Chicago city leaders are on the brink of making a significant change in how polluting businesses are permitted to operate within the city. This move comes almost two years after the city settled a civil rights complaint that highlighted discriminatory practices impacting the health of low-income communities of color.
The proposed measure, expected to be introduced Wednesday, aims to revamp the way heavy industry is situated and managed in Chicago. If approved, it would mandate city officials to evaluate the overall pollution burden on communities before giving the green light to new industrial projects.
At a time when the federal government is rolling back protections for underprivileged communities grappling with disproportionate pollution levels, Chicago’s ordinance stands out as a beacon of hope for local action in the face of a federal administration that is not supportive of environmental justice. Recent months have seen the Trump administration undo longstanding directives addressing unequal environmental burdens at the federal level and challenge government programs that monitor environmental justice concerns nationwide.
Advocates are optimistic that this local legislation could serve as a model for how state and local governments can utilize zoning and permitting regulations to shield vulnerable communities from becoming environmental sacrifice zones.
Gina Ramirez, the Midwest director of environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, emphasized the importance of acknowledging Chicago’s industrial past, particularly in low-income neighborhoods on the city’s South and West sides. The proposed ordinance would empower these communities by establishing an environmental justice advisory board to have a say in the permitting process.
Cheryl Johnson, an environmental activist from the Far South Side, echoed the sentiment, emphasizing the fundamental right to good health for all individuals. Her organization, People for Community Recovery, which was founded by her mother, Hazel Johnson, has been at the forefront of advocating for pollution protections for nearly four decades.
The ordinance, named after Hazel Johnson, who fought for the health of her neighbors in a public housing community surrounded by polluters since the 1970s, is a testament to the ongoing struggle for environmental justice in Chicago. The civil rights complaint filed in 2020 by Cheryl Johnson’s group and other local environmental organizations shed light on the city’s history of placing polluting industries in low-income areas while avoiding affluent white neighborhoods.
Following an investigation by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, a binding agreement was reached with the Biden administration, requiring Chicago to address these environmental injustices. Despite delays, Mayor Brandon Johnson has pledged to honor the agreement and is now poised to present the long-awaited ordinance.
While progress is being made, not all community groups are satisfied with the proposed measures. Activists like Theresa McNamara from the Southwest Environmental Alliance have expressed concerns that the ordinance may not go far enough in addressing the environmental challenges faced by marginalized communities.
As Chicago takes steps towards environmental justice, the city’s actions could serve as a blueprint for other municipalities looking to prioritize the well-being of their residents and combat environmental injustices. A recent incident involving a city official in Newark, New Jersey has sparked controversy and debate over the effectiveness of environmental policies. The official, whose name has not been disclosed, referred to a newly passed environmental ordinance as a “weak piece of crap,” citing concerns over its lack of enforcement mechanisms.
The ordinance in question, passed by the Newark City Council in 2016, was hailed as a groundbreaking initiative aimed at curbing pollution and promoting environmental justice. However, according to experts familiar with the situation, the ordinance has failed to achieve its intended goals due to a lack of concrete action.
Ana Baptista, an environmental policy professor at The New School in New York, played a key role in the passage of the ordinance in Newark. She expressed disappointment in the ordinance’s ineffectiveness, stating that it has become little more than a symbolic gesture with no real impact on polluting industries.
Despite its shortcomings, the ordinance has served as a catalyst for similar legislation in other states. At least eight states, including California, Minnesota, New York, and Delaware, have passed similar ordinances in recent years. However, the lack of enforcement mechanisms in these ordinances raises questions about their ability to bring about meaningful change.
Oscar Sanchez, a member of the Southeast Environmental Task Force, emphasized the importance of local and state entities in addressing environmental justice issues in the absence of federal support. He highlighted the role of advisory boards in advocating for marginalized communities and pushing for more stringent regulations on polluting industries.
As the debate over environmental policies continues to unfold, it is clear that more needs to be done to protect vulnerable communities from pollution and environmental degradation. The incident in Newark serves as a reminder of the challenges faced in implementing effective environmental policies and the importance of holding officials accountable for their actions.
