Environmental Racism (Communities Less Likely to Resist)

Industry and government see siting strategy as their most important undertaking. Though we haven’t found a “Master Plan” specifically targeting poor, Black, Hispanic, Appalachian or Native American communities for LULUs (Locally Undesirable Land Use), we’ve come close in this and some other cases. In this case, of 43 trash incinerators planned for California, the 3 that ended up getting built were in communities of color. In 1984, the California Waste Management Board paid the Los Angeles consulting firm, Cerrell Associates, $500,000 to define communities that won’t resist siting of LULUs. The study drew on a broad range of industry and academic studies and we believe it’s been broadly circulated throughout the regulatory agencies and waste industry around the country. The Cerrell Study is explicit in identifying communities who won’t resist LULUs. Because almost every new group served by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice since 1984 (and by the Energy Justice Network since 1999) matches the Cerrell profile, we believe it’s the “Master Plan” for siting. Cerrell provides important proof that siting is 99% politics and 1% science. One amazing line in the report (see p53) rings particularly true in our experience: “One occupational classification has consistently demonstrated itself as a strong indicator of opposition to the siting of noxious facilities, especially nuclear power plants — housewives.” It’s amazing how well these words and the strategies outlined in this document over 20 years ago still hold very true today.