The little project that couldn't, part 1 (Issue #2)

Hey! I’m Chris, the Principal of CJSC, LLC. I launched my firm in 2021 because I got sick of seeing community voices, especially voices of color, repeatedly marginalized in aviation projects. Since then, my interest has broadened from aviation projects to “sustainability” projects more broadly.

This newsletter issue tells Part 1 of the story that led me to where I am. Some of you know this story well… because you were there with me that summer in 2019. Others may know this story from a newsletter I wrote in 2021. It’s as important to me today as it was back then.

Somewhere west of the Atlantic ocean…

The summer afternoon was bright as we consultants made our way to the event space. Just a few days earlier, we’d discovered that hundreds of people might show up for the public meeting we were hosting for our client. Were we phased by that news? Well... no. As a large, nationwide firm, we'd successfully published hundreds of environmental review documents for development projects while handling many "surprises" just like this one. Our adaptation this time was straightforward: get a bigger event space, rope in more local staff, print more handouts, find some more audio-visual equipment, and set up overflow spaces outside with shading. No big deal, really.

The project we were consulting for involved building a certain structure within the boundary of a certain airport. This action required U.S. Federal Government environmental review before construction could begin. We were good at this stuff (so good!), which maybe was why we kept getting hired for “challenging” and “controversial” projects nationwide.

We walked into the event space and gave it a look: Big auditorium with over 100 seats, multiple smaller rooms, and a small open foyer. Looked good. So, we began setting up for our public meeting: a "workshop" portion in the foyer, with hearing-related activities in the other areas. As I was helping deploy a few tables and a stack of handouts, I heard giggling in the background. Then someone walked by me and spoke in a low voice:

The first member of “the public” had shown up... two hours in advance of our meeting start time.

By the time we opened the doors later that afternoon, there was a long line of people outside. We’d set up the “workshop” portion of the meeting with poster boards showing the potential environmental impacts of the airport development project… but most people didn't bother to go to the workshop. They went straight to the public hearing room, filling up the auditorium seats within the first 30 minutes. The hearing itself wouldn’t begin for at least another hour.

In living color

When the time came for the public hearing, a few of us wonderful consultants (e.g. yours truly!) stationed ourselves at the front of the hearing room along with our (indirect) client the airport director, plus a court reporter and a hearing officer. A senior member of our company then introduced the hearing format and ground rules, such as:

• There shall be a strict time limit for each commenter; and,

• Absolutely, positively NO APPLAUSE!

As he was speaking, I looked out from my perch and saw something I hadn’t seen in a public meeting before: nearly every person in that room was Latino or Latina. I’d never been to a meeting that was predominantly attended by people of color. No clarity of thought came to me at that moment... but as the hearing moved forward, my thoughts became more clear.

I readied a little notebook and a pen as people lined up and began speaking in turn. After all, the purpose of the hearing was to provide a forum for comments on the sufficiency of our environmental analysis and draft environmental document (a draft “Environmental Assessment” under the National Environmental Policy Act). But as the first hour of the hearing passed, I noticed that I hadn’t written anything down. Almost no one was commenting on the analysis.

Instead, people were talking about things altogether different:

Asthma. Bronchitis. Cardiovascular disease. Cancer. 

I found this curious. We'd showed right in our document that the proposed project would have no significant air quality impacts. Air quality standards were created to protect health and welfare... so what was all this talk about health? And why were so many brown folks here... there can't be any disproportionate impacts to "minority populations" if there are no significant impacts to begin with... right?

The comments went on, and people started talking about other topics: Wealth-sharing agreements. Community benefits. But wait: our document showed that the project would bring jobs specifically to this region. That's wealth-sharing and community benefits... right?

What an odd affair this hearing was!

The truth of the matter

An hour went by. Two hours went by. Hundreds of people, in the hearing room and several overflow spaces. Dozens of comments — yes, some of which were supportive. Signs waving. A fight in the hallway — or threats of one, anyway (“hold me back, bro!”). And, plenty of prohibited applause.

Eventually, it was all over.

Later that night, we consultant team members were at a restaurant with our (indirect) client the airport director for dinner. I was sitting at the bar drinking the worst Manhattan that side of... uh, Manhattan, when I heard a verbal exchange that I'll never forget for the rest of my career.

It was the airport director, speaking to a senior member of our team. Without a moment's pause, that senior member turned and responded:

Then they laughed.

This exchange might seem rather flippant, but that's not why it was memorable to me. It was memorable to me because it was accurate. Our draft environmental document showed that the airport project would have no significant impacts that wouldn't be mitigated in any of the over one dozen impact categories we analyzed, according to a very specific U.S. Federal Government definition of the word “significant.”¹ On top of that, the project was forecasted to bring thousands of jobs.

I, too, didn't hear anything in that meeting that changes the project. 

Hundreds of concerned people. Dozens of comments, growing to hundreds by the end of the comment period later that summer. But none of those comments mattered.

Something was amiss.

In Part 2, I'll explore what was amiss and what you can do about it.

Start learning about authentic engagement

FIRST: Follow these awesome folks on LinkedIn:

• Heather Luna of keduzi: workshopping pro-connectedness and anti-oppression as a way of life

• Lavinia Muth: deconstructing the (un)sustainable fashion industry

• Dr. Vidya Shankar, Ph.D: decentering whiteness in evaluation of non-governmental organization projects

SECOND: Forward this issue to people you know who work in "sustainable" aviation and other green technology sectors.

Got something to say to me?

Hit the “reply” button and give me a piece of your mind.

Introductory image source: “Accident ferroviaire de la gare Montparnasse.” Studio Lévy & Sons, October 1895.

1  Federal Aviation Administration. Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures.” July 16, 2015. Original link. Archived link.