An EPA afternoon: participatory community learning and education

First, there's still time to participate in the EPA's Environmental Justice Conference here in Detroit--it's free, they take walk-ins, and your participation is meaningful!  Go here to see where it's at and what's going on tomorrow:  http://www.cleanairinfo.com/ejconference/agenda.htm

This is a mix of summary and commentary on today's events from the afternoon EPA Federal work group session.  I participated in the community organization working group, and later attended the panel for "The Detroit Story".

Interesting news came out of the ongoing EPA Environmental Conference today. This afternoon we realized that people all over the U.S. are striving to organize, but there's a lot of organizational fragmentation.

[More after the page break]

I think one of the biggest future challenges for the EPA will be to answer this question: 

How can the EPA help communities lead real sustainable change?

It was clear that we can no longer ask for EPA to be at the rescue at all times.  Likely because EPA is overloaded with things to do and is under-resourced (read how EnergyInDepth uses EPA's lack of response to recent research, or consider how many chemicals under ToSCA are still yet to be studied by the EPA decades after the creation of the act!).

But some of the brightest notes come from knowing that many local groups are seeking or doing good work already.  People from Alaska, Louisiana, and of course Michigan came forth to provide their comments.

Also, many community members expressed their dislike about how the benefits pf many federal policies and initiatives, tend not to be clear or even make it to the local communities.  This is understandable, pretty much everyone hates the idea of imperialistic decision making, or the idea of "cookie cutter" policy.  This is what people advocating for government rightsizing/reduced governmental power are probably looking for big changes in.


Tea Party activists and Detroit [or for those non-Detroiters: your community's name goes here] grassroots organizers share a lot more in common than most people would think:
We care about our basic human needs as individuals and as a society, and the things happening on a community level are sometimes too particular or complex for top-down-only government action/inaction.  From this conference, many people have recognized that there's a gap in how our democracy functions.  Better yet, they also have the drive to make sure--in the words of Grace Lee Boggs--that another future is possible.


However, strong and equitable leadership is something that agencies like the EPA can provide, and part of good leadership is facilitating participation and insight from all the potentially impacted entities.


In some ways, this is being addressed by the EPA, but in other ways, the general community is disadvantaged by not having sufficient scientific and citizen literacy to be well prepared for public hearings.  Most of our first real encounter with the science (including economics and ethics) at a public hearing happens before we've had time to do our own research to learn about all the factors at play.  By the time the hearing takes place, I believe our obligation as citizens is to provide sound and astute insight that will influence the selection of what typically boils down to a "yes", "no" or "option 1, 2, or 3" scenario.

I commented about the lack of scientific and citizen education/literacy that comes prior to their open hearing sessions and asked what continuing dialog for education and outreach does the EPA have right now.  Based on their response, it doesn't seem like the EPA is collaborating with the Department of Education.  Based on the response of other commentators, the lack of education, outreach, and awareness for efficient political efficacy is also severely lacking [good news though, EPA just finished a directory of environmental entities--a hand book for who to call about what kind of problems/resources if you will, I'll see if I can post a link for it here].
[as another aside,I was soon referred to as "the young man from Canton" by several other commenters who referenced my remarks, and I even got a complement from someone representing the U.S. Attorney's office!]

An EPA rep (I think from New York based on his accent) recommended I/we check out the community engagement initiative:http://www.epa.gov/oswer/docs/cei_action_plan_12-09.pdf

From what I've skimmed, the EPA Community Engagement Initiative seems to be designed as a reactionary process to solid waste/pollution rather than educational, but it does address the participatory aspect for community involvement in decision making.

My biggest concern however is that there's nothing said and proactively done about sound community education happening in advance of a problem or decision making event that aligns with environmental issues involving EPA and public decision making.

Though we've been assured that the EPA will step up their education and outreach--and even consider having other language interpreters available at future events-- education and outreach from the EPA is currently lacking.  

Also, outreach education is clearly lacking on a local level, in the afternoon community work group for example, some Detroiters questioned the benefits of a light rail system.  This was a failure to at least communicate the benefits from economic development and mass transit on whatever government entities were involved with the project.  For those wondering what some of these benefits may be (see groups like Transit Riders United for more benefits about light rail, I'm pulling from the top of my head at this time): reduced automobile traffic cuts down on exhaust emissions and dust/other fine particulate matter from getting kicked up, also cuts down on fossil fuel consumption--exhaust emissions are a major contributor to asthma and other respiratory diseases in Michigan, and fossil fuel vapors are known carcinogens (will back up with a source when I have time, but in chemistry, hydrocarbon molecules--the stuff that makes up most of our gas and oil--tend to be carcinogenic).  Plus, you can take the train, not have to worry about driving and do things with your time while going somewhere.  Ideally, developers want the train destinations to either arrive at vibrant places, or help create existing places more vibrant (the economic development part)--if you own a property, the value of it might go up (the fact that most low income individuals cannot afford to own their own property is an issue that needs to be addressed elsewhere, I'm just stating one of the developmental ideals I've frequently heard).  Also, it might interest other people in appreciating Detroit who may have not explored it in the same way if they took a car there.

Another example from the breakout group: The EPA had conducted something called the "Moving Goods" study, a well-invested study (paraphrasing the title from what Omega Wilson of the EPA said, will have to check again when I have time, it's about transit though), and sought to disseminate it to all other agencies.  A gentleman in my group from the USDOT had never received this document and found out about it today just by being with the community breakout group.  Many non-agency group members commented again about how the trickle down assumption clearly did not work--we certainly didn't know anything about this.  Encouraging further participation from the public in the planning and study is ideal in helping to make these initiatives better known, and would help remedy the problem at least in the communities it may have been tested in.  However, I must reiterate that sound and in-depth education that happens prior to and during these processes is paramount to making well informed studies and decision making.  Right now, the education side is sorely missing--in the EPA, and even in the US Department of Education.  Environmental education--at least to the extent that high school graduates would know basic environmental factors for good health like air and water quality, and be able to take efficient and efficate political action on the local, county, state, or federal level is certainly lacking.  I went through the public school system stayed very engaged as a citizen, and even took additional college courses in political science and still didn't know what county government does until I met a Wayne County commissioner this summer.

Public hearings aren't always enough either--many communities (Del Ray especially) remarked about how they felt excluded from open public forums for things like the Detroit Works project.  Many of us SEA members and other every day citizens can also attest to how schedules sometimes don't line up with what's going on in the public forum (think about the times you had class at night... or work...).

Participatory dialog and planning is almost certainly the way to go, and it looks like this plan addresses that from what I've skimmed on the first page. I'm now trying to briefly blog about some of the happenings.

'Twas good may seem optimistic, there was certainly a fair share of dissenting and afflicted community representatives giving their comments, but most everyone could find a positive note.  Also, the Detroit Salt Company--a mining company--was there and participated as part of the panel, that was a welcome surprise!  It was unfortunate to see how very few other industries and companies were present.  I applaud George Davis for his frank statements and sincere efforts toward making the company "be a good 'corporate citizen' with emphasis on citizen".  We'll hold him to his words, and it's certainly a fine time for all of us to re-examine how businesses can be responsible.

Bonus:  Mr. Davis is a University of Michigan Alum who believes he must not only be a leader, but also among the best.  Go Blue!