Cleckley, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
Henry Holmes, Urban Habitat Program, San Francisco, CaliforniaIntroduction
This session examined the Proposed DOT Order that prescribes procedures to be followed in implementing Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-income Populations." This Order states ". . . each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations." The proposed DOT Draft Order applies to all appropriate DOT regulations, policies, guidance, and program activities as well as to any program, project, or activity undertaken by DOT or that receives financial assistance or permits from DOT, which may have environmental justice implications.
Discussions
Eugene Cleckley explained that the DOT Order was written to be applicable to all different modes of transportation within the Department of Transportation, including surface transportation, aviation, and the Coast Guard. He stated that the draft proposal presented at the conference was written generically to encompass a wide variety of agencies. "The approach was to take the Executive Order, and with regard to Title VI and NEPA, mesh it into existing regulations and procedures," he explained. All future actions from the Department of Transportation will reflect the Executive Order, Title VI, and how they all relates to NEPA. Each mode of transportation will take the Executive Order and develop a strategy for carrying out the order.Mr. Cleckley noted that the purpose of the DOT Order is to:
· Insure greater stakeholder participation and involvement in decision-making.
· Direct resources to identify discriminatory outcomes, disproportionate impacts, inequitable distribution of investments, and civil implications.
· Improve research, data collection, and assessment techniques.
· Promote interagency cooperation in transportation planning, development, and program implementation to achieve livable, healthy, and sustainable communities.
Henry Holmes, who directs transportation projects for the Urban Habitat Program, pointed out the need to define terms such as adverse impact. He indicated that it must be determined who will make the definitions, and what standard or criteria will be used for definitions. "When we speak of adverse impacts, are we talking about health impacts, future impacts, and use-development impacts, or economic impacts?" he questioned. Mr. Holmes suggested that there should be a shared language that addresses environmental justice, and a common understanding of what it means in the context of transportation policy and the transportation system.
Mr. Holmes stressed the importance of forming partnerships and collaborations through effective communication, and that participatory decision-making is essential in the development of a framework for establishing strategies. He felt that the DOT Order should specifically address ISTEA, because ISTEA is a major piece of federal legislation that allows for different modes of transportation planning. It also has specific planning factors for the states and MPOs, and it has a great proactive mandate for public participation.
Recommendations:
· A collaboration of efforts to build partnerships, realizing that partnerships are not built overnight.
· Establish common language or definitions so that parties involved in the partnerships can communicate effectively and understand the intent of the Order.
· Deal with environmental justice issues at the conception of proposed plans.
· Do not eliminate involvement of MPOs, but encourage MPOs and local and state officials to work with ISTEA towards the goals of environmental justice issues.
· DOT Order should reference existing laws and regulations, especially ISTEA, to establish a mind-set that truly addresses environmental justice issues.
· Residents of impacted communities should not be just part of the process, but also recipients of dollars being spent.
· Award work contracts to residents who live in the impacted communities (i.e., restoration and remediation of project).
· Realize there are court rulings which define adverse impact and disproportionate impact.
· Emphasis should be placed on alternative methods of transportation and not just new roads.
· The Order should be amended to include a "No New Roads" policy.
· Explain to the general public that the DOT Order is an internal document that says that each department must think about environmental justice in everything they do.
· Make the public aware of regulations.
· Provide training for federal officials and local officials.
GROUP B: HEALTH AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS
Moderator: Susana Almanza, Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice, Austin, Texas
Panelists:
Samara Swanston, New York Department of Environmental Conservation, New York, New York
Gerald Poje, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland
Sid Davis, Southern College of Technology, Marietta, Georgia
Sandra Coulberson, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, Georgia
Joseph Ossi, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DCIntroduction
Public health concerns make up a major part of the environmental justice field. Improved designs, methodologies, and measures are needed to assess and mitigate disproportionate health effects (including multiple and cumulative impacts) of DOT or DOT-funded programs, policies, and activities under NEPA and other environmental laws. Because negative impacts often fall heaviest on low-income and people of color communities, better techniques are needed to link health and environmental databases, evaluate potential biases toward environmental impacts over community impacts, and assess social and economic impacts, as required by the ISTEA, during planning, programming, and project development.
Discussions
Samara Swanston, an attorney with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, asserted that transportation issues have a profound impact on people of color communities. Siting the high percentage of deaths from asthma by African Americans (triple the rate of whites), Ms. Swanston noted, "There is strong presumptive evidence that disadvantaged and minority communities routinely experience greater than average environmental exposure. I lost two family members to asthma deaths within the past five years." She discussed how "urban sprawl," a condition created by people moving into the suburbs and commuting to work, has contributed to noise and air pollution. Ms. Swanston suggested that vehicle miles traveled must be reduced, car pooling encouraged, better land-use planning implemented, and that the 1990 Clean Air Act as well as the nation's energy policy should be strengthened. "We must deal with policies and Acts that are already in place and stop repealing and delaying Acts," she said.
Gerald Poje, a research scientist with the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, told the group that fifteen months ago, his agency co-sponsored with other federal agencies, such as the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a major symposium to address research in health needs. This effort helped in the development of Health and Human Services (HHS) Environmental Justice Strategy. The symposium addressed childhood lead poisoning and respiratory diseases and air pollution. He stressed that African Americans, Latinoes, and Asian Americans are disproportionately represented in areas with high ozone and air pollution levels, with up to 69% of children from minority groups living in areas that exceeded the .08 ppm ozone level between the years 1991-1993. Dr. Poje stated that children have a much greater susceptibility to pollution than adults, and we must first identify the dilemma, and then set an agenda to address the problem.
Dr. Poje outlined the NIEHS departmental environmental justice strategy as follows:
· To form partnerships to enhance the community capacity to participate before decisions are made.
· To provide and seek education and training. Agency and staff must be trained on environmental justice issues and strategy.
· To include the public when performing data analysis and collection.
· To develop new health research models to be used to study populations, communities, and exposures and diseases in small populations of people.
· To look at multiple and cumulative exposures to hazards.
· To develop new biological markers on risk factors.
Dr. Sid Davis pointed out that the DOT Environmental Justice Executive Order provides people with an additional opportunity to defend their interests through legal redress and to reshape transportation investment outcomes. He discussed the need for environmental justice principals to be supported by government mandate as well as by concerned individuals at the local level.
Sandra L. Coulberson explained the functions of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It is a public service agency located in Atlanta, Georgia that works closely with the Centers for Disease Control and the United States Environmental Protection Agency in addressing environmental health-related issues. The agency is primarily responsible for: (1) conducting public health assessments, health consultations and investigations, (2) developing toxicological profiles, (3) conducting community and health professional training and education, (4) conducting and sponsoring applied research, and (5) providing health-related support in response to emergency situations. Her agency is responsible for providing technical advice and consultation to private citizens, local, state, and federal agencies in the event of an acute release of a hazardous substance.
Joseph Ossi, of the Federal Transit Authority, explained to conference participants that in metropolitan areas, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) decide how federal funds will be spent. He did not feel that the public is involved early enough in the planning process. Mr. Ossi noted, "The public needs to get involved in decisions such as how much money to spend on highways versus transportation; how much do we put in to rehabilitating existing highways versus building new ones; and how much money is spent on the north side versus the south side."
Mr. Ossi emphasized that the proposed DOT Order requires agencies to consider the following when proposing transportation projects:
· Air, noise and vibration pollution, soil contamination, park land, and recreational facilities.
· Transportation facilities that are aesthetically appealing.
· Transportation facilities that provide access to public facilities and public services.
· Transportation facilities that promote community cohesiveness.
· Transportation facilities that do not negatively impact employment opportunities.
Recommendations:
· Consider the impact on quality of life when communities are displaced by highways.
· Consider using the National Historic Preservation Act as a defense to stop projects in old communities.
· Evaluate diversity of MPOs and examine the way the MPOs are working with the state DOTs.
· Evaluate the use and possible misuse of ISTEA funds.
· Determine the availability of ISTEA funds.
· Evaluate health effects due to transportation-related emissions.
· Include public involvement in the beginning and at higher levels.
· Put to better use congestion mitigation funds and make funds available to public advocacy groups.
· Provide education and empower communities to get involved.
· Make the Title VI process and necessary forms available to communities.
· Look at sitings of bus depots.
· Increase mass transit funding.
· Revise National Health Standard to reflect actual levels of concerns.
· Educate the community on health impacts associated with children, ozone levels, and transportation projects.
· Evaluate emissions, both cumulative and multiple exposures.
· Improve research data collection and assessment technique.
· Promote interagency cooperation and transportation planning and development.
· Communicate the planning process on a basic level; use English and Spanish versions.
· Examine health impacts on isolated communities and segregated communities.
· Include public involvement in evaluation of MPO certification reviews.
GROUP C: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND OUTREACH
Moderator: Joyce Rhyan, National Institute for Community Empowerment, Dallas, Texas
Panelists:
Fred Skaer, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
Raul Alvarez, People Organized in Defense of the Earth and Her Resources, Austin, Texas
Jim Chapman, Campaign for a Prosperous Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia
Arthur Cole, The Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolence and Social Change, Atlanta, Georgia
Sally Hill Cooper, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, DCIntroduction
Public involvement is an important ingredient in effective transportation planning. State DOTs and MPOs are challenged with the task of involving culturally diverse stakeholders early in the planning process and during project development as in the case of ISTEA. The question is how to design and evaluate effective public involvement techniques, workshops, educational materials, technical assistance, and strategies in partnership with culturally diverse stakeholder groups.
Discussions
Fred Skaer stressed that public involvement in the transportation planning and project development process should begin earlier. He pointed out that when ISTEA passed in 1991, it did not include a lot of language that would require a public hearing. When developing the Department's planning regulations, it was decided to adopt additional performance standards that specifically discuss "early involvement." The Department seeks to improve public involvement through the following initiatives:
· Developed a public involvement policy that was signed by Gordon Linton and Rodney Slater in December, 1994.
· Developed a book, "Innovations in Public Involvement for Transportation Planning." The book offers techniques to improve public involvement.
· Conducted research which focuses on minority and low-income communities.
· Developing a course on public involvement strategies and programs.
Mr. Skaer explained, "In order to insure that the federal, state, and local governments are accountable for our actions, we currently have a certification process in place for metropolitan transportation planning. We must certify that the MPOs are doing their job and that the public involvement process is in line with ISTEA."
Raul Alvarez, an organizer with the Austin-based People Organized in Defense of the Earth and Her Resources, has worked on issues that impact a community in Austin, Texas. This community is comprised largely of African Americans and Latino Americans. Some of the issues include the closing of gasoline stations and power plants, and military base conversions. Currently, the organization is working with the Surface Transportation Policy Project to increase the understanding of transportation decision-making in communities. Mr. Alvarez's group is trying to develop a system for improving outreach and empower communities to become more involved with transportation issues.
Jim Chapman reported that bicyclists have benefited better under ISTEA than any other special interest group, and there are certain issues about bicyclists that can be transferable to other groups not already involved in planning. He noted, "We seek greater public involvement so that we can have an exchange of information, solicit public comment and ideas, identify circumstances or impacts that were not considered by agency representatives or sponsors of projects, and build public support."
Arthur Cole, of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolence and Social Change, reminded the group that public involvement is maximized through partnerships. He emphasized that an important issue to be addressed is the desired outcome of public involvement and how it is measured in terms of health and economic indicators. Mr. Cole suggested that there is a distinction between involving community-based groups or involving individual residents, and individual viewpoints should be considered when making transportation decisions. The input of residents in neighborhoods should be solicited. He advised the group on ways in which public support can be broadened.
Sally Hill Cooper discussed her agency's functions. She stated that where ISTEA has helped to open up the planning process, rail and community groups need to be persistent to insure that change occurs. Established primarily as a regulatory (safety) agency, the Federal Railroad Administration has little grant money or grant authority, but the agency works with the Federal Transit Administration and the Federal Highway Administration, piggy-backing on a number of their programs. Ms. Cooper told the group that last year, FRA and FHWA worked together and conducted nine workshops for Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and railroads. These workshops were designed to help MPOs and railroads understand how the actions of one can impact the other, and how ongoing cooperation can improve results, reduce disputes, and misunderstandings can be minimized, saving time and resources. Ms. Cooper reported that since ISTEA, some MPOs have formed freight advisory councils to address freight issues. These issues can be important to communities. For example, if congestion on access roads to intermodal terminals is reduced, surrounding communities benefit.
Recommendations:
· Insure greater stakeholder participation and public involvement in transportation issues.
· DOT should develop information systems that will inform the community on types of materials transported, schedule of transports, and potential hazards.
· Introduce proposed projects in the developmental stages.
· Material Safety Data Sheets should be made available to the community through community centers, churches, etc.
· Develop ways to get information to people (including the handicapped, people without transportation, people who cannot read).
· Develop phone bank to get the elderly and children involved.
· Develop partnerships between communities and public and/or private organizations.
· Hold local officials accountable.
· Provide training to local officials, especially in rural areas.
· Make community involvement a process not an event.
· Allocate resources to identify and address discrimination outcomes, disproportionate impacts, and inequitable distribution of investments.
· Direct resources to the MPOs to work on projects.
· Direct funds into impacted communities.
· Develop citizens advisory groups on local level.
· Use local residents to collect data and develop a community profile database.
GROUP D: RESEARCH NEEDS
Moderator: Bob Holmes, Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Doug Birnie, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, DC
Warren Banks, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
Eric T. Hill, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
Samaad Bishop, South Bronx Clean Air, Bronx, New YorkIntroduction
A growing body of research is underway to support environmental justice, social equity, and transportation needs in low-income and people of color communities. This session explored some of the major transportation-related research areas where work is needed (i.e., distributive impacts and Clean Air Act Amendment, energy conservation, sustainability, contracting, facility siting, transport and routing of hazardous and radioactive materials, equity in investments, funding, quality and availability of service, and land-use).
Discussions
Doug Birnie, of the Federal Transit Administration, reported that like a lot of agencies that have just published their environmental justice strategies, the FTA did not consult with the community before developing its strategy. This was due to time constraints. The FTA is trying, however, to incorporate environmental justice in all of its on-going activities and develop a research and data-collection strategy. Mr. Birnie noted that the FTA will conduct meetings with grassroots groups around the country over the next nine months and will have a national meeting in February 1996 to discuss what was learned in these meetings.
Mr. Birnie listed the following activities around environmental justice at the FTA:
· Public involvement&emdash;Get people involved, and even if the administration changes, issues can stay alive.
· ISTEA&emdash; Legislation enacted in 1991 to reauthorize the Mass Transit Highway Act, ISTEA gave flexibility to communities to spend money in the communities in which they live.
Warren Banks, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), informed the group that although it has been recognized for a while that risks from environmental stressors can accumulate and the resulting cumulative effects may be an important determinant of public health and environmental quality, there is an acute shortage of decision rules and tools for cumulative risk assessment. There is an emerging consciousness that "cumulative risk" should be taken into account when making decisions about protection of public health and environmental quality, and that it is widely acknowledged that some socio-demographic groups (e.g., poor minority communities) and/or residents of certain geographic areas (e.g., inner-cities) may be at disproportionately higher risk than the general population when the cumulative effects of exposures to multiple toxicants are considered. Despite the growing prominence of cumulative risk in public policy debates, it is apparent that different groups and individuals use this and related terms in different ways. The absence of standard definitions and common concepts seriously hinders constructive dialogue among important stakeholders.
EPA is charged with protecting the public health and the environment. Dr. Banks explained that in carrying out this responsibility, the agency uses the tool of risk assessment to help identify and rectify environmental threats. The need for new approaches and methodologies should not preclude the EPA from using the present state-of-the-science in a way that will yield a more comprehensive characterization of risk. "It is therefore the intent of the EPA to more fully address the multiple stressors, sources, pathways, and adverse effects to which a target entity is exposed as well as risk assessments such as socioeconomic factors," Dr. Banks noted.
Dr. Banks further stated that although many of EPA's current activities reflect an increased emphasis on the need to assess cumulative risk more comprehensively, much work still needs to be done. "If the agency is to move forward in its ability to assess cumulative risks, it will be necessary to bring together researchers, assessors, and decision-makers, as well as important stakeholders, so agreement can be reached on what needs to be done and how best to do it."
Eric T. Hill, a researcher at the University of South Florida, explained the function of the Nationwide Personal Transportation Study (NPTS), which is to compile national data on the nature and characteristics of travel. NPTS addresses a broad range of travel in the US and provides data on all personal trips by all purposes and all modes of transportation. This data may be used to describe current travel patterns and is a valuable trend-analysis tool to forecast future travel demand. NPTS data can be used to research certain racial and ethnic groups in our society, including African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians.
Mr. Hill reported that the analysis of travel characteristics of African Americans in the United States revealed that the four indicators of travel (vehicle trip, vehicle miles of travel, person trip, and person miles of travel) increased between 1983 and 1990. Greater access to employment opportunities and services within African American communities, or from these communities to suburban locations, is needed in order for these communities to prosper economically and socially.
A requirement of the Intermodal Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) mandates increased community participation in developing transportation systems. "Policy-makers and planners at the state and local levels and in Metropolitan Planning Organizations need to give greater attention to travel demands of African Americans. The growing market also supports the desire for increased diversity in the composition of decision-makers in the transportation arena," he said. Transportation officials at the federal, state, and local levels should consider the implications of future policies and plans on African Americans and include this population when developing transportation systems. The changes merit continued close observation of African American travel behavior and needs.
Samaad Bishop, a member of South Bronx Clean Air, explained that it is important in the South Bronx to look at diesel emissions in relation to transportation. Mr. Bishop explained that one goal of his group is to get mobile monitors to monitor the PM10 emissions in his area. Concerning public involvement, Mr. Bishop noted, "In the Bronx, how do we get people interested? We must make people feel that they are a part of the process, and not that public participation is just some 'dog and pony show.' "
Recommendations:
· Maximize public involvement, empower communities to participate, and provide training and education.
· Get community input at the very beginning of a project.
· Determine cumulative risks by using technology such as GIS, computer models, hazardous zone assessments, etc.
· Develop Public/Private Partnerships to find areas of common interests and create win/win situations.
· Conduct a research project to determine the effectiveness of environmental justice mitigation measures by identifying what was done, and how it may impact the community.
· Conduct research that will develop performance measures for rating agencies' environmental strategies, implementation, and programs.
· Develop partnerships with curriculum in schools to bring people to the forefront in looking at environmental justice issues.
GROUP E: NEPA, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, AND CIVIL RIGHTS
Moderator: George Duffy, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
Panelists:
Bob Knox, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
Jim DeLaLoza, Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, California
Grover Hankins, Texas Southern University Law School, Houston, Texas
Fern Shepherd, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, Washington, DCIntroduction
Panelists in this session explored some of the strategies and actions that are needed to integrate environmental justice into NEPA guidance and transportation impact assessment. They also examined key litigation, disputes, and equity concerns associated with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and NEPA analysis of DOT or DOT-funded activities among state DOTs and MPOs. Speakers focused on ISTEA, statewide transportation planning agencies and MPOs, and environmental justice guidance in assessing and mitigating adverse effects of transportation projects, policies, and practices on low-income and people of color communities.
Discussions
Bob Knox, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, reported that his agency is addressing environmental justice issues in several ways, such as helping industry to understand the concept of environmental justice and addressing communities that were not included when EPA was initially formed and regulations were written. Many communities had no political voice to oppose industry sites prior to 1965. Mr. Knox stated that EPA is conducting GIS studies throughout the country at sites that are known to have pollution problems and going to the communities to determine if there is disproportionate distribution of pollution. Sites that have multiple pollution sources are being specifically studied.
Mr. Knox explained that EPA is looking at cumulative impact, not just single industries and single emissions. "We are looking at what happens when emissions are mixed," he noted. "When regulations were written at EPA, cumulative effects were not considered. As a result, dumps were cleared and public housing was constructed in the midst of different types of industries, creating what is called toxic donuts. Even if the industries are in compliance, the people in the community are often still at risk because of the cumulative effect."
Mr. Knox outlined some issues EPA is currently investigating:
· Indoor and outdoor air pollution
· Facility sitings
· Education of the community
· Garbage collection in communities
· Hazardous waste disposal
· Lead poisoning
· NEPA
· Occupational Health and Safety
· University/Neighborhood Partnership (technical voice for the community)
Mr. Knox listed several ways that EPA is working to promote community-based environmental protection: (1) providing grants to communities so that they can hire technical experts to advise them on environmental issues; (2) helping start resource centers where communities can obtain real information; and (3) encouraging universities to become the catalyst to bring industry and community people to the table. He reported that industry is beginning to recognize that environmental justice issues are not going to go away as long as the communities are aware and as long as the communities equate environmental justice with environmental health.
Jim DeLaLoza, a planner with the Los Angeles Authority of Metropolitan Transportation, described a successful transportation project in which the community was involved from the beginning. He reported that in 1989, a congressman representing the east side of Los Angeles (which is 90% Hispanic) realized that most of the rail projects were going to the west of Los Angeles although the east side had the highest dependency on public transportation. The congressman asked the question, 'Why isn't the east side getting any projects?' Once this issue was brought up, a transportation project that was scheduled for some time in the future was pushed forward. He explained, "We started a community planning project in which the community got involved in order to maximize the benefits of the project to the community, with a strong emphasis on public participation, urban design, transit, economics, and housing." Mr. DeLaLoza emphasized that the entire community was involved, and so was every elected official in the area, including four congressman, two local representatives, and an advisory committee.
Grover Hankins, a professor at Texas Southern University Law School in Houston, noted that NEPA establishes a broad national policy to insure that the general welfare is protected for future and present generations. NEPA requires federal agencies to prepare an EIS for all major federal actions that will significantly affect the quality of human environment. The statue merely requires federal agencies to include an EIS with all final reports. "The only people who benefit," said Mr. Hankins, "are the consultants who prepare the EIS paperwork and the law professors who criticize them."
Mr. Hankins went on to explain that although Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been on the books for 31 years, it has mainly been used for municipal service cases and desegregation efforts with regard to schools, swimming pools, hospitals, etc. He suggested that because of a lack of environmental justice statutes, there is a new focus on environmental areas and Title VI. He expressed a belief that the problem with Title VI is that the institutional memory for litigating Title VI is fading fast, and nobody is trying to revitalize it. Mr. Hankins noted, "The courts are unaware of the impact of Title VI, and the judges must therefore be educated. Some judges want to limit Title VI's impact; therefore, there is a lot of litigation caution."
Mr. Hankins offered several examples to illustrate the disproportionate impact minority communities often endure. He told the group about a Port Arthur, Texas neighborhood that is comprised mostly of African Americans. The homes are small and people cannot get fire insurance. Therefore, the residents of that community are unable to enhance the value of their property. He spoke of a neighborhood in Corpus Christi, Texas, comprised of African Americans and Latinoes, where the zoning was changed in 1948. Prior to the zoning change, two refineries were located near the community. Now there are from 12 to 14 refineries and over 2,000 storage tanks. A Latino community leader came before the city council to have the zoning and deed restrictions changed, but his request was denied since the developer is the only one who could make that change request. Mr. Hankins noted, "Transportation of refuse in people of color communities in disproportionate numbers, rail car emissions associated with the transport of toxins on trucks, and diesel emissions from trucks and buses near our schools are all transportation-related issues. Environmental justice must be considered when planning transportation projects."
Fern Shepard, an attorney with the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, spoke of the Barney Circle Freeway, a proposed federally-financed freeway that will run adjacent to the Anacostia River, cutting through neighborhoods and park lands in southeast Washington, D.C. Ms. Shepard explained that southeast Washington is overwhelmingly African American and middle-to-low-income. The city's highest poverty rates are in this area. In her opinion, the construction of this freeway would have many severe environmental impacts, including:
· Excavating 70,000+ tons of lead-contaminated soil adjacent to residential neighborhoods;
· Adding 80,000+ cars and trucks, driving at freeway speeds directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods. This will add substantial air pollution (about 170 tons a day) and noise pollution to these neighborhoods and decrease property values;
· Paving over 17 acres of scarce park land and adding the sixth interstate bridge over the Anacostia River, the most endangered urban river in the country; and
Ms. Shepard stressed that this freeway construction was unnecessary since the missing freeway links can be supplied with low-cost, low-traffic, neighborhood- and park-protecting ramps. Ms. Shepard explained that the Barney Circle Freeway would cost the federal treasury more than $200 million to construct, at a time when the District's fiscal crisis already has resulted in severe cutbacks in city bus service and increases in transit fares. Even the proposed Metro subway construction is being threatened by cutbacks&emdash;the very transportation services that are so important for low-income city residents. With the assistance of the recipient of the 1993 Civil Engineering Award for Most Outstanding Highway Design, the community has developed an alternative to construction of the Barney Circle Freeway. Ms. Shepard is persuaded that this alternative would address the FHWA's concerns regarding missing highway links; it could be constructed at a fraction of the cost of the Barney Freeway; it would disturb less than two acres (as compared to 17 acres) of park land without bisecting the park; it would not require the excavation of hazardous wastes; and it would not disturb homes or businesses. Ms. Shepard indicated that FHWA had refused even to consider evaluating the community's alternative.
Residents have been fighting the Barney Circle Freeway for over a decade without success. These residents filed a lawsuit in 1993 against FHWA to get basic information about how this project would affect their lives&emdash;something the Environmental Justice Executive Order and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) require. The lawsuit also alleges that FHWA violated the Clean Air Act, Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (which prohibits the construction of federal highways through park land where prudent and feasible alternatives exist). Residents currently are investigating possible violations of various civil rights laws, including Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Recommendations:
· Provide legal assistance to communities dealing with environmental justice issues.
· Reward states that comply with Title VI and environmental justice issues.
· Promote grassroots involvement in policy decisions.
· Monitor Title VI enforcement by the states.
· Provide internal training to both the state and federal employees on Title VI, Environmental Justice and applicable regulations and guidelines.
· Merge Civil Rights functions in DOT.
· Consider impact on environment because of single occupancy vehicles.
· Hire community activists to work with the State DOT, so that the state can better interface with the community.
· Get agency staff into the communities.
· Get low-income people to the conferences.
· Send out mailing lists to impacted communities.
· Use user-friendly language when writing documents.
· Audit proposed projects to make sure environmental justice issues are addressed.
· Build trust between government and the people.
· Use creative measures to increase stakeholder and public involvement and participation.
· Educate the community.
· Focus on small groups (senior citizens, high school students, etc.)
· Schedule meetings at a time convenient for people who live in the affected communities.
· Develop bilingual information.
· Include Title VI analysis in EIS.
· Use MPOs to organize community action groups.
GROUP F: TRANSPORT OF HAZARDOUS AND RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
Moderator: Rep. Joseph Neal, South Carolina House of Representatives Columbia, South Carolina
Panelists:
Carol Bradley-West, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Cherokee, North Carolina
Dale Deese, Lumbee Legal Services, Pembroke, North Carolina
Mildred Myers, South Carolina Environmental Watch, Columbia, South Carolina
Curtis Thomas, Federal Highway Administration, Columbia, South Carolina
Ernest Burnhauser, Federal Railroad Administration, Atlanta, GeorgiaIntroduction
Panelists examined the environmental justice implications associated with the transport of hazardous and radioactive wastes through low-income and people of color communities. Routing along some major transportation corridors may pose disparate burdens on some populations as a results of accidents, explosions, and spills. The environmental justice implications of the DOE proposal to ship radioactive waste across North Carolina and South Carolina will be presented as a case study.
Discussions
Joseph Neal, a South Carolina State Representative, expressed his hope that this conference will give answers to some of his questions. "What do small communities do when the potential for accidents involving nuclear waste and other highly toxic forms of waste occurs? What resources exist at the federal level to help communities like those in South Carolina that have no infrastructure?"
Mr. Neal explained that South Carolina is planning to open the gates and take waste from wherever it may come, despite the fact that Chem Nuclear and the Savannah River Plant are already located there. Most of these facilities are located in poor, rural communities served by secondary, substandard roads. "In South Carolina," said Mr. Neal, "we have 24 Superfund sites, of which 23 are in communities of color; and 400 CERCLIS sites, of which 90% are in communities of color. We add to that South Carolina's recent move to position itself as the major depository of nuclear waste in this country and possibly in this world. The dangers and the hazards for us become even greater as this material comes in, because we are talking about millions of cubic feet of materials." Mr. Neal expressed concern that the enforcement of environmental laws and regulations are less stringent in low-income and people of color communities, and that emergency services were poorly equipped to deal with a disaster should one occur. He noted, "In South Carolina, what we see is the emergence of environmental racism, and we are scared."
Carol Bradley-West, of Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, reported that her group is presently concerned with the transportation of nuclear waste. She explained that there have been 89 railroad accidents in North Carolina since 1984, or one railroad accident every six weeks. Ms. Bradley&endash;West was concerned that in North Carolina, there are 148 public railroad crossings with only a few automated cross gates, flashing lights, and warning signs. "The first shipment of hazardous materials passed within 40 yards of residents along the railroad," she noted. "The health and general welfare of the residents was not a concern because they were poor, uneducated, minority people. This is a classic example of the people who generally get dumped on. No environmental assessment was made because it was determined that there was no significant impact that would require socioeconomic or environmental analysis." The Executive Order states that all federal agencies "shall" consider the environmental impact of projects and conduct analysis. Ms. Bradley-West stressed that this was not done before the shipmentsstarted. She concluded by saying, "Without some responsible actions by federal agencies, the Executive Order is meaningless."
Dale Deese, of Lumbee Legal Services, reported that Robeson County is the largest county in North Carolina and is located in the southeastern region of the state. Its population is multi-racial with a majority Native American and African American combined population of 65,000. Robeson County is home to the Lumbee, the largest Native American population in the eastern United States. Mr. Deese noted, "The rural, low-income, and multi-cultural dimensions of the county and its region in North Carolina have made the area a prime target for economic interests whose development projects abuse both the people and the locality."
He explained that Robeson County's major environmental problems are in the following areas: (1) continued targeting of its region of the state for major waste facilities and waste transportation, (2) significant toxic exposure and health risks in the county's numerous industrial and manufacturing plants, (3) major contamination of the Lumbee River, (4) contamination of ground and surface water from private and public waste generators, and (5) eight inactive hazardous waste sites that are on the state's priority list.
Mr. Deese told the group of a train carrying a high-level nuclear waste in the form of enriched uranium that in September 1994, traveled from Sunny Point Ocean terminal through Brunswick, Columbus and into Robeson County, until it reached the town of Pembroke. This train also traveled through other nearby towns and communities. Mr. Deese was concerned that a full environmental study has yet to be completed that takes into account the health, safety, and welfare of the people who live alongside the current rail route of the highly enriched uranium.
Mildred Myers, of South Carolina Environmental Watch, expressed concern regarding the amount of nuclear waste being transported on our highways, railways, and other modes of transportation. "Our community is already impacted with radioactive waste; however, no studies have been conducted to evaluate the number of cancers in our area," she said. Regarding the regulations governing radioactive waste, Ms. Myers did not think they were adequate when one considers the existing opportunity for destruction of people and property. "As a nation, I do not know how we are going to handle this nuclear waste problem because we are such large consumers. I do know that I want other states to handle their share of the waste. South Carolina bears the burden of most of the nuclear waste disposal, more than any other state and perhaps, any other nation."
Curtis Thomas, of the Federal Highway Administration, explained the function of the Office of Motor Carriers, a component of FHWA that is responsible for regulating all surface transportation in commerce, including general freight and the transport of hazardous materials and hazardous substances. With an office in every state, the agency has jurisdiction over shippers, manufacturers, inspection/testing facilities, and drum reconditioners. The Office of Motor Carriers monitors state programs and state activities, and provides technical assistance, guidance, and training directives to states, helping to develop comprehensive programs. Motor Carriers Safety Assistance Program funding is provided to states based on their programs. Mr. Thomas stated that the primary mission of the Office of Motor Carriers is to prevent accidents and hazardous materials incidents. Civil penalties, criminal penalties, and an "out-of-service" orders are mechanisms used to insure that the industry complies with the regulations. An "out-of-service order" is an order to cease all or part of a company's operations if that company is found to be in violation or if their safety ratings are less than satisfactory.
Mr. Thomas informed the group that in South Carolina, his agency has stepped up efforts to insure that everyone is informed about the Office of Motor Carriers and its role. "In South Carolina, there are no designated routes for hazardous material transportation," explained Mr. Thomas. "If you are in a state where there are designated routes, then find out what they are. Recently, laws have been developed that issue guidelines for selecting designated routes for the transportation of hazardous materials. If existing routes are not in compliance with these guidelines, then find out what can be done to change them." Mr. Thomas advised that although over 50% of all materials transported are petroleum products, identification and education of what is being transported is important. In that capacity, he announced that the Office of Motor Carriers will provide compliance seminars for anyone who needs training.
Ernest Burnhauser, of the Federal Railroad Administration, reported that FRA has an inspection force of about 385 field inspectors and supervisors. The five major disciplines inspected are: (1) Motive Power Equipment&emdash;the inspection of locomotives, (2) Track&emdash;inspection of tracks, (3) Signal Operators&emdash;inspection of the circuitry that operates railroads, (4) Operating Practices, and (5) Hazardous Materials. Due to the increase of rail road crossing deaths, a new discipline, Rail Crossings, has been recently created to address this problem.
Recommendations:
· Provide information on the materials being shipped, shipping routes/times, and any potential hazards to the people who live along the railroad tracks.
· Provide training and education to community people and local organization on materials being shipped.
· Provide information to communities on resources available to assist in training.
· Develop strategy to get information into rural communities.
· Identify community leaders.
· Provide research assistance through agencies such as CDC.
· Form agency/university partnerships that will bring college students into the communities to help.
· Provide tribal communities with equal consideration.
· Use creative methods to promote community participation and outreach.
CHAPTER 7: BREAKOUT GROUP SESSIONS - PART II
GROUP G: EMPOWERMENT AND ENTERPRISE ZONES
Moderator: Kathryn Rice, Atlanta Empowerment Zone, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Aretha Allen, Baltimore Empowerment Zone, Baltimore, Maryland
Reverend Calvin Peterson, Disabled In Action, Atlanta, GeorgiaIntroduction
Transportation planning has a key role in community economic development and restoration. The challenge in empowerment and enterprise zones is to offer community residents a greater role in local transportation decision-making, employment and investment opportunities, improved mobility (including disabled persons), tax credits and tax grants to businesses, resources to lift children and families out of poverty, adequate housing, and infrastructure to promote safe, healthy, livable, and sustainable communities.
Discussions
Aretha Allen, a Human Services worker from Baltimore, reported on her city's empowerment zone. She noted that in addition to the $100 million empowerment grant from the federal government and $223 million in tax benefits to businesses to help develop three areas of Baltimore, the Mayor has been successful in obtaining commitments from the state and private businesses for another $800 million to support empowerment zone communities.
Ms. Allen reported that the Baltimore Empowerment Management Corporation has formulated four programmatic committees to establish programs in the empowerment zone. The committees are:
· Economic Development and Job Training Committee: This committee is designed to attract new businesses in the various zones through tax credits and other attractive business incentives. It is also designed to bring various job training programs to the various zones. They are trying to attract various companies to establish job training sites in the various communities.
· Community Mobilization and Public Safety Committee: This committee is designed to organize all of the residents, businesses, and churches in the various empowerment zones. The group conducted a city-wide community mobilization meeting in which over 500 residents in the three empowerment zones met to organize the six village centers.
· Housing Committee: This committee is designed to attract new businesses into the zones and to address the vacant housing issues in the various zones.
· Health and Family Development Committee: This committee is designed to provide health and family development services to the families throughout the various empowerment zones.
Rev. Calvin Peterson, of Disabled In Action, began by thanking Dr. Bullard for allowing the concerns of people with disabilities to be heard. He noted that every two seconds a baby is born in this country with some type of disability. Using statistics for the City of Atlanta, Reverend Peterson's remarks focused on the failure of public policy to adequately address the needs of the disabled, and especially the disabled who live in poverty. He noted that there are 360,000 disabled individuals in Georgia, with 117,000 in Atlanta. Rev. Peterson said that despite the 1968 Occupational Barrier Act, there are still streets that do not have curve cuts as required. He also stressed the need for more handicapped-accessible public housing, while commenting on the scarcity of housing options for the disabled who are also poor. He stated that out of 14,000 public housing projects available in 1988 through the Atlanta Housing Authority, only 121 were handicapped-accessible. He also emphasized that based on Census Bureau records, African Americans who are disabled have the highest unemployment rate and therefore have fewer housing options. Reverend Peterson further noted that in Atlanta, there are approximately 2,000 disabled youth in high school and 568 in grammar school who will soon be heads of households. He asked, "If the Housing Authority is ill-equipped to accommodate the current needs of disabled citizens, where will the people go?"
Recommendations:
· Create consistency between federal and state officials as to how money and information is filtered to the local level.
· Identify funds available to empowerment and enterprise zones.
· Improve community involvement and public participation.
· Formulate partnerships.
· Create community advisory boards.
· Convince Congress to invest in communities.
· Develop outreach initiatives that are based on community needs.
GROUP H: TRANSPORTATION DECISION-MAKING
Moderator: Michelle DePass, New York City Environmental Justice Alliance, New York, New York
Panelists:
Charles J. Campbell, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Milbrey Heard, Atlanta Regional Commission, Atlanta, Georgia
Warren Williams, Georgia Transportation Alliance, Atlanta, GeorgiaIntroduction
This session explored the role of government decision-making in creating an open and fair transportation planning process. Major areas under investigation included the impact of locational decisions, land-use, investment and development strategies, and strategies to foster public involvement and interagency cooperation at the local, state, and federal level under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Clean Air Amendment (CAA), Americans with Disability Act (ADA), and the Civil Rights Act (CRA).
Discussions
Charles Campbell, an environmental planner with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, focused his comments on the State DOT's efforts to infuse public involvement in the transportation decision-making process. He noted that his Department had recently published a handbook called Getting Involved, which outlined a ten-step process used in his agency in making major transportation decisions. Four of the ten steps were highlighted:
· Internal administration procedures
· Agency and public scoping
· Definition and analysis of group project needs
· Preliminary alternative development review, where we identify environmental features
Mr. Campbell pointed out that in addition to publishing the handbook, his agency has distributed the handbook to eleven districts; offered training workshops for environmental consultants, consulting firms, agency representatives, and other groups; and is presently involved in developing a book on the public-involvement process.
Milbrey Heard, principal transportation planner with Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), shared information on her organization, an independent government agency created by the State Legislature. The ARC is composed of 23 elected officials and 15 citizens. Ms. Heard reported on an ARC project called 20/20, which allows citizens to share visions of how they want the region to look in the year 2,000. She noted that participants favor housing and shopping that is clustered around major transit and employment centers, and participants envisioned a more balanced transit system.
Warren Williams, of the Georgia Transportation Alliance, commented on the need for change in the transportation policy in Georgia. The Georgia Transportation Alliance is a non-profit citizen group funded by the Energy Foundation, and the Turner Foundation. The major change Mr. Williams would like to see is increased public participation.
Recommendations:
· A Citizens board should be established to monitor county commissioners and make them more accountable.
· Involve the public in the certification process for MPOs.
· Citizens should be encouraged to develop alternative plans early in the process.
· Community groups should receive contracts to conduct the citizen participation process for project planning and development.
· Citizen advisory group members should be selected from impacted areas.
· Let the public know how and when to plug into the planning, review, and public hearing processes.
· Public hearing requirements for various mandates should be as seamless as possible.
· Continue federal overview, even after the EIS is complete.
· USDOT must enforce Title VI requirements.
· DOT should create a dialogue process for the public, public interests groups, legal groups, etc., to review Title VI compliance.
GROUP I: TRAINING NEEDS
Moderator: Pam Tau Lee, University of California, Berkeley, California
Panelists:
Alyce Boyd-Stewart, United States Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
Haywood L. Turrentine, Laborers/ AGC Education and Training Fund, Pemfret Center, Connecticut
Sha-King Alston, Northeast Environmental Justice Network, Lowell, MassachuttetsIntroduction
Workers of color are still under-represented as managers and professionals in local, state, and federal transportation agencies. Trained professionals are needed in every aspect of transportation. There is a need for programs in hazardous material worker training as well as the planning and design of new high-tech systems. Colleges and universities, labor unions, consortia, and interagency partnerships should have a role in diversifying the transportation work force.
Discussions
Alyce Boyd-Stewart, of the United States Department of Transportation, reviewed requirements for environmental justice suits under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, including disparate impact standards and establishing a prima facie case. Her comments focused on the role of DOT in the process: investigation and evaluation of the complaint and advocacy for the law rather than for a particular group.
Ms. Boyd-Steward acknowledged the need for training of DOT personnel by the community, to assure that the community's problems are addressed. She ended with a plea for governmental accountability and made the following recommendations to the public to assure accountability on the part of officials:
· Place telephone calls that follow correspondence.
· Be persistent; do not let officials off the hook.
· Comment on issues that appear in the Federal Register.
· Contact congressional representatives.
Haywood Turrentine, Program Director for Lead and Asbestos with Laborers&emdash;AGC Education and Training Fund, explained to the group that his union provides asbestos abatement, remediation, restoration training, and employment opportunities to residents of impacted communities. Mr. Turrentine noted that historically, residents from impacted communities were not included in the opportunities made available through federal funds spent on remediation activities. His organization recently formed a partnership with Clark Atlanta University and a consortium of seventeen historically black colleges through an initiative to provide hands-on training for researchers who are doing research in the area of hazardous waste and the environment.
Additionally, his union works extensively with public housing authorities to recruit residents from impacted communities, providing them with training, union membership, and guaranteed employment at the end of their training doing abatement and restoration work. Mr. Haygood recommended that DOT require contractors to use people from impacted communities to perform this work in order to maximize benefits to the impacted areas.
Sha-King Alston, of the Northeast Environmental Justice Network, shared his experiences in providing training to local organizations in New England and down the eastern corridor, helping them to develop their organizations, strengthen their relationships, and build coalitions on the issues they face. Mr. Alston also works with an organization called "Youth Build USA," which focuses on working with young people from the ages of 16 to 25, particularly those who have "fallen through the cracks." He noted that Youth Build USA helps the young people complete their GED's, and provides leadership and construction skills training to aid them in finding employment.
Mr. Alston cautioned those conducting training to listen to the people. He noted, "We must listen to the concerns of the people living in the community. As an example, in the community in which I live, transportation stops running at 5:00 p.m. If you have an employer who is flexible, then you can come in early and leave a little early in order to catch the 4:40 p.m. bus. If you do not have a flexible employer, then you are out of a job. This is a prime example of why it is necessary to understand the needs of the people you serve."
Recommendations:
· Identify training needs so that the community and agencies can better understand Title VI and achieve environmental justice.
· Form training partnerships between labor unions, local agencies, and universities, with the goal of providing training and employment to people in impacted communities.
· Target individuals in the community to be trained.
· Provide training, membership into labor unions, and guarantee employment for at least 60 days.
· Develop partnerships between DOT and communities recognizing the need to develop environmental justice groups within communities.
· Provide early intervention for youth at risk by linking together impacted communities and youth.
· Provide technical training on difficult transportation and environmental justice issues (i.e., transportation models, GIS, etc.).
GROUP J: RURAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS
Moderator: Ely Dorsey, Southern Organizing Committee, Atlanta, Georgia
Panelists:
Marion Butler, Arkansas Department of Transportation, Little Rock, Arkansas
Lilly Webb, Center for Community Development, Sparta, Georgia
Shirley Paschal, Central Savannah Area Enterprise Communities, Crawfordville, GeorgiaIntroduction
Rural communities often become forgotten places in transportation planning. Geographic isolation, combined with high poverty, out-migration of young people, and a growing aging population, pose special transportation problems for rural communities.
Discussions
Marion Butler, of the Arkansas Department of Transportation, commented on the public transportation needs of rural Arkansas. He focused on the information-gathering methods, conclusions, and recommendations of a task force established in 1990 by Governor Clinton to evaluate transportation in rural areas. The group utilized the following methods for gathering the information:
· Community forum/community input
· Assembled list of transportation providers
· Conducted personal interviews with key individuals
· Obtained demographic information for each county in the state
Mr. Butler shared the task force's conclusions with the group. They include:
· In rural areas, the issue of transportation inaccessibility is not a racial problem, but a human problem.
· Many of the employed could not remain employed because of a lack of transportation.
· Transportation vehicles supplied by the state or federal government could only be used for their designated purposes because the vehicles are program-related. An example of this is the school bus. The constitution prohibits the use of a school bus for reasons other than educational purposes. Therefore, the buses are used to transport students, then the buses sit idle until it is time to pick up the students.
· Low-income people were the most under-served.
Key recommendations by the task force included the creation of a state-level interagency coordinating council, and a series of demonstration projects. In conclusion, Ms. Butler stated, "There must be a partnership with all transportation providers, a moving away from a narrow focus on individual program goals. If United Parcel Services can do it with packing, we should be able to do it with transportation for human services."
Lily Webb, from the Center of Community Development, shared her insights on the problems of transportation in rural communities. Speaking on the challenges facing her hometown of Hancock, GA, she stated, "We do not have an airport, navigable river, train station, or bus stop (Trailways or Greyhound), and we do not have public transportation." Ms. Webb also addressed the need for effective communication between officials and people in rural communities. She explained that some community people are more knowledgeable than the engineers and planners regarding the transportation problems they face.
Shirley Pascal, of the Central Savannah Area Enterprise Communities, described the conditions of her community in Toliver County, an enterprise community that is one of the poorest areas in the State of Georgia. She stated, "Some of the concerns are teenage pregnancy, a high infant mortality rate, high unemployment, and inadequate public housing. We have had many social agencies that have come into the community to address some of our economic problems. Some of them have had a small measure of success, and others have failed miserably because before the enterprise community, no one asked the grassroots people for their opinion. The grassroots people must be considered in order to have a total economic picture." Ms. Pascal stressed the need for transportation services that permit residents to have access to human development centers which will open within the enterprise zone.
Recommendations:
· Educate the elected officials.
· Improve information exchange and communication between community organizations and local, state, and federal agencies.
· Make federal, state, local agencies accountable.
· Identify local leadership.
· Assist in developing community organization.
· Improve the attitudes of state, local, and federal officials with respect to the Executive Order.
· Make mass distribution of the Executive Order to all state, local, and federal agencies.
· Improve understanding of how to respond to environmental justice issues by state, local, and federal agencies.
· Develop unofficial networking, immediately, between the USDOT officials and local community groups.
· Agencies must interpret regulations in a way that considers environmental justice.
· Form partnership relationships between federal, state, and local agencies and local community environmental justice organizations.
· Local groups should continue with their own strategies and must demand the development of partnership.
GROUP K: NATIVE AMERICAN AND INDIGENOUS ISSUES
Moderator: Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network, Bimidji, Minnesota
Panelists:
Paulette Hansen, Intertribal Transportation Association, Washington, DC
Martin S. Carney, Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribe Member, Riverdale, Georgia
Doug Meiklejohn, New Mexico Environmental Law Center, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Howard Sarasohn, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CaliforniaIntroduction
This session focused on specific transportation needs of Native Americans and indigenous peoples, tribal governments, and grassroots groups on reservations. Other areas of discussion included the nature of sovereignty, state, and nation-to-nation relationships in transportation planning and technology use, capacity building, improved methods of administration of Tribal transportation systems, assessment of the Indian Reservation Road (IRR) program authorized under ISTEA, and short-term and long-term policy implications of pending federal transportation amendments to the National Highway System.
Discussions
Tom Goldtooth, of the Indigenous Environmental Network, delineated the problems faced by Native American communities due to the failure of federal government tribal policies. Native American communities presently face serious inequities in the failure of the federal government to fulfill its trust responsibilities to assist the Native American tribal governments with developing and implementing our own tribal transportation policies, administrative and regulatory infrastructures. With tribes located west of the Mississippi River, those with larger land bases, most roads are unpaved, creating safety problems and emergency response delays. Highway planning, either by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (which is within the Interior Department) or the state planning departments, often do not take into consideration Native American sacred and historical site protection and the inconsistent application of the provisions of the National Environmental Protection Act. In many instances, environmental assessments and environmental impact statements are not adequately conducted within tribal lands and waterways due to confusion and gray areas to which federal agencies have responsibility to regulate and enforce safe, healthy, and environmentally-sound transportation activities. Mr. Goldtooth noted, "Tribal governments and our tribal grassroots communities must have a greater role in local and regional transportation decision-making."
Mr. Goldtooth pointed out that the federal government is under federal mandate to make provisions for special tribal funding to develop and implement their own transportation programs. He expressed concern for the dangers involved with the transport of toxic and radioactive materials throughout tribal lands and waterways. He also reported that Native American subsistence fishers along the Columbia River in Oregon/Washington and the St. Lawrence River corridor are battling military radioactive wastes and PCB contamination of the riverbeds.
Mr. Goldtooth concluded with a discussion of tribal governments, and emphasized that tribal governments must accept the responsibility of assuring that grassroots members of tribal communities have access to jobs, services, and opportunities to participate in the policy development of all federal transportation programs provided to tribes.
Paulette Hansen, of the Intertribal Transportation Association, began by explaining the difficulty of assessing environmental justice principles due to the small size and dispersal of the Native American community. She noted that the primary focus of federal programs and funding support for Native Americans has centered on populations residing on reservations. Yet, she felt that the Clinton Administration is attempting to place the relationship between Native American people and the federal government into better balance. She commented, "The President has asked each agency to review and redirect policies and programs to achieve a government-to-government relationship with tribes. The White House Intergovernmental Affairs Office policy treats tribes and their communities with the same respect as states, counties, and cities, under the Indian Reservation Roads Program (IRRP), which is jointly administered by the Federal Highway Administration and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)."
Ms. Hansen highlighted the improved funding system for roads by noting that Native Americans can now receive money from states for transit purposes rather than depending exclusively on the BIA treasury for funding. She concluded by stressing the importance of tribes receiving an equitable share of funding for transportation. The American Association of State Highway Officials conducted a survey of 32 states with Indian tribes to determine how much money is actually going to tribes. The survey concluded that out of $53 million dollars designated to places with a population of less than 50,000 people, tribes nationwide are lucky to get several hundred thousand dollars. "Tribes, for some reason, are not getting an equitable share of the funding," said Ms. Hansen. "When the transit program is reauthorized, ITA would like to get some of the percentage points off of the top to be administered for transit purposes."
Martin S. Carney represents Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes in coordinating Native American activities which revolve around cultural preservation, burial sites, and cultural education. He noted that his goal for participating in the conference was to obtain a better understanding of the issues that he presented to his group and to coordinate federal programs for the tribes he represents. He was in total agreement with the other panelists that transportation is a key element in community and economic development among the tribes.
Doug Meiklejohn, an attorney with the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, reported on the transportation issues faced by the Pueblo reservation. The Pueblo reservation is located at the base of the mesa near the Los Alamos National Laboratory. This facility is where the first atomic bomb was built in the 1940's, and where nuclear research continues. Mr. Meiklejohn's comments focused on the issues faced by the Pueblo due to the transportation of nuclear material through their reservation. The most prominent issue posed is how to deal with a potential nuclear accident involving the transport of nuclear material. Mr. Meiklejohn stated: "Two things must happen before a spill occurs: (1) there should be an agreement, clarified in writing, between the federal and state governments and the Pueblo about who is going to deal with such an accident if a spill occurs; and (2) the Pueblo needs to be provided with federal funding to put together resources to deal with such an accident. There has been discussions between the Pueblo, and the Department of Energy and the lab on training sessions. To date, no efforts have been made to train members of the Pueblo reservation."
Howard Sarasohn, of the California Department of Transportation, provided statistics on the Native American population in California. California has the second largest Native American population in the 50 states (second to only the state of Oklahoma). Approximately, 240,000 Native Americans are scattered all over California. Approximately 40,000 of the Native Americans are not native to California. This leaves about 200,000 Native Americans in California that are native to California. Two-thirds of these 200,000 persons do not belong to a federally recognized tribe. He explained the relationship between CALTRAN and the Native American community. "Sometimes we get along real well, and other times we do not get along so well. It is generally transportation-related issues that create the problem. Our right-of-way is an excellent place for Indians to gather some of the things they need for sacred ceremonies. In some places, our right-of-way is sacred land. Our maintenance people are trained to know not to apply herbicides on sacred lands, and they know how to tend the land so that native plants can flourish."
Mr. Sarasohn's comments focused on three issues:
· Recognized versus unrecognized tribes&emdash;Currently recognized tribes have benefits that unrecognized tribes do not have, especially where money and determinations regarding remains and goods found during archeological digs are concerned.
· Native American Preservation Act&emdash;This act deals with the Federal Park Service; however, some of the definitions are unclear and are in need of clarification.
· Environment Reports and the rationale used to determine the hierarchy (i.e., wetlands versus Native American Lands).
Recommendations:
· Prohibit the transportation of toxic and radioactive waste through Indigenous Lands (or any lands) in communities where Native American people live, presenting a risk of contamination of land, water, air, or especially their religious and sacred areas.
· Develop regional/local partnership models for intergovernmental relations among tribes and nearby communities and states that have been mandated under ISTEA since 1991.
· Government (including federal, state, county, parish, and town) and all U.S. citizens must recognize tribal sovereignty, cultural and religious rights, including recognition of all Native American sacred areas and burial sites, and preservation laws.
· Evaluate whether the state has spent an equitable share of transportation dollars on Indian Lands. Of $53 million dollars available annually, less than $1 million dollars goes to tribes.
· Demand that Congress establish transit funds under the Preservation of Roads Program (similar to the funds provided under the Indian Reservation Road Program).
· Develop an understanding between tribal government and local officials.
· Federal, state, and local agencies must include tribal stakeholders, community members from impacted Native American communities, and tribal elected officials when making transportation decisions.
· Hold the next environmental justice meeting in tribal lands.
· Insure that federally-mandated requirements for states, locals, etc., cooperate with tribal governments in transportation planning, carried out through the establishment of government and tribal citizens in an overview-advisory capacity.
· Tribal governments should be included as an active partner and an advisor in the federally-established Memorandum of Understanding between Federal Highway Administration and the Bureau of Indian Affairs in the administration of the Indian Reservation Road Program.
· Identify national Native American organizations, tribal governments, tribal organizations, and Native American environmental grassroots groups, and provide this information to federal transportation agencies and staff.
· Federal, state, and local governments must respond to all letters and calls received by any Native American person.
· Allow tribal governments and tribal members to provide overview mechanisms on how all federal transportation funds are being spent on tribal lands.
· Whenever possible, hire community people to do work on Indian Lands, and provide training to non-Native American contractors.
GROUP L: EQUITY IMPLICATIONS OF PRICING AND OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES
Moderator: Martine Micozzi, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC
Panelists:
Michael Cameron, Environmental Defense Fund, Oakland, California
Cameron Yee, Urban Habitat Program, San Francisco, California
Felicia Young, Surface Transportation Policy Project, Washington, DC
Wibur E. Crockett, Ohio Department of Transportation, Columbus, OhioIntroduction
As federal funding is cut, many states and regions are looking at operational and pricing strategies to manage demand for limited transportation facilities. Such strategies include congestion pricing, ramp metering, signalization programs, and freeway incident management programs. While these policies may be effective in reducing congestion and improving overall mobility, they can also have significant equity impacts. This breakout session explored equity implications of transportation pricing investments, methods and policies to mitigate the regressive impacts on low-income and people of color communities.
Discussions
Michael Cameron, a researcher with the Environmental Defense Fund, commented on using pricing strategy to reduce single-occupancy automobile use. He gave a report on a study entitled Efficiency and Fairness on the Road, which evaluated the impact of imposing a five-cent-per-mile vehicle miles traveled (VMT) pricing strategy: He stated, "The study looks at both the efficiency and equity impact of this pricing strategy. On the efficiency side, it will reduce VMT by 11%, ozone precursors by 9%, and will reduce congestion by 24%. On the equity side, wealthy individuals in Southern California travel three times as far each day than low-income individuals. If the VMT fee is imposed, total travel in Southern California will go down by 11%. Low-income people will reduce travel by 29%, and the highest income people will reduce travel by 3%."
Mr. Cameron pointed out that pricing strategies can potentially generate a good deal of money that could then be invested in transit and mobility services for low-income people. He explained that "lifeline" pricing is an option for reducing charges to low-income travelers. Mr. Cameron anticipated negative short-term impacts of pricing strategies, but said they could be lessened through mitigation measures, with the end result being elimination of the automobile monopolies.
Cameron Yee, of the Urban Habitat Program, spoke about how his program looks at the framework around transportation policies as they relate to equity concerns. He stressed the importance of considering social, economic, and environmental impacts of a transportation system. Mr. Yee's comments centered around the equity concerns that arise in a congestion pricing scheme where fees are charged to drivers who use the road during peak congestion periods. He noted that low-income drivers could be disadvantaged by this scheme, but pointed out that "lifeline" toll rates could be charged to low-income drivers to lessen the impact. He concluded by noting that many questions must be answered before congestion pricing can be considered. He concluded his remarks with the following statement: "While addressing this issue may be difficult, it is important in terms of building a socially just transportation system which provides equal mobility alternatives for all people."
Felicia Young, of the Surface Transportation Policy Project, commented on the importance of public involvement in all stages of decision-making regarding transportation projects. She pointed out that there is a need for the decision-making process to be outlined so that the community will know when and how people can participate in transportation projects. She felt that as the conference attendees talked about congestion pricing and pricing strategies, they should look at the implications across all modes.
Ms. Young stated that the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ushered in a new era of intermodal planning and public involvement, and ideally, transportation policy in one mode should complement transportation initiatives in other areas. She asserted, that "in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan region and in other areas of the country, transportation policy decisions are often made in isolation of the impacts on other modes and with minimal public involvement despite the goals of ISTEA." As an example, she discussed the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority's proposed fare increase. She contended that increasing transit fares negatively impacts rider ship, and the number of single-occupancy vehicles will therefore increase.
Ms. Young closed by stressing the need to continue forming coalitions linking transportation investment decisions, so that transportation decision-makers will be challenged to address inconsistent transportation policies and investment decisions at the local, regional, and national levels. "There is strength in numbers," she said. "We must harness the strengths as we push for transportation reform."
Wilbur E. Crockett, of the Ohio Department of Transportation, began by telling the story of a 43&endash;year-old project which began in 1951 to construct Interstate 670 in Ohio. He discussed how the project displaced the minority community, yet individuals and constructors in the impacted communities did not receive the jobs created by the project. Mr. Crockett also commented on the failure of ISTEA, noting that ISTEA was implemented to change the planning process, funding distribution, and land-use as related to transportation projects. He concluded his remarks with the following observations: "The hope for many was that this Act would help resolve transportation issues. This did not happen, and there is little hope that it will happen, because of plans to drastically reduce transportation funds. While the funds for highways are decreasing, the number of highways are steadily increasing. There is a distinct correlation between pricing and operational strategies, and economic impact."
Recommendations:
· Clarify where and how revenue generated from any market-based policy (i.e., pricing strategy) will be spent.
· Address equity implications if a pricing strategy or any other market-based policy is implemented.
· Provide alternatives to existing transportation options.
· Hold transportation decision-makers responsible.
· Look at causes, and not just symptoms of problems.
· Involve stakeholders in research addressing pricing and equity concerns.
CHAPTER 8: CONFERENCE CLOSING - THE ROAD AHEAD
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE
Gloria Jeff
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DCWe at DOT recognized that transportation is not just a transit or highway issue. Surface transportation is an essential element of everyone's day-to-day existence, work, play, purchasing activities, medical and spiritual needs. In that respect, this effort had to reflect the totality of surface transportation (FHWA, FTA, FRA).
When one reads about the 90's being the decade of the environment, it is not about the environment in which many of you live, but it is the concern for the environment as it comes to mean the protection of the earth, the birds of the air, the fish in the sea, and the plants that grow upon the earth. It has meant protecting the water we drink, and in a metropolitan concept, the air we breathe. The protection of the living environment has not always been sharply focused, but we wanted to bring human focus into the environment. This is now the time for change. In this Administration, there will be "no more business as usual." The people who provide political and career leadership in transportation are working to transform DOT. Our goal is to put people first.
We need to start building partnerships to solve problems. The formation of a partnership does not begin with the signing of a statement of agreement, and it is not premised on one member making up for the weakness of the other. A partnership is formed based on shared objectives, mutual strengths, shared commitments, and establishing trust. Through the process of forming partnerships, a fundamental working trust must develop among those involved in the activity.
What we heard you say is that the role of the federal and state government is to stay directly involved and that the feds should lead states and local units, provide expert training, enforce, and provide funding sources to community-based organizations. Looking back at the fundamental objectives in terms of ensuring greater stakeholder participation in transportation decision- making, we heard you say that we must come early to the community, come willing to listen and learn, come willing to share information, come willing to build on the strengths, and come willing to train.
In terms of directing resources to identify and address discrimination, disproportionate impacts, inequitable distribution of investments, and civil rights implications, we must come up with definitions that everyone understands, provide dollars to communities, provide jobs to the community in the data collection and analysis stages, and focus on prevention of poor decisions rather than how to mitigate them.
In terms of promoting interagency cooperation in transportation planning, development, and program implementation to achieve livable, healthy, and sustainable communities, we must develop good working relationships between state and federal agencies. We must form partnerships between the Department of Labor, Transportation, and unions that will enable us to solve both the transportation problem and the community problem.
We are pleased to have unveiled our draft DOT Order at this conference. We came to you first, early in the draft stages, requesting your input. We hear that you need it to be put in English, to include maintenance and construction, cumulative effects, and that federal regulations should include questions and answers to clarify proposals.
In conclusion, I hope to avoid using any clichés or well-worn words. What I would like to say is that the resources of the FHWA will be available from our Environmental Department and from our Civil Rights Office to provide training and attend your meetings to provide information. Welcome to the partnership. Now, let us roll up our sleeves and get to work.
NEXT STEPS AND FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS
Robert D. Bullard
Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, GeorgiaDuring this two-and-a-half-day conference, we have heard from a number of individuals who represent diverse transportation interests and constituencies. This conference brought together persons from government, private business, non-governmental organizations, academia, grassroots groups, and the community to begin a serious dialogue on building meaningful partnerships.
For some grassroots individuals, this forum provided the first real face-to-face meeting they have had with their respective state DOT and metropolitan planning organization officials. We would like to see the dialogue and relationships established at this Atlanta meeting continue when people return to their home states and communities. We challenge the U.S. Department of Transportation, state DOTs, MPOs, and transportation officials to broaden their circle of advisors and reach out to neighborhood-based planning bodies and other community stakeholders to assure that their voices are heard, especially on transportation decisions that directly impact low-income and people of color communities.
After hearing many of the presenters during the plenaries and breakout sessions, there appears to be a general consensus on community involvement: we all can agree that more work is needed to bring culturally diverse institutions, groups, and individuals into the transportation decision-making, process advisory boards, task forces, and review panels. The day is long past when a few "good old boys" or hand-picked individuals who do not represent the interest of low-income persons and people of color make decisions behind closed doors about what is best for these communities. Strategies to create just, healthy, sustainable, and livable communities must actively involve the impacted residents. This is consistent with a core tenet in the "Principles of Environmental Justice." People must be at the table to speak for themselves.
The Environmental Justice Executive Order, signed by President Clinton on February 11, 1994, comes at a crucial time in our nation's history and the long struggle to assure that all Americans are treated the same. It should be made clear to elected officials, statewide transportation agencies, and metropolitan planning organizations that the Executive Order it not a new law. Neither is it an unfunded mandate, a term that leaves a bad taste in many people's mouths.
It would be wise for the USDOT to adopt a partnership approach in which grassroots environmental justice groups and their networks are brought to the table as full partners (not silent or junior partners) in planning public outreach activities such as a national summit, conferences, regional hearings, and town hall meetings. Moreover, public involvement (not public relations) is needed in developing guidance, performance standards, research designs, and output measures for implementing key provisions of the Executive Order such as data collection and assessment of vulnerable populations, high impact areas, and disproportionate and adverse impacts.
The Executive Order brings us back to some unfinished business of civil rights and environmental protection. More specifically, Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and NEPA have been around for decades. We would not need an Executive Order if the nation's civil rights, environmental, and public health laws were equally enforced across the board. However, in the real world, all communities are not created equal. Historically, dirty industries, locally unwanted land uses or LULUs, and freeways have followed the path of least resistance. If a community happens to black, inner-city, poor, rural, unincorporated, and politically powerless, it is likely to exhibit disparities in residential amenities and municipal services, including transportation-related enhancements.
What factors create these disparities? Transportation and environmental disparities result from ahost of governmental practices such as discriminatory land use; disparate facility siting and clean-up strategies; exclusionary practices that limit participation of people of color and low-income persons in decision-making boards, committees, panels, task forces, and professional staff of agencies charged with protecting public health and the environment; and different enforcement of environmental and civil rights, land use, and transportation laws.
We challenge the participants at this conference to work with community leaders to design workable partnerships that begin to identify and address disparate outcomes, decisions that place some populations, as highlighted in the Executive Order, at special risk. Grassroots community leaders specified initiatives where they would like to see more public involvement. A few of the items include:
· Fund grassroots groups and networks community outreach.
· Design livable community/environmental justice partnerships.
· Promote education and awareness of the Proposed DOT Order among state DOTs, MPOs, and community-based transportation groups.
· Conduct regional training workshops and seminars on Title VI (Civil Rights Act of 1964) and NEPA.
· Create model interagency partnership initiatives involving empowerment and enterprise zone communities.
· Hold a meeting between environmental justice leaders and Secretary Peña.
We challenge you to design real strategies and partnerships to address disparities in urban land use, funding of highways and public transit, transport of hazardous and radioactive materials, and facility siting that may have disproportionate and adverse impacts (environmental, health, and socioeconomic) on the communities located "across the tracks."
It is time for federal, state, and local transportation bodies to "do the right thing" and work toward creating model partnerships that promote truly just, healthy, sustainable, and livable communities.
Environmental Justice Resource Center
Clark Atlanta University
223 James P. Brawley Dr., SW
Atlanta, GA 30314
Phone (404) 880-6911 Fax (404) 880-6909