California’s flawed tool on environmental justice

Could a tool meant to address environmental injustice inadvertently overlook the state’s most vulnerable neighborhoods?

For years, community groups and environmental justice advocates have argued that flaws within the California Environmental Protection Agency’s screening tool have enabled some of the state’s already marginalized communities to miss out on billions of dollars in funding to combat pollution. And as CalMatters climate reporter Alejandro Lazo explains, new research supports their arguments.

Published in Nature Machine Intelligence, the report looked into CalEnviroScreen, which was billed in 2013 as “the nation’s first comprehensive statewide environmental health screening tool.” 

The tool looks at different geographic regions in California (designated by the U.S. Census) and evaluates them on 21 environmental, public health and demographic factors, including air pollution, low birth weight and unemployment rates. CalEnviroScreen then takes the top 25% most dire areas and designates them as “disadvantaged communities.”

By law, at least a quarter of funds from the California Climate Investments fund must then be spent on these communities. For example, in 2022, the fund funneled $1.3 billion into 19,500 new projects, of which $933 million was directed to disadvantaged communities.

But researchers found that of the dozens of factors CalEnviroScreen considers, it only weighs three health factors: low birth weight, cardiovascular disease and emergency room visits for asthma. By excluding other serious health and social conditions — and thus residents who are less likely to have asthma or seek emergency care, for example — certain groups, such as immigrant communities, are left out. 

• Benjamin Huynh, the study’s lead author and researcher at John Hopkins University: “These things can come across as very technical, but when you look at the numbers and you see the billions of dollars flowing…these very seemingly technical details actually matter a lot.”

In 2021, the San Francisco Chronicle also reported how CalEnviroScreen did not label some of the city’s most densely populated neighborhoods, such as Chinatown and the Tenderloin, as environmentally “disadvantaged” despite the poor living conditions of residents.

CalEPA spokesperson Amy Gilson said it is reviewing the study and any potential changes to CalEnviroScreen must “go through a robust scientific evaluation” and “extensive public process.”

This isn’t the first time the state has come under scrutiny for its shortfalls to mitigate environmental harms.

A 2017 law establishing the Community Air Protection Program, for instance, was supposed to curb air pollution for 15 low-income communities of color. But $1 billion and four years later in 2022, CalMatters found it remained unclear whether the law improved the smoggy air quality in those communities. 

Last year, the federal environmental protection agency launched an investigation after California Native American tribes alleged that the state water board discriminated against them by failing to protect the water quality of the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The tribes also argued that the board “excluded local Native Tribes and Black, Asian and Latino residents” from the policymaking process.

For more on the CalEnviroScreen study, read Alejandro’s story.

From Wendy Fry of CalMatters’ California Divide team:

At a CalMatters forum, a top official from a California labor agency emphasized Thursday the need for improved enforcement of laws designed to shield farmworkers from extreme heat, pesticide exposure, and other hazardous workplace conditions. 

Moderated by CalMatters health reporter Ana B. Ibarra, the event in Bakersfield explored topics such as safety nets for farmworkers, mental health concerns, and injury and death from exposure to extreme heat. 

Despite California’s strict laws, programs, and resources aimed at safeguarding its nearly 500,000 farmworkers, significant challenges persist in protecting them, experts said during the panel. A recent UC Merced study identified significant gaps in the health and well-being of these workers.

“We agree that enforcement needs to improve,” said Sebastian Sanchez,  deputy secretary for Immigrant and Agriculture Workforce at the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, one of the panelists.  

Other panelists included Edward Orozco Flores, the faculty director of the UC Merced Community and Labor Center, and Teresa Romero, the president of the United Farm Workers, which represents 7,000 farmworkers in California.

The experts attributed the persistent farmworker safety issues to inadequate state enforcement, workers’ fear of retaliation, and employers’ lack of awareness and compliance. 

“They do not have a voice,” Romero said, referring to farmworkers. “They’re afraid to report problems. They don’t want to report it because they don’t want to lose the job that is supporting their families.” 

Orozco Flores said his study found that 64% of those who said they wouldn’t file a complaint against their employers said they feared retaliation. 

Romero mentioned some employers make their workers shift their labor to nighttime hours to avoid heat-related problems, which she said creates chaos in the farmworker family.  

“It is cruel,” she said, asking the audience to consider the challenges they would face having to change their schedules on short notice and figuring out what to do with their families and kids. 

A leader of an indigenous group from the audience pointed out that 35% of farmworkers who work in the fields are indigenous and don’t speak Spanish. He asked the state to provide more information and training materials in Mixteco and Triqui. 

Sanchez agreed more needs to be done to develop training materials in indigenous languages and said his department has asked the governor’s office for more funding.  

Areceli Barrios, a member of the audience who said she spent 28 years working in the fields as a farmworker, described having to work at night and without sufficient water at times. She said she suffered abuse, heat, and sexual harassment. 

“There were many injustices, but (a person) tolerates it because they don’t have papers. No one helps you,” Barrios said in Spanish.  

Dolores Huerta, the famous labor leader and civil rights activist, attended the event. She pointed out that she started organizing farmworkers when she was 25, and she is about to turn 94. 

“The fact that we’re still having these conversations means that we have failed,” Huerta said. “All of us have to step up and do more. When we think about all the sacrifices farmworkers have made, there’s no reason we should be in the same place we were 70 years ago.” 

CalMatters events: The next one is scheduled for March 27 in Sacramento on maternity ward closures and state efforts to protect access. And it’s not too early to put our first Ideas Festival on your calendar, for June 5-6.

Less than a month after Rep. Adam Schiff announced in 2023 that he was running for U.S. Senate, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she was backing the Burbank Democrat. A year later, former Sen. Barbara Boxer also endorsed Schiff — notching him yet another high-profile endorsement from an influential woman in politics. 

Schiff’s appeal to many Democratic women, the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday, may be what ends California’s 31-year streak of having at least one female U.S. senator. (The state’s other U.S. senator is Alex Padilla, elected in 2022.) Besides leading the first impeachment against then-President Donald Trump in 2019, Schiff has a track record of supporting reproductive rights, plus a huge campaign war chest.

But voters who back his primary Democratic competitors — Reps. Katie Porter and Barbara Lee — argue that having at least one female senator for California “is essential.” And as the only female person of color running, Lee has emphasized throughout her campaign how her experience as a Black woman has given her insight on the needs of some of California’s most vulnerable.

Nevertheless, as Schiff continues to lead in polls (more on that below), including with female likely voters, Porter and Lee must place at least second on March 5 if they want California to have a chance to continue its three decades-long streak. 

New Senate poll: Schiff is still the frontrunner in the U.S. Senate primary, with the support of 24% of likely voters in a Public Policy Institute of California poll released Thursday night. The more noteworthy result: Porter (19%) and Republican Steve Garvey (18%) are neck-and-neck for the second ticket out of the March 5 primary. Lee is stuck in fourth place at 10%. Voters may be locked into their choice, with less than two weeks of balloting left: Only 6% said they didn’t know who they support.

The PPIC poll also found that Trump is primed to sweep the delegates at stake in California’s Republican presidential primary, with 64%, far ahead of former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley at 17% and well clear of the 50% plus one he needs to grab all 169 delegates. But Trump has a lot of ground to make up in a looming November rematch with President Biden, who has a 55%-32% lead among likely voters.

Decision time: Our comprehensive Voter Guide has what you need to know on the big races on the March 5 ballot. We’re also answering common voting questions: How can you get your vote counted faster? How are the presidential primary rules different? And as the campaign heats up, keep up with what you need to know from CalMatters’ coverage.