Connect with us

Activism

Minority Environmental Justice Groups Want to Connect to Millions in EPA Funding for California

The California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) says the programs they have in place to restore decades of environmental devastation and neglect in minority communities can play a key role in achieving the state and federal green goals to enforce regulations and distribute resources more fairly and equitably.

Published

on

EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman visits Los Angeles to tout President Biden’s Investing in America agenda. Photo by Lila Brown/CBM.
EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman visits Los Angeles to tout President Biden’s Investing in America agenda. Photo by Lila Brown/CBM.

By Lila Brown, California Black Media

Environmental justice advocates in California petitioned Gov. Gavin Newsom this past summer, asking the state to direct a portion of the millions in federal and state dollars California is investing in cleaning and greening communities to Black and other minority organizations.

The California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) says the programs they have in place to restore decades of environmental devastation and neglect in minority communities can play a key role in achieving the state and federal green goals to enforce regulations and distribute resources more fairly and equitably.

“There’s systemic racism that we are trying to dismantle that is beyond the usual American concepts of environmentalism and there’s a lot of interrelated and intersecting issues that we’re trying to fix on the ground, Mari Rose Taruc, CEJA’s energy director, told California Black Media.

Taruc says environmental groups recognizing the harm done to communities of color in the past — and their implication on the local level — is a critical part of the environmental justice movement.

“Environmental justice was born out of the Civil Rights Movement, and that is to the credit of Black organizers that came out of the South to raise consciousness of environmental pollution and destruction of dumping grounds primarily located in BIPOC communities,” she said.

CEJA is a coalition of the 10 biggest environmental justice organizations that coordinate efforts to protect the health and well-being of Black, Indigenous, Latino, and Asian Pacific Islander communities in California. The organization also develops programs and raises money to tackle some of the new challenges communities are facing due to the climate crisis.

In July, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regional Administrator Martha Guzman presented $2 million to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to revitalize the Taylor Yard along the Los Angeles River, turning a former freight railyard into urban green space.

The project reinforces President Biden’s goal for environmental justice to restore the damage that has been done from previous administrations ranging from decades of neglect to the lack of enforcement as it pertains to environmental laws, regulations, and policies.

Historically, railyards contaminated nearby ground and waters with petroleum and other dangerous contaminants.

Guzman spoke with California Black Media about policies that led to disadvantaged and low-income communities being the areas where toxic and hazardous wastes were disposed, as opposed to more affluent neighborhoods.

“This can be traced to many of our origins, be it slavery or the taking of indigenous lands here in the West,” she said. “We see where all these facilities are, and we know that race is the largest determinant of pollution.”

Guzman says the Biden administration is keeping equity and environmental justice front of mind.

“We have to invest in these communities because we have to be intentional about dealing with those generations of neglect and land use decisions that led to a disparate impact to our communities,” says Guzman who leads the EPA efforts to protect public health and the environment for the Pacific Southwest region spanning Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the U.S. Pacific Islands territories, and 148 Tribal Nations.

The investment strategy, she says, intends to heal legacy issues and now the EPA’s No. 1 priority is enforcement.

According to Bass’ office, the City of Los Angeles plans to restore this site as part of a greater L.A. River initiative to restore ecosystems and habitats, form walkable trails along 52 miles of the river, and create easy access points for residents to enjoy what the river has to offer.

Throughout California, EPA awarded $9,299,566 in total funding from the Fiscal Year 2023 Brownfields Multipurpose, Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund, and Cleanup (MARC) Grant Funding through 12 separate grants.

According to the EPA, a brownfield is a property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant. It is estimated that there are more than 450,000 brownfields in the U.S.

“This funding provides unprecedented resources and highlights how President Biden’s Investing in America agenda and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are delivering environmental and economic benefits for California,” according to a press release from Guzman’s office.

The EPA is investing nearly $100 billion nationwide to deliver clean water and clean air, advance our transition to clean transportation, and enact environmental justice (EJ), especially in communities that have been disadvantaged and underserved, many of which are low-income communities or communities of color.

In addition, President Biden’s Executive Order 14008 — Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad announced Justice40, which mandates that at least 40% of the benefits of specific federal programs — including brownfields and those created by BIL and IRA — must flow to disadvantaged communities. In April 2022, EPA committed to meeting and exceeding this mandate.

Taruc says CEJA has not received any of the EPA funds, but the organization continues to find opportunities for different organizations throughout the state to be able to connect to funding programs focused on environmental justice.

One of the ways that CEJA ensures communities are recipients of funds is through programs such as “Solar for All” so that low-income households receive solar panels to improve their homes and lower their fossil fuel consumption, which reduces emissions.

Taruc says one focus of CEJA is ensuring people — particularly disadvantaged minorities who have been disproportionately impacted — live in safe and clean environments.

“Most environmental justice groups believe we should not build housing next to oil drilling sites and there should be a buffer zone of where you build new housing. We’ve been fighting to close these oil wells because housing should be built in places that are not only affordable but safe,” Taruc concluded.

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Activism

OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare. 

Published

on

Rhonda M. Smith.
Rhonda M. Smith.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners

Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”

That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.

That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.

The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.

These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.

I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.

About the Author

Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.

Continue Reading

Activism

OPINION: Supreme Court Case Highlights Clash Between Parental Rights and Progressive Indoctrination

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes — often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity.

Published

on

Craig J. DeLuz. Courtesy of Craig J. DeLuz.
Craig J. DeLuz. Courtesy of Craig J. DeLuz.

By Craig J. DeLuz, Special to California Black Media Partners

In America’s schools, the tension between parental rights and learning curricula has created a contentious battlefield.

In this debate, it is essential to recognize that parents are, first and foremost, their children’s primary educators. When they send their children to school — public or private — they do not surrender their rights or responsibilities. Yet, the education establishment has been increasingly encroaching on this vital paradigm.

A case recently argued before the Supreme Court regarding Maryland parents’ rights to opt out of lessons that infringe upon their religious beliefs epitomizes this growing conflict. This case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is not simply about retreating from progressive educational mandates. It is fundamentally a defense of First Amendment rights, a defense of parents’ rights to be parents.

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes, often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity. The parents argue that the subject matter is age-inappropriate, and the school board does not give parents the option to withdraw their children when those lessons are taught.

This case raises profound questions about the role of public education in a democratic society. In their fervent quest for inclusivity, some educators seem to have overlooked an essential truth: that the promotion of inclusivity should never infringe upon parental rights and the deeply held convictions that guide families of different faith backgrounds.

This matter goes well beyond mere exposure. It veers into indoctrination when children are repeatedly confronted with concepts that clash with their family values. 

“I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” noted Justice Samuel Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised a crucial point, noting that it is one thing to merely expose students to diverse ideas; it is quite another to present certain viewpoints as indisputable truths. By framing an ideology with the certainty of “this is the right view of the world,” educators risk indoctrination rather than enlightenment. This distinction is not merely academic; it speaks to the very essence of cultivating a truly informed citizenry.

Even Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern regarding the exposure of young children to certain materials in Montgomery County.

“I, too, was struck by these young kids’ picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality, I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this,” she said.

Justice John Roberts aptly questioned the practicality of expecting young children to compartmentalize their beliefs in the classroom.

“It is unreasonable to expect five-year-olds, still forming their worldviews, to reconcile lessons that conflict fundamentally with the teachings they receive at home,” he said.

As was noted in my previous commentary, “The Hidden Truth In The Battle Over Books In American Schools”, what lies at the heart of these debates is a moral disconnect between the values held by the majority of Americans and those promoted by the educational establishment. While the majority rightly argue that material containing controversial content of a sexual nature should have no place in our children’s classrooms, the education establishment continues to tout the necessity of exposing children to such content under the guise of inclusivity. This disregards the legitimate values held by the wider community.

Highlighted in this case that is before the Supreme Court is a crucial truth: parents must resolutely maintain their right to direct their children’s education, according to their values. This struggle is not simply a skirmish; it reflects a broader movement aimed at reshaping education by privileging a state-sanctioned narrative while marginalizing dissenting voices.

It is imperative that we assert, without hesitation, that parents are — and must remain — the primary educators of their children.

When parents enroll a child in a school, it should in no way be interpreted as a relinquishment of parental authority or the moral guidance essential to their upbringing. We must stand firm in defending parental rights against the encroaching ideologies of the education establishment.

About the Author

Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He has served as a member of The Robla School District Board of Trustees for over 20 years. He also currently hosts a daily news and commentary show called “The RUNDOWN.” You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.