Comment Log Display

Dear CARB,
Thank you for your consideration.
The purpose of this comment letter is to share
insights and suggestions I believe were not considered in the
development of the People’s Blueprint. Although I’m in
a great mood, I’ll make a conscious effort to not seem angry
while writing about the injustices suffered by many in South
Sacramento. As James Baldwin said, “To be Black
in this country and to be relatively conscious is to be in a rage
almost all the time.” I am not Black, but can empathize, and
imagine.
To commit
an injustice and not correct it, when it is correctable, is to
double down on that injustice. As I skimmed through the
People’s Blueprint, and watched recordings of the meetings, I
found an attempt to prevent conflict and progress from happening
again, “moving forward.” What I didn’t find, was
how to correct the injustices that were allowed to happen to
several South Sacramento neighborhoods as part of the AB 617
process. California governmental and non-profit environmental
justice circles were aware of the issues; and so were you because
residents came here and told you. You deferred the issues to your
Board colleague, that also sits on the Board of the Air District,
and the Board of Supervisors. The only folks I recall who genuinely
tried to help South Sacramento residents frustrated with the
process were Ms. Ladonna Williams, Ms. Margaret Gordon, and Ms.
Katie Valenzuela.  They
listened and either provided technical assistance or used their
voice to call out the injustices. But there are no public
participants, that are also residents, (in the South Sacramento AB
617 process) left for them to help now.
Like many others, I also
quit the South Sacramento AB 617 process.  It was a waste of my time, and many others felt
the same, who are no longer there.  However, I recently attended the latest AB 617
Community Steering Committee meeting for South Sacramento, via
Zoom. I immediately noticed that the meeting only had three members
of the public in attendance, including myself. The two others were
non-profits with strong relationships to the local government.
Using the chat feature, I asked about the seeming lack of residents
at a meeting which was often touted as a community led
process.  The
responses were more than a little bit surprising. 
First, one of the
non-profits in attendance tried to explain away the lack of
community participation by stating that “the community is
tired.”  My
community is largely unaware of the AB 617 process; I’d guess
that less than 1 out of every hundred residents knows about AB 617;
that’s not being tired, its being unaware. I think what was
meant is that the same 10 people paraded at every outreach event,
and photo-op are tired. The Blueprint should push OCAP and
community based organizations to continuously strive to diversify
the public participation at AB 617 meetings; otherwise, you risk
creating a monopoly on community voices, which is contrary to EJ
principles. 
The other non-profit
responded by stating that “we lost community trust and need
to rebuild that trust again for this process to work.” I
asked why they were speaking on behalf of the government, and not
letting the air district answer my question for themselves. I also
mentioned that I have never lost the community’s trust, and
don’t understand why I would need to build trust between the
community and the local air agency. Then the AB 617 Community
Steering Committee responded to the conversation.   
First, one of the new CSC
members asked if the AB 617 CSC meetings were public meetings. The
other new steering committee member also expressed uncertainty
about whether they are public meetings, or not.  Finally, a long-standing
CSC member stated that they are public meetings, but the topics are
so niche and technical that community isn’t interested. I
responded by stating that other, similar communities do have lots
of residents interested in the local air pollution and its effects
on the health and well-being of their children.  I don’t recall if the
air district responded because my eyes glazed over and I tuned out
by this point. If the meetings are recorded, it’s all
there.
To those uninformed about
the history of South Sacramento’s AB 617 process, it would
seem to be working well today.  Peace exists there, in the absence of tension
or anger. The community members who showed up initially with
tension and anger, driven by love for their community, were pushed
away. They are no longer there seeking peace based on the presence
of justice. 

Sadly, it has been my
experience that every time I tried drawing attention to those
unjustly left behind from the AB 617 process, OCAP management felt
compelled to rebut my comments with bureaucratic talking points
that only deepen the injustice.  An example of this would be calling out the
pollution and marginalized people existing immediately outside the
AB 617 boundaries, and receiving a response along the lines of
“the boundaries were selected by a community steering
committee, through a process that was intended to empower the
community, and nothing can be done about it now”  I would much rather hear
an acknowledgement of the injustice and a commitment to seek
redress for them, not a talking point for why it happened. In this
case, CARB is basically blaming the community to absolve the
government of responsibility. The folks left out of South
Sacramento’s AB 617 process were never informed of the
process and excluded from targeted outreach, thus the opportunity
to inform the steering committee of their plight, based on not
living within the originally proposed boundaries (which also
initially excluded an industrial park surrounded by dense housing).
Those folks never had a say in their air quality future, or their
kid’s health. The
were not made aware of AB 617; they aren’t tired or
distrustful, yet.
I’ve taken the time
to film who was left out of the AB 617 process, for you to see who
was denied the justice that AB 617 was intended to provide. The
back wall of the park in this video abuts Highway 99 where traffic
is often stalled. It also sits about one quarter of a mile from a
Title 5 facility that is across the street from the AB 617
boundaries. It’s also about a half mile from an industrial
park and the associated truck routes for the many logistics centers
located there.  As you
can see in the video, the park is packed with children and
families. The park has been home to many marginalized ethnic
communities, and even a few gangs. Now, it is rapidly becoming a
predominantly Arab immigrant community. The park serves as the main
greenspace for the low-income housing that surrounds the park, all
a quarter mile from the AB 617 boundaries. Here’s a link to
the video: https://youtube.com/shorts/nvVcnm0VQIM?feature=share
The injustice of allowing
the people in the video to remain unaware, and without a voice in
the health of their air, when the “first of its kind”
harbinger of equity is only a quarter mile away, becomes twofold if
you only look forward in your Blueprint, or limit all opportunities
for redress to the AB 617 process, or OEJ. They’ve had plenty
of time to seek alternative means of justice for this community,
having been made aware years ago. In addition to looking for models
in some of the AB 617 communities that worked well, for a variety
of reasons that included CARB’s commitment to them, as
compared to South Sacramento, you should also look for models of
what still needs fixing, and fix them, before looking to start new
AB 617 communities using successful models that often required
political capital you didn’t distribute equally.  
If not already included,
the AB 617 Blueprint needs to include something that allows CARB to
revoke AB 617 status and funding from Air Districts not acting in
good faith, or without any public participation. It also needs to
provide redress for those who experienced injustices at the start
of the AB 617 process. AB 617 cannot be the promised harbinger of
justice for South Sacramento if the Blueprint moves forward without
a mechanism that provides redress for the people in the video: the
people who were excluded from AB 617 in a way that does serves as a
model…for injustice, systemic racism and, inequity.

My apologies if CARB and
the AB 617 Consultation Group provided for all my concerns in the
People’s Blueprint and I missed it. It’s my belief that
community shouldn’t need to read large government documents
to share their concerns about the issues in their community and
then ask how you plan to fix them. I’ll leave reading those
fat documents to the folks getting paid to advocate or explain
them. I do this for spirit, and am fighting on several fronts, so
my time is limited.  
“In the end, we will
remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our
friends.”
Thank you,
Mauro Libre