environment

This week parents with toddlers protested planned cuts in services, fee hikes at the State House. Last week the Environmental League of Massachusetts released a report that highlights the deep environmental spending cuts that have taken place in Massachusetts. While in the Environmental League of Massachusetts report environmental officials said that they understand that the current state fiscal crisis has forced spending cuts, both advocacy organizations evaded the tough question that legislators are facing today: cut these programs further, take money away from other programs to fund them or raise new revenues.  

“A healthy environment is the result of decisions we make together through our government through different policies, initiatives and decisions that keep our water clean and protect our green spaces.”

“Young children thrive when we support policies that create a network of support to help their families overcome their childrens’ health challenges.”

While everyone would agree with the above statements and would support funding these government initiatives, we cannot lose sight of the fact that there are many other worthy programs in our state that also contribute to the overall health of our community. In fact the State House corridors are packed everyday with hundred of single issue advocates lobbying for their worthy programs to be protected from cuts.

The public debate about these programs should not based on whether a program is more important than another one or which one is getting cut the most but on how we all as a community decide how to support all these structures by providing them with the necessary funding to keep them functioning and servicing our communities.

In good economic times we have cut taxes in the state to bring money back into “people’s pockets”. In bad economic times, we cut taxes to “re-active the economy and create jobs”. We can not have it both ways and expect to have the same level of services and programs.

We need to continue our one issue advocacy but add a revenue message to protect the entire range of important programs that we value in our communities.

Walking down my own block in Allston Sunday afternoon, I came upon discarded TVs, destroyed furniture, and broken beer bottles. I have seen many parts of Allston treated more as a temporary staging or dumping zone than as a neighborhood. That is why I was so happy to see this article on the newsstand at my local convenience store:

[Roughly a dozen volunteers] met with the Allston-Brighton North Neighbors’ Forum on Aug. 2 and 3 to plant trees and bushes along Everett Street between Lincoln and Adamson streets...

“This is a site that’s been pretty neglected,” said Mattison. “There are these sort of bands, these slivers and patches, of the neighborhood that have gone neglected for too long, and [it’s] too east to forget they are there.”

Check out the Globe story When towns talk trash, earth, taxpayers benefit.

It's the exception rather than the rule that public officials can save money and help the environment, too, but initiatives by several area communities acting together on solid waste service might do just that.

The US Environmental Protection Agency reports on how cleanup work by community organizations, local municipalities and the Massachusetts Water
Resources Authority (MWRA) that started years ago continues to reduce
the flow of contamination into the Charles:

"The Charles River is one of our signature waterways and it is clear
that more than a decade of focus and attention - from the full spectrum
of community organizations, environmental groups, businesses,
institutions, municipalities and state and federal agencies - has begun
to turn the tide toward the promise of a clean, fishable and swimmable
river," said Massachusetts Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Ian Bowles. "The challenge before us is to maintain the momentum and
finish the job - and learn from our lessons in the Charles and spread
them to the other impaired watersheds of the Commonwealth."

Full Press Release below

The April issue of AMC Outdoors discussed the $1.51 billion 2008 Environmental Bond, drafted by the governor's office and supported by The Coalition for the Environmental Bond. The bill would replace the nearly-exhausted $707 million Environmental Bond passed in 2002.

The legislature has until July to pass the bill in this ses­sion. Failure to do so would delay the bill’s voting—and possible funding of projects—until the 2009-2010 legislative session.

So just what is at stake?