democracy

Autocracy Continues to Build

I have long labored in this column to outline the frustrating situation all biologists feel in this world as our interests are destroyed by increasingly autocratic tendencies of the government. And no, I have never been partisan about this situation. Both parties are to blame in creating the country we find ourselves in right now, facing a perilous future where generations will not only not be able to enjoy the standards of living we do today but will suffer to keep a standard of living with any comfort at all. 

Will we see lush cover crops and small farms in the future USA?

I am not surprised, however, to find many people freaking out about a government bent on destroying social programs. After all, many voters have long been fed a thin gruel diet of small social program ‘wins,’ so that they will overlook that their future is being stolen by the 1% who are paying for both political parties, allowing them to extract wealth and power by destroying Life on Earth.

Tinkering Around the Edges

I was recently listening to the Bay Area’s own brilliant journalist Kara Swisher interviewing Rahm Emanuel, a person who seems like a reliable voice of mainstream Democratic politics. Ms. Swisher pressed Mr. Emanuel on what the Dems should do at this juncture, and his responses were along the lines of ‘messaging the voters’…’adopting a new platform or two’…etc. There was zero reflection about the way politics is using people to enrich the 1% while destroying the environment and no reflection on how to engage and involve citizens in their own governance.

All Politics Is Local

National government tactics are repeated here in California and all around the Monterey Bay. If you think that the current use of Executive Orders is unusual, check out the far-reaching litany of executive orders from California’s governor, who is proud to reduce environmental protections as part of these moves, none of which is primarily directed at environmental conservation. 

In Santa Cruz, I see politicians and government staff baselessly blaming and attacking people who are trying to protect the environment, including other columnists who write for Bratton Online. These local politicians and staff have long supported the roughshod environmental analysis of many projects before them as long as the project serves some social good and/or is economically attractive. For instance, many pointed out the inadequacy of the Regional Transportation Commission’s analysis on the estimated numbers of tourists attracted by the new North Coast Rail Trail, but politicians didn’t care enough to direct better work. I have witnessed this same political hunger for other projects that badly impact the environment at Arana Gulch (recreational development), Pogonip (recreation and agricultural developments), Glenwood (housing and school development), Santa’s Village (housing development), Seascape (housing development), Wilder Ranch (recreational development), UCSC (housing development), Terrace Point (educational buildings), Nisene Marks (recreational development), Cotoni Coast Dairies (tourism development), and Neary Lagoon (transportation development).

Up Close and Personal

I have had occasion to be privy to the autocratic decision making that creates the results where the environment, and conservationists, end up losing and here’s how it goes. First, someone who wants to develop and negatively impact nature works with an expert at navigating the review process so that they get just what they want. Second, once they have a plan for meeting regulatory demands (aka “jumping through the hoops”), they meet with one or two of the politicians whose vote they’ll need. Then, they make a deal of some sort to guarantee the votes. Then, the person proposing negatively impacting the environment meets with the bureaucrats who also get calls from the politician, and then they, too, make a deal. Finally, after everyone’s approval to the plans and approach, the project proponent goes through the motions of a public process, taking and ignoring input and moving forward with what they wanted to do in the first place. When pressed about why not do a more authentic public process, anyone that was part of those deals will tell you, “why bother?”…”it just makes more trouble”…”we know best and came up with the best solution.”

Do those trends sound familiar at a national level right now? We have far more potential to affect political change closer to home than further away.

Why Aren’t the Dems Fighting?

Some people who are concerned about the Administration’s actions nowadays ask ‘why aren’t the Democrats fighting?’ The answer is that everyone in power is in awe of what they, too, might get away with one day. Plus, some of what is being highlighted as shocking power grabbing is the same stuff that all politicians have been doing for some time now, but perhaps less bombastically.

During the first round of this administration, there was a surprising assertion that we were suddenly going to war with Iran, a country with about the same number of military as the USA. NPR picked one of their preferred retired generals to interview about the wisdom of this decision and that general said that he could not condone the action because ‘Americans have not been prepared for this war.’ That is, the military demands that politicians prepare citizens for war, presumably so that the funding will keep flowing to support the war effort once it is started.

I believe it has become equally normalized that it is the politicians’ job, in working for their biggest donors, to keep citizens constantly prepared for environmental degradation. And, it is my experience that the staff people of governmental agencies look at legally mandated disclosure and environmental review interactions with citizens as a burden and a waste with no chance of improving the agency’s work and better protecting the environment.

Is It Any Surprise?

Given what I’ve just outlined, I am not surprised by what I’m witnessing at a national level. As a nation, we have prepared ourselves well for this situation to work out excellently for the 1%. I am not happy that many more people get to experience the exasperation that conservationists have been feeling for decades, but so it goes. Perhaps this is the best chance we have had to start working together.

How can we organize an alternative in local politics where the people are prepared for a Monterey Bay that is protected by its citizens for the next 1,000 years? The answer lies with more permanence of residency, sustainable and vibrant economies, and removal of any environmental impacts of growth, but those things are at odds with our current societal structure. And yet, these things (and more) are sorely needed. If we can make it work here, the goodness will spread. It starts with developing leadership and engaging many more people. You’re right there with us, right now. 

-this essay originally posted at BrattonOnline, a weekly roundup of all thing local and sometimes global affecting the Monterey Bay. Read it and keep in touch!

Democracy and the Environment

I like the phrase ‘all politics is local’ and have coined a corollary phrase ‘war starts at home.’ We must find solutions that work at the local level, including resolving conflict. My twist on these issues has an environmental focus, and I want to illustrate our local situation in this essay.

Voting

If locals were judged for those they elect, how environmentally-minded would anyone think we are? I can’t think of a single local city council member who purports to prioritize environmental conservation. None of our County Supervisors advertises environmental conservation as a primary concern. Likewise, the local State Assembly members do not have strong environmental conservation platforms. Only when you reach the level of State Senator do we get an inkling that our local constituencies support environmental conservation: John Laird has long been an effective environmental conservationist, and conservation is one of his main priorities.

As we consider voting, how are we to be informed about which candidate might best serve environmental conservation? My experience has been that it is not easy. Unfortunately, there is no reliable environmental conservation organization informing local votes through their endorsement process. The Santa Cruz Group of the Ventana Chapter of the Sierra Club used to serve this important role, and the Group still ostensibly considers making endorsements – apparently only if a candidate seeks their endorsement. For 2022, the Group posted a list of endorsements, though without any analysis explaining their reasoning. Upon examination, most of the candidates they endorsed had little or no mention of environmental conservation in any of their election materials.

Lacking other means, you must follow environmental issues yourself and watch how politicians and political candidates react to those issues. Even if you track a single issue, you will find it helpful in illuminating for whom you should cast your vote. As a reminder from my past columns, priority environmental conservation issues for our area include: habitat protection for maritime chaparral and coastal prairies, creek and river habitat conservation, water pollution, and wildlife habitat connectivity/corridors. Of course, there are many issues to address when conserving rare and endangered species throughout our region, and those must be prioritized as well. If one of those priorities strikes your fancy, watch it carefully to see who is active and how politicians navigate to address them…and vote accordingly.

Environmental Advisors for Politicians

One of the ways environmental conservation conflicts might get resolved is through governmental advisory bodies. Locally, cities and the County have advisory bodies that ostensibly COULD advise on environmental matters. However, I cannot think of a time when City Council Members or County Supervisors sought out those advisory committees for advice, let alone acted on any of the advice otherwise offered by those committees. I suppose that’s a reflection of politicians’ assessment of how much local voters care about environmental matters. You might ask yourself, ‘are there environmental conservation conflicts locally?’ I hope you recognize that the answer is, ‘yes.’ The next question is ‘how are those conflicts being addressed?’ The answer is, ‘they are not.’ ‘Why?’ The answer to that question is ‘one side, the one in power…the one that destroys the environment…is winning.’ Why would anyone seek to resolve conflict when they are already winning? Two reasons come to mind: the primacy of environmental conservation for life on Earth and, consequently, avoidance of war which is the natural result of the degradation of the environment. All politics is local, and we’ve punted on this issue to our peril.

The following section lists the advisory groups that could be tasked to help resolve environmental conflicts, should politicians ever realize the importance of doing so.

City of Santa Cruz

The Santa Cruz City Council has a Parks and Recreation Commission to advise the City Council. Unfortunately, as reflects the views of the politicians who appointed them, the majority of those advisors care so little for environmental conservation that they fail to address those issues as part of their advisory role. This is a shame because the City’s parks contain a wealth of biological diversity, including many rare and endangered species, and these advisors could be valuable in helping to address most of the priorities I outlined above.

County Political Advisors

The County curiously has two bodies to advise the Supervisors about environmental matters: the Fish and Wildlife Advisory Commission and the Commission on the Environment. The Fish and Wildlife Advisory Commission membership historically has included a majority of experts with strong environmental conservation track records. After years of that Commission, there was the anomalous creation of a second advisory body, the Commission on the Environment – this one appointed with a majority of members without any environmental conservation interest, expertise, or experience. If you’ve got insight into why that second commission was convened when Supervisors could easily turn to the first, I’d love to hear from you.

Joining Together: Activism

Another way locals can affect change democratically is through organized activism. The list of environmental conservation groups acting at our local level includes the Valley Women’s Club of San Lorenzo Valley, California Native Plant Society, Land Trust of Santa Cruz County, Watsonville Wetlands Watch, Surfrider, Friends of the North Coast, Friends of the Greenbelt, Friends of Pogonip, Save our Shores, the East Meadow Action Committee, the Habitat and Watershed Caretakers and the Santa Cruz Group of the Ventana Chapter of the Sierra Club.

From time to time, other groups including Audubon Society, Earthjustice, the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, the First Amendment Project, Save the Redwoods League, Peninsula Open Space Trust, Sempervirens Fund, and the Center for Biological Diversity have stepped into the Monterey Bay area to assist with environmental conservation.

Each of the groups above has a history of success in their own issue areas in our region. But, even with all of their work, major environmental crises still plague our area and are going virtually unaddressed. Those crises are getting worse. And, despite the work of all of these groups, we have the bleak political landscape that I outlined in the opening of this piece. Simply put, none of those groups has affected the political change we need to sustain environmental conservation in our region.

Rating Activist Groups

If we want to donate money or join a group, how do we know how effective it is? Unfortunately, there isn’t an organization that rates our local conservation groups for their effectiveness. Nationally, if you want to give money to a group for environmental conservation, you might use Charity Navigator to peruse groups’ effectiveness. But that group’s ratings don’t really reflect our local situation. For instance, if you looked at the Sierra Club, you might find Charity Navigator’s high rating for the Sierra Club Foundation, whose work (despite the nomenclatural similarity with the Sierra Club Santa Cruz Group) doesn’t address our local conservation issues. Here again, if you follow even a single local issue, chances are that you’ll get to witness the effectiveness of a local conservation group. I know the groups I’ve been impressed with…but, we have so much more to do!

Working Together to Healthy Nature and a Lasting Peace

Only by working together, through democratic institutions and processes, by supporting the leaders and groups that are most effective, can we create the local changes from which others can learn. Together, starting locally, we will create a world that embraces successful environmental conservation and achieves a lasting peace. I hope that you will do something to help.

-this post originally published at BrattonOnline.com, a dependable source of interesting information especially for the Monterey Bay area. Sign up and enjoy.