Written by Derek Nissly, Fair Shake Community Democracy Intern, Summer 2024
An Environmental Justice Advisory Board (EJAB) is a group that advises government agencies on issues related to environmental justice, ensuring that policies and actions address the needs and concerns of marginalized communities disproportionately affected by environmental harms. These boards play a crucial role in promoting fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race or income, in environmental decision-making processes. The importance of EJABs lies in their ability to bridge the gap between communities and policymakers, advocating for equitable solutions to environmental challenges. The goal of this document is to compare the strengths and weaknesses of different EJAB bylaws to provide informed recommendations for communities to advocate for strong Board structures that have the power to move their vision and needs forward.
Below are the common pieces of EJAB bylaws that are ‘graded’ by the following scale:
Gold: Exemplary Structure and Functionality
Bylaws that fully empower the board with strong authority, community engagement, and clear governance.
Silver: Strong Structure with Minor Gaps
Bylaws that provide a solid foundation but have minor areas needing improvement.
Bronze: Basic Structure with Significant Limitations
Bylaws that establish a board but with major gaps that limit its effectiveness.
Policy Statement and Purpose:
Clearly state the commitment to environmental justice, ensuring fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income. Ideally, also include the means by which the Advisory Board will influence government agencies and policy decisions.
Gold:
Minnesota defines the different terms used AND defines what success looks like:
“Meaningful Involvement happens when: • People have an opportunity to participate in decisions about activities that may affect their environment and/or health; • The public’s contribution can influence the regulatory agency’s decision;”
“Fair treatment” means no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or policies.”
New Jersey provides a thorough explanation of each of the things the Advisory Council will be responsible for, who they answer to, why they do the things they are responsible for, and by what manner they will reach their decisions
“The EJAC will make recommendations to the Commissioner of DEP to ensure that DEP develops effective communication programs, implements and enforces environmental laws and empowers communities, consistent with the guidance document developed under EO-23, so that such actions do not unfairly burden any population within New Jersey with a disproportionate impact on the health, wellbeing, and quality of life of those residents”
“The Council shall participate in working groups to establish comprehensive strategies and identify best practices that address issues facing vulnerable communities including health disparities, sustainability, equitable development, community and economic revitalization, pollution, climate change, and resiliency”
Silver
Colorado gives a very short and broad description of the responsibilities of their Environmental Justice Advisory Board, failing to address what ‘environmental justice matters’ may include, how they will successfully advise the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment etc. Overall covers what is necessary in a purpose statement, just missing details that better communicate what their goals are.
“The Advisory Board was created to advise the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (“the Department”) and the Governor’s Office on environmental justice matters, implement the Environmental Justice Grants Program, work with the Environmental Justice Ombudsperson,and recommend best practices for engagement with Disproportionately Impacted Communities”
Bronze
According to the Environmental Advisory Board Bylaws of Pennsylvania, the purpose of the Advisory Board in this state is to simply “recommend to the Secretary the adoption, amendment, or repeal of such rules, regulations, standards, criteria, policies, guidance and procedures as it deems necessary and advisable for implementation of the agency’s environmental programs and recommendations of the Environmental Justice Work Group.” The Pennsylvania Advisory Board has earned a Bronze as they are missing important details specifying what ideals they intend to follow while advising on rules and regulations. Unlike the Minnesota or New Jersey Bylaws, this purpose statement never mentions fair treatment or the importance of meaningful involvement. In general, the more explicit the bylaws are in their goals and purpose, the easier it will be to assess the board’s effectiveness in the future.
Identification of Overburdened Communities:
Define criteria and methods for identifying overburdened communities based on demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental factors.
Gold
Minnesota’s EJAB states that the first step in their ‘framework approach’ is to “Identify areas where low-income Minnesotans, people of color, and others may be experiencing more harm or are more susceptible to environmental conditions as areas of focus for environmental justice action.” They then go on to describe that demographic data, information about environmental conditions, health data, and community knowledge will all be used as tools to identify these areas.
Silver
Colorado’s EJAB was tasked with the oversight of Colorado’s Environmental Justice Grants Program, which is an interesting tool that allows for Disproportionately Impacted Communities to apply for funding for environmental mitigation projects, allowing for the communities that need help to identify themselves. The bylaws even include a section highlighting that they will alert members of the public of opportunities to apply. Overall, however, Colorado’s EJAB fails to mention any use of the states’ own tools and data collection abilities as methods of identifying overburdened communities, and instead seems to rely on these communities reaching out for help themselves.
NA
Pennsylvania and New Jersey both fail to directly address the means in which they will identify Overburdened Communities in their EJAB bylaws. Although Pennsylvania does in fact use GIS Data and other information to identify EJ communities, it is important to directly reference the methods used in the bylaws so the expectations and responsibilities of the board are explicit.
Community Engagement and Public Participation:
Mandate robust public participation processes, including public hearings, community meetings, and opportunities for feedback in all decision-making processes that the Environmental Justice Advisory Board is involved in.
Gold
Minnesota heavily addresses community involvement in its purpose statement, going as far as identifying when success is reached.
“Meaningful Involvement happens when:
People have an opportunity to participate in decisions about activities that may affect their environment and/or health;
The public’s contribution can influence the regulatory agency’s decision;
Community concerns are considered in the decision-making process; and
The decision makers seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected.”
Following this identification of how to know when meaningful involvement is reached, Minnesota goes on to address some strategies that will be employed to promote participation in pages 11-13 in their Bylaws. Here are some examples:
“Hold community meetings and events early and frequently. In addition to and in advance of formal and required public meetings, employ a variety of formats early on and frequently to share information, listen to residents’ concerns, and answer questions. Demonstrate how community input was considered.”
“Expand public notification methods. During certain actions, such as some permits and rulemaking, the MPCA is required to formally notify the public through specified traditional media. When environmental justice is of concern, the MPCA will employ additional methods specifically tailored to that community as early in the process as practical, and as often as appropriate.”
“Build upon previous efforts to deepen community connections and understanding. Collaborate to foster supportive partnerships, authentic relationships, and culturally competent long-term engagement. Expand the network of community stakeholders that we interact with to ensure representation from affected communities, and inclusion of as many community members and organizations working on environmental justice as possible. Encourage community members to be involved.”
NA
Beyond the responsibility of Colorado’s EJAB to oversee Colorado’s Environmental Justice Grant Program which provides some community engagement opportunities, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Colorado fail to address the importance of Community Engagement in Environmental Justice.
Metrics and Evaluation:
Gold
Minnesota begins with identifying all of the goals the EJAB intends to meet through their various responsibilities. This includes their overall ‘framework goals,’ but also individual goals for different responsibilities like advising on permitting, environmental review and remediation, compliance and enforcement, prevention and assistance, etc. By including goals within each of their overarching goals, it allows for easy identification of what areas of the Board need the most focus and adjusting as their efforts progress. Another important aspect the Minnesota EJAB ensured to include was a review and documentation of the equity impacts of rules their state government pushed and passed. This ensures that knock-on effects of rules that seem positive on the surface can be identified before the implementation of said rule.
NA
Colorado, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey fail to mention how they will measure their success as an Advisory Board moving forward.
Regulatory Programs and Enforcement:
Include provisions for integrating EJ considerations into regulatory programs, permitting processes, and enforcement actions, with the authority to deny permits or impose conditions to mitigate adverse impacts.
Gold
Minnesota covers both the Advisory Board’s role in developing new policy measures and regulatory programs as well as the means by which said programs and initiatives will be enforced.
“During permitting, identify and evaluate additional measures, beyond meeting established permit limits, to avoid and diminish impacts… Work with the permittee to incorporate these measures into the permit or supplemental documents as possible.”
“Conduct more frequent inspections or other compliance determination work at facilities in areas of concern to ensure they are meeting applicable regulations and permit conditions”
“Coordinate work with state agencies and local governments in Minnesota to reduce disparities across multiple agencies/jurisdictions, enhance relationships, and together, implement Governor’s directives on Tribal relations, diversity and inclusion. Involve local government staff, elected officials, and others in actions and projects in areas of concern for environmental justice. “
Silver
The Advisory Board Bylaws of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Colorado all address how they will provide “recommendations” or “advice” to various governmental agencies, but each fail to discuss any sort of regulatory program they hope to employ. Additionally, no mention of enforcement are made throughout any of the bylaws.
Pennsylvania: “The EJAB may recommend to the Secretary the adoption, amendment, or repeal of such rules, regulations, standards, criteria, policies, guidance and procedures as it deems necessary and advisable for implementation of the agency’s environmental programs and recommendations of the Environmental Justice Work Group.”
New Jersey: “the EJAC will coordinate with DEP’s Office of Environmental Justice in providing advice and guidance to Executive Branch departments and agencies and will collaborate with the Environmental Justice Interagency Council (EJIC) to identify environmental justice community concerns, develop priorities and action plans, and facilitate interagency collaboration with environmental justice communities”. “The EJAC will make recommendations to the Commissioner of DEP to ensure that DEP develops effective communication programs, implements and enforces environmental laws and empowers communities
Colorado: “The Advisory Board was created to advise the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (“the Department”) and the Governor’s Office on environmental justice matters, implement the Environmental Justice Grants Program, work with the Environmental Justice Ombudsperson, and recommend best practices for engagement with Disproportionately Impacted Communities.”
Monitoring and Assessment:
Establish ongoing monitoring and assessment of environmental conditions in overburdened communities, using data and community input to identify and address EJ concerns.
Gold
The Minnesota Advisory Board addresses how they will use data and community knowledge to find areas in need and touches on measuring and predicting the impact of their policies, and whether additional monitoring will be necessary for certain areas.
“Consider known or potential areas of concern for environmental justice when planning for environmental monitoring. When deciding where, when, and what to monitor, expressly consider contaminants of concern in areas of concern for environmental justice. Evaluate whether additional monitoring would help to understand risks.”
“Consider more comprehensive risk assessment and cumulative impact analysis. In areas of concern for environmental justice, determine if additional analysis of pollution from multiple sources and the evaluation of non-chemical stressors and community vulnerability will better inform decisions.”
NA
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Colorado all fail to explicitly mention how or if they will monitor and assess the environmental conditions within overburdened communities. Although Colorado has the Grant Program for
Interagency Coordination and Collaboration:
Promote coordination and collaboration with other governmental agencies, organizations, and stakeholders to address EJ issues comprehensively and effectively.
Gold
Minnesota mentions throughout the bylaws instances where interagency collaboration will be considered. They also cover the importance of including local governments and federal agencies like the EPA.
“Coordinate work with state agencies and local government in Minnesota to reduce disparities across multiple agencies/jurisdictions, enhance relationships, and together, implement Governor’s directives on Tribal relations, diversity and inclusion. Involve local government staff, elected officials, and others in actions and projects in areas of concern for environmental justice.”
“Collaborate with EPA. Identify ways the expertise and resources of the EPA can help advance our work in Minnesota and identify ways the MPCA can support EPA’s work in the state”
Silver
New Jersey mentions the role of their Advisory Board in advising and encouraging the DEP in including direct community participation in decision making and uses strong words that support the EJAB working WITH other agencies, rather than simply giving recommendations
“The EJAC will COORDINATE WITH DEP’s Office of Environmental Justice in providing advice and guidance to Executive Branch departments and agencies and will COLLABORATE with the Environmental Justice Interagency Council”
Bronze
Pennsylvania includes the role of the board in recommending amendments, implementations, or repeals of rules, but doesn’t mention any measures to ensure cooperation or discussion between the two groups. Although similar to New Jersey, the PA Bylaws don’t use strong enough words like “collaborate” and “coordinate with.”
Similarly, Colorado mentions the role of providing advice but doesn’t use strong enough language to make the collaboration between government entities ensured. They do use the words “work WITH,” but only once and not nearly as explicit as New Jersey.
“The Advisory Board was created to advise the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (“the Department”) and the Governor’s Office on environmental justice matters, implement the Environmental Justice Grants Program, work with the Environmental Justice Ombudsperson, and recommend best practices for engagement with Disproportionately Impacted Communities.”
Training and Capacity Building:
Ensure regular training for board members and staff on EJ principles, multicultural competency, and effective community engagement strategies.
Gold
Minnesota states the following along the lines of capacity building:
“Train and develop all managers and staff in multicultural competency, institutional racism, the MPCA’s environmental justice policy, Civil Rights Act Title VI requirements, and other areas identified that support MPCA’s capacity to assure equal access and achieve equitable outcomes,” and
“Train relevant program staff in procedures and policies to integrate environmental justice principles into their specific area of work. Incorporate these responsibilities into employee work plans. Collect employee feedback to monitor effectiveness of capacity-building and awareness-raising work.”
These measures ensure a board well-versed in the laws and regulations already existing, the existence of overburdened communities, and the importance of their role as a member in the board in mitigating disproportionate impacts of environmental issues.
NA
No mention of the education or training of the board members was made for PA, NJ, or CO
Inclusion of Diverse Stakeholders:
Ensure representation from affected communities, including residents, community organizations, and environmental justice advocates, to provide diverse perspectives and insights.
Gold
All four states make sure to mention the importance of a diverse and representative board. This includes not only diversity in race and income-level, but also in occupation and expertise, ensuring to include members from academia, environmental groups, government employees, and community leaders. The inclusion of a member from the business-sector is often an overlooked yet important voice to be included in the advisory board.
Resource Allocation:
Allocate adequate resources, including funding and staff, to support EJ initiatives, community engagement, and capacity-building efforts.
Silver
The EJAB of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Colorado each have a member appointed by their respective Departments of Environmental Protection that will all assist in administrative support and in the case of New Jersey, acting as the secretary during meetings, guiding the board through the agenda and “recording, transcribing, and maintaining a permanent file of the transactions (including minutes) of the Board; receipt, preparation, and transmittal of incoming and outgoing correspondence of the Board.” The bylaws, however, do not address any funding.
Bronze
Minnesota fails to address any concerns around resources like funding or staffing for administrative purposes, but does touch on the allocation of the board’s time towards efforts ensuring effective community engagement.
“Employ outreach and civic engagement strategies and tools”
“In addition to and in advance of formal and required public meetings, employ a variety of formats early on and frequently to share information, listen to residents’ concerns, and answer questions. Demonstrate how community input was considered”
State EJ Advisory Board Links
