News Feeds

Dr. Katharine Wilkinson is an author, strategist, and teacher, working to heal the planet we call home. She addresses the question of “What Could Possibly Go Right?”

The convenient myth of civic nationalism has allowed Holyrood to ignore the rising threat of Reform for too long, argues Coll McCail

The post Elections 2026: Soul searching for Scottish political identity appeared first on Red Pepper.

Paltry sales as shoppers shun cage eggs Channel News brendan 1st May 2026 Teaser Media

Anderson Bean: Could you start by introducing yourself and your role in the Guilford County Schools?

Carla Harris: I am a high school science educator. I have been teaching for the past 10 years, all in North Carolina. I am also a member of the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE), and I do a lot of organizing work with them.

AB: How would you describe the current state of public education in North Carolina for both teachers and students?

CH: One word that comes to mind is abysmal. The last study I saw ranked North Carolina 50th in public school funding out of all the states, so it’s pretty difficult right now. In 2008 North Carolina was 25th in teacher pay, today it is 43rd, $14,000 less than the national average. North Carolina is also currently the only state that has not passed a state budget.

You have a lot of people in this profession who really love what we do, but it’s getting really hard for people to stay. Within the past 20 years, the General Assembly has been chipping away at the public school system in many different ways. For example, they eliminated master’s pay starting in 2014, so educators with advanced degrees now earn the same as colleagues without them. For anyone entering the system after 2021, there are no longer state-provided health benefits in retirement, which discourages people from joining the profession. North Carolina has also eliminated traditional tenure and weakened due process protections for teachers. At the same time, the pay scale is structured so that salaries increase early on but then flatten out for much of a teacher’s career, with little to no meaningful raises between, roughly, years fifteen and twenty-four.

My own health insurance costs doubled this past year. Classified staff—bus drivers, custodians, and cafeteria workers—until recently weren’t even making $15 an hour. That leads to shortages, vacancies, and burnout across the board.

Conditions inside schools are also very difficult. Because of low state funding, maintenance is not always addressed in a timely way. In my school, there are several places where every time it rains, ceiling tiles have to be replaced within a couple of days. There are ongoing leaks. In a neighboring county, schools couldn’t open on time one year because of mold in multiple buildings after air conditioning was cut over the summer to save money.

Resources are scarce. Most teachers buy their own basic supplies, tissues, pencils, hand sanitizer, things that used to be provided by the school.

Health insurance has also worsened. Costs have gone up while coverage has gone down. Starting teacher salaries are so low that, when you factor in the hours worked, they fall below a living wage, which makes it even harder to bring new people into the profession.

Most schools only have a nurse one to two days a week, with nurses split across multiple buildings. That makes it difficult for them to really know students and their health needs. Mental health services are even harder to access.

These problems are tied to broader policy decisions. Legislators have chosen to maintain one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the country, with plans to reduce it to zero by 2030. At the same time, funding is being diverted away from public schools. Over the past few years, there has been a sharp increase in private school vouchers, also known as Opportunity Scholarships. This year alone, over $500 million in taxpayer dollars has gone to these vouchers, effectively siphoning money away from public schools. And the majority of recipients are already from wealthier families.

AB: What is NCAE organizing for May Day, and what are the main goals of the action?

CH: To coincide with the nationwide call to action on May Day this year, NCAE has organized a day of action under the slogan “Kids Over Corporations.” They are inviting all school employees, along with the broader community, to come to the Capitol in Raleigh. The goal is not only to stand in solidarity with one another, but also to get legislators’ attention and begin shifting policy back in our direction.

School employees are being asked to call out of work that day. The central demands are for increased funding for public education by redirecting money away from corporate tax cuts and private school vouchers.

It has been made clear that this is not a strike, but a one-day action that can serve as a step toward larger actions in the future. A longer-term goal of NCAE is to become a formalized union and win collective bargaining rights, and this action is part of building toward that.

To coincide with the nationwide call to action on May Day this year, NCAE has organized a day of action under the slogan “Kids Over Corporations.”…School employees are being asked to call out of work that day. The central demands are for increased funding for public education by redirecting money away from corporate tax cuts and private school vouchers.

So far, over fifteen school districts have been forced to close for the day. This happens when enough workers put in absences that there are not enough substitutes to cover positions, which forces districts to convert the day into an optional teacher workday. We expect that number to grow, and there are also educators participating from districts that have not officially closed.

These decisions are made at the county level. Some districts have made the day an optional teacher workday, while others have required employees to use annual leave. These kinds of responses reflect attempts to limit collective worker action.

AB: How does this year’s May Day action compare to the 2018 “Red for Ed” mobilizations in North Carolina? What feels continuous, what’s different, and how does this moment compare to being part of the broader national wave back then?

CH: North Carolina had similar actions in 2018 and 2019. In 2018, there was a national teacher strike wave across multiple states, including Arizona and West Virginia. That created a lot of momentum, and people here were ready to take action because they could see what was possible when educators organized collectively.

Now, we are building on the lessons learned from those experiences. In both moments, there has been a strong emphasis on grassroots organizing—attending local meetings, connecting with educators across districts, and collectively developing strategy. It’s often a year-long process to build toward actions like this.

This year, one of the key strategies has been organizing coordinated absences. In some districts, educators formally entered their absences into the system, while in others, workers signed commitment forms indicating they would do so if necessary. In my district alone, there were nearly 800 commitments, which was enough for the school board to act before everyone even formally submitted their absences. The collective action itself was enough to force a response.

While the numbers may be smaller so far than in 2018, we are seeing broader connections with other organizations this time. There has been collaboration with immigrant rights groups, voting rights groups, and other community organizations. There have been art builds to create banners and materials, as well as coordinated actions like banner drops and rallies. There is also a larger coalition coming together for events around May Day.

So while 2018 was defined by a powerful national wave of teacher strikes, this moment is characterized more by coalition-building and deeper connections across movements.

While [the 2018 “Red for Ed” mobilizations in North Carolina were] defined by a powerful national wave of teacher strikes, this moment is characterized more by coalition-building and deeper connections across movements.

AB: GCAE has also been active in the Triad labor movement, including solidarity with UAW struggles. Can you talk about the importance of cross-union solidarity in the region? [The Piedmont Triad is a metropolitan region in the north-central part of North Carolina that make up three cities: Greensboro, Winston Salem and High Point. – EDS]

CH: GCAE, as a local chapter of the statewide union, has supported UAW organizing efforts. That connection is very real, UAW workers manufacture our school buses, and their children attend our schools. It highlights how interconnected working-class struggles really are.

We’re all working under the same system, and we recognize that the system is not working for us. Organizing around public schools is a powerful way for people to connect because over 80 percent of working-class families send their children to public schools. Most people have some connection to a public school, which creates natural links between different struggles. Schools become a central place where broader working-class solidarity can grow.

AB: How are the struggles of other school workers, like bus drivers, cafeteria staff, and support personnel, intersecting with those of teachers right now?

CH: There’s a misconception that this action is just about teachers. NCAE represents all public school workers, so when we are asking for more funding, we are asking for better pay and improved conditions across the board.

When school funding increases, salaries can go up for everyone, and conditions improve for all school employees.

We’ve seen this in recent struggles. In Guilford County, school nutrition staff organized a two-day walkout in 2023 to demand higher wages. That action led to raises, though there were still concerns about how those increases were structured.

Even before that walkout, GCAE spent over two years organizing to raise classified staff wages to $15 an hour. That campaign shows how long it can take to win even modest gains. When we push for larger changes now, we understand that this is a long-term fight.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”
Featured Image credit: Anthony Crider; modified by Tempest.

The post Kids Over Corporations appeared first on Tempest.

The CSIPM participated in a consultation organized by the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) on Empowering Family Farmers, in preparation for the Global Thematic Event that will be held during the 54th CFS Plenary Session in October 2026.

In a collective contribution, the CSIPM highlighted that the event is a key opportunity to reflect on and advance policies that strengthen family farmers, small-scale food producers, fishers, pastoralists, Indigenous Peoples, women and youth, as well as peasant and Indigenous agriculture rooted in agroecology. It also stressed that the discussion should build on commitments governments have already made within the CFS and under the United Nations Decade of Family Farming.

The CSIPM called for a critical review of policies from recent decades to better understand how they have contributed to deepening dependence on external inputs, capital, and new technologies (including digital ones); reinforcing the agro-industrial model; weakening resilience, and increasing vulnerability. It also underscored the need to recognize the structural challenges faced by family farmers, including criminalization and limited access to finance and markets.

Among the priorities that the CFS event should address, the CSIPM highlighted agrarian reform, particularly in connection with the ICARRD+20, held in Colombia; the implementation of the UN Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and on the Rights of Peasants (UNDROP); access to markets; criminalization and violence against people defending their territories; and the dependency and concentration of power that new technologies and the digitalization of agriculture may generate, among others.

The CSIPM’s initial analysis provides a clear picture of the challenges facing family farmers, based on experiences shared by different constituencies, and underscores the importance of ensuring inclusive and meaningful participation in food governance, so that policies are developed together with those who produce food and feed their communities.

Read the CSIPM contribution

• More information on the CFS Global Thematic Event
• Towards smallholder-oriented public policies. CSIPM independent report (2019)

The post Keys to strengthening policies for family farmers appeared first on CSIPM.

FIFA’s World Cup is coming up fast, and cities across America are making big plans to get soccer fans to the stadiums … and sometimes, making headlines for their astronomical transit prices. But is it a smart way for agencies to cash in on fútbol fever, a necessary evil to recoup the costs of mega-events, or simply price-gouging visitors who are doing cities a favor by choosing shared modes?

We appreciate the latest podcast from Transit Tangents, which breaks down four host cities’ approach to shared transportation during the biggest sporting event in the world, including the infrastructure they built (or didn’t) to accommodate it. And that includes one $35-million station platform extension that’s drawing a lot of scrutiny.

Now Hiring: Director of Rural Justice The Central California Environmental Justice Network (CCEJN) is seeking a passionate and experienced leader to serve as its next Director of Rural Justice in Fresno. This full-time leadership role focuses on advancing environmental justice across the San Joaquin Valley—supporting efforts around clean water, pesticide reform, and farmworker rights. The […]

Ride the bus — and get your steps in.

Transit agencies don’t do enough to remind policy makers, and even their own customers, of the connection between good public transportation and good public health, argues a new report that asserts that better messaging can strengthen the agencies’ funding and impact.

There is obviously already a consensus around transit’s physical and mental health benefits, but report, prepared for the Transportation Research Board, calls for agencies to communicate it better.

“Transit agencies [should] acknowledge the health benefits and use it to help get resources,” said Andrew Dannenberg, an affiliate professor at the University of Washington. “It’d be great if they’re saying, ‘Take transit, it’s good for your health,’ when they’re talking to legislators trying to get funding to build, maintain, and expand transit.”

The authors identified seven healthy outcomes directly linked to public transit — such as basic physical activity, cleaner air, fewer crashes and expanding social networks — but Danneberg emphasized that transit officials shouldn’t merely recite the list, but create messaging.

For instance, he said, “A quarter of people reach their recommended daily physical activity just by walking to and from transit. That is not a trivial amount.”

Case studies demonstrate the success of good health messaging in transit funding. In Boston a decade ago, a health assessment that identified the negative consequences that service cuts would have on community health and economic well-being led to those cuts as well as fare hikes to be pared back.

“The [assessment] fed directly into the decision-makers’ process towards coming up with a solution for the budget gap,” the report said. “By presenting monetized impacts in a succinct report, it appears the results were able to gain traction, and broaden the discourse to include consideration of health impacts.”

Transit funding is so often on the chopping block to close year-over-year budgets, but policy makers must be compelled to see the long-term budgetary implications of good transit towards people’s health. A case study from rural New Mexico recalled how a bus service saved Dona Ana County more than $600,000 annually by reducing hypertension and connecting people to preventative care. And two studies in Portland found that people living near transit have lower health-care costs — not a small finding in a nation that spent $5.3 trillion, or roughly $16,000 per person, on health care in 2024.

Yet health-care savings created by transit aren’t often plowed back into transit.

“The cost that you might save in health by having people more physically active are good for society overall,” says Dannenberg. “But they don’t translate into, ‘Good, now we got extra money that we can put into the transit systems.’”

Thus, some recommendations: First, transit agencies need to know their impact on community health. As the report notes, health benefits are complex, making it challenging at times to quantify. However, the report identifies research partnerships as key to doing so. For example, Boston’s health impact assessment was conducted by its regional planning agency in collaboration with researchers from Harvard and Boston University.

Second, communicating transit’s health benefits is just as important. The dense nature of scientific research tends to limit its audience to specialists. But the Boston example demonstrates that making findings generalizable also helps transit’s case. Broadening their audience, as well as who benefits from transit (hint: everyone!), is a key pivot.

“Benefits can also be realized by people who do not use transit,” the report stresses. “This is an important distinction when communicating the value of public transportation to decision-makers and the public.”

It’s unfair to expect transit officials — who are often in a desperate struggle for funding and must spend almost all of their time simply running their systems — to create health messaging. Instead, groups like the American Public Transportation Association must reframe transit for everyone’s well being, Dannenberg said.

“If you look at what’s on [the APTA] website about why transit’s good for you, health is kind of buried in there,” Dannenberg said. “But why not make that one of the stronger messages?”

In a devastating blow to what John Lewis called “the most powerful non-violent tool we have in a democracy,” a right-wing, illegitimate SCOTUS finally gutted the Voting Rights Act they’ve long been chipping away at, ensuring communities of color will increasingly be denied “a voice in their own destiny.” By striking down a new Louisiana voting map as a bogus “racial gerrymander,” the court’s extremist hacks betrayed generations who fought and bled, said Fannie Lou Hamer, “to live as decent human beings.”

The court’s 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais kneecapped “our nation’s most important federal civil rights law," effectively voiding the last remaining provision of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act’s Section 2 that allowed voters of color to legally challenge racially discriminatory electoral maps. Specifically, they rejected Louisiana's redrawn 2024 Congressional map that created a second majority-Black district - in a one-third Black state - aimed at righting the GOP’s racist wrongs of the past, defying precedent, context and common sense to argue the move, already upheld by two courts, was ”an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.“

In another outlandish opinion, Samuel Alito, the hackiest of a cabal of hacks, didn’t directly strike down Section 2, which prohibits voting practices that discriminate on the basis of race; writing for the majority, he argued he was simply “properly” re-interpreting it to require proof of intentional discrimination - which Congress didn’t write into the law, which defies past rulings that redistricting must only result in discrimination, intended or no, and which is almost impossible to prove. Thus, wielding “sleight of hand and legal gibberish,” did Alito give license for corrupt politicians to further rig the system by silencing entire communities of color.

The potential death knoll for a vital law that's curtailed racial gerrymandering and discrimination for 60 years comes, of course, after years of whittling away by Roberts Court zealots, using tactics from voter ID laws to limiting registration. One advocate: "This ruling isn’t about the law, it’s about power, and giving Republicans more seats they (could) win at the ballot box." One "pernicious" result, writes Rick Hasen: To "bleach the halls" of Congress, state legislatures and city councils, the life's work of judges who see their constituency as aggrieved white men hostile to the rights of minorities - a stance that puts them "at odds with democracy itself."

In a fiery dissent, Justice Elena Kagan charged the majority “straight-facedly holds the Voting Rights Act must be brought low to make the world safe for partisan gerrymanders." The law they “eviscerate", she wrote, "is - or, now more accurately, was - one of the most consequential, efficacious, and amply justified exercises of federal legislative power in our Nation’s history. It was born of the literal blood of Union soldiers and civil rights marchers, and repeatedly, and overwhelmingly, reauthorized by the people’s representatives in Congress. Only they have the right to say it is no longer needed - not the Members of this Court.”

Above all, critics decry the hubris and perfidy of those heedless Court members blithely stripping from millions of Americans the elemental rights so many of their descendants struggled, suffered and died for. The Rev. William Barber eviscerated a court, ignorant of the painful history of "the rights that cost our people so much," that has "decided their job is to enable extremism and systemic racism by arguing that race has no place in the American Democratic process. Race has always had a place in the process. And claiming that partisan decisions are not racist is a form of racism." "Some of us," John Lewis humbly noted of his lifetime of good trouble, "gave a little blood for (that) right."

John Lewis called the fight for voting rights "the struggle of a lifetime, or maybe even many lifetimes."Photo from Getty Archives

So did Fannie Lou Hamer, who fought against a Jim Crow South she'd grown up in because, "I was sick and tired of being sick and tired." The granddaughter of slaves and youngest of 20 children of sharecroppers, she was 45 in 1962 when she went to a SNCC meeting at a church in Sunflower County, Mississippi and learned Black people could register to vote. The next day, she took a bus with 17 others to the county seat in Indianola. Police only let her and another person take the literacy test; she failed, but kept going back until she passed: "If I'd had any sense, I’d a been scared. But the only thing (whites) could do was kill me, and it seemed they’d been trying to do that a little bit at a time since I could remember."

On the way back, police stopped them and brought them back to Indianola, where the bus driver was fined for "driving a bus the wrong color." Back at the plantation, her children said the owner was angry she'd gone to vote; he told her to leave that night "because we are not ready for that in Mississippi." "I didn’t try to register for you," she said.. "I tried to register for myself." Then she left: "They set me free. It’s the best thing that could happen. Now I could work for my people." For the rest of her life, she did. She joined the voter registration campaign, helped organize Freedom Summer, became SNCC's oldest field secretary, ran for Congress.

Left with a limp after surviving childhood polio, she embraced her identity as a Black working-poor woman with a disability and little formal education, upending preconceptions of both Black colleagues and white foes. When Rep. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. once challenged her expertise, she retorted, "How many bales of cotton have you picked?” In 1963, she became more disabled after she was arrested with other activists in Winona MS, taken to jail and brutally beaten by cops and, on their order, other black prisoners, suffering permanent damage to her eyes, legs and kidneys. She was still in jail when Medger Evers was murdered.

In August 1964, she recounted that ordeal at the Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City, days after the funerals of murdered Freedom Riders Chaney, Schwerner and Goodman. Testifying to the Credentials Committee, she challenged the seating of Mississippi's all-white delegation - from still-all-white primaries - demanding the party seat Black members of an integrated Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party she'd helped found. In the end, MFDP delegates were not seated - party leaders offered a compromise of 2 seats, which she declined - but she had confronted them on a national stage about their own discrimination, famously asking, "Is this America?"

- YouTube www.youtube.com

During Hamer's testimony, then-president Lyndon Johnson had hastily called a news conference to divert attention for white Dem voters alarmed by her insistence on true equality. Cameras duly cut away from Hamer, but networks later showed her speech. "Hamer had pulled back the curtain," read one account. "The United States could not claim to be a democracy while withholding voting rights from millions of its citizens." Ultimately, Hamer's inclusive political vision, along with a groundswell of civil rights activism, led to Johnson's finally signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, ensuring government could not “deny or abridge the right of any citizen to vote on account of race or color.”

Hamer remained active through the 1960s and 1970s. She spoke with Malcolm X in Harlem, at the '68 and '72 DNC, at 1969's Vietnam War Moratorium rally in Berkeley. In 1971, she helped found the National Women's Political Caucus, aimed at recruiting, training and supporting women to run for office. The titles of her speeches reflected her resolve, her anger, her fierce hope: "We're On Our Way," "Nobody’s Free Until Everybody’s Free,” "The Only Thing We Can Do Is Work Together," ""What Have We To Hail," "America Is A Sick Place," "To Make Democracy A Reality," and, in 1976, "We Haven't Arrived Yet."

Clearly, sorrowfully, we damn sure still haven't. Unlike so many others, Hamer lived to do her work and tell her story, for a while. She died in Mississippi on March 14, 1977, aged just 59, of breast cancer exacerbated by high blood pressure, diabetes, and complications from her jail beatings. She died, too, "from being poor, Black, and an activist in Mississippi at a time when all of that was lethal." Andrew Young gave her eulogy, telling mourners "the seeds of social change in America were sown here by the sweat and blood of you and Fannie Lou Hamer." Then they sang her favorite song: “This little light of mine." Her gravestone reads, "I am sick and tired of being sick and tired." May we honor her labors, and may she rest in well-earned peace and power.

“The wrongs and the sickness of this country have been swept under the rug. But I’ve come out from under the rug, and I’m going to tell it like it is.” - Fannie Lou Hamer

"To the Justices Who Took What Others Bled For: History will have its say. But so will the bridge. So will the blood on the pavement. So will the people who were told to wait, then beaten for praying, then buried for believing the Constitution meant what it said....You’ll wear this shame for the rest of your lives." - Derek Penwell

New updates from FracTracker’s community air monitoring initiatives, including sensor deployments, air sampling, and ongoing work with frontline communities in the Ohio River Valley.

The post Campaign Update: Progress on FracTracker’s Community Air Monitoring Projects appeared first on FracTracker Alliance.

Here is a repost of our May Day episode from 2021. In it, we talk about the history of May Day from pagan rituals to the Haymarket Affair to International…

When Doug Burgum appeared before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee as President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Interior department last year, he was extended the traditional benefit of the doubt, with senators chummily reminiscing about North Dakota, lobbing softballs, and avoiding tough questions on the way to voting to confirm Burgum as Interior secretary. If Burgum got the idea that this is how all hearings would go, he was mistaken. A year later, as the Interior secretary who has overseen a multi-pronged effort to dismantle the agency and sell off or sell out our national public lands, Burgum seemed totally unprepared to handle difficult questions from members of Congress, not to mention the decidedly different vibe of a budget hearing where elected representatives demanded accountability for how their constituents’ resources are being stewarded and tax dollars are being spent.

In appearances before three congressional committees so far, Burgum struggled to defend President Trump’s proposed Interior department budget and explain the administration’s chaotic, destructive, and unpopular agenda for America’s public lands. Below are five of the most head-scratching exchanges between Burgum and lawmakers—along with some useful information Secretary Burgum might want to bookmark for his next Hill appearance.

Burgum can’t provide details on the $10 billion request for ‘beautification’ in Washington, D.C.

President Trump’s budget proposal includes a $10 billion request for a new Presidential Capital Stewardship Program which would “carry out priority construction and rehabilitation projects in the Washington, D.C. area.” According to the Interior department’s own website, the deferred maintenance backlog for Washington, D.C. is just over $2 billion. When asked by Senator Angus King of Maine what the extra $8 billion is for, Burgum’s bumbling explanation was that “D.C. is like a state. It’s not just, like, the National Mall. It’s for the greater capital region. That’s a region.” But again, according to the Interior department, adding in the deferred maintenance backlog for the entire states of Maryland and Virginia—far beyond the D.C. area— would bring the total to $4 billion, still leaving more than half of Burgum’s $10 billion request unaccounted for. Meanwhile, last year’s budget for the entire National Park Service was just $4.6 billion.

During the Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, Senator Jeff Merkeley of Oregon also asked about the $10 billion request for the Presidential Capital Stewardship Program and if Burgum could provide a specific list of what the funds would be used for, as required by law. Burgum said he would “get you all the information you need according to law” but stopped short of agreeing to provide a detailed list. “As long as we don’t have the details, it’s a slush fund,” Merkeley responded. “You can call it something else if you want.”

Burgum learns about batteries and fossil fuel subsidies

Burgum struggled to hold his own against the expertise of Senator King—a former energy executive—on energy issues. In response to questions from King about the Trump administration’s actions to block renewable energy projects, Burgum fell back on a well-worn intermittency argument. “We have no ability to dispatch wind and solar,” Burgum claimed, and followed up with, “There are times in North Dakota when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine.” But King pointed out, “That’s where batteries and storage come in.” Burgum argued that worldwide battery storage would only provide one hour’s worth of energy. However, in the United States where Burgum is Interior secretary, battery storage has been increasing rapidly, with a new record set in 2025 for energy storage installations, and is expected to reach at least 600 gigawatt hours of installed energy storage by 2030. This is the equivalent of 300 Hoover Dams, according to the Department of Energy, which offers other comparisons Burgum may find helpful. In California, 44 percent of evening peak energy is now being delivered via batteries.

Burgum also complained that he doesn’t understand “why we had to have massive taxpayer subsidies to produce” renewable energy. King pointed out that the U.S. currently pays $30 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry. The International Monetary Fund put this figure at $3 billion in explicit subsidies in 2022 alone, with an additional $754 billion in implicit subsidies. A 2025 analysis found that even without taxpayer subsidies, renewable energy sources are still the most cost-effective source of energy.

Burgum defends 24 percent of National Park Service staff coincidentally choosing to quit at the exact same time

Senator Patty Murray of Washington pressed Burgum about unacceptable cuts to on-the-ground staff at national parks in Washington and a budget that proposes to eliminate even more park staff. Arguing with the characterization that staff had been “forced out,” Burgum insisted, “There’s been no forcing of anything. These are all voluntary.” Murray wasn’t buying it: “However you want to put it, a quarter of them left over the last 15 months.” According to the National Parks Conservation Association, 4,000 staff, nearly 25 percent of the National Park Service workforce, left their jobs since January 2025 as a result of “pressured resignations and early retirements” along with hiring freezes that prevented vacancies from being filled. That’s an awful lot of people who somehow all voluntarily left their jobs at the same time.

Burgum, who voted to condemn the Rice’s whale to extinction, worries about the impact of wind turbine installation on whale populations

In response to questions from Representative Chellie Pingree of Maine, Burgum complained about the impacts to whales and other marine life from pounding pylons into the sea floor to install offshore wind turbines. Pingree immediately pointed out the disconnect between Burgum’s sudden whale-based arguments against offshore wind and his vote to remove Endangered Species Act protections for the endangered Rice’s whale in order to clear the way for more offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico: “If you’re going to be talking about pounding and those kinds of things, then we can’t have offshore drilling, and you want to re-permit the entire East Coast for offshore drilling. If you want to talk about danger to marine mammals and danger to fisheries, my next question is going to be about what happened with Deepwater Horizon, and you want to reduce the permitting standards there. There’s just a lot of hypocrisy in your arguments.”

Burgum denies erasure of history on national park signs

Burgum awkwardly tried to dodge a question from Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii about the removal of exhibits about slavery at the President’s House site in Philadelphia and other actions to erase history from national park sites across the country.

“Some of these examples that are floating around in the media saying some of these things have been removed, they haven’t been removed. In the case of Philadelphia, there’s a weird injunction where we can’t put the new signage up. And what is on the new signage, which is not hiding any points of our history, is available for anyone to read.”

Burgum referred Hirono to the President’s House Site website, where images of new panels—including information about slavery—are indeed available to view online. New physical panels at the site itself, however, are not yet in place, depriving visitors of the opportunity to learn from these interpretive materials in context during their time at the site.

Hirono also asked Burgum about the removal of signs referring to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Burgum responded, “I don’t believe that any of that information has been removed.” However, signage related to slavery and the internment of Japanese Americans, was removed from signs at Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge in New York City following an executive order signed by President Trump in March 2025 ordering the removal of materials that contain “improper partisan ideology.”

The post Highlight reel: The five most bewildering moments from Doug Burgum’s congressional hearings appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Why the Northwest’s oil dependence keeps fuel prices high Brett Morgan Thu, 04/30/2026 - 4:02 pm

In this issue:

Earth Month / Forest Defense team news / Our new team: Just Transition / Make Polluters Pay town hall / Arts Team news / Book Club / Neighborhood Teams / Some extra cheer!

Happy April – it’s Earth Month! April is a busy month of events, celebrations, opportunities to take action, and regrettably–a lot of corporate greenwashing. (A reminder to call out greenwashing when you see it! Ads from the largest local and global emitters and earth-destroyers, including NW Natural, Zenith, Amazon, and Google are certainly not genuine and deserve public shaming!)

Earth Day started as a protest in 1970 with tens of thousands in the streets demanding clean air and water. Thanks for helping to keep the roots of this holiday alive by joining us in the streets at No Kings last weekend! Read on for many ways you can take action with us this Earth Month, and keep an eye on the 350PDX Calendar. 

 Every day in April: Support 350PDX by ordering the “Third Planet” cocktail   at Radio Room on NE Alberta – a springy beet-infused rum with apple,   ginger, and lemon on the rocks. 50% of the proceeds from each cocktail go   directly to support 350PDX’s climate justice work. How cool is that? We have   more local businesses supporting us this Earth Month, stay tuned for more   announcements about those throughout the month, including chances to win cool prizes.

Portland’s official  Earth Day Celebration is on Saturday, April 25, 11:00am – 3:00pm. Join 350PDX, Making Earth Cool, Sunnyside Environmental School, and SOLVE for the 5th annual vibrant, inclusive, and impactful day to celebrate Earth Day. We will begin with a gathering on the grounds of Sunnyside Environmental School for music, speakers, tabling, action stations, face painting, a costume competition, and lunch, followed by a parade through the Sunnyside neighborhood, featuring the 350PDX giant puppets, marching bands, singing, and dancing. Fill out this form if you’d like to volunteer at the event. You won’t want to miss this!

Forest Defense Team

April 8, 350PDX is co-sponsoring Sierra Club Oregon Chapter’s Public Townhall: The Future of Our Wild Roadless Forests. RSVP here. Join Representative Salinas and several advocacy organizations to learn and celebrate how protecting our forests from new roads supports healthy watersheds, habitat, and many more benefits for generations to come.

March was a big month for increasing youth access to green career opportunities in underserved communities. Seasonal green job opportunities are now posted at Thrive East PDX and we’re circulating a Youth Green Jobs Guide to career counselors at East Portland high schools. Big thanks to 350PDX Forest Defense Team members Carol Pinegar and Ellen Mendoza for volunteering at the March 5 Green Jobs Open House! Over 50 youths had an opportunity to talk with nine employment organizations.

Stop by Costello’s Travel Cafe (2222 NE Broadway) after April 17 to experience the Forest Defense Team’s latest installation of forest photos and prose, creating new pathways for Portlanders to access their personal connection to state forests.

New Team Focused on Just Transition

We’re excited to announce we’re starting something new with our volunteer teams. In April, our current Fossil Fuel Resistance Team and Climate Justice Policy Team will join forces! We’ll meet twice a month, working together on issues that are actively in need of attention, and spend part of the time in small groups to track various issues related to a just and sustainable energy transition.

Our first team meeting will be on Tuesday, April 14, at 6:00pm. We’ll meet at Radio Room (which is running an Earth Month special for us!) at 1101 NE Alberta St.

When: When: 2nd and 4th Tuesdays from 6:00-7:30 pm, alternating between in person and virtual

Topics: CEI Hub, Zenith, data centers, Make Polluters Pay, transportation decarbonization, PCEF, building emissions

Whether you’ve been part of one of these teams in the past or you’re interested in joining for the first time, you are welcome! Email Cherice or Dineen with any questions or to join the team (cherice@350pdx.org, dineen@350pdx.org).

Make Polluters Pay Community Town Hall

Join advocates from the Make Polluters Pay coalition from across the state for a virtual Community Town Hall on April 7 from 6:00–7:15pm. We’ll celebrate the amazing energy of our collective advocacy, reflect on the 2026 legislative session’s failure to pass the Climate Resilience Superfund Act, and look ahead at how we’re building community power to hold big polluters accountable!

WHO: Make Polluters Pay Coalition

WHEN: Tuesday, April 7th from 6:00–7:15pm

WHERE: on Zoom

WHY: To celebrate our action-takers, build community, and continue the work!

Register here

Arts Team

Our March Artbuild, attended by an eager group of climate activists and artists, was one of the highest Artbuild turnouts in years! We screenprinted, repaired puppets, painted a banner, and worked off some of the distress we’ve felt due to recent news. And then, on March 28, a crowd of 50 Arts Team puppeteers marched across the Burnside Bridge for No Kings. At Waterfront Park, we joined our Mourning Mothers puppets’ powerful display of grief over the current state of our world. More photos and video here.

April 12, from 1:00-4:00pm, we’ll have another Artbuild to create the last puppet in our current space (3639 N. Mississippi Ave). Please join us, and please let Donna know if you’ll be there, so we can plan!

And then–help bring our puppets to life at the Earth Day Parade on April 25! The more puppeteers we have, the more puppets that get to march! It’s a fun and important way to make a stand for climate justice. Reach out to Donna Murph1949@aol.com

Donna, Lauren, Dannika, Allison

Book Club

The 350PDX Book Club meets every month on the first Wednesday of the month at 6:30pm. Every other month is in person and the others are virtual. Reach out to books@350PDX.org with any questions or to join our list, and please RSVP so we can inform you of any meeting changes!

Join us on Wednesday, June 3 at 6:30pm for our next non-fiction in-person meeting. We’ll discuss Eight Bears: Mythic Past and Imperiled Future by Gloria Dickie, a global exploration of the eight remaining species of bears―and the dangers they face.

Save the date for our other upcoming meetings:

• Wednesday, May 6 at 6:30pm (Virtual) – Book to be selected in April

• Wednesday, July 1 at 6:30pm (Virtual) – Book to be selected in June

Do you like to talk about books and climate justice? We are seeking volunteers to help facilitate! Contact books@350PDX.org to learn more.

SW Neighborhood Team

The Southwest Neighborhood Team includes neighborhoods on the south and west sides of Portland. We work together to raise awareness of the climate emergency.

Our street corner demonstrations continue weekly in February, every Friday from 3:00-4:00pm. at SW Garden Home & SW Oleson Rd. We gain attention with our climate action signs in a highly visible location. Street parking is available or reach us via bus or bike. We have extra signs to share!

Join our monthly Zoom meeting on Monday, April 20, from 6:30-7:30pm.  We’ll be discussing plans for tabling at Portland Sunday Parkways in May. To get involved, please contact Pat Kaczmarek at patk5@msn.com.

Washington County Team

Our next gathering will be our regular monthly online meetup at 6:30pm on Tuesday, April 14. We are excited to host Robin Straughn, Sustainability & Resiliency Manager for the City of Hillsboro. Robin will walk attendees through the recently approved Climate Action Plan for Hillsboro and answer questions.  We continue to converse with the City of Hillsboro regarding a second Electrification and Sustainability Fair in Hillsboro/Washington County in July.

We always welcome newcomers to our events and to our monthly online meetings (6:30pm on the second Tuesday of the month). For the link, join us here or contact us at 350washco@gmail.com.

Brooklyn Climate Action Team (BCAT)

BCAT brings Brooklyn neighbors together to take on the climate crisis — one hyper-local action at a time.

Averaging 15 neighbors per session, BCAT’s NET Training Study Group builds real momentum. Neighbors gather to work through the program’s training videos and prep for the city’s in-person NET certification. April‘s session filled up quickly, with more neighbors already lined up for the next one.

Go-Bag packing events are returning this spring, tentatively in May. Details on timing and location coming soon — start thinking about what you might need to refresh or build your emergency kit. BCAT is also exploring a volunteer partnership with a local community garden. Are you a resident of the Brooklyn Neighborhood and want to get involved? Reach out at bcat@350pdx.org.

New Milwaukie Neighborhood Team! Join Us!

Do you live in Milwaukie and want to take action for climate justice with your neighbors? There’s a group currently forming a neighborhood team and they’d love to connect with others in Milwaukie who want to help start the team, or who are interested in joining once it’s formed. To get connected, sign up here.

Some Extra Cheer! 

 A federal court struck down President Trump’s attacks against the Endangered Species Act, restoring key values of the bedrock environmental law to the status it held for decades before the first Trump administration attacked the bedrock environmental law. More here!

 350PDX’s Communications Director’s film “Roost 2020 PDX” premieres at The Portland EcoFilm Festival on April 30. What begins as a traditional natural history documentary about Portland’s crow roost becomes a chronicle of a city navigating a year of immense turmoil and unexpected beauty. More info and trailer here.

Thank you for reading our monthly newsletter. We hope to see you soon!

With gratitude,

Cherice, Dineen, Irene, Jessica, and Noelle

 

The post 2026 April Newsletter! appeared first on 350PDX: Climate Justice.

Going full glam with EWG Verified® JR Culpepper April 30, 2026

.has--background.block-content--type-curated-block-list { padding-top: 3rem; padding-bottom: 3rem; }

Crafting the perfect look for any occasion takes laser-like focus, patience and the right products. The last thing on your mind should be whether a product is safe to use.

When you're getting ready for an important occasion, whether a wedding, prom or graduation, you don't want any stress over what’s in your cosmetics.

This spring, EWG is making sure those worries won’t interrupt your makeup flow state. We’ve put together a list of products to help reach your full glam look. This list includes lipsticks, mascaras, eyeliners, eyeshadows and foundations. 

The best part? Every product below is EWG Verified®. That means it has been reviewed by our scientists and meets our strictest standards for safety and ingredient transparency.

If you’re looking for other ideas or products, check out our Skin Deep database.

Lips CRUNCHI Everluxe® Lip Crayon View details Counter Lined and Primed Lip Defining Pencil View details Maia’s Mineral Galaxy Liquid Lipstick View details Mascara Well People Expressionist Curling Mascara View details Counter Think Big Mascara View details Rejuva Minerals Pur Lash Volumizing Mascara View details Eyeliner Well People Fresh Lines Eye Pencil View details Maia's Mineral Galaxy Mineral Eye Liner View details CRUNCHI Highliner® Pencil View details Eyeshadow CRUNCHI Shadow Bar® Enchanted Neutrals View details Rejuva Minerals Eyeshadow Multi Purpose Powder View details ATTITUDE Oceanly Eyeshadow View details Brows DIME Boost Duo View details Well People Expressionist Brow Pencil View details Foundation Well People Supernatural Complexion Stick Foundation + Concealer, Light Medium Warm View details ATTITUDE Oceanly Foundation, Cream View details Counter Skin Twin Featherweight Foundation View details Highlighter/bronzer ATTITUDE Oceanly Highlighter View details Well People Supernatural Stick Highlighter View details Counter Velvet Cream Bronzer View details Authors EWG Communications Team April 30, 2026

GUALALA ROADS ASSESSMENT ORDER Recent Public Meetings

North Coast Water Board staff and the Sonoma Resource Conservation District (Sonoma RCD) recently hosted two community meetings to provide information on the developing Gualala Roads Assessment Order. Presentations addressed components of a typical road assessment, paths to completing assessments required by the order, and updates on the technical work conducted by the Sonoma RCD.

A selection of questions raised by meeting attendees (in bold) and North Coast Water Board responses (in italics) are included below. This summary does not capture all community discussions; it is intended only to give high‑level responses to a selection of key concerns. For answers to additional questions, please see the Frequently Asked Questions on the Gualala Roads Program web page or contact project staff identified in the Contact Information section below.

The responses below outline order concepts and do not represent final decisions.  Concepts may change as staff continue internal deliberations and further input is received from the public. The North Coast Water Board will make final decisions only at adoption. Before then, draft order language will be available to the public once the draft order is released for review.

Q: Who will the order apply to?

A: The Gualala Roads Assessment Order will apply to landowners in the Gualala River Watershed who own 1,000 acres or greater.

The North Coast Water Board retains the authority to issue separate, individual Water Code section 13267 informational orders to other landowners if the North Coast Water Board’s Executive Officer determines that roads on their properties pose a risk to water quality.

Q: When will landowners be required to complete road assessments and implement treatments?

A: Assessment requirements for landowners in the Gualala River Watershed will be included in the Gualala Roads Assessment Order. Treatment requirements will be included in a later regionwide roads order.

A compliance schedule for completing road assessments and road management and treatment plans will be included in the Gualala Roads Assessment Order. Staff are considering a timeframe of approximately three years for assessments and road treatment plan submission, with flexibility for landowners to request an alternative timeline for Executive Officer approval. Landowners in the Gualala who accept North Coast Water Board-funded contract support will be subject to the same compliance schedule as those who conduct assessments independently.

Compliance schedules for the future regionwide roads order will be included in that order. Development of the regionwide roads order will occur through a separate public process, which is expected to begin this summer.

Q: What criteria will be used to determine who may serve as a “qualified professional” when conducting assessments for landowners?

A: North Coast Water Board staff are considering what criteria will be used to determine who may serve as a” qualified professional” when conducting assessments for order compliance.  A balance is being sought between flexible requirements and demonstrable experience in sediment and erosion control. These details will be made available this summer when the draft order is circulated for public review.

Similar orders issued by the North Coast Water Board require plans designed to prevent and minimize sediment delivery to be developed by professionals who possess qualifications such as licensure as a Registered Professional Forester, Professional Geologist, or Professional Civil Engineer.

Q: How much contract funding is available to support road assessments for landowners?

A: The North Coast Water Board has secured $5 million in contract funding to support Gualala landowners. These funds are being used to (1) develop technical reports that will recommend assessment methodologies, (2) conduct community outreach, (3) provide technical trainings to landowners on road improvement techniques, and (4) conduct road assessments. To date, approximately $3 million Based on a preliminary analysis, staff expect the currently contracted funds noted above will be able to cover most of the assessments and report development for landowners subject to the order.

Q: How will the $5 million of contract funding be used to educate landowners?

A: The Sonoma RCD is contracted to conduct a series of technical trainings to guide and support landowners in erosion and sediment control concepts and implementing road maintenance techniques to reduce erosion and sediment delivery to streams. The Sonoma RCD and North Coast Water Board are currently identifying a timeline for providing these technical trainings. Details will be provided when available.

Q: Will landowners be provided a template for completing assessments on their own?

A: The Sonoma RCD is contracted to develop an Evaluation Methodology report for the North Coast Water Board. This report will recommend a road assessment protocol and will be available for landowner use. Similarly, the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, Part X provides example data forms and direction on conducting effective road assessments. In addition to these protocols, staff expect the order to allow landowners to propose an alternative assessment protocol for Executive Officer approval.

Timeline

A draft Gualala Roads Assessment Order will be made available for public review in summer 2026 in advance of a December 2026 adoption hearing of the North Coast Water Board. Specific dates for the review period and adoption hearing will be shared when available.

Upcoming Public Engagement Opportunities

North Coast Water Board staff continue to hold recurring staff office hours that serve as unstructured meetings during which members of the community are encouraged to share any questions or comments they may have about Gualala Roads Assessment Order. Details for upcoming office hours will be provided when available.

A third community meeting will be held at the Lake Sonoma Visitor Center on Thursday, June 18th, 2026, from 10:00 am – 12:00 pm. Additional details will be provided to email list subscribers when available.

GUALALA RIVER SEDIMENT TMDL ACTION PLAN ADOPTION

The North Coast Water Board adopted the Gualala Sediment Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Action Plan in February 2026. The Action Plan will be considered for approval by the State Water Resources Control Board in early 2027.

FUTURE QUARTERLY UPDATES

North Coast Water Board staff will continue to provide quarterly updates throughout the development of the projects. Please direct interested individuals or groups to subscribe at the following link for timely project information: public.govdelivery.com/accounts/CAWRCB/subscriber/new?topic_id=r1_tmdl_gualala_river_watershed

CONTACT INFORMATION

If you have any questions, concerns, or would like to know how to get further involved, please feel free to contact the following staff:

General Inquiries:
RB1-Gualala@waterboards.ca.gov

Gualala Roads Assessment Order:
Matt Graves (707) 576-2831 matt.graves@waterboards.ca.gov

Gualala TMDL Action Plan:
Joel Bisson (707) 576-2703 joel.bisson@waterboards.ca.gov

Across the United States, rising energy prices, an ongoing affordability crisis, and compounding reliability and resiliency issues are driving demand for energy solutions that lower monthly bills and keep the lights on for households and small businesses.

Clean energy technologies can meet these needs by lowering energy use and costs. As a result, significant momentum has grown across the clean energy and community development financing ecosystem, mobilizing a range of financial institutions, including:

• Community lenders seeking technical assistance, capitalization funding, and capacity building opportunities to grow clean lending portfolios.
• Green banks seeking new partnerships, product deployments, and opportunities for scale
• Regional banks mapping opportunities to enhance Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) lending while integrating portfolio level investment opportunities for new asset classes.
• Philanthropic organizations seeking catalytic investment opportunities to drive community development objectives.

These organizations and others are building local strategies and piloting a range of clean community financing initiatives. Still, many community clean energy projects face common challenges in achieving scale as they often do not satisfy mainstream capital’s credit box.

Absent the federal funding that aimed to address these challenges, an opportunity has emerged to strengthen regional financing ecosystems that leverage individual organizations’ strengths and improve coordination across regional priorities, barriers, and opportunities. These ecosystems play a significant role in building a more resilient capital base and developing the place-based infrastructure to scale clean energy investment that delivers solutions with outsized economic and community impact.

RMI is exploring what a strong regional financing ecosystem needs in practice and how local circumstances and market realities may shape priorities, opportunities and partnerships. This article outlines eight lessons for strengthening regional clean community financing ecosystems, using Michigan as a case study.

Lessons from Michigan’s Clean Community Financing Ecosystem

RMI, in partnership with the Michigan Climate Investment Hub (the Hub), hosted a roundtable discussion in early 2026 to build a shared understanding of the current realities across Michigan’s clean community financing ecosystem. Discussions focused on priority market opportunities, partnerships, and identifying strategic next steps.

Across four market segments — single-family residential, multi-family residential, small business lending, and MUSH (Municipalities, Universities, Schools and Hospitals) — insights from Michigan demonstrate how other regions can accelerate clean energy opportunities in their communities.

Lesson 1 Institutional density attracts national capital, because capital flows where there is clarity, coordination, and credible partners.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Make your ecosystem legible to external actors, providing clarity on who does what, where capital gaps exist, and how partners can plug in with clear entry points.
• Package opportunities for national intermediaries and investors.

The Michigan clean community financing ecosystem has strong institutional density and alignment, represented by diverse capital sources, actors, products, and offerings targeting emerging opportunities across the state. The ecosystem includes:

• Michigan Saves, the nation’s oldest green bank, which has facilitated over $790 million in energy improvements with a 30:1 private capital leverage ratio. It also hosts a vetted contractor network of over 1,500 partners.
• Two Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) coalitions — the Michigan CDFI Coalition and the Detroit CDFI Coalition — represent a significant share of Michigan’s more than 44 certified CDFIs. Together, they chair a joint climate committee that drives ambition and provides technical assistance. They use a four pillar strategy to fill local gaps: advocacy, collaboration, sharing and learning, and growth.
• A dedicated Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) marketplace, administered through Lean and Green Michigan, that includes 62 local governments representing 85% of Michiganders. Since 2015, it has facilitated 89 projects and mobilized $315 million in private investment.
• Local impact capital providers, like The Kresge Foundation, play a key role in keeping clean energy projects moving forward. They provide catalytic capital, technical assistance, capacity building, market building and strong partnerships across Michigan’s CDFI network.
• Regional banks, such as Fifth Third, are expanding beyond CRA activity and increasing their role in clean community lending in Michigan. They leverage partnerships, intermediaries, and green banks, as well as innovative financing models such as equity equivalent investments and tax equity programs.

Strong coordination across state actors in Michigan has attracted national interest from organizations such as Inclusiv, Justice Climate Fund, and Local Initiatives Support Corporation, which have developed dedicated strategies and state-specific commitments to complement existing coordination efforts. When transparent market signals show how, where, and when national organizations can play a catalytic role in delivering value and creating opportunities, they respond.

Lesson 2 A financing ecosystem works best when coordination is treated as core infrastructure, not as a side activity. Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Establish a formal coordination body or “hub.”
• Create shared priorities across market segments.
• Move beyond convening to build ongoing working groups that can put ideas into action.

One of Michigan’s strengths is that organizations are organically coordinating through bilateral engagement, as well as organized forums for strengthening collaboration. These forums have recently taken shape in partnership with the Michigan Climate Investment Hub (the Hub), established in 2025 as an anchor institution designed to attract and accelerate climate investments across the state.

“Michigan’s rich ecosystem of climate actors has indicated a clear appetite for increased collaboration and coordination in pursuit of speeding adoption and increasing access to clean energy and climate mitigation/adaptation resources. The Hub is channeling that demand and acting as a trusted convener and connector – working with in-state and national stakeholders to build lending capacity, attract and mobilize capital, and accelerate deployment to meet the goals laid forth in the MI Healthy Climate Plan.”

— Ben Dueweke
Director of the Michigan Climate Investment Hub

Organizations like the Michigan Environmental Council, Michigan Energy Innovative Business Council, and Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs Coalition are also bringing together businesses, utilities, policymakers, and financial institutions to develop policies, rate designs, and collaborative approaches to capitalize on clean energy economic growth and community development opportunities. Stakeholders across the state recognize a need to continue to align around shared priorities across market segments (more in Lesson 4) to put ideas into practice.

Lesson 3 Durable ecosystems are not dependent on any single funding source or administration, but state leadership can accelerate momentum.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Use state or local support where available to build early momentum.
• Build self-sustaining capital flows and market-driven partnerships.
• Design for resilience to policy shifts.

Early state adoption of efficiency and energy waste reduction policies helped build momentum for clean energy in Michigan. That momentum is reinforced by strong state level initiatives, such as the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) Office of Climate and Energy’s MI Healthy Climate Plan, which provides technical assistance programs, multi-stakeholder coordination efforts, grant and funding challenges, and communications and promotional strategies.

While state-level programmatic support can be subject to administrative uncertainty, the level of interest across Michigan is suggestive of a long-term, systemic transition that is currently underway. This is displayed by EGLE’s Growing Green Lending Challenge, a dedicated blended-capital program designed to accelerate capacity building, foster partnerships, and drive innovation in Michigan’s clean energy lending ecosystem – which received over a dozen partnership proposals and ultimately announced four winners of the challenge.

Additionally, local jurisdictions have been charting a path forward in defining city leadership by integrating climate into long-term strategy planning for affordability, reliability, resilience and economic growth.

The city of Ann Arbor has developed the A2 Zero Carbon Neutrality Plan, a comprehensive climate partnership plan underpinned by commitments to 100% clean and renewable energy by 2030, a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, residential electrification, energy efficiency and resiliency.

Other communities like the city of Holland and Marquette County have partnered with their local utilities and EGLE to pilot the MiHER Program for residential and multifamily home energy efficiency and electrification upgrades in 2024, which has subsequently been rolled out statewide.

These kinds of initiatives provide early momentum for ecosystem actors to coordinate around and build self-sufficiency.

Lesson 4 Segment-specific strategies outperform one-size-fits-all approaches.

• Map gaps by market segment.
• Create segment-specific working groups.
• Design tailored products.

Different markets require distinct financing tools and coordination strategies.

Institutional density is important, but equally so are the products, tools, and solutions at work across the ecosystem. In Michigan, stakeholders are showing up across market segments with products and solutions designed to address specific barriers to accelerating the local clean community lending and investment opportunity. This suite of solutions includes:

• Origination partners focused on addressing affordability and financial access gaps.
• Risk mitigation tools such as loan loss reserves (LLRs), guarantees, and interest rate buy-downs facilitated by concessional capital.
• Bridge financing products offered through local financial institutions and green banks.
• Aggregation and warehousing to free up balance sheet capital for originators, encourage participation, and attract institutional investors.
• Capitalization funding providing a diverse pool of funding sources for local institutions to scale lending activity and capacity.
• Liquidity pathway support to address capital market access barriers through standardization support, balance sheet commitments, and secondary market development.

While there is strong shared commitment and optimism across the ecosystem in Michigan, organizations naturally focus on different market segments, barriers, and community-specific solutions aligned with their missions. This diversity can make broad discussions on clean community financing less effective for aligning around clear, market-specific priorities. While large forums are valuable for building momentum and awareness, more targeted, segment-specific working groups are often needed to drive practical collaboration and scalable solutions.

For example, the roundtable facilitated by RMI and the Hub surfaced small businesses as a market segment of shared interest across actors, representing a sizable investment opportunity and impact potential for clean energy lending. However, there remains a need for affordable financing products that can align timelines and project sizes with lender expectations and tenures, paired with technical assistance to help build clean technologies into capital expenditure plans. And even within the small business market, not all solutions look the same.

Lesson 5 Technical assistance is as important as capital to avoid under-deployment.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Embed technical assistance into every program and fund as core infrastructure.
  • For lenders: provide underwriting and product design support.
  • For borrowers: offer project planning resources and pre-development resources.
  • For contractors: support technology adoption incentives and capacity.

Without technical support, capital alone will not deploy effectively.

In addition to financial products and services, a number of organizations are actively working to enhance technical assistance programs and coordination efforts across the ecosystem to help build capacity, coordinate priorities, and deploy fit-for-purpose solutions.

Lesson 6 Financing models must be designed around local economics and constraints.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Start with market diagnostics on how energy markets, policy, workforce, and cultural aspects are impacting clean lending opportunity in the state.

Energy prices, workforce, and policy shape what financing models will succeed.

Michigan has some of the nation’s lowest gas prices, and highest electricity rates, presenting a challenge for incremental clean energy lending and associated electrification projects. These dynamics reduce the affordability of many residential clean energy technologies, as shown in RMI’s Green Upgrade Calculator and Market Readiness Map. These challenges are compounded by a limited supply of specialized workers, such as high-efficiency HVAC installers, compared to surrounding states.

While bundling certain technologies presents an economically viable pathway for lifetime savings, it also introduces higher upfront capital demand, financing costs, and misaligned loan tenures and payback periods. This creates additional barriers for many communities with limited access to affordable financing.

Lesson 7 Treat well-coordinated, strategically deployed concessionary capital as strategic infrastructure, and target risk absorption to create markets.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Focus limited resources on portfolio-level de-risking.
• Create a state or regional strategy to deploy concessionary capital.
• Use concessionary capital to develop proof points, strengthen local capacity, and unlock private capital participation.

Targeted risk absorption can unlock private capital and build markets.

Local institutions directly addressing affordability (i.e. community lenders and green banks) need sufficient balance sheet capacity and flexibility. Loan loss reserves and guarantees can help create capacity and build a track record of performance that lowers risk, while simultaneously building portfolios of attractive assets. Still, the availability of concessionary capital is a limiting factor in scalability. Many places face a difficult reality in competing with peers for limited concessionary capital sources.

Our roundtable surfaced interest from participants in aligning around shared priorities and opportunities to coordinate the best use of this capital to create opportunity for all stakeholders and move beyond bespoke use cases to regional strategies and portfolio level approaches.

Lesson 8 Financing alone won’t drive adoption of clean energy — project pipelines are shaped upstream.

Recommendations to other ecosystems:

• Invest in architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) training and incentives, developer engagement, and contractor education programs to ensure clean energy benefits are designed into solutions.
• Reduce point-of-entry friction by creating more resources and capacity for project pre-development.

Project pipelines are shaped before financing enters the picture.

Understanding true sources of demand is critical in channeling efforts, building strategy, and engaging stakeholders where most effective. While much of the emphasis over the past few decades has been on the need for consumers to drive demand and capital allocators to provide workable financing solutions, in many sectors the real drivers of demand are more nuanced.

Stakeholders of the Michigan clean community financing ecosystem recognized that for a sector like multi-family residential, there is a clear lack of programmatic development across the AEC industry to integrate clean energy solutions into designs, specifications, and manufacturer relations. Absent investor requests, many designers, developers, and contractors are likely to default to business-as-usual where they have existing manufacturing and supply chain relationships. Roundtable participants pointed towards a role for subnational financing ecosystems to help catalyze coordination with AEC industry leaders, noting Passive House Pennsylvania as one model leading the way that could benefit Michigan.

Conclusion

There is more work to be done in Michigan, but the state is one of the leaders in building a collaborative and innovative ecosystem to support clean energy deployment and community development. As such, there is a lot to learn from their experience. Stakeholders across the policy and finance landscape in other states should take these lessons and apply them in their own contexts with the goal of developing resilient financing ecosystems that empower their communities to deploy clean and cost-saving technologies.

 

 

 

The post What Michigan’s Clean Community Financing Ecosystem can teach other US regions appeared first on RMI.

FDA abandons stricter tanning bed standards, leaving teens at risk Anthony Lacey April 30, 2026

Tanning beds can increase the risk of skin cancer, and the Food and Drug Administration has long warned that children and teens should never use them. Yet the agency has quietly killed a rule that would have banned anyone under 18 from using these devices.

The FDA first proposed the rule over a decade ago, along with other restrictions on the use of tanning beds and requiring that they carry warning labels. If finalized, the rule would have brought the federal government in line with dozens of states that have already restricted teens’ access to the beds.

Instead, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s FDA recently issued a notice scrapping the proposal. The agency justified the move by claiming industry groups and others raised “scientific and technical concerns” about the plan. It also asserted that withdrawing the proposal doesn’t prevent it from crafting new tanning bed rules in the future.

That leaves minors without any federal protection from an industry that has long targeted teenage girls. It’s hardly going to “Make America Healthy Again.”

At least 23 states, along with most of Canada, the European Union and Australia have already banned minors from tanning beds due to their serious health risks. The FDA’s decision is a clear case of burying its head in the sand while leaving teens in harm’s way.

What the science says

The science on tanning bed risks isn’t emerging or uncertain.

A large scientific body of evidence links tanning bed use to serious health harms, with cancer often occurring decades after first exposure. The FDA’s withdrawn rule was based on these findings, proposing a plan to protect minors across the country from these harms.  

In 1999, the National Toxicology Program classified tanning beds as known carcinogens. It cited the link between the ultraviolet, or UV, radiation the beds produce and the risk of developing both melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers.

Nearly a decade later, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, or IARC, placed tanning beds in its highest risk category: a known human carcinogen. This classification is the same given to tobacco and asbestos, based on a 75% increased risk of melanoma for women who start using tanning beds before the age of 30.  

A large body of epidemiological evidence also links use of sunbeds to higher melanoma risk, especially when first use occurs before age 30. 

The IARC review also found that tanning bed usage  increased the risk for other skin cancers including, squamous cell carcinoma, as well as caused serious, lasting eye damage.

Agency avoids action

Despite the evidence, the FDA spent decades avoiding any real action. 

When initially faced with evidence showing rising melanoma rates in young women, the agency proposed in 2013 a warning label. That label advised that tanning beds should not be used by people under the age of 18. But there was no way to enforce it to guarantee the labels were used, and no restriction on minors using the beds.

It was a gesture, not a safeguard.

The ultraviolet A, or UVA, radiation inside a tanning bed is very different from the natural sunlight your body encounters outdoors. 

Tanning beds are deliberately engineered to maximize  UVA radiation, the wavelength responsible for tanning the skin, while minimizing ultraviolet B, or UVB, rays responsible for sunburn. It’s a design choice to keep customers coming back by removing the most immediate, visible consequences of overexposure.

But suppressing the burn doesn’t suppress the damage. UVA radiation penetrates deeper into the skin than UVB and is linked to skin aging, skin immune harm and plays an important role in the development of skin cancer. 

Some proponents of tanning beds point to modest, short-lived increases in the body’s vitamin D levels as a justification for use. But researchers are clear. No brief vitamin D boost is worth the added cancer risk, especially when there are safer alternatives, such as dietary changes. 

Ineffective sunscreen carries its own risks

The tanning bed problem doesn’t stop at the salon door. 

Consumers might think wearing sunscreen while sunbathing protects them from harmful UVA exposure. But many sunscreens primarily block the rays that cause sunburn, UVB, while providing far weaker protection against  UVA. The result is UV exposure that closely resembles a tanning bed.

Researchers calculated that a two-week vacation spent using a sunscreen with poor UVA protection, even with frequent reapplication and no visible sunburn, delivers the same solar exposure as 10 trips to a tanning salon. 

That’s why EWG’s Guide to Sunscreens® places heavy weight on strong UVA protection in the product rankings. And it’s why we’ve worked for decades to urge the FDA to require stronger UVA standards and set a limit on sun protection factor, or SPF,  values for U.S. sunscreen.

The gap between what sunscreens promise with their often high SPF labels and what they actually deliver on UVA is well documented. 

When EWG tested sunscreens in 2021, we found that, on average, UVA protection was just one-quarter of the SPF level advertised on the label. 

FDA researchers reached the same conclusion in their own sunscreen testing, finding that many U.S. sunscreens lack adequate UVA protection. The agency flagged a particular concern that high SPF numbers often mask weak UVA coverage.

EWG Verified® sunscreens go one step further. These products must undergo additional testing to confirm that their UVA protection exceeds the requirements in both the U.S. and in Europe – not just meet them. They’re also free from EWG’s chemicals of concern, so you know you’re buying a safer and more effective sunscreen for you and your family.

The sun is both a major cause of skin cancer and the body’s primary source of vitamin D, an essential nutrient that forms when skin is exposed to intense sunlight. 

But generating vitamin D needs only a few minutes of sun exposure per week during summer for people with less melanated skin. Major medical associations advise against deliberate, prolonged sun exposure as a strategy for boosting vitamin D levels. The health risks outweigh the returns. 

What you can do

The science on tanning beds, sunscreens and UV risks is clear, even if federal policy is not. 

EWG provides actionable consumer advice to minimize the potential for long-term harm:

• Avoid tanning beds entirely. There is no safe level of use, especially for minors. The risk increases the younger that someone starts using them. 
• Use sunscreen. High SPF numbers don’t always guarantee UVA protection. It’s important to find a sunscreen that works for you.
• Check out EWG’s tools. Search EWG’s Guide to Sunscreens™ and EWG's Healthy Living App to find top-rated products that provide balanced UVA/UVB protection without ingredients of concern.
• Cover up. Wear protective clothing, hats and UV-blocking sunglasses.
• Seek shade. Find or create your shade with an umbrella or canopy.
• Time your outdoor activities. UV radiation is strongest between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Plan your outdoor time around the sun's peak hours when you can. 

Go outside. Have fun. Don’t get burned. A tanning bed isn’t worth the risk. 

Areas of Focus Sunscreen Family Health Women's Health Children’s Health Agency withdraws decade-old plan for protecting minors from skin cancer Authors David Andrews, Ph.D. May 1, 2026