Writting Sample-Green Paper

8/3/2019 Writting Sample-Green Paper

1/24

The Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment January 2011

The Green PaperA Community Vision or Environmentally and Economically Sustainable Development


2/24


3/24

ContentsForeword ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................ 3

How the Grey Economy Has Failed the Valley .......................................................................................... 5

P2P Leaders Vision or a Green Economy in the San Joaquin Valley ............................................ 9

How the Vision Becomes Reality ...................................................................................................................11

Appendix: ..................................................................................................................................................................19

Endnotes ....................................................................................................................................................................22


4/24

2 The CenTer On raCe, POverTy & The envirOnmenT

The Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment (CRPE)

conceived o this Green Paper in 2007, ater Caliornia

passed its landmark climate change legislation, the GlobalWarming Solutions Act (AB 32). AB 32 positioned Caliornia

at the ront lines o the new green economy. The State and

the Country began to recognize what low-income com-

munities and communities o color had been saying or

decades- we needed to transition away rom ossil uels and

the unsustainable use o natural resources towards sustain-

able, environmentally riendly solutions. Under this guise,

several proposals or biomass projects and alternative energy

solutions such as ethanol and hydrogen energy productions

popped up around the San Joaquin Valley.

Once we began investigating the local impacts o these pro-

posed projects, we discovered that while these projects may

have some regional, state-wide, national, and global ben-

ets, those benets came at the expense o the low-income

communities and communities o color where the projects

were located. CRPE saw the same cycles o environmental,

economic, and social harm that had plagued the San Joaquin

Valley being perpetuated. We noticed that proponents o the

green economy in Sacramento, the Bay Area, Los Angeles,

and Washington, D.C. would oten talk about the role o rural

communities in the green economy, but no one was talkingto those rural communities. We decided to change that.

We began a series to trainings that engaged the communi-

ties we worked in rom Fresno, Kern and Tulare Counties,

some o the poorest Counties in Caliornia. We engaged

residents in a conversation about what green jobs meant

to them, where they saw their communities itting into the

promise o the new green economy, and how they wantedto see their communities develop in a healthy and sustain-

able way. Most importantly, participants elt it was impera-

tive to ensure the green economy did not perpetuate the

myth o jobs vs. the environment. But rather, that jobs,

economic opportunity, and environmental health needed

to be linked in order to have a truly sustainable and healthy

community. It was an exciting discussion and we are proud

to share our results.

The communities with whom we work are not alone in

seeing the potential o legislation such as AB 32. Over ourmillion people in Caliornia voted to preserve AB 32 by de-

eating Proposition 23 on the November 2, 2010 ballot. This

Green Paper outlines how rural San Joaquin Valley commu-

nities plan to participate in the promise o AB 32 and ask or

your support in making their vision a reality.

Foreword


5/24

The Green PaPer 3

The San Joaquin Valley is a unique region o Caliornia aced

with serious social, economic, racial, and environmental

inequities and challenges. Community leaders and resi-dents across the San Joaquin Valley are optimistic about the

potential o the emerging green economy to help solve

the complex problems acing the region. There is particular

enthusiasm or the promise o green jobs and a healthier

environment among residents o rural cities and unincor-

porated communities where the need or economic and

environmental justice is the greatest.

Traditional eorts to promote economic development in the

Valley have consisted o top-down approaches that have

ailed to include meaningul avenues o participation orgrassroots leaders rom disadvantaged communities. This

has resulted in a model o economic development that has

perpetuated a cycle o low-wage jobs in polluting industries

such as prisons, mega-dairies, distribution warehouses, and

power plants. In order to build a new green economy in the

Valley that can truly address social, environmental, and eco-

nomic inequities, residents rom the Valleys most disadvan-

taged communities must not only have a seat at the table;

but also be able to sit at the head o their own tables.

Applying our rom the ground up philosophy to issues oeconomic development, reducing pollution, and protect-

ing public health, CRPE worked with grassroots leaders rom

low-income, rural communities in the Valley to develop their

vision o the green economy. The purpose o this paper is to

present a proactive strategy which builds upon their experi-

ence in the Valleys economy. Only a holistic, community-

driven green economy can succeed in the long term.

We submit the vision, principles and recommendations

presented in this document as a roadmap or arriving at that

community-driven green economy.

The Vision and Principles

CRPE developed this reports vision, principles and policy

recommendations in conjunction with over 160 residents

who participated in our Power to the People Program (P2P)

representing, eighteen disadvantaged communities rom

Fresno, Tulare, and Kern counties. The P2P Program consisted

o twelve trainings during 20092010 that covered topics

related to the emerging green economy. The ultimate goal othis program was to empower community leaders to dene

a sustainable and equitable green economy and to actively

participate in its creation.

From this process, community leaders crated the ollowing

vision or a new green economy:

Community leaders want to live i n healthy, vibrant, rural com-

munities, where they can live, work, and play free from the threat

of environmental harm; they want to breathe clean air, drink

clean water, and have access to economic opportunities that

lift their families out of poverty. They want access to equitable

and sustainable green jobs, that respect the dignity of workers,

provide a living wage and year-round employment, and protect

the environment in which people live, work and play.

From this vision, community leaders crated three core prin-

ciples which must guide the development o a true green

economy in the Valley. These principles are:

v Promotion o Environmental Health and Justice

v Economic Opportunity or All People

v Green Jobs Must Support Equity and Justice

Executive Summary


6/24


Policy Recommendations

Power to the People leaders identied three major strate-

gies or attaining the communitys vision or a new green

economic model:

v Invest in the human capital o low-income disadvantaged

communities in the Valley;

v Promote socially responsible green businesses and

practices; and

v Address environmental impacts o economic develop-

ment and support meaningul public participation.

From these strategies, we developed the ollowing six main

policy actions or recommendations:

v Adopt comprehensive immigration reorm;

v Create green vocational training programs;

v Increase access to capital and other resources or emerg-

ing and potential green entrepreneurs;

v Require and incentivize existing businesses to adopt

sustainable and just practices in their production and

operations;

v Identiy environmentally over-burdened communities

and analyze potential impacts o proposed new develop-

ment and projects in the San Joaquin Valley; and

v Address environmental impacts o economic develop-

ment and support meaningul public participation o

all residents, in particular leaders rom over-burdened

communities.

Report Organization

The rst section o this report describes the socio-eco-

nomic and environmental conditions that characterize the

dominant economic model in the San Joaquin Valley, oten

reerred to as the Grey Economy. We explain how this grey

economy, with industrial-scale agriculture as the main driver,

leads to extreme poverty and chronic unemployment, envi-ronmental degradation, health disparities, and lack o civic

participation in the San Joaquin Valley. The second section

o the report describes the vision and principles crated by

community leaders. The last section presents the strategies

and policy actions or state and local governments to ensure

the San Joaquin Valley creates a sustainable and equitable

green economy. In the Appendix, we outline the process

CRPE and community leaders used to develop this Report.

Our hope is that this report will inspire a new green economic

model or the San Joaquin Valley guided by the vision o lead-ers rom communities who are most negatively aected by the

grey economic model. The policy recommendations oered

are neither exhaustive nor comprehensive; they are intended

to be a starting point or discussions among stakeholders, poli-

cymakers, and community leaders on how to create a green

economy that incorporates principles o environmental, eco-

nomic and social justice while also providing tangible improve-

ments to the Valleys most underserved communities.

CRPE is committed to the development o a sustainable,

community-driven green economy or the San Joaquin Valley.

Moving orward, we will continue to work with community

leaders, our allies, and policymakers to ensure that this new

green economy becomes a reality.


7/24

The Green PaPer 5

The San Joaquin Valleycomprised o Kern, Tulare, Fresno,

Kings, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin

Countiesis pivotal to the state and national economy,

as it leads the nation in agricultural and dairy productivity.

Sometimes reerred to as the nations bread basket, the

Valley produces the majority o the produce grown in the

United States. In 2008, the Valleys Agricultural industry gen-

erated $25.3 billion dollars, over 70% o the states entire ag-

ricultural revenue, keeping Caliornia as the top agricultural

producer in the nation.1 Amidst, and supplying this wealth,

are equally extreme levels o human and environmentalexploitation. Industrial-scale agricultural production is

inextricably tied to, and dependent upon, cheap immigrant

labor, unsustainable resource extraction and waste disposal

in order to generate proits.

While the region is hailed as one o the most productive

agricultural regions o the country, it also stands out, un-

ortunately, because o its extreme poverty, chronic unem-

ployment, environmental degradation, health disparities,

and lack o civic participation. Despite all o the wealth and

abundance generated by agriculture, the Valley has someo the highest rates o ood insecurity in Caliornia. In 2005

it had our o the top ten most ood insecure counties in

the state.2 Additionally, a 2008 report on the well-being o

Americans ranked Caliornias 20th Congressional District,

encompassing Kern, Kings, and Fresno counties, last in the

nation based on income, education, and health outcomes

o its residents.3

These realities are, one could argue, a byproduct o the

Valleys agricultural legacy. The socioeconomic structure o

the San Joaquin Valley and the greater Central Valley regionhas been entirely shaped by large-scale, primarily corporate

agriculture which has been the main economic engine in

the Valley and Caliornia or many decades. Much research

has been done on the impact that industrial-scale agricul-

ture has had on the development o rural communities.

Overwhelmingly, this research has shown that,

. . . communities characterized by large-scale, especially

industrial, arm structures are oten associated with ad-

verse community socioeconomic conditions, e.g., lower

community standards o living, less economic diversity,

ewer community services, less vibrant retail trade, etc.,

than communities with other types o arming enterpris-

es.4 (U.S. Congressional Research Service, 2005).

Demographics

The Valley has a diverse population o 3.8 million residents.

In 2008, Latinos became the largest ethnic group represent-

ing 47% o the population, ollowed by non-Hispanic whites

at 39%, Asian-Paciic Islanders at 7.3 %, Blacks at 6%, and

Native Americans at .5%.5 It is important to note that while

Latinos represent the majority o the population; they con-

tinue to be a minority on the decision-making bodies that

govern the region.

Agriculture has also played a key role in shaping the Valleys

diversity, serving as a magnet or immigrants, predomi-

nantly rom Mexico, drawn to the Valley in search o jobs.

In 2000 nearly 20% o Valley residents were oreign born,6

many o whom reside in small, rural communities depen-

dant on agriculture.

How the Grey EconomyHas Failed the Valley


8/24


9/24

The Green PaPer 7

potentially contaminated agricultural land. Los Angeles

unsuccessully sued Kern County to orce it to accept this

waste. Kings County also created a similar health protective

ordinance to prevent this practice.20 The Valley is not only

the source o the nations ood; it is also seen as a dumping

ground or the rest o the state.

Throughout the United States, low-income communities

and communities o color are more likely to be located near

polluting acilities and live in areas with high concentra-

tions o poverty.21 This is not a coincidence. The 1984 Cerrell

report, commissioned by the Caliornia Integrated Waste

Management Board (now called Cal Recycle) to identiy

communities that would present the least resistance to the

siting o waste incinerators, highlighted this act.22 In his

book, From the Ground Up, CRPE ounder Luke Cole discuss-

es the reports main recommendation that,

. . . companies target small, rural, communities whoseresidents are low-income, older people, or people with

a high school education or less; communities with a

high proportion o Catholic residents; and communi-

ties whose residents are engaged in resource extractive

industries such as agriculture . . . Ideally, the report states,

ofcials and companies should look or lower socioeco-

nomic neighborhoods that are also in a heavy industrial

areas with little, i any, commercial activity.

While the Cerrell report ocused on siting incinerators, the

distribution o unwanted land-uses and high pollutingindustries across the San Joaquin Valley, as in other parts

o the country, are disproportionately located in communi-

ties that it the Cerrell criteria. The Cerrell Report conirmed

what many grassroots environmental justice leaders know

intuitively: that polluting industries deliberately target their

communities. The act that this report was commissioned by

a government agency also highlights the role o policymak-

ers in allowing exploitation o these communities.

Cumulative Health Impacts

The cumulative impact o these serious environmental

injustices can be seen in the health outcomes o Valley

residents. Rates o respiratory illness and health problems

related to poor air quality are extremely high. Valley children

have the highest childhood asthma rate in the state: one in

ve children in the Valley suers rom asthma.23 High levels

o particulate matter in the air also contribute to high rates

o cardiac and respiratory illness. Breathing polluted air that

ails to meet ederal health-based standards or ozone and

ne particulate matter costs Valley residents over $6 bil-

lion dollars a year in health-related expenses, nearly $1,600

per-person per year, and is associated with 2,600 premature

deaths annually.24

Many rural communitieslike McFarland, Earlimart,

Buttonwillow, and most recently Kettleman Cityhave

experienced the emergence o clusters o cancer and birth

deects. This is not surprising, given that homes and schools

are oten located next to crops and ields that are routinely

sprayed with pesticides. Due to their proximity to pollu-

tion sources, low-income communities and communities

o color are disproportionately impacted by these negative

health outcomes. Many residents are orced to drink water

which is oten times contaminated, while also breathing a

toxic soup o air pollution that leads to severe health issues.

These health problems are exacerbated by the act that

many Valley residents lack access to health care. In 2009,

one-million Valley residentsor roughly one-ourth o the

Valleys populationlacked access to health insurance.25

Young adults and non-citizens, a large segment o the

Valleys population, are more likely to endure this health as-

sault without a doctor.

Lack o public participation

The cycle o poverty, chronic unemployment, pollution and

poor health outcomes that grips the San Joaquin Valley

perpetuates itsel because o the undamentally undemo-

cratic nature o the region. The people most impacted by


10/24


these injustices are quite oten deliberately excluded rom

participating in the decisions that aect their lives. There

are numerous barriers to public participation in the Valley,

particularly or rural, low-income communities o color.

For example, important meetings are oten held during

normal business hours, when most people are at work and

cannot attend. These meeting are held in county seats or

in Sacramento, or in otherwise distant locations inacces-

sible to most low-income residents, many o whom lack

access to adequate transportation. Notiication o these

meetings is usually done via the Internet, which automati-

cally excludes anyone that lacks access to a computer.

Meetings are usually conducted in English and important

documents are only available in English, which excludes

participation rom a large part o the Valleys residents who

are limited English speakers. I mportantly, decision-making

bodies throughout the Valley do not relect the racial and

economic demographics o impacted communities. All o

these institutional barriers prevent meaningul community

participation, and disconnect the government rom the

governed. Governmental institutions which simultaneously

exclude the majority o Valley residents and are ruled by a

minority class thus lack undamental legitimacy.

Conclusion

The implementation o the community vision described in

this report requires a complete and total departure rom the

Valleys current model o economic development described

above; a type o grey economy, dened in the Green Equity

Toolkit as one where,

. . . prots are routinely permitted to be derived rom

the pollution o air, water and land; the exploitation and

under-compensation o workers; the creation o environ-

mental-related illnesses; the disproportionate dumping

o toxins in low-income communities o color; and the

creation o wealth stratication and deep poverty.26

As this grey economy continues to exploit disadvantaged

communities, the need or a new, sustainable economic

model in the San Joaquin Valley becomes crystal clear. Green

economic development initiatives being tested in other

regions o the state promise change, yet must be adapted

to the Valleys unique socio-economic, political, and rural

culture to ensure that those eorts succeed. Only a holistic,

community-driven green economy can succeed in the long

term, both socially and environmentally.


11/24

The Green PaPer 9

Community leaders and residents overarching vision is

simple and straightorward. Leaders want to live in healthy

vibrant rural communities, where they can live, work, and

play ree rom the threat o environmental harm. They want

to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and have access to

economic opportunities that lit their amilies out o poverty.

From this vision, the community leaders who participated in

the Power to the People program crated three specic core

principles which they believe must guide the development

o any projects or eorts to create a truly green economy in

the Valley.*

1. Promotion Of Environmental Health& Justice

A sustainable and green economy must result in a clean and

healthy environment or all people. It must actively work to

reduce the disproportionate burden o pollution placed on

the Valleys rural, low-income communities and communi-

ties o color. Any project or industry purporting to be green

must either directly reduce environmental pollution or not

exacerbate existing pollution levels in the Valley. Additionally,

local, state and national governments must stop the trend o

locating polluting acilities or industries in low-income com-

munities o color and accepting regional pollution reduc-

tions as a trade-o. Finally, government and private investors

must support ventures that remediate existing pollution.

2. Economic Opportunity For AllA green economy must provide economic opportunity or

all residents, with priority given to traditionally marginalized

groups, such as women, people o color, and people with

low incomes. Failure to include traditionally marginalized

populations in the green economy threatens the success o

* Power to the People reers to the yearlong trainings conducted withcommunity leaders to develop this vision. For more inormation reer to theAppendix.

economic development in the Valley. Studies o economic

development in regions with weak economies and high lev-

els o social inequity have ound that strategies that pursue

airness, inclusion, and broadened opportunity are critical or

regional revival o weak economies.27

Compliance with this principle will require a serious invest-

ment in the development o Valleys human capital in order

to prepare its residents or jobs in the green economy, via

training programs or local residents in communities where

a green industry seeks to be located. Local policies that pro-

mote the hiring o local residents or job opportunities are

another example o the types o polices that must be imple-

mented in order to ensure equitable community access to

economic development opportunities.

3. Green Jobs Must Promote Equity & JusticeThe third and most critical principle o green economic

development demands the inusion o justice and equity

into each sector o this new economy. As the Green Equity

Toolkitstates, when policymakers and green rms dont

consciously weave equity into a strategy or developing the

green economy, green jobs are not guaranteed to be any

more equitable or sustainable than jobs in the grey econo-

my.28 Green and sustainable jobs in rural communities must

actively contribute to a more sustainable environment, and

aord actors in this economy the ability to sustain a good

quality o lie or themselves and their amilies.

Green Jobs Defned

Community participants in the Power to the People cam-

paign developed their own denition o green jobs in accor-

dance with their core principles. Given the high levels o un-

employment in the Valley, job creation is a key component o

the new green economy. However, the ultimate objective o

a new green economy is to reverse trends o discriminatory

and exploitative economic development in the San Joaquin

P2P Leaders Vision for aGreen Economy in the

San Joaquin Valley


12/24


Valley. Job creation must be regarded as a means to achiev-

ing this end. Thereore, community leaders and residents

envision jobs which will actually lead to improved quality o

lie or disadvantaged communities in the Valley.

As dened by P2P community leaders, sustainable and green

jobs are those that:

v PROTECT & IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH

PEOPLE LIVE, WORK, & PLAY

Green jobs are ound in industries that either work to

reduce environmental pollution or do not exacerbate ex-

isting pollution levels. These may be conventional green

sectors such as solar and wind energy, modern public

transportation systems, recycling, and especially small

scale, sustainable organic agriculture. Community leaders

also identied an interest in developing employment

opportunities in non-conventional green industries that

provide an environmental and social benet such as edu-

cation, catering ocused on healthy organic oods, park

maintenance, and other types o social entrepreneurship

that capitalize on their existing assets.

v PROVIDE A LIVING WAGE

A sustainable green economy should provide employees

a living wage that allows them to meet their basic needs,

including ood, clothing, housing and medical care, child

care and basic transportation, helping them lit their

amilies out o poverty.

v RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF WORKERS

Green jobs respect the rights and human dignity o

workers including their most basic right to orm and join

a union with their co-workers to protect their interests.

This also includes the provision o basic benets such as

health insurance, vacation, and sick leave.

v GENERATE OPPORTUNITY FOR LOCAL COMMUNITY

Overall health and benets to the community at large

must also be taken into consideration when seeking to

create green jobs. Local hiring policies must be enacted

to ensure economic benet in the communities in which

these industries are located. In the case o jobs that

require technical expertise, training and educational

opportunities should be made available to develop the

capacity o residents to perorm those jobs.

v PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY & INCLUSION FOR PREVIOUSLY

MARGINALIZED RESIDENTS

Jobs should be available to all members o the com-

munity regardless o their gender, age, or national origin

with priority given to traditionally marginalized residents.

Passage o comprehensive immigration reorm is critical

to meeting this goal and ensuring economic mobility or

immigrant workers and their amilies.

v PROVIDE YEAR-ROUND LONG-TERM EMPLOYMENT

& OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVANCEMENT

Given their experience with precarious seasonal jobs in

large-scale industrial agriculture, it is important or leaders

that sustainable jobs oer year-round employment with

long-term advancement opportunities or employees.

v PROVIDE A SAFE WORKING ENVIRONMENT

FREE OF TOXICS

It would be a contradiction to have a so-called green

job that exposes workers to toxics. Green jobs must

aord their employees a sae and healthy work environ-ment ree o exposure to chemicals that may damage

their health.


13/24


14/24


a moratorium on the mandatory 30-day impoundment o

vehicles owned by unlicensed drivers. * The latter policy rec-

ommendation has strong bipartisan support and emerged

as a recommended action in the State Board o Food and

Agricultures Vision 2030 drat report.33

acto #2: Ct G voctol Tg Pogs

Green vocational training and incubator programs play an

integral role in the human capital investment strategy to create

a socially responsible green economy. Community colleges

currently oer various vocational training and basic skills

development opportunities, ranging rom courses in English

and computer literacy to trade apprenticeship programs

such as carpentry, nursing, wastewater operation, and many

others. It is important that basic skills and trade development

* The mandatory 30-day impoundment o vehicles owned by unlicenseddrivers is a punitive practice which extorts poor and working class residents otheir hard-earned money, and compromises their ability to eed their amiliesand pay their bills. Impound ees can average about $30 dollars (or more) perday, meaning that unlicensed drivers can end up paying $900 or more to recovertheir vehicles ater 30 days. Many unlicensed drivers simply cannot aord to doso and thereore lose their vehicles altogether, resulting in additional hardship.

continue to be an aordable and accessible human develop-

ment opportunity or Valley residents, and particularly or low-

income residents and people o color. Valley K-12 schools must

adequately prepare students with the basic skills they will need

to participate in vocational training programs created as the

Valley transitions to a new green economy.

Strategy #2: Promotion o Green and SociallyResponsible Entrepreneurship

The transition to a green and sustainable economy in the

San Joaquin Valley presents a tremendous opportunity or

social innovation and entrepreneurship. Rather than wait

or corporations or governments to create green economic

development opportunities, low-income communities o

color should be encouraged to create those opportunities

Evergreen Cooperatives o Cleveland

The Evergreen Cooperatives o Cleveland

is an innovative approach to equitable

and sustainable economic development

working to stabilize and revitalize six

low-income neighborhoods o Cleveland,

Ohio. Evergreens comprehensive eco-

nomic development strategy, based on

the Mondragon model, is centered on jobcreation, wealth building, and sustainabil-

ity through the establishment o green

businesses run as worker-owned coop-

eratives. Evergreens employee-owned,

or-prot companies are based locally and

hire locally. Evergreen creates meaningul

green jobs and keeps precious nancial

resources within Cleveland. Workers earn

a living wage and build equity in their

rms as owners o the business.

http://www.evergreencoop.com

Womens Action to Gain Economic

Security (WAGES)

For 15 years, WAGES, has worked with

low-income immigrant Latinas in the

San Francisco Bay Area to build worker-

owned green businesses that create

healthy, dignied jobs or low-income

women. WAGES helps launch coopera-

tives where women develop personaland proessional skills, become leaders,

and gain economic security. As co-op

members, women have healthy work,

good pay, and a voice and a vote in key

decisions and they distribute business

prots equitably. WAGES also provides

training and technical assistance to

incubate the co-ops and a ramework or

continued learning and business growth

through their Co-op Network.

http://wagescooperatives.org/

The Business Alliance or Local Living

Economies (BALLE)

BALLEs mission is to catalyze, strengthen

and connect networks o locally owned

independent businesses dedicated to

building strong Local Living Economies.

A Local Living Economy ensures that

economic power resides locally to the

greatest extent possible, sustainingvibrant, livable communities and healthy

ecosystems in the process. BALLE acili-

tates the development o community

networks o independent businesses, to

guide networks through various stages o

development, to synthesize and commu-

nicate the best ideas and practices, and

to build the larger movement or local

living economies.

http://www.livingeconomies.org

Models of Green Economic Development in Action


15/24

The Green PaPer 13

or themselves by becoming sel-employed green business

owners. Some residents o low-income rural communities

have ideas and skill sets they can use to create their own

green businesses. Community leaders identied interest in

the development o various businesses, ranging rom or-

ganic arming cooperatives, catering o healthy organic ood,

and bike courier services, to name just a ew. Community

leaders also identied a desire to utilize more equitable busi-

ness models such as worker-owned cooperatives. Thereore,

green economic development in the Valley should include

various types o assistance or leaders o these communities

who wish to establish socially responsible businesses.

acto #1: ics accss to Cptl d ot rsoucs

fo G etpus

Many o these potential entrepreneurs ace signicant barriers

in establishing their own green businesses. One o the main

barriers is a lack o access to capital. Many traditional bank-

ing institutions will simply not lend money to low-income

individuals who lack assets or credit history. Thus, availability

o non-conventional types o lending such as micro-nance

is critical to help low-income people o color establish green

businesses. Eorts to make micro-nancing opportunities

available have had tremendous success in helping individuals

transition out o poverty. For instance, the Grameen Bank in

Bangladesh, which provides nancially impoverished residents

access to micro-nancing to acilitate the establishment o

their own business, has helped lit over 65% o their borrowers

out o extreme poverty. * Numerous micro-nance initiatives

similar to the Grameen model exist in the United States. The

Dolores Huerta Foundation is currently piloting a program in

the Valley to provide low interest, collateral ree small busi-

ness loans to low income residents in rural communities in

Southern Kern County.

In addition to access to capital, many low-income entrepre-

neurs will also require technical support in order to ensure the

success o their businesses. Types o assistance needed will in-

clude developing business plans, nancial advising, and busi-

ness management coaching. Business incubator programs are

* Grameen Bank provides nancial services to the rural poor o Bangladesh.Those services include loans, saving accounts, pension plans and loan insur-ance. The overall goal o Grameen Bank is the elimination o poverty. Grameenprovides micro-lenders in poor communitys access to capital to make micro-loans to women who are working to develop or expand a small business. Inmany o the poorest regions in the world, micro business creation is the onlyway or amilies to escape poverty and build a better uture or their children.

The Agricultural Land Based Training Association (ALBA)

ALBA is a highly successul example o the type o eco-nomic development consistent with the vision o thePower to the People campaign. ALBA works to advanceeconomic viability, social equity and ecological land man-agement among limited-resource and aspiring armers.

ALBA accomplishes this through a holistic approachproviding disadvantaged aspiring armers with education,leadership development, business support and education,and has proven to be successul in changing the lives opeople involved with ALBA. Since 1985, 500 amilies havestudied, networked, or developed businesses with the help

o ALBAs Rural Development Center. ALBA owns and oper-ates two organic arms with over 27 beginning and limited-resource armer-tenants. The ALBA program is a model orother agricultural incubator projects nationwide.

For more inormation on ALBA visit: www.albaarmers.org.

The South Central Farmers

The South Central Farmers Cooperative is a model o agrassroots economic development organization consis-tent with the vision and values developed by Power tothe People leaders. Ater being displaced in their struggleto save the 14 acre urban arm known as the SouthCentral Farm in Los Angeles---which was bulldozed in2006 the members ormed an organic arming coop-erative aimed at providing resh, healthy grown produceto their community.

Cooperatively owned by its members, the Farm is Certi-ed Organic, using only integrated pest management andbiodiversity practices. All produce is grown and harvestedon land leased by the cooperative. The arm is located inBakerseld and Buttonwillow Caliornia.

The South Central armers operate a highly successulCommunity Supported Agriculture (CSA) program in which

one person or a group can purchase one box or multipleboxes o in-season produce. The CSA largely serves thosewho normally would not have access to aordable, resh,and healthy produce. The cooperative believes that allresidents are entitled to resh, healthy ood choices.

For more inormation on the South Central Farmerswww.southcentralarmers.com, (800) 249-5240, [email protected].

Two Models for OrganicFarming Options in the San

Joaquin Valley


16/24


another type o resource or potential green entrepreneurs.

Most successul incubator programs include intensive trade-specic skill set development and industry-specic business

management education. However, in capital and resource

intensive enterprises, like arming or energy development,

incubator programs must provide access to land and water or

skill development. Moreover, upon completion o an incuba-

tor program, policymakers should allow expedited mecha-

nisms or accessing capital, land and other necessary resourc-

es. There are several successul incubator programs currently

available in Caliornia, like the Agricultural Land Based Training

Association, a highly successul agricultural program. Other

potential types o incubator programs that could be createdas a component o a new green economy include:

v Environmentally Sound House Cleaning Cooperatives (i.e.

WAGES Model);

v Distributed Energy Generation Programs (such as solar

development and installation);

v Water Efciency and Re-Use Programs (such as greywater

re-use systems); and

v Innovative Transit Programs (such as vanpools).

acto #2: rqu d ictz Cgs t

Poducto d Opto Pctcs of exstg Bussss

In addition to helping launch new green businesses, the

creation o a green economic development model or the

San Joaquin Valley requires that existing businesses become

more socially and environmentally responsible. There are

various social and environmental production and operation

practices that existing businesses should incorporate as they

embrace a green economic development model. Examples

osustainable and justbusiness policies and practices to

adopt include:

v direct hiring o employees to ensure accountability;*

v paying adequate wages that allows workers to meet their

basic needs;

v providing aordable healthcare benets;

v providing shared ownership opportunities or shared

wealth creation (Employment Stock Ownership Pro-

grams); and

v treating workers with dignity, including the right to orm

a union.

expls of otl polcs d pctcs to

dopt clud:

v implementing technologies that go beyond Best Avail-

able Control Technology and Reasonably Available Control

Technology (BACT/RACT)to achieve necessary pollution

reductions needed or the Valley to meet Federal air qual-

ity standardsespecially or energy production that has

signicant pollution emissions; **

v establishing buer zones and using Integrated Pest Man-

agement or application o pesticides in urban and rural

operations;

* Farm labor contractors (FLCs) shield growers or landowner rom liabilityby taking responsibility or the recruitment, payroll, management, and work-ing conditions o their workers. According to recent studies, FLCs provide upto 50% o all agricultural labor in Caliornia. Growers increased reliance onFLCs is directly related to their desire to avoid legal requirements and liabilityin regard to immigration, health and saety, paperwork, to avoid unionizationor labor disputes. FLC abuses in the elds are well-documented, and includewithholding wages rom workers, abandoning workers without payingthem, paying workers less than the agreed rate, making improper deduc-tions, short-counting or shor t-weighing units produced, requiring workersto overll standard units paid by piece rate, charging workers or rental oequipment provided ree by growers, keeping bonus or other money dueworkers, overcharging workers or transportation or collecting or transporta-tion expenses rom both employers and workers, and abandoning crews ar

rom home. http://www.cirsinc.org/Documents/Pub0106.1.pd

** BACT and RACT are relative standards set by each Air pollution controldistrict. One o the biggest challenges aced in the San Joaquin Valley is thatthe regional air district has set the level o BACT/RACT below what is neededto achieve signicant reductions needed to bring the Valley into attainment oclean air standards.


17/24

The Green PaPer 15

v establishing Renewable Energy goals and standards; and

v establishing zero waste goals, including reuse o recycla-

ble and compostable materials instead o landlling.

Public policies that both require and incentivize these prac-

tices are critical to attaining this transition.

Strategy #3: Address environmental impacts oeconomic development & support meaningulpublic participation

Under the Caliornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),

public agencies are required to conduct a review o

potential environmental eects o new development

prior to granting approval. The resulting environmental

documents can be an important tool in protecting com-

munities rom potentially harmul projects. However, these

documents oten ail to adequately identiy existing and

potential pollution, as well as the health and social im-

pacts o new development on the community. The law

also allows public agencies to approve environmentally

harmul projects as long as those impacts are disclosed.

This helps explain why there is an over-concentration o

polluting acilities in the Valleys low-income communities

and communities o color. In a green economic develop-

ment model, all o the impacts o potential development or

proposed projects must be ully mitigated or avoided prior

to making a inal decision.

Establishing a green economy in the Valley that is consistentwith the vision o grassroots community leaders, willrequire a signicant shit in the way that policymakerscurrently approach economic development. The CaliorniaEnvironmental Justice Alliance, o which CRPE is a member, islaunching a new initiative called Green Zones or Economicand Environmental Sustainability to create a new holisticramework or achieving change in low-income communitiesand communities o color. In doing so, it will provide newpolicy models that are grounded in community participation.The initiative will ocus on targeting ederal resources toneighborhoods that suer rom concentrated pollution andlack economic opportunities by creating a ederal GreenZones designation. These areas will be identied using theEnvironmental Justice Screening Methodology, a cumulativeimpact screening tool developed by researchers RachelMorello-Frosch, Jim Sadd and Manuel Pastor. As a result,communities will be prioritized or a range o ederal benets.The initiative will utilize community visioning and planningprocesses to identiy priority benets in each area. Theinitiative will ocus on creating benets in three areas:

1. Reducing existing environmental pollution and improvingland-use decisions by drawing regulatory ocus to those com-munities that have long shouldered the costs o unsustain-able economic activity and land-use planning, and enable thereduction o pollution in overburdened communities.

2. Investing in sustainable, community-based developmentby proactively connecting public and private resources

to the designated neighborhoods, which will be able toaccess increased public unding and stimulate privateinvestment in green economic development, such asalternative-energy and energy-eiciency projects.

3. Increasing community capacity and power by ground-ing each Green Zone in an authentic community-basedplanning and visioning process and utilizing participatorydecision-making structures to ensure community voicesguide regulatory action and identiy needed beneits.

CEJAs mission is to strengthen the progressive environmen-tal justice movement in Caliornia by building on the localorganizing eorts and advocacy successes o our memberorganizations to achieve state policy change. CEJAs mem-bers are the Asian Paciic Environmental Network, the Cen-ter on Community Action and Environmental Justice, theCenter on Race, Poverty and the Environment, Communitiesor a Better Environment, the Environmental Health Coali-tion, and People Organizing to Demand Environmental andEconomic Rights.

The Green Zones initiative is a proactive, comprehensiveapproach to local change that is grounded in communityvisions or healthy, sustainable neighborhoods.

For more inormation check out the ull report: Green Zonesor Economic and Environmental Sustainability: A ConceptPaper rom the Caliornia Environmental Justice Alliance athttp://caleja.org/documents/2010_0000_green_zones.pd

Green Zones for Economic and Environmental Sustainability:a cocpt ctd b T Clfo eotl Justc allc


18/24


acto #1: Coduct cops lss to dtf

otll o-budd couts d lz

pottl pcts of poposd w dlopt d

pojcts t S Joqu vll.

Decision-makers should prevent the continued siting o pol-

luting acilities in overburdened, low-income communities

and remediate pollution in communities already overbur-dened by pollution. An analysis should identiy income levels,

racial demographics, health disparities, and existing pollution

burdens. Special attention should be paid to dominant pollu-

tion sources, such as pesticide concentrations, mega-dairies,

oil production and rening, waste disposal and composting

acilities, incinerators, bio-mass acilities and power plants.

The Valleys decision-makers should incorporate this analysis

in their decisions to approve proposed new projects, to revise

permits on existing acilities, as well as to make appropriate

zoning designations to prevent overburdening communities

in the uture.

Popl idtf eotll Obudd

Couts

In order to have a comprehensive analysis o the impacts o

new developments or projects, decision-makers must rst

identiy overburdened communities. Various screening tools

have emerged to identiy overburdened and vulnerable com-

munities. Researchers Manuel Pastor, Rachel Morello-Frosch

and Jim Saad developed an Environmental Justice Screening

Method specic to air pollution or the Caliornia Air Resources

Board. This tool takes into account measures o hazard proxim-

ity and sensitive land uses, cumulative impacts rom potential

air pollution exposures and estimated cancer and respiratory

risks, and indicators o social vulnerability, all at the census

tract level, to calculate relative scores or high priority areas.34

The San Joaquin Valley Cumulative Health Impacts Project

(SJVCHIP), a coalition o environmental justice and health

advocates and researchers afliated with the University o

Caliornia, Davis, is currently working to develop a screening

tool to identiy and map out overburdened environmental

justice communities in the San Joaquin Valley.35 SJVCHIP has

worked with advocates to ensure environmental hazards spe-

cic to the Valley such as pesticides and pollution rom mega-

dairies are included in their screen. Both o these tools, as well

as other similar methodologies, can prove useul as starting

points or developing comprehensive decision-making analy-

ses. This inormation should be used by the regulatory agen-

cies when permitting potentially polluting acilities.

acto #2: Fost mgful Publc Ptcpto nw

G ecooc modl

Meaningul public participation is essential to the establish-

ment o sustainable communities and a green economy; yet

residents o environmentally overburdened communities

are oten excluded rom important decisions. Residents rom

disadvantaged communities ace many barriers which com-

plicate their ability to participate in civic lie in a meaningul

way, and thus are not able to participate in the development

Biomass reers to organic waste de-rived rom both agricultural and urbanareas. Orchard removal, demolition andconstruction debris, and green waste arethe most common sources o biomass.This material can be incinerated in powerplants to produce electricity, but these

incinerators emit a lot o air pollution.

Using biomass or uel to make energy isa growing industry in the Central Valley.Electricity rom biomass incineratorsqualies as renewable energy. Since theuel capacity o current and proposedplants is ar greater than the biomass

available in the Central Valley, hundredso thousands o tons o biomass arebeing trucked to the Valley rom urbanareas. This is contributing to the Valleysalready extensive air pollution problem.

There are better options than incinera-

tion or much o this biomass. Timberwaste rom urban areas should be recy-cled into new timber products. Greenwaste rom urban areas should becomposted or chipped or landscaping,gardening and urban orestation. Ag-ricultural biomass should be returnedto the soil whenever possible. This can

oten be done directly by leaving thebiomass in the eld or the material canbe composted and returned to the soil.

These alternatives to the current prac-tice o incineration are more sustain-able or the long term energy needs

o our planet. They promote healthiersoil which grows healthier ood andprovide less dependence on ossil uelor ertilizer. There are other cleaner,less destructive ways to provide renew-

able energy by using abundant power

sources such as wind, wave, and solar.

The Trouble with Bio-Mass in the San Joaquin Valley


19/24

The Green PaPer 17

o economic policies and actions. Increasing the sel-deter-

mination and power o disadvantaged communities to be

actively involved in decisions impacting their community is a

central component o the vision created by Community lead-

ers. This can be accomplished by:

l adoptg polcs tt coug gt tspc

d cout ptcpto cc lf

v providing adequate notication to aected residents

regarding potential harmul land-use projects;

v making proessional translation services available at

public hearings;

v ensuring that meetings related to projects and/or

policies which will impact overburdened commu-

nities are held at accessible locations and times in

close proximity to the aected community; and

v providing residents with sufcient reader-riendly in-ormation, translated into Spanish, in a timely manner.

l icsg dsdtgd cout pstto

dcso kg bods t vll

v Reserving an equitable and sufcient number o

appointments or representatives o disadvantaged

communities to existing non-elected decision-

making bodies;

v Creating citizen committees that have real author-

ity to review proposed project plans and approve ordeny permits or new acilities and development;

v Enacting local and regional campaign inance

reorm, including public inancing, so that leaders

rom disadvantaged communities can be viable

candidates or elected oice; and

v Ensuring that processes to redistrict the political

boundaries are conducted in an equitable manner

that include representation o leaders rom disadvan-

taged communities.

The Unique Role o Government in AdvancingGreen Economic Development

State and local governments both within and outside o

the Valley will play an essential role in helping to promote

a sustainable green economy in the Valley. First, it is impor-

tant or state and local governments to incorporate local

sustainability policies that do not have unintended adverse

aects or redirected impacts on San Joaquin Valley communi-

ties. For example, a waste diversion policy that has no geo-

graphic limit, like one rom Los Angeles or the San Francisco

Bay Area, continues to result in more waste disposal in the

San Joaquin Valley. Landll diversion policies in other regionswill indirectly lead to the expansion o bio-mass generation

acilities in the Valley who are allowed to accept and inciner-

ate waste rom outside the region, but are not required to use

localized stock, such as agricultural waste. Bio-mass acili-

ties, generating a supposed renewable energy source, will

thereore be able to burn all urban waste largely rom outside

the Valley, including plastics that produce toxic emissions.

Thereore waste reduction policies must go beyond mere

landll diversion and ocus on the elimination o waste. For

instance, San Franciscos Zero Waste Policy, which aims to

divert 75 percent o the Citys waste away rom landlls by

2010 and zero waste by 2020, will not only benet the local

waste disposal ees o San Franciscans but moreover, lessen

the burden o imported waste to be burned in the Valley. *

Second, state and local governments should enact poli-

cies that both incentivize and require polluting industries

to adopt policies that protect communities rom urther

environmental harm, such as zero waste emissions targets.

Regulatory agencies will need to mandate targets or nutri-

ent reductions rom ertilizer and manure application, toxic

* SF Environment, the Commission on the Environment, the Board oSupervisors, and the mayor have all helped create ordinances and resolu-tions to address the problem o solid waste, including setting the goalso 75 percent landll diversion by 2010 and zero waste by 2020, variouspolicy initiatives to ensure that government leads by example, and eortsto encourage the private sector to move toward zero waste. For details, visit

http://www.senvironment.org/our_programs/program_ino.html?s

si=3#LegislationInitiatives


20/24


pesticide reductions, greenhouse gas reductions, and ne

particulate matter and ozone precursor reductions. History

has shown that a change in practice cannot solely be incen-

tivized, but rather mandated. For instance, basic health and

saety protections or armworkers, like restrooms and clean

and cool drinking water in the elds were a result o legal

mandates ought or by armworker advocates.36 Incentivizing

a transition away rom an established industry practice that is

degrading the environment only truly goes to scale when the

harmul practice has been outlawed and thereore a need to

transition away rom such practice is inevitable.

Third, state and local governments must prioritize invest-

ments in environmentally overburdened communities that

remediate the eects o long-term exposure to pollution

and inrastructure deicits resulting rom years o neglect.

Such investments must promote environmental sustainabil-

ity and community health, as well as green economic devel-

opment. Examples include energy projects that meet local

community energy needs via renewable energy sources,

such as solar power plants.

Fourth, decision-makers should work with residents o

overburdened communities to identiy and prioritize their

community development and inrastructure needs. Specic

priority issues identied by community leaders include

roads, sidewalks, street lighting, and clean, aordable drink-

ing water. Environmentally overburdened communities

should also have priority in receiving unding allocations

rom Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), ed-

eral stimulus unding, local tax revenues and other public

unding sources. Disadvantaged communities in the Valley

particularly unincorporated communitiesoten times do

not receive CDBG dollars and other unds because they lack

direct representation. Unortunately, county supervisors and

other policymakers systematically neglect these communities

in the overall allocation o public resources, requently leav-

ing them out o local planning processes where unding

decisions are made. This includes CDBG unds, one o the ew

unding sources available or inrastructure improvements in

low-income communities.*

ConclusionThe vision laid out in this document calls upon policymak-

ers to work with community leaders to make signiicant in-

vestments in the Valleys most valuable resource, its people.

These investments include supporting comprehensive

immigration reorm which will allow a signiicant portion

o the Valleys population to participate reely in the new

economy and investment in job training and educational

programs to provide residents with green job skills. This new

model also calls or a proactive strategy to eradicate poverty

by acilitating access to capital and providing support or

green entrepreneurship. Existing industries and business

are a key part o the solution and policies should be devel-

oped that require and incentivize their participation in the

creation o a new green economy. Lastly, the development

o comprehensive decision-making processes that provide

avenues or meaningul participation will ensure the estab-

lishment o an equitable economy.

A truly green and sustainable economy cannot be built

upon the ault lines o poverty, injustice and inequality. The

strategies and policy recommendations outlined in this

report lay the oundation or a more equitable, environ-mentally sustainable, and just economy. It is our hope that

this report will serve as a catalyst or a longer conversation

between policymakers and community leaders about how

we can all work together to make this vision a reality.

* In 2010 CRPE and several allied organizations co-sponsored the Com-munity Equity I nvestment Act (SB 194 Florez), state legislation that wouldhave reormed the CDBG selection process in Caliornia to ensure betterrepresentation o disadvantaged unincorporated and ringe communi-ties. It would have directed counties and cities to prioritize the needs oresidents in these communities that all within their jurisdiction and have

no local governing board or have less than 2,000 residents, when deter-mining how to distribute CDBG unds. The proposed legislation passedboth houses o the State Legislature but was unortunately vetoed byGovernor Schwarzenegger in September 2010. For details, please visit:

http://www.policylink.org/at/c/%7B97c6d565-bb43406d-a6d5-eca3bb35a0%7D/SB%20194%20FACT%20SHEET%20090810.PDF

A truly green and sustainable

economy cannot be built upon

the ault lines o poverty, injustice

and inequality.


21/24

The Green PaPer 19

The Power to the People Campaign was conceived as parto CRPEs larger Land Use Project, which works to ensure

that rural low-income communities and communities o

color benet rom healthy, equitable land use decisions, with

an emphasis not only on changing the decisions, but how

and by whom decisions are made. The Power to the People

Campaign (P2P) combined CRPEs traditional approach o

ghting polluting projects such as ethanol plants and ossil

uel power plants with a new proactive approach o train-

ing communities to dene or themselves their vision or a

healthy sustainable community. In order or rural low-income

communities and communities o color to enter the discus-sions around the new green economy and sustainable land

use planning, they rst needed to ully understand the issues.

Thereore, CRPE prepared a curriculum that would increase

community leaders understanding o the various acets o the

emerging green economy. From this curriculum we designed

a series o twelve trainings, attended by residents o various

Fresno, Kern, and Tulare County communities with whom we

work. During the trainings, Community leaders developed

the vision, principles, and policies presented in this report.

The Communities

Leaders participating in this process represented more than

eighteen communities throughout Fresno, Tulare, and Kern

counties*. There were two types o communities repre-

sented: rural cities, such as Wasco and Arvin, and unincorpo-

rated communities, such as Allensworth and Alpaugh. Both

types o communities ace distinct challenges. Many o the

unincorporated communities are struggling to address basic

inrastructure deicits such as lack o sidewalks, street lights,

and clean drinking water. Rural city residents, on the other

hand, ind themselves ighting urban sprawl, construction o

reeways through their communities, and polluting indus-

tries that want to relocate to their neighborhoods.

* Allensworth, Alpaugh, Arvin, Bakerseld, Delano, Ducor, Exeter, Fresno,Lamont, Li ndsay, McFarland, Pixley, Plainview, Shater, Strathmore, Tooleville,Visalia, Wasco.

Appendix:about t Pow to t Popl Cpg

Yet, these communities share a common story inuencedby the dominance o large-scale industrial agriculture in the

region. Populations are comprised o a majority o people

o color, most o whom are Latino immigrants. Many are

employed as arm-workers. Rural cities and unincorporated

communities in the region both ace severe levels o unem-

ployment and poverty. In 2006 Tulare and Kern Counties, to-

gether with Fresno, Kings, Merced and Madera Counties had

the highest percentage o residents living below the poverty

line in Caliornia.**

Leaders or this campaign were recruited by a combination o

grassroots tactics employed by CRPEs Community Organizing

Department. Tactics ranged rom an intense house-meeting

campaign in the City o Wasco, aimed at starting a discus-

sion with residents about the green economy; to targeted

outreach to leaders working with CRPE on other campaigns,

primarily leaders rom CRPEs Forgotten Voices campaign. The

Forgotten Voices campaign works with residents o unin-

corporated communities in Tulare County to inuence the

update o the Countys General Plan in order to reverse basic

inrastructure decits caused by years o neglect.

** Poverty rates in six Valley counties highest in state, U.S. The Fresno BeeAugust 29, 2007


22/24


The Trainings

CRPE held a series o twelve trainings on a regular basis in

the City o Wasco (Kern County), throughout 2009 and into

early 2010. Many o the leaders with whom CRPE works ace

economic, linguistic, and social barriers to civic participa-

tion; thereore, our training program was structured to ad-

dress many o these issues in order to acilitate the mean-ingul participation rom our leaders. Our trainings were

scheduled on the third Saturday o each month rom 10:00

am to 1:00 pm to maximize the number o participants able

to attend. We selected Saturday so as not to interere with

the majority o our leaders work schedules during the week;

however, or many o our leaders who are arm-workers,

Saturday is a regular work day. As trainings were held once

a month some community leaders were able to ask or that

day o in order to attend.

In addition to selecting a day that would accommodate ourleaders, CRPE also provided ree, onsite childcare at all the

trainings. Many o our leaders are parents o young children

who cannot aord to pay a babysitter to watch their chil-

dren so they can attend these types o meetings. Under the

creative leadership o CRPEs administrative sta in Delano,

what began as childcare evolved into a parallel environmen-

tal education program to ollow, while their parents attend-

ed their own training. Each o the youth trainings concluded

with a presentation by the youth o what they had learned.

Language is also a huge barrier to many o CRPEs leaders whoare monolingual Spanish speakers. Thus, all trainings were

bilingual to accommodate CRPEs monolingual Spanish as well

as monolingual English speakers. Our partner organization

Fresno Metro Ministry provided us with translation equip-

ment that allowed us to provide simultaneous translation

rom Spanish to English and English to Spanish. By removing

numerous barriers that normally prevent traditionally margin-

alized populations rom civic engagement, our trainings had

repeat attendance o both parents and youth. More than 165

leaders rom over eighteen communities participated in at

least one o our Power to the People trainings, with over 50%o leaders attending more than one o the trainings.

The trainings themselves were led by CRPE sta members

and partners rom ally organizations. A range o topics

were covered at the trainings, including renewable energy,

dening green jobs, organic agriculture, land-use issues, and

many others. Trainings also included trips to communities

and groups who are working to build a sustainable green

economy in Caliornia. Additionally, Power to the People

leaders practiced their advocacy skills. In November 2009,

Community leaders attended hearings convened by the Kern

County Agricultural Commissioner, to provide testimony in

support o a measure to prevent the application o restricted

pesticides within a quarter-mile o schools in the county. In

December 2009, a delegation o community leaders attend-

ed the San Joaquin Valley Regional Green Jobs Summit, with

one o our leaders presenting about the P2P campaign to a

crowd o over 200 people.

But it was not all work. In addition to inormation, P2P train-

ings also provided our leaders with opportunities to develop

riendships with other community leaders. Each o the train-

ings concluded with all the participants, leaders and trainers,

singing songs rom the social justice movement and sharing

a meal prepared by community members.

In addition to education and community-building, P2P

trainings also ocused on leadership development as a cen-

tral theme throughout. An unoreseen, but exciting, result

o the Power to the People trainings was the ormation o

the Committee o Residents Organized at the Service o a

Healthy Environment (ROSAS). Community leaders rom

the City o Wasco joined to establish ROSAS in order to

pursue their vision o establishing an environmentally and

economically sound economy in their community. Building

rom their participation in the P2P trainings, members o

Comit ROSAS are currently working with CRPE to raise

awareness around risks related to pesticide exposure and

mega-dairy pollution, as well as identiying a potential pilot

project consistent with CRPE and the communitys articu-

lated vision and goals.

Next Steps o P2P Campaign

The next phase o this campaign will be to make this vision

a reality by supporting community leaders in the develop-

ment o pilot projects that will put this vision into action.

Grassroots EJ leaders should not be let having to wait or

the green economy to come to them. Leaders have the so-

cial assets, leadership and willingness to develop their own

projects which all within their vision o what is green. CRPE

is committed to working with community leaders towards

the development o these pilot projects that allow them to

become active participants in a new green economy.


23/24

The Green PaPer 21

Community leaders were inspired by our visit to the ALBA

arm in Salinas where they met and spoke with ALBA armers

who were once arm-workers, and are now running their

own organic arming businesses. Thereore, the rst pilot

project being explored is the establishment o a small-scale

organic arm. CRPE is currently working with members o the

Comit ROSAS to develop this pilot project, to be consistent

with the principles and values stated in the community

vision presented earlier in this document. This project seeks

to capitalize on the extensive arming expertise o our lead-

ers who are predominantly arm-workers, while also helping

these leaders obtain economic independence. Community

leaders see this project as a means to achieve their dreams

or a better economic uture or their children and amilies, as

part o a larger green economy which promotes the health

and well being o all.

Power to the People TrainingsDATE TOPIC TRAININGS

February

2009Power to People Training Kick O! CRPE Sta

March

2009

Renewable EnergyRaael Aguilera, Verde Group

Mark Stout, Clean Tech America

April

2009Dening Green Jobs & Leadership CRPE Sta

May

2009Organic Agriculture

Brett Melone, Agriculture Land Based Training Association

(Alba)

June

2009Land Use & the Green Economy

Genoveva Islas-Hooker, Central Caliornia Regional Obesity

Prevention Program

July

2009Field Trip to Salinas or Tour o Alba Farm

Brett Melone, Agriculture Land Based Training Association

(Alba)

September

2009Not So Green Energy & Developing Vision

Tom Frantz, Association O Irritated Residents

CRPE Sta

October

2009Dierent Models o Organic Farming

Shereen Dsouza, Caliornia Food & Justice Coalition

Tezozonoc, South Central Farms

November

2009Advocacy in Action

December

2009

Regional Green Jobs Summit Field Trip to

South Central Farmers Farm

San Joaquin Valley Green Jobs Coalition

South CenTral Farmers

March2010

Micro-lending & Next Steps Brock Seraphin, Dolores Huerta FoundationCRPE Sta


24/24

Endnotes1 Caliornia. Department o Food and Agriculture. CaliorniaAgricultural Resource Directory 20082009. CA Dept. o Food andAgriculture, 20082009. Print.

2 Wirth, Cathy, Ron Strochlic and Christy Getz. Hunger in theFields: Food Insecturity Among Farmworkers in Fresno County.2007.

3 Burd-Sharps, Sarah, Kristen Lewis and Eduardo Borges-Martin.The Measure o America: American Human Development Report.Print. New York: SSRC/Columbia University Press, 20082009.

4 US Congressional Research Service and Cowan Tadlock. Calior-nias San Joaquin Valley: A Region in Transition. 12 December 2005.

5 US Census Bureau. State & County Quickacts: Kern, Tulare,Kings, Fresno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus,

San Joaquin Counties. Retrieved Sep. 15 2010, rom

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 Bengiamin, Marlene. Captiman, John. And Chan, Xi. HealthyPeople 2010: A 2007 Prole o Health Status inthe San JoaquinValley. Fresno: Central Valley Health Policy Institute

9 Taylor, J. Edward and Philip L. Martin. The new rural poverty:Central Valley evolving into patchwork o poverty and prosperity.Caliornia Agriculture (2000): 54(1):2632.

10 Ibid.

11 Employment Development Department Maps o Unemploy-ment rates and jobs, July 2010

12 Kissam, Ed. Re: Wage Ino Farmworkers San Joaquin Valley.Email to the author. 17 Sep 2010.

13 Caliornia. Air Resources Board. Latest Ozone Summary orSelected Regions. Air Quality Data

14 Ibid.

15 American Lung Association, State o the Air: 2010< http://www.stateotheair.org/2010/key-ndings/SOTA2010.pd>

16 Ibid.

17 The Community Water Center Website.

18 Cole, Luke and Sheila Foster. From the Ground Up: Environ-

mental Racism and the Rise o the Environmental Justice Move-ment. New York: New York University Press, 2001.

19 Biosolid Land Application Ban.

20 Municode.com.

21 Ibid.

22 Caliornia Waste Management Board. Political DifcultiesFacing Waste-to-Energy Conversion Plant Siting. CA Waste Man-agement Board. Prepared by Powell, Stephen o Cerrell Associates,1984.

23 University o Caliornia Los Angeles Caliornia Health InterviewSurvey Data.

24 Hall, Jane and Victor Brajer. The Benets o Meeting FederalClean Air Standards in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley.2008. .

25 Chooljian, Steve. Capitman, John. Et al. The Aordable Care Actand Caliornias San Joaquin Valley: A CAUSE Perspective. Fresno:

The Central Caliornia Health Policy Institute, 2010.

26 Liu Yen, Yvonne and Keleher, Terry. Green Equity Toolkit: Stan-dards and Strategies or Advancing Race, Gender, and Equity in theGreen Economy.

27 Pastor, Manuel. Benner, Chris. Been down so long: Weak MarketCities & Regional Equity. Retooling or growth:

28 Ibid.

29 Ibid.

30 Cohn, Jerey Passel: DVera. U.S. Unauthorized ImmigrationFlows are Down Sharply Since Mid-Decade. Washington DC: PewHispanic Center Report , 2010.

31 < http://migration.ucdavis.edu>

32 Pastor, Manuel et al. The Economic Beneits o ImmigrantAuthorization in Caliornia. Los Angeles: The University o SouthernCaliornia, 2010.

33 < http://www.cda.ca.gov/agvision/>

34

35 < http://regionalchange.ucdavis.edu/projects/current/san-joaquin-valley-cumulative-health-impacts-project>

36 Ynostronza, Carlos. The Farm Worker: The Beginning o a NewAwareness .

Writting Sample-Green Paper

Documents

Transcript of Writting Sample-Green Paper