FROM: Ostroff Associates

DATE: December 13, 2021

RE: DEC Climate Justice Working Group Meeting

Working Group Members

• Eddie Bautista, Executive Director, NYC Environmental Justice Alliance

• Jill Henck, Clean Energy Program Director, Adirondack North Country Association
• Dr. Donathan Brown, CEO & Co-Founder, Adirondack Diversity Solutions
• Sonal Jessel, Director of Policy, WEACT for Environmental Justice
• Rahwa Ghirmatzion, Executive Director, PUSH Buffalo
• Amy Klein, CEO, Capital Roots
• Mary Beth McEwen, Interim Executive Director, Cornell Cooperative Extension Of
Oneida and Madison Counties
• Abigail McHugh-Grifa, Executive Director, Rochester People’s Climate Coalition
• Elizabeth Yeampierre, Executive Director, UPROSE

New York State Agency Members

• Alanah Keddell-Tuckey, Chair, Interim Director of Environmental Justice, DEC

• Neil Muscatiello, Director, Bureau of Environmental and Occupational Epidemiology,
Center for Environmental Health, DOH
• Joseph McNearney, Director of Stakeholder Engagement, DOL
• Christopher Coll, Director of Energy Affordability and Equity Program, NYSERDA

1
2
3
Eddie Bautista – With regard to measuring and reporting investments and benefits, where
is the State leaning? Will both be counted or is the State going to create a matrix that
determines what qualifies as a benefit?
• Chris Coll – The State is going to track both. There will be accounting for direct
community investments and this can be compared to the geographic locations of
disadvantaged communities (DACs). The State is also going to try to create a system
to account for the co-benefits associated with emissions and pollutant reductions
which are tied to a number of health outcomes and economic development
standards.
• Bautista – This is really great news. This is in alignment with the original intent for
the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). Up until now the
State has said that it is going to track either the investments or the co-benefits, but
to see that both will be tracked reflects very highly on the State.
• Coll – The State will want to have further conversation around the tracking and
reporting of investments and co-benefits in order to make sure the process is as
transparent as possible. There may be challenges at first, but hopefully a system can
be designed to accurately capture what is taking place.

4
5
6
Rahwa Ghirmatzion – It would be helpful to have the list of communities that will hold each
public comment period in order to make sure there can be a high level of participation. It is
good to hear that there could be more than six meetings.

7
8
Abigail McHugh-Grifa – There are still concerning areas in the Rochester region. There will
be push-back on the map during the public comment period seeing that there are census
tracts that clearly should be included, but they are not still.
• Alex Dunn – These tracts have similar characteristics to the tracts in Sunset Park that
were excluded. They have a very high BIPOC percentages and low-median income
levels, but the environmental burden did not score as high as one would think.
• Elizabeth Yeampierre – To say that Sunset Park does not have a high environmental
burden is wrong. Data shows that if someone lives within two miles of a highway
then that person can be susceptible to air pollution health impacts. Sunset Park is
within two blocks of the Gowanus Expressway and to say publicly that it does not
face an extremely high level of environmental burden is incorrect and concerning.
The MTA bus depot is directly across from UPROSE’s office. There are dozens of
communities in residential areas that have sweat shops and hide an industry where
people work in terrible conditions with no windows and the data overlooks them.
• Dunn – It is going to be important that the Group looks at what is happening in
Sunset Park and Rochester closer. These areas clearly face environmental burdens,
but it needs to be examined why they are not showing up on the map. Certain
conditions are invisible and there are data constraints that cannot show sweat
shops. The data that is being used for environmental burdens and health impacts do
capture air quality quite accurately, but there may be criteria in the future that
needs to be updated to capture these neighborhoods.

9
 • Bautista – The intent of the law was not to capture every single Environmental
Justice community. Also, the intent was not to include every person of color. The
intent of the law was to find the communities that needed the most assistance and
are least able to respond to the challenges of climate change moving forward. The
map will be imperfect at times and updated as needed. It is important to make note
of the current data constraints so that agencies can work on finding that data.

Yeampierre – Was extreme wind considered? There have been many new instances of
tornadoes in Brooklyn. These events coupled with being located next to a maritime
industrial park is problematic.
• Dunn – Extreme weather was one of the original indicators included in the original
list. However, it may have been removed seeing that it was not as impactful as one
would think. The focus was to include the best indicators that also accounted for
other conditions.

10
11
Amy Klein – It is very upsetting that DOH is not able to track diabetes levels. There are
numerous comorbidities associated with diabetes that directly relate to DACs and lack of
access to high quality food.
• Neil Muscatiello – A lot of the data that DOH has access to is at the county level. This
was identified as a challenge at the start of this process. It was discussed extensively
with the consultants, Amanda and Alex. Going forward there are going to be efforts
to get more granular data that will be directly applicable to this process in order to
measure data at the census tract level. Also, one issue was that diabetes may have
not been the best indicator. Using hospitalization as an indicator captured the tracts
that may have been included using diabetes while at the same time expanding the
scope to more accurately capture health impacts. There is also a question over
where people are treated for their diabetes either their primary care doctor or
emergency care.
• Yeampierre – What is concerning is that diabetes is directly related to systemic
racism and negatively impacts people of color at higher rates because of the lack of
healthy food in these communities. It should be noted that this process is harmed
because the State is lacking in its data collection operations.
• Bautista- There is clearly tension over this issue. There should be an explanation of
the decision that will be made so that it is clear why the decision was made. This will
be extremely important to have, especially when justifying this decision to each
other’s respective communities.

Dunn – It is important to note that while tweaking the indicators the Group found that
when only the health indicators and population characteristics were included it matched
many of the concerns that were included in the ground-truthing process. The reason for the
current version of the indicators is that the Group had to balance the discussion points, the
ground-truthing process as well as the mandate in the legislation.

12
13
14
15
Bautista – Where is the State in terms of outreach to indigenous communities? Citizen-
members of the Group have been asking for this information at each meeting for the last
year. If this information is not ready still, then it should be clearly noted in the document
that citizen-members have wanted information, but have not received it yet from the State.
• Alanah Keddell-Tuckey – DEC has reached out to tribe leadership multiple times and
still have not heard back. The State wants them to be involved, but at the level that
they desire to be. There needs to be a fine line walked in terms of outreach and
respecting their internal processes. David Witt can speak more to the direct
engagement.
• Ghirmatzion – There has been outreach directly to PUSH Buffalo and tribes have said
that they have not received the level of outreach that the State is claiming. It would
be really good to have the nations come and provide a presentation directly to the
Group next year.
• David Witt – There has been continued outreach, but leadership from the respective
nations have not responded decisively that they would like to participate at this
time. They are always more than welcome and just because they have not been
participating yet does not mean that this is permanent. Task forces that have been
created within the tribes that handle environmental issues do not necessarily speak
for tribe leadership. The State prefers to make decisions based on a direct
correspondence with leadership in order not to undermine the process.

16
17
18
The vote was unanimous with no new comments or explanations by members. The Criteria will be
posted by January 1st, 2022 for public comment.

19
Keddell-Tuckey – The Group should expect the language to be posted for public comment by
January 1st, 2022. This will trigger a 120-day public comment period. The Group should
also expect to meet at least quarterly for the first two years. The next meeting will be in
January 2022 to further discuss in more detail the public comment process. The Group will
also be invited to future Climate Action Council meetings to provide feedback on the
Scoping Plan process.

20