1. Prepared by: Center for Justice, Tolerance & Community University of California – Santa Cruz Waste Facilities, Environmental Justice, and Community Participation:

2. Purpose of Today’s Session Review data collected to provide the context for understanding the community.

3. Environmental Justice Opportunity Assessment and Analysis CJTC Presentation #3 Understanding the Community December, 2003 Setting the Context Introduce best practices research and emerging themes Questions and Answers

4. Environmental Inequity is a Problem Recognized by Californians

5. That recognition has a real basis There is an established pattern of inequity by race and income for various environmental “negatives” in California. Previous studies on:  Transfer, storage and disposal facilities  Toxic release inventory sites  Respiratory risk indices from cumulative exposure layers  Schoolchildren and academic performance

6. It Isn’t Just Income

7. It Isn’t Just Move-in

9. And It Covers a Broad Range of Ages

10. Worries about Academic Perfor- mance & Ambient Air Toxics

11. Impacts on Academic Performance in Detail (L.A.U.S.D.)

12. Effects Hold in a Multivariate Analysis Scores are Lower Even When You Control for School Poverty, Teacher Quality, and Other Factors Up to Ten Percent of Racial Score Difference Could Be Due to Environmental Stress Policy Implications as the State Launches School-building Effort But It Must Be Getting Better, Right?

13. Is It Getting Better? Pattern of TRI Facilities by Ethnicity, 2000

14. Is It Getting Better? Pattern of TRI Facilities by Income, 2000

15. Different Demographics, Different Environment

16. This Sets the Context for Participation with Environmental Agencies

17. There are potential issues with waste facilities... Recall that we downloaded the Solid Waste Information System Database, and  Geo-coded all solid waste disposal, transfer, and waste tire sites  Matched these at a block group level with demographic and income variables  Conducted a preliminary analysis to see whether the patterns merit concern

18. Active and Permitted Disposal Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census tract that is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California

19. Active and Permitted Transfer Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census tract that is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California

20. Active and Permitted Waste Tire Sites, and the Population Percentage of the Census tract that is Non-Hispanic White in 2000, California

21. Looking at the Sites with GIS We decided to contrast each main site – disposal, transfer, and waste tire – with demographics within one mile.  The basic procedure involves mapping and then comparing with Census and other information (SWIS)  We are careful to control for other variables that might predict where facilities are sited.

22. Visual view of the Census Tract Geography

23. Visual view of the Census Block Group Geography

24. View of the Census Block Groups with the Water Area Clipped Out

25. View of Active and Permitted Disposal Sites

26. Visual view of the Active and Permitted Disposal Sites with a One Mile Buffer Zone

27. View of Census Block Groups Intersected with Clipped One Mile Buffer Zones

28. View of One Mile Buffer Zone Intersected with Census Block Geography and with the Water Clipped Out

29. Analyzing the demography Recall our basic findings:  Transfers and waste tire sites are very unevenly distributed by race and income  Landfills/solid waste disposal seem more equitably located – but perceptions linger & have merit in a complex view

30. Analyzing the demography Recall our basic findings:  Transfers and waste tire sites are very unevenly distributed by race and income  Landfills/solid waste disposal seem more equitably located – but perceptions linger & have merit in a complex view

31. Analyzing the demography Recall our basic findings:  Transfers and waste tire sites are very unevenly distributed by race and income  Landfills/solid waste disposal seem more equitably located – but perceptions linger & have merit in a complex view

32. Perceptions Count...

33. The Complex View: Multivariate Analysis Multivariate analysis means controlling for the effects of several variables at the same time. Sophisticated technique which helps:  Distinguish whether an apparent correlation with race is just the effect of income  Determine other important factors like population density and degree of urbanization

34. Regression Analysis

35. Regression Analysis Controlling for Urban Area

36. Waste Facility Data Conclusions  Further analysis was done and still supports the notion that there is inequitable proximity  Even where support in the data is weaker, perceptions of inequitable proximity persist  Better outreach and improved community voice could help with both the reality and the perception

37. Connecting with the Community

38. Who was contacted….  Activists and advocates  Neighborhood and grassroots organizations  US EPA staff  Public participation professionals in Cal EPA, other agencies and outside government

39. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION COMMUNITY INPUT COMMUNITY USE Involvement in processes Program Utilization Information Capacity Connected Engagement

40. CONTEXT for community participation: Participation is built through conflict and collaboration. Areas for participation: needs assessment, planning, implementation, enforcement and evaluation.

41. CONTEXT for community participation: There is often a disconnect between what the community hears and understands AND the authority and messages of multi- tiered agencies.

42.  Education of all stakeholders will further community capacity and participation.  Communities want and need more information to better participate.  Technical assistance may be necessary for those with greater needs. TOOLS for improving community participation: Education

43.  Know your audience  A public relations approach to "marketing" or simply disseminating information may not capture the public.  Authentic outreach means communicating, dialog, and engagement with the public. TOOLS for improving community participation: Marketing

44. Not all communities are the same, they have different assets and needs. Targeted and/or prioritized efforts in monitoring, outreach, programming, etc. can help to further EJ work and community participation TOOLS for improving community participation: Diversity

45. OUTCOME of the work Recognizable results, such as complaint resolution protocols and advisory groups, will be important to build community buy-in. These actions lead to authentic participation.

46. Some recommended tools/mechanisms Accessible use of technology Technical Outreach Services for Communities Stakeholder Advisory Groups Community-Specific Research Complaint Resolution Protocols Public Participation Guide

47. We learned from the research…. Initial best practice research from across the country is consistent with what we have heard in CA.

48. We learned from the research…. Quality participation….is good business

49. Questions?