News Feeds

• The author of the book “Sidewalk Nation” reports that many cities do a terrible job of maintaining sidewalks, but some are improving. Siloed departments’ areas of oversight overlap, property owners are put in charge of repairs, and municipal budgets are tight. Michael Pollack advocates for cities to create departments of sidewalk and institute funding mechanisms like sidewalk improvement fees. (Governing)
• Rep. Rick Larsen, the ranking Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said a bipartisan consensus is emerging around a multi-year funding bill involving safety improvements and freight connectivity. (Transport Topics)
• Amtrak unveiled the new Freedom250 next-gen Acela train (Railway Age) and, separately, a new train wrap celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence (Axios).
• Short-hop flights of less than 250 miles are on the decline. (NPR)
• A federal bill encouraging transit-oriented development would bolster transit agencies’ bottom line by adding more riders. (Transportation for America)
• On the Seams goes inside Amazon’s vast distribution and delivery network.
• “Just one more lane, bro,” transportation engineering textbooks still say. “Just one more lane, and I promise, no more traffic.” (State Smart Transportation Initiative)
• San Antonio found a way around Texas’ ban on rainbow crosswalks by painting sidewalks instead. (New York Times)
• A Minnesota bill would consolidate Twin Cities transit agencies. (streets.mn)
• Empty Waymos are circling aimlessly around Atlanta cul-de-sacs. (WSB-TV)
• Saratoga is taking public input on a Complete Streets makeover for Main Street. (Saratoga Magazine)
• The fast-growing Arkansas village Cave Springs is also redesigning its Main Street to make it more pedestrian-friendly. (CNU Public Square)
• A think tank is urging the British government to lower speed limits to avoid an “energy shock” due to the Iran war. (The Guardian)
• Fox News reporters are probably so used to being able to park illegally with impunity that they were shocked when an automated camera ticketed them within two minutes in Beijing — ironically, while they were there to do a negative story about Chinese surveillance. (X)

hambachforest.org – Tangandewa is more than just a game; it’s an adventure that combines strategy, skill, and a touch of luck. As players dive into this captivating world, they often find themselves swept away by the thrill of the competition. However, before you jump in headfirst, taking a moment to conduct some research can make all the difference in your gaming experience. Understanding what Tangandewa has to offer not only enhances your enjoyment but also boosts your chances of success. Let’s explore why doing your homework before playing Tangandewa is essential for both new and seasoned players alike!

Benefits of Conducting Research Before Playing Tangandewa

Researching before you play Tangandewa opens up a world of opportunities. It allows players to familiarize themselves with the game’s mechanics, which can significantly enhance gameplay.

Understanding various strategies is another perk. Knowing different approaches gives you an edge over opponents who might dive in without preparation. You’ll be more equipped to adapt and make smarter decisions during intense moments.

Additionally, research helps identify reliable platforms for playing Tangandewa. With so many options available, finding trustworthy sites ensures a fair gaming experience.

Gathering insights from experienced players provides invaluable tips that can elevate your skills. Learning from others’ successes and mistakes is a shortcut to mastering this exciting game!

Understanding the Rules and Strategies of the Game Tangandewa

Tangandewa is a captivating game that demands familiarity with its rules for an enjoyable experience. Players must grasp the core mechanics, as these lay the groundwork for effective gameplay.

Understanding how to navigate turns and make strategic moves can significantly elevate your chances of winning. The dynamics change based on the number of players involved, so it’s essential to adapt your strategy accordingly.

Moreover, mastering specific strategies can set you apart from others. Whether it’s bluffing or forming alliances, knowing when to act is crucial in gaining an advantage.

Pay attention to opponents’ moves; reading their intentions often reveals potential openings for attack or defense. With practice and keen observation, you’ll find yourself becoming more adept at maneuvering through challenges presented by Tangandewa.

Why Research is Essential for Success in Tangandewa Sites

Success in tangandewa sites hinges on the depth of your research. When players invest time to understand various aspects of the game, they position themselves ahead of their competitors.

Knowledge about different strategies can be a game-changer. Players who familiarize themselves with tactics and gameplay nuances often find it easier to adapt during intense moments. This adaptability not only enhances decision-making but also increases winning potential.

Moreover, researching Tangandewa helps identify reputable platforms for play. Not all websites provide the same quality or security features, so understanding which ones are reliable makes a significant difference in your gaming experience.

Being informed allows you to engage with fellow players more effectively. Sharing insights and discussing strategies fosters a sense of community that enriches everyone’s experience within the Tangandewa universe.

By dedicating time to research before diving into gameplay, you’re setting yourself up for success and creating an enjoyable journey through this exciting world.

The post The Importance of Doing Research Before Playing Tangandewa appeared first on HAMBACHFOREST.

Probably the most surprising news this spring was that some staff members scared up an American Woodcock with three youngsters. This is the first documentation that this species successfully breeds...

There may still be ice in the rivers and snow on the ground, but spring is in the air—and that means migrating shorebirds are, too. Millions of feathered travelers cross whole hemispheres in their...

It’s the 78th anniversary the Nakba. The Nakba, meaning “catastrophe” in Arabic, refers to the mass displacement, dispossession, and ethnic cleansing of roughly 750,000 Palestinian Arabs during the 1948 Arab-Israeli…

Thursday, May 14, 2026
Press Contact: Sumeet Bal, Director of Communications, 917-647-1952, sbal@publicadvocates.org

California Can’t Lead the World While Leaving Workers Behind

SACRAMENTO, Calif.—California enters this May Revision in a moment of unexpected abundance—and familiar avoidance. 

Tax revenues are more than $16 billion above forecast. The state’s cash position has hit record highs. California dominates the global technology economy, leading the world in IPOs, artificial intelligence, Fortune 500 companies and innovation. But California cannot claim to lead the world while its teachers, nurses and essential workers are being priced out of the communities they sustain. Dominating in technology while losing ground on economic security for working families is not a strong legacy—it is a contradiction that demands solutions. The question this May Revision must answer is not whether California can dominate. It already does. The question is who that dominance works for.

California already knows how to build the things families need—the governor’s commitment to increasing per-pupil funding, investing in our educators, and expanding community schools proves that. When the state chooses to invest directly, boldly and consistently, it changes lives. Community schools are doing that now, in the communities that need it most. 

Housing and transit deserve the same commitment—not threats, not red tape reduction alone, but direct state investment that meets the scale of the crisis. Without substantial and sustained funding for affordable housing, low-income Californians will continue to struggle, regardless of how much development streamlining or local government oversight the state pursues. Meanwhile, the state’s basic protections against rent gouging and arbitrary evictions, the Tenant Protection Act, will expire in 2030 unless a governor with the courage to fight for and strengthen it steps forward. At the same time, without an infusion of state money, our public transit network is in danger of collapse. 

Abundance is not the same as security—AND it is not the same as justice. The working families at the center of our state’s story are experiencing a cost of living crisis that no IPO can solve—and they are waiting to see whether California’s record revenues will reach them, or pass them by once again. The question is made more urgent by federal cuts stripping millions of Californians of healthcare, food assistance, and housing support, and a proposed restructuring of Cap-and-Invest revenues that could cut affordable housing, transit, and clean air programs in half—redirecting dollars from low-wealth communities to fossil fuel companies. Seven years ago, the governor promised to fix the state’s boom-and-bust tax system. The boom is here. The question is whether he will use it for the Californians who built this state—and can no longer afford to live in it.

Education: A Legacy Built, A Problem Unaddressed

“Governor Newsom’s historic community schools investments will cement one of his enduring legacies, just as LCFF defined Jerry Brown’s,” said John Affeldt, Managing Attorney for Education Equity. “The research is showing that California’s community schools have cut chronic absenteeism by 30% compared to similar schools, reduced suspensions by 15% overall and delivered learning gains in English equivalent to 151 extra days of instruction for Black students.”

“But the governor’s May Revise failed to address one of the key equity challenges remaining for him—the state’s unconstitutional discrimination against low-wealth school districts in modernizing facilities. The State’s program for renovating dilapidated schools substantially favors high-wealth communities who are able to raise much more in matching funds, leaving students in poor districts in overheated portables and leaky classrooms amidst black mold and unremediated asbestos. The governor has acknowledged ‘you can’t look in the eyes of these kids,” but today, he chose to look away—and to keep fighting them in court,” added Affeldt, a lead counsel in a Public Advocates’ lawsuit suing the State over the issue.

“As far as moving forward into the future, our state cannot continue to rely on temporary AI stock market bubbles. To his credit, the governor proposed some modest new taxes, but to build a budget that will enable our residents to thrive, California needs more robust permanent revenue streams to support our schools and healthy communities. We cannot ask teachers to transform students’ lives while those same teachers are being priced out of the communities they serve.”

Higher Education: Affordability Crisis Threatens College Access & Completion?

“California’s economy is growing because generations of students had a path to affordable higher education. But too many low-income students are still being left behind as the cost of education and living continue to rise. If we want a future powered by innovation, we need to make sure opportunity isn’t reserved for those who could afford college anyway. We call on the governor and the legislature to strengthen and expand Cal Grant to keep the door to economic mobility open for the students coming after us—and ensures California’s future includes everyone,” said Sbeydeh Viveros-Walton, Director of Higher Education.

“For low-income Black and Latinx students, affordability is the difference between access, completion and attrition,” said Jetaun Stevens, Deputy Director of Higher Education Equity & Senior Staff Attorney. “Housing is the largest cost students face when pursuing higher education, and California’s housing crisis makes higher education out of reach for many low-income students. With 60% of community college students facing housing insecurity and nearly a quarter of community college students facing homelessness, we need greater investment in housing. We call on the governor and legislature to invest in additional projects through the Higher Education Housing Grant program—including reinvesting funds from withdrawn projects—and open up access to part-time community college students. We encourage the governor and legislature to make greater investments in affordable housing and homelessness prevention to improve economic opportunity for all low-income Californians, including supporting the Senate’s proposal to invest $1 billion in Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program 7 (HHAP) and an additional $1 billion for HHAP 8.”   

Housing Relief Deferred, Renters Left Behind

We welcome the inclusion of $500 million in HHAP 7 funds—California’s primary homelessness assistance program—in the governor’s proposal, but we are concerned about new requirements to receive that funding. Requiring a local funding match will shut out many jurisdictions. Requiring a Prohousing Designation is even more limiting: only 47 jurisdictions would currently qualify. Further, a Prohousing Designation is substantially based on how friendly a jurisdiction’s development environment is for market-rate developers—a standard which should not impede aid to people experiencing homelessness. Consistent, predictable funding is what moves people from the streets to stability. The Senate’s “Foundation for the Future” budget priorities letter reflects this, committing $1 billion for HHAP 7 and $1 billion more for a subsequent 8th round of funding. The governor should match that commitment—without the barriers.

Governor Newsom’s proposal also fails to address what his administration’s proposed changes to Cap-and-Invest would do to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities grant program (AHSC), the largest source of affordable housing funding in the state. When asked directly, the governor said it wouldn’t be addressed in his proposal. That is not an answer. Redirecting Cap-and-Invest money away from affordable housing and transit to fossil fuel companies and other polluters is a choice—and it demands a response.  Now is the time, however, for Governor Newsom to propose funding to backfill the affordable housing and transit funding that will be lost if his proposal to redirect AHSC money to polluters moves forward.

The human cost of inaction is not abstract.  More than half of California’s 6.1 million renter households spend more than 30% of their income on rent. Nearly a third spend more than half. Evictions have now surpassed pre-pandemic levels. “Housing is the largest item in a family’s budget and the governor’s housing proposals in his final budget do not address the problem or deliver the help renters desperately need,” said Michelle Pariset, Director of Legislative Affairs. “Governor Newsom will leave office without securing his legacy on rent stabilization and just cause for eviction, as the state’s basic protections against rent gouging and arbitrary evictions are set to expire in 2030. He could have worked with the legislature to remove this sunset on the Tenant Protection Act—permanently shielding renters from gouging and no fault evictions. Instead, renters will face that fight with a new governor and a legislature freshly-drenched in real estate industry campaign spending.”

Transit: When Transit Fails, Working Families Pay

The future of public transit in California hangs in the balance at the same time the rising costs of transportation is hurting low-income families. Citizens in multiple regions are collecting signatures for ballot initiatives to maintain critical service, but the state must do its part. “The governor’s proposed CARB regulations for the Cap-and-Invest program would eliminate over $600 million a year in critical state transit funding—funding for service, lower fares for seniors and students, electric buses, and infrastructure upgrades. These are cuts that the Californians who depend on transit cannot afford,” said Laurel Paget-Seekins, Senior Transportation Policy Advocate. “This governor’s proposal would leave a massive multi-year budget hole for transit and affordable housing at a time when Californians need additional investment to address rising costs of housing and transportation.” 

###

Public Advocates Inc. is a nonprofit law firm and advocacy organization that challenges the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing, transportation equity, and climate justice.

The post Press Statement: California Can’t Lead the World While Leaving Workers Behind appeared first on Public Advocates.

Climber Alex Honnold is best-known for his daring feats, recently scaling Taiwan’s Taipei 101 tower live on Netflix, but he’s more typically climbing some of the world’s most challenging natural landscapes. But he’s also an advocate for renewable energy, and the foundation he started, the Honnold Foundation, supports community-led solar energy growth around the world.

How do those two interests fit together? For Honnold, the connection seems clear. “Go on enough trips like this,” he said, referencing his climbing trips to remote locations, and “you just see how much it matters.”

“A lot of these projects basically help protect the land in a way that you wouldn’t necessarily assume,” he said. “Empowering local communities is always a good way to protect the land on which they live.”

Honnold was interviewed by Grist Editor-in-Chief Katherine Bagley at Grist’s live event Turning the Tide: Stories of Climate Solutions, held during San Francisco Climate Week.

In his own climbing experience, Honnold shared, he’s seen how landscapes have changed even in the span of just a few years due to rising temperatures. “A lot of things that used to be approaches or descents up snowy couloirs … those are mostly melted out,” Honnold said. “Basically, big mountains you see change very quickly right now. It’s pretty sobering.”

But he also emphasized the need for positive stories that help people understand that progress is happening. “I personally am just not inspired by pessimism at all,” he said. “The environment has been severely degraded, we’ve lost a lot for sure, but if you were just dropped onto this planet right here, right now, and you just looked around in the natural world, you’d think, ‘This is incredible.’ There’s so much life, the natural world is still amazing, and there’s still so much to protect.”

Watch the full video of the event, including Honnold’s interview, or read a few excerpts (lightly edited for clarity) below.

Katherine Bagley: You and I are about the same age, and I remember as kids growing up in the ‘80s and ‘90s, it was like the recycling ads and the oil spills and that we had to save the ozone layer. And I’m curious when climate became part of the conversation for you.

Alex Honnold: Yeah, honestly, I’m not sure. None of those things really speak to me. I think that I was probably not that environmentally aware as a child. I mean, my parents are both professors. I grew up in Sacramento, just sort of a suburban California kid. And I think those weren’t big things in my house. I don’t think either of my parents were profound environmentalists in any way, even though we went camping and stuff, but that’s kind of different. 

And so I think it really was as I started to travel as a rock climber and go on expeditions. I mean, basically I just started reading a lot more. I read a ton of environmental nonfiction and just started to care a little more and then to see a little bit more. And sort of seeing some of the links between energy access and global poverty and climate change — basically the transition to renewables. And those are all things that I was kind of interested in starting in, I guess 2009.

Basically when I started doing some of my first overseas rock climbing expeditions, I was like, “Oh, I care about the way the rest of the world works and I’m interested.” And really the more I learned, the more it was like, “Oh, this seems important. This seems like something I should be more stressed about.”

Emily [Teitsworth, executive director of the Honnold Foundation] was just talking about Kara Solar, this organization that the Honnold Foundation supports in the Ecuadorian Amazon. And this is in Guyana [referencing an onscreen photo], which is the other side of the Amazon. It’s a different river base and everything. This is called a tepui. It’s like this giant rock face. And this was an expedition for a TV show in National Geographic. But anyway, we basically took river transit boats all the way to the end of the river kind of thing, and then walked for a week through the jungle to get to these walls. 

And so, I mean, I think that has really helped inform my environmental activism. Do you call it activism? Basically, the reason I care. And it’s that you go on enough trips like this and you’re kind of like, Well, we took two-stroke gas-powered boats to the end of the fricking world and then hiked for a week into the jungle to go climb this wall. And you see how these communities — basically you just see how much it matters.

* * * 

Bagley: Have you noticed climate change or other environmental impacts that have impacted some of your favorite places to climb?

View this post on Instagram

Honnold: Yeah, I mean, one of my favorites is Yosemite. And so you don’t really see climate change impacts in Yosemite that much. I mean, other than beetle kill and obvious things like that, where you’re sort of like, “Oh, the forests have changed composition very quickly,” and drought, and fire, and those types of impacts. 

But you really see it in some places that aren’t necessarily my favorite places to climb, bigger mountains with glaciers. I don’t like ice climbing, which is a good thing, because it’s all falling down anyway. Like, that ship has sailed. 

Because actually, one my last experiences in Patagonia in southern Argentina — if anyone’s ever been to some of the climbing areas in Patagonia, the key to success in Patagonia, basically the weather’s always horrible, is to always have a whole spreadsheet of objectives so that depending on the weather window, you can choose the correct objective. If you’re like, “Oh, we have one day of marginal weather in between two storms, what’s the right objective for that?” Anyway, so we had a really, really bad weather window with marginal conditions and cold temperatures. And we’re like, perfect for an ice climbing objective, let’s go in and do an ice route up this one spire. 

And we hiked in. And hiking in is no joke. It’s like a couple of days to walk into the town and you get to the mountain and we get up there. Anyway, we got there and there was no ice route anymore. The whole thing had fallen down and it was gone. And we were just like, huh. Like, that’ll probably never reform. Like, that’s just gone. 

You see that all over the world with glaciers and with ice features. And a lot of things that used to be approaches or descents up snowy couloirs, like basically just hike up a chute in a mountain, those are mostly melted out. And so now it’s just like a rock chute with things falling down it the whole time. Basically big mountains you see change very quickly right now. 

It’s pretty sobering, because those landscapes don’t seem like they should change. Because when you look at it, you’re just like — since time immemorial, this has been these rugged mountains. And then you’re sort of like, “Oh, no, actually since four years ago, that’s completely changed.” 

I mean have any of you guys been to Chamonix? Anybody skied in Chamonix? They have a whole tourist attraction with labels and dates and stairsteps to the level of the glacier so basically you can get off and you’re sort of like, in 1850 the glacier was up to here and then you go down literally hundreds and hundreds of stairs, you drop hundreds of vertical feet down to this, like, tiny, tiny little piece of ice and, like, here’s the glacier now. And you’re kind of like, “Whoa, that’s changed a lot in the last hundred years.” It’s insane.

* * *

Bagley: I feel like there would be this assumption based on your climbing and where you go that your go-to would be land conservation, but your foundation does solar energy work, and I’m just curious how that interest came about in particular.

View this post on Instagram

Honnold: Well, I would actually say the energy access work in some ways is land conservation or ties in to land conservation in many ways. Just to go back to this project in the Ecuadorian Amazon, when you reduce the cost of river power transit, you know, basically when you make the boats solar, you don’t have to buy gas. It reduces the need for communities to cut roads through the forest. And so that is basically land conservation because once you cut a road to any of these communities, then those roads are jumping off points for illegal mining, illegal deforestation, basically extractive industries can easily take hold there. A lot of these projects basically help protect the land in a way that you wouldn’t necessarily assume. Basically, empowering local communities is always a good way to protect the land on which they live.

* * *

Bagley: You now go to a lot of the Climate Week events, a lot of these other kinds of events all over the country, and I think for a long time, there was this narrative of just everything is horrible. I’ve been covering climate change as a journalist for 20 years, and it’s a pretty depressing beat a lot of the time. I remember when you and I were talking the other week in preparation for this, you wanted to stress the optimism that there is actually a lot that we can do about climate change, and that doesn’t get nearly enough attention. So can you talk a little bit about the need for that narrative shift? 

Honnold: So I was at New York Climate Week, six months ago or whenever, last year in New York, and there were just so many questions about existential doom and gloom, or like, “Climate, it’s a lost cause, we’ve already lost so much,” blah, blah, blah. And at a certain point, you know, maybe like two days into climate week, I just kind of snapped. 

I’m personally a pretty optimistic person, and just often see the good in things, but I was kind of like: Yeah, I mean, the environment has been severely degraded, we’ve lost a lot for sure, but if you were just dropped onto this planet right here, right now, and you just looked around in the natural world, you’d think, “This is incredible.” There’s so much life, the natural world is still amazing, and there’s still so much to protect. I think we’re better off highlighting what we have and what we can save, rather than mourning what we’ve already lost. Because in a way, what’s lost is lost. You basically only have from the present moving forward. And that’s still pretty freaking great. 

I interview climate folks all the time, and one of the things that I’m often struck by is I interview a lot of marine biologists and people working in ocean conservation, and when you protect reefs — basically anytime you make something a no-fishing zone or you protect it in any way, life just returns. I mean the oceans seem to recover even faster than things on land. Every time I’m just like, man, there’s such a capacity for restoration if you give nature even the slightest chance. 

And I feel like to date, humans haven’t really given nature much of a chance. We haven’t really chosen to make that much effort yet. I mean, obviously in some cases, local communities can put tremendous effort into saving one river, let’s say. But at a big picture, humans haven’t really tried that hard yet. And I’m kinda like, man, humans are capable of a lot when we try. And so that keeps me pretty optimistic.

* * *

Everybody here knows more about all of this than I do. I just love rock climbing, and I’m trying to do my small part to do something useful in the world. But I do think that there’s something lost in the pessimism around environmental storytelling and all that kind of stuff. Just because at least I personally am just not inspired by pessimism at all. I’m kind of like, “Oh, well, if it’s already lost, then screw it, it’s already lost.” But if I’m making progress, if I am improving, then I’m very motivated to keep making progress and keep improving. 

And I mean, that’s kind of a personal thing. That’s true for training, that’s true for all the things that I do in sport and climbing. If I feel like I’m making progress then it’s easy to get up and try hard and absolutely try my best. And so I feel with environmental issues, it’s like you’re better off focusing on the places that you can make progress. I mean like seeing a river restored like that and just seeing the absolute transformation in just a few years [referencing the restoration of the Klamath River after the removal of dams], that’s incredible. It’s stories like that I think are worth highlighting.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Alex Honnold: ‘You just see how much it matters’ on May 14, 2026.

This year of the Fire Horse brings a long-awaited transformation to one of America’s oldest Chinatowns. 

After years of organizing, planning, and fundraising, APEN and Friends of Lincoln Square Park are finally breaking ground to renovate the Lincoln Recreation Center into a state-of-the-art Resilience Hub!

With disasters becoming more frequent and intense, we need deep investment in the systems and social supports that strengthen our communities and offer resources in times of crisis.

This is where Resilience Hubs come in.

By turning a place where the Chinatown community gathers every day into a resilience hub, we shift disaster response from an individual burden to a collective plan.

Hear directly from APEN Chinatown members and community advocates on the importance of this project.

Since the 1970’s, Lincoln Rec Center has been more than a building; it’s been an essential gathering spot.

Today, it serves roughly 1,000 neighbors each day, including youth, seniors, immigrants, and low-income families who rely on the Center for CalFresh assistance, voter registration, free community college classes, and essential services in their own languages, like Cantonese, Mandarin, and Vietnamese.

“I have been a member of APEN and a resident of Oakland for nearly 20 years. To me, Lincoln Recreation Center is more than just a place—it is the heart of our Chinatown community,” shares APEN member Feng Ying Zhou.

Feng Ying Zhou and Chinatown members kicking off the year with APEN’s big member meeting in 2024.

Our Chinatown members’ passion and courage have been critical to the momentum of this long-spanning project.

“We have met with city departments on-site, joined countless meetings, and provided feedback to shape the design. We have spoken directly with elected officials, sharing the real needs and voices of our community,” Feng Ying explains.

And a Resilience Hub can’t come soon enough. California’s perennial wildfires have shown how quickly smoke, ash, and power outages can put vulnerable residents at risk.

This project will turn Lincoln Rec Center into a safe shelter where neighbors can access clean air, emergency resources, culturally appropriate services, and recovery support when disaster strikes.

Volunteers created 5,800 emergency starter kits packed with life-saving essentials like flashlights, first aid kits and masks at Lincoln Rec Center.

“I was deeply moved when I first heard about the vision for a Resilience Hub,” shares Feng Ying.

“I was reminded of the devastating wildfires in California. It made me realize how critical and urgent this project is. This is not just a renovation—it is about building a lifeline for our community.”

Every dollar you donate today helps our members continue to build resilience in Chinatown and steward a place where generations can continue to live with dignity and security.

We hope to welcome you soon to the new Lincoln Rec Center!

 

With gratitude,

Sky Liang (APEN Lead Organizer) and Feng Ying Zhou (APEN Oakland Chinatown Member)

 

 

The post A Long Awaited Glow Up for Oakland Chinatown appeared first on Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

Richard Kidd has seen what happens when energy runs out.

As an emergency logistics officer with the United Nations, Kidd was responsible for ensuring the flow of food, fuel, and water in some of the world’s most fragile environments. In refugee camps, energy isn’t abstract — it’s life or death.

“The refugee camp is the ultimate energy poverty environment,” he says. “If you run out of diesel to run the generators, you turn off the generators that clean the water, and people start to die of waterborne disease. You turn off the generators that provide power to the medical clinics, and you no longer have cold chains to keep medicines effective. Or you turn off the power that provides the lighting and the security, then you have violence.”

That experience shaped how Kidd understands energy: not only as infrastructure, but also as the foundation for human dignity, safety, and survival.

That perspective influenced his approach to driving efficiencies in last-mile logistics, and led him to RMI.

In the early 2000s, Kidd was invited to participate in an RMI design charrette exploring what a net-zero refugee camp might look like — an ambitious idea that brought together thinkers from across disciplines.

“I was brought into the charrette as the refugee camp guy,” he recalls. “I met Amory and the entire Rocky Mountain team. It was really enriching and exciting.” Richard then went on to collaborate with Amory and RMI on Winning the Oil End Game. He also briefed RMI’s board on energy and environmental security.

What stood out for Kidd during these early collaborations wasn’t just the people, but the way they approached problems.

“Two principles I learned from RMI that cascaded through everything were whole-systems integrated design and the idea of ‘making the problem bigger.’ Because then you have more solutions.”

At first, that idea can sound counterintuitive. But in practice, it means stepping back from a narrow technical question to understand the real need behind it. Instead of asking, “How do I heat my house?” you ask, “How do I keep people warm?” That shift opens up entirely different solutions — like better insulation, smarter building design, or passive heating — that can reduce or even eliminate the need for a furnace altogether.

It’s a way of moving from what RMI cofounder Amory Lovins calls the “hard path” to the “soft path.” The hard path focuses on producing more energy — bigger power plants, more fuel, and more supply. The soft path starts by reducing demand through efficiency and smarter design, often solving the problem before new energy is needed.

By expanding the frame, challenges that once seemed intractable become flexible, and new, often simpler solutions come into view.

Those ideas would stay with Kidd as his career evolved.

Kidd went from the UN to the US government, where he spent over 16 years leading public-sector sustainability projects at the Department of Energy, the Army, and later, the Department of Defense.

Initially, he led the Federal Energy Management Program at the US Department of Energy, helping federal agencies meet their sustainability goals through improved building performance, energy efficiency, and renewable energy deployment.

Later, he brought that same systems-thinking approach to the US Army, where he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy and Sustainability. There, he helped drive significant reductions in energy use, including cutting petroleum consumption in the Army’s vehicle fleet by more than 40% in just a few years.

“Enabling fuel savings required looking at more than just vehicle efficiency. It required examining rule sets and patterns of use,” Kidd says. “In the federal government, the higher the individual’s rank, the larger the vehicle. We changed this and allotted vehicles based on use-cases, matching form to function.”

While with the Army, Kidd implemented what was then the federal government’s comprehensive High Performance Sustainability Design Guide — a set of standards designed to ensure federal facilities are energy-efficient, environmentally friendly, and cost-effective — resulting in the largest portfolio of LEED-certified buildings in the nation. He also led efforts that resulted in the largest pipeline of energy savings performance contracts in the federal government and the deployment of over 700 megawatts of renewable energy systems.

Kidd then served as the deputy assistant secretary of defense for environmental and energy resilience, where he and his team guided policies associated with a $13 billion energy bill and authored the Department of Defense’s climate adaptation and mitigation plans.

Today, Kidd continues to apply that systems-thinking approach as a strategic advisor on energy innovation, decarbonization, and climate resilience. He works with a wide range of clients — from consulting firms and investors to utilities, research institutions, and emerging technology companies — helping them identify solutions that are both commercially viable and socially beneficial.

And he traces this kind of impact back, in part, to the way RMI shaped his thinking.

It’s why he believes the organization’s influence can’t be measured by projects alone.

“RMI’s impact goes far beyond what shows up in an annual report,” he says. “It’s in the people they’ve influenced — people who’ve had some interaction with RMI and then are inspired and go do other things.”

Over time, that ripple effect adds up.

“I would suspect RMI’s cumulative impact… is much higher than the sum of all their annual reports.”

Today, Kidd continues to support RMI as a Solutions Council donor — part of a deliberate giving strategy focused on both humanitarian and environmental work. He sees his contributions not just as charitable, but also as a way to sustain the ideas and insights that have shaped his own work, and a way to help others do the same.

“Every little bit counts,” he says. “This is a collective problem that we collectively have created as a society, and we collectively have to address it.”

For those considering their first gift, his message is simple:

“Everyone has an opportunity to be part of the solution… and if you really want to make a difference, RMI is one of the best places to do it.”

The post From Energy Scarcity to Systems Change: Why Richard Kidd Gives to RMI appeared first on RMI.

Creating the Grid of the Future: Transmission planning in Oregon and our Region Joshua Basofin Thu, 05/14/2026 - 1:55 pm

With only hours to spare, union nurses represented by California Nurses Association successfully forced Kaiser to back off from firing a DACA nurse colleague because the federal government has been extraordinarily slow to renew her work authorization.

For Immediate Release:

May 14, 2026

Contact:
Ashley Castaneda, ashley@restorethedelta.org

SACRAMENTO, CA — In a major blow to an already declining Delta along with California Tribes, Delta farmers, and the environmental justice communities across the Bay-Delta region, Governor Newsom’s May Revise budget proposal allocates $25 million to the misleadingly named “Healthy Rivers and Landscapes” program, which would send even more water to corporate agribusiness interests, while dedicating zero funding to critical Delta levee protections. 

Investments in Delta levees are essential to protecting the region’s four million residents from worsening flood risks driven by climate change and safeguarding the Delta’s $7 billion annual economy.

Restore the Delta has consistently advocated for Proposition 4 funding designated for levee improvement in the Sacramento San-Joaquin Delta. Yet instead of prioritizing these urgent infrastructure upgrades, the Governor’s proposed budget directs $125 million in Proposition 4 funds to the Bay Area for the development of a park.

A budget is a moral document, and Governor Newsom’s approach to water resources management fails the tests of morality, fairness, affordability, and protection for everyday Californians. Under this administration, the Delta has not only been neglected, it has been placed at even greater risk by policies that continue to endanger the region, its communities, and its future.

###

Utah’s San Rafael Swell and San Rafael Desert are known for their sinuous slot canyons, soaring redrock cliffs, and prominent buttes. These quintessential redrock landscapes are home to irreplaceable cultural and historic resources, important wildlife habitat, and unmatched recreation opportunities, including destinations such as Mexican Mountain, Buckhorn Draw, Tomsich Butte, Sweetwater Reef, designated wilderness areas, and the San Rafael Swell Recreation Area. Unfortunately, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is considering substantially expanding damaging off-road vehicle use across these landscapes.

Please speak up today for the San Rafael Swell and the San Rafael Desert.

As a refresher, the BLM previously completed travel management plans for the San Rafael Swell and San Rafael Desert in 2024 and 2022, respectively. Frankly, neither plan was particularly good because each prioritized off-road vehicle use at the expense of natural and cultural resources as well as non-motorized recreationists. Together, those plans designated hundreds of miles of new motorized vehicle routes. Now the Trump BLM is planning to go even further and is proposing to open hundreds of miles of additional off-road vehicle routes in its latest quest to transform quiet, wild places into motorized playgrounds.

The San Rafael Swell and Desert are too special to meet that fate.

The BLM is accepting comments through Monday, June 8. While the comment deadline is the same for each plan, they are being analyzed separately. Follow the links below to comment on each plan.

Click here to submit comments on the
San Rafael Swell
  Click here to submit comments on the
San Rafael Desert
 

These beloved landscapes offer endless opportunities for hiking, camping, and spending time with family and friends. They should be known for stunning vistas, abundant cultural sites, and opportunities for solitude, not off-road vehicle damage.

Do you know the San Rafael Swell or Desert especially well? Comments that draw from first-hand knowledge and experiences in these areas are the most effective. Have questions? Reach out to our Utah Organizer, Mimi Ortega, and she’ll be happy to help guide you through the process.

Thank you!

The post Take Action: Speak Up for the San Rafael Swell and Desert! appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

By Jane HoltTen people gathered at Spring Creek Prairie Audubon Center on a recent April morning, a morning filled with sunshine, warm temps and bird song. While the sun and 60-degree temperature...

The company said it plans to use the funding to finance “tax-driven investments,” including “hybrid tax equity, accelerating the deployment of clean energy.”

Every time a lease sale looms over the Arctic, we hear a version of the same hopeful, persistent question: Why can’t Alaska Wilderness League—or everyday people—simply show up, bid on the land, and choose not to drill?  

The answer reveals a system that is far less democratic than it should be—and far more focused on corporate profit than the public good.

Lease Sales Are Built for Extraction

Oil and gas lease sales on public lands are not open marketplaces. Lease sales are carefully constructed processes, governed by agencies like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and built from the ground up to serve the singular purpose of facilitating extraction.  

Caribou near Trans Alaska Pipeline. Photo by Lisa Shon Jodwalis, BLM

To be a qualified bidder, an entity must register with the federal government, demonstrate financial capacity, and have the expertise and intent to actually follow through on oil and gas development. This includes bonding requirements, compliance obligations, and operational expectations layered on top, particularly if seismic exploration or development programs are pursued. 

All of it reinforces the same baseline assumption that oil under federal public lands exist for extraction. There is unfortunately no pathway in this system for someone whose goal is protection when conservation is not considered an eligible use.  

Previous Attempts to Bid 

In 2008, student and climate activist Tim DeChristopher entered a Utah BLM auction and successfully bid on 14 parcels of land, covering 22,500 acres, with the explicit intention of keeping them out of the hands of oil and gas companies. He had no intention of developing the leases and, critically, no ability to pay the $1.8 million he committed to.

DeChristopher was charged, convicted, and ultimately sentenced to federal prison.  Even efforts that attempt to operate within the system’s gray areas reveal its limits.

When the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) stepped in to bid on Arctic Refuge leases, it raised a new set of questions that cut to the heart of who this process is meant to serve.  

Photo sourced from Northern Alaska Environmental Center

AIDEA is a state-backed financing entity, not an oil company, and its participation blurred the lines between public interest and industrial development. If an entity that doesn’t drill can acquire leases, who is it ultimately acting for? And if the rules can stretch to accommodate certain actors, why do they remain so rigidly closed to others—particularly those seeking to protect rather than exploit?

Whose interests in the Arctic Refuge are recognized as legitimate? 

The Refuge Is Not a “Product” 

The Arctic Refuge is a living, interconnected ecosystem. It supports the Porcupine caribou herd, sustains migratory birds across continents, and holds profound cultural and spiritual significance for the Gwich’in people, who have depended on and protected this land for generations.

Elder Kenneth Frank warming up before the 2014 Gwich’in Gathering that was held in Old Crow, Yukon. Photo sourced from Alaska Magazine / Peter Mather.

Time and again, attempts to industrialize it have faltered. Lease sales have struggled to attract interest. Major oil companies have stayed away. The economic promises used to justify development have not materialized.

Meanwhile, the broader context in which these lease sales are proposed tells its own story.

As global tensions rise, including ongoing conflicts with Iran, oil prices fluctuate and often climb, placing strain on families across the country. But the notion that drilling in the Arctic Refuge would provide relief is misleading and ignores the basic timeline of Arctic development. 

Even under the most aggressive scenarios, oil extracted from this region would not reach the market for decades. It would do nothing to lower prices today, tomorrow, or in the near future. What it would do is lock in long-term industrialization of one of the last intact ecosystems in the United States, all while oil and gas companies continue to post enormous profits driven in part by the very instability used to justify their expansion. 

How You Can Take a Stand

We believe that if people were given the opportunity to bid on the Arctic for the purpose of protecting it, they would. And while the current system doesn’t allow for that kind of participation, we’re creating a way to make that collective will visible.

By contributing “$25 per acre” to Alaska Wilderness League, you can show how much land you would choose to protect if the rules were different. This is a symbolic action, not a literal bid. But it sends a powerful message: the Arctic’s value is not measured in barrels of oil. It’s measured in caribou migrations, intact ecosystems, and the right of future generations to inherit a thriving, wild landscape.

Take a Stand

We know that the reason you can’t simply “bid to protect” the Arctic Refuge is not a lack of care, creativity, or commitment on the part of the public. The system was just never built to accommodate those things in the first place. Changing that reality will take persistence, pressure, and a reimagining of what we believe public lands should be.

Until then, we will keep fighting—for the Arctic, and for the principle that some places are too important to be reduced to a line item in a lease sale.

Audubon is calling on beachgoers to make beaches safer for birds by avoiding their nesting areas during this busy holiday weekend and throughout the summer.These special birds lay their eggs right on...

This week on the Talking Headways, former Supreme Court law clerk and Cardozo School of Law Professor Michael Pollack discusses his new book Sidewalk Nation: The Life and Law of America’s Most Overlooked Resource.

Pollack discusses who manages, owns and feels ownership of sidewalks, and advocates for a department dedicated to them.

We also talk about the nexus between sidewalks and roads, the impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Denver’s successful funding and maintenance referendum.

Scroll past the audio player below for a partial edited transcript of the episode — or click here for a full, AI-generated (and typo-ridden) readout.

Jeff Wood: Are we free on the sidewalk?

Michael Pollack: Ha. That’s a loaded question.

Jeff Wood: I know. People should go read the book to get the whole answer.

Michael Pollack: Are we free on the sidewalk? We are freer than we might think, but also more subject to being made un-free than we might think. So again, it’s public space, or at least it is private space with a public easement, and so the Constitution applies.

We have rights to speak. We have rights to protest. We have our First Amendment rights. We have our Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police. I don’t get into this in the book, but sidewalks also raise Second Amendment concerns about the freedom to carry weapons openly or concealed.

So we have our constitutional rights on the sidewalk, and yet the law, the constitutional law, as well as what cities have in fact done, has limited all of those rights, sometimes in the name of public order, as we were discussing before, and sometimes in the name of protecting the adjacent property owners.

So for example, you do get to protest and picket on the streets, but the courts have said it’s okay sometimes if a municipality says you’re not allowed to do that in a residential neighborhood. Sometimes that’s gonna be upheld. Why? Because the owners of those homes or the residents of those homes deserve their peace and quiet, even if, you know, or perhaps especially if they are the target of that protest.

But we are in fact free to picket in front of commercial establishments. That’s well established. We’re free to, as I was saying before, engage in signature gathering for petitions, referendums, things like that on most sidewalks, except sidewalks at post offices, where there’s a whole line of cases where that’s deemed to be obstructive of important federal efforts, right?

When it comes to policing and our right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, well that’s true, except that we can be stopped by the police and briefly frisked by the police. If you put your garbage out for collection on the sidewalk, which in New York City, that’s what we do, that garbage can be searched by the police because it’s considered abandoned property.

And then there’s all of the new technology surveillance architecture that is deployed on the sidewalk, so that’s cameras or license plate readers or facial recognition. None of that is really governed by our current Fourth Amendment law at all. So yes, are we free on the sidewalk? Absolutely. It is public space.

It is not private space, therefore we have constitutional rights. But those rights are not quite as capacious as I think we often think they are. Now, when I say that, I don’t mean that we automatically don’t have the right to protest in a residential neighborhood or that we don’t have XYZ rights from unreasonable searches and whatnot.

Rather, what the Constitution tells us is that, or at least how the courts have interpreted the Constitution, what it tells us is that governments have the ability to prohibit us from protesting in a, in a residential neighborhood. They have the ability to instruct their police officers to stop and frisk folks in these ways.

It doesn’t mean that they have to make those choices. It doesn’t mean that we as voters have to make those choices either. And so part of my message in the book is when we think about what we want our public life to look like, that includes what we want our speech, protest, policing, surveillance public life to look like.

And we have more, we as voters have more of a role to play here than I think we often think we do. The Constitution does not answer all of these questions one way or the other. It leaves them to the local political process. And so if you don’t like what’s happening, you can and should vote for something else.

This article From ICE to Iran, veterans are challenging US militarism  was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Embed from Getty Imageswindow.gie=window.gie||function(c){(gie.q=gie.q||[]).push(c)};gie(function(){gie.widgets.load({id:'n9aeomz4ROpJDA_TbOSxLw',sig:'YAE1p7Ommh8D2OTKw9oo5CLdgf6rTpvq987BCTnyV-8=',w:'594px',h:'396px',items:'2272262840',caption: true ,tld:'com',is360: false })});

One hundred fifty people holding tulips stand in formation on the marble floor of the Cannon House Office Building, until Capitol Police arrest over a third of them and remove them in cuffs. 

Maybe you saw an image of these veterans with their flowers — the red tulips that are an Iranian national symbol honoring martyrs. Perhaps you saw a photo of a disabled veteran’s wrists being handcuffed while leaning on a cane. You may have caught a video where a mother or a partner of a deployed soldier spoke about wanting their loved one back from this unconscionable war.  

When 66 protesters from a coalition of veteran and military family organizations were arrested on April 20, these images went viral worldwide. This attests to not only the specific weight given to veterans who speak out against wars, but also the deep hunger to see any kind of tangible action against the United States and Israel’s profoundly unpopular war with Iran.

One of those arrested was Katie Chorbak, president of 50501 Veterans, which organizes more than 2,000 members into policy fights, nonviolent direct action and sustained advocacy. Chorbak, a fifth-generation combat veteran, chose to bring her concerns directly to lawmakers out of the belief that veterans have a “responsibility to speak plainly” when the country is moving toward war without transparency or congressional debate.

#newsletter-block_7030efd753e8f2d3ef2849022f64f2ff { background: #ECECEC; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_7030efd753e8f2d3ef2849022f64f2ff #mc_embed_signup_front input#mce-EMAIL { border-color:#000000 !important; color: #000000 !important; } Sign Up for our Newsletter

We’ll send you a weekly email with the latest articles.

“Veterans showing up in that space matters because we understand the realities of war beyond headlines and talking points,” Chorbak said. 

Despite decades of demonization of Iran by U.S. politicians, amplified by mainstream media, Trump’s war on Iran was met with immediate disfavor in March (a Reuters poll found that only 27 percent of voters approved of the initial strikes). Still, there has been little substantive resistance in Congress and relative quiet in the streets of cities that saw record-breaking protests against President George W. Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s.  

Yet, over these last 20 years, veterans never stopped organizing against U.S. wars and militarism. The organizers of the April 20 action — About Face Veterans Against War, Veterans for Peace, 50501 Veterans, the Center on Conscience and War, Military Families Speak Out and others — are building antiwar veteran and service member leadership, offering a vision of how we could end this country’s marriage to reckless, crushing militarism.

Where did this come from?

GI resistance is the tradition, dating back to the Revolutionary War, of American soldiers choosing to stand on their conscience and withdraw their consent to carry out the orders of commanding officers. The spectrum of resistance has encompassed the Vietnam War era’s more visible draft dodging and widespread disobedience in the ranks, and the quiet, mostly unseen refusal of soldiers in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars to execute civilians, load their guns, carry out missions, report for duty or even to deploy. 

In a 1971 demonstration, Operation Dewey Canyon III, antiwar veterans threw their medals at the U.S. Capitol. (Vietnam Veterans Against the War)

Now, military resistance to the war on Iran is beginning to take publicly visible forms. Hundreds of complaints were filed by troops in every branch of the military when Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, a Christian nationalist, directed his commanders to inform their units that the Iran War is a holy war anointed by Jesus. And in the theater of war, service members whose labor enables the war machine can always find ways to clog the gears (sometimes literally). Rumors abounded of sailors clogging toilets and starting a fire on the Gerald Ford aircraft carrier, which had to retreat for repairs in March.

Public acts of refusal are vital to building a movement. Many soldiers can’t imagine refusing orders or deployment until they see someone else doing it. But courage is contagious, and an opportunity to join a collective action can offer the necessary bridge to take that risk. 

Antiwar groups offer two core ingredients to transform spontaneous individual acts of refusal into a movement: visibility and access to support. Kelly Dougherty, who co-founded About Face in 2004 after returning from a year in Iraq in the Army National Guard, now serves as the counseling director for the Center on Conscience and War, or CCW, supporting service members seeking separation from the military, information about their rights or conscientious objector status. Dougherty says that while the Iran War has prompted a recent surge in calls to CCW’s hotline, “most service members I speak to have been questioning the system of war and whether or not they can morally participate in it for months or years.”

About Face has carried the banner of supporting GI resistance since its founding by Iraq War veterans with the support of seasoned organizers from Veterans for Peace. The group launched a Right to Refuse campaign after the 2024 election to bring renewed attention to the long tradition of refusal of illegal and immoral orders. To get the word out, Right to Refuse uses visibility efforts, direct actions, social media, on-the-ground outreach and word of mouth. An encrypted support form allows for anonymous inquiries. The campaign works in tandem with the GI Rights Hotline, which has fielded calls from active duty questioners and emerging conscientious objectors since 1994.

Previous Coverage

What happens when soldiers stop believing in war?

As mainstream media conglomerates continue to shift rightward, so grows the importance of direct actions that alert soldiers to their options, as well as pressuring elected officials.  This is why the CCW chose to have its executive director Mike Prysner risk arrest in the April 20 action. “Most people in the military aren’t familiar with their right to seek discharge as a conscientious objector,” Dougherty said. “We wanted to let service members know that if they are experiencing a moral crisis because they cannot, in good conscience, participate in war, that they can file for conscientious objector status and there is an organization that will support them every step of the way.” 

GI resistance has power because war requires obedient soldiers. But active duty service members’ opportunities to make direct impacts are shrinking as war becomes increasingly outsourced and automated. Remote-controlled weaponry is taking over from real humans (often referred to as “boots on the ground,” underlining the nature of using youngsters as cannon fodder). Perhaps the most concerning trajectory is the trend of replacing decision makers with AI that can deploy and direct weaponry, as seen with Israel pioneering a shocking rate of mass death in Gaza with their Lavender and Where’s Daddy programs. These trends make the launch of this war on Iran a critically important window for supporting GI resistance before complete control over mass killing is in the hands of the ruling class and their machines. 

Work stoppage or interference by active duty military can slow or impair the war machine, but this alone may not end the war on Iran. There are more ways in which antiwar service members and veterans can leverage their social position not only as workers, but as symbols. Their voices on military matters have weight both with elected officials and the general public. They have the platform to challenge the myths of morality, necessity and infallibility in which the warhawks wrap their armies and wars. As they increase the unreliability of the armed forces, they can also decrease public confidence in how the troops are being used. Both resistance and public opposition are key toward ending not only a specific war, but tearing up the blank checks for endless wars at home and abroad. 

Veterans rising to meet the moment 

Founded as Iraq Veterans Against the War, About Face has expanded from opposing the war on Iraq to a deeper critique of militarism, as new members joined over the years who had participated in many different facets of the so-called Global War on Terror. Its opposition to the war on Iran is part of a broader recent effort to challenge the U.S.-Israeli wars for regional dominance, resource control and global positioning. 

Embed from Getty Imageswindow.gie=window.gie||function(c){(gie.q=gie.q||[]).push(c)};gie(function(){gie.widgets.load({id:'7Hk63C2HR612tEVbSTstOA',sig:'ByAz3okymnfIlsj8FT5mdfKMBdAOknnQ833nbgBmPew=',w:'594px',h:'396px',items:'2272262682',caption: true ,tld:'com',is360: false })});

After Oct. 7, 2023, About Face welcomed hundreds of new members who were moved to organize with other veterans in solidarity with Palestine. To harness that energy, they immediately formed Veterans for Ceasefire, whose first of many direct actions was a sit-in on Nov. 9, 2023 in Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s office. Eight members participated in the 2025 Global Sumud Flotilla. 

In addition to challenging U.S. aggression overseas, veterans have also become important voices for demilitarization of the homefront. In the summer of 2020, when troops were turned against U.S. civilians in the wake of George Floyd’s murder by police, About Face reached out to National Guard members, encouraging them “Stand Down for Black Lives” by refusing mobilization against racial justice protesters. 

Challenging militarism at home — and connecting it to wars abroad — has become even more crucial in a time of rising authoritarianism. “Right to Refuse was definitely created with Project 2025 in mind and what was promised in that document about domestic use of the military to enforce their authoritarian agenda,” said Matt Howard, interim national organizing director of About Face. 

Sure enough, ICE surges in 2025 saw the use of military forces to quell civil dissent and carry out race-based purges. The National Guard occupied cities, while the Department of Defense offered bases, staging areas and logistical support for mass detentions. Anti-ICE resistance also faced the kind of intensified surveillance and data collection tested in the killing fields of U.S.-Israeli wars abroad.

Tapping into the organic dissent in the ranks is a particular gift of the Right to Refuse campaign. Billboards facing the main gates of North Carolina’s biggest military installations appeared in September 2025 announcing a website titled NotWhatYouSignedUpFor.org (a joint visibility campaign of Win Without War and About Face). When thousands of active duty Airborne troops (a cold-weather division from Alaska) and military police were placed on standby for Department of Homeland Security support, including a 500-person brigade from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, a billboard at the main gate greeted them with, “Did you go Airborne just to pull security for ICE?” Marines entering Camp Lejeune saw “Not what you signed up for? You have options.” 

In U.S. cities experiencing paramilitary occupation from DHS forces, U.S. military veterans found opportunities to demilitarize the skills they brought home and apply them to justice, protection and liberation. A delegation of  About Face members traveled to Minneapolis in February to join local members and other community organizations in building a grassroots response to the escalation of ICE violence. 

Additionally, About Face’s Monitoring and Analysis of Military and Border Operations, or MAMBO, project uses open source intelligence gathering to analyze and map domestic deployments of military and DHS forces, offering usable reports to community groups. Some members of About Face and its close partner Veterans For Peace provide security for local actions and community events, and train and mentor emerging movement security practitioners, both civilian and veteran. This is a radical revisioning of what security can be when seen through a lens of demilitarization — neighbors keeping each other safe. 

Alongside the DHS and National Guard occupation of U.S. cities, the impacts of the war economy and continued cuts to social spending have provided many opportunities for action. Last Veterans’ Day, About Face organized a Vets Say No War on Our Cities march in major cities including those dealing with ICE occupation like Los Angeles, Chicago, Portland, Washington, D.C. and Memphis. The message they shared was: “We will not allow attacks on our neighbors, or military occupation of our cities and deadly cuts on vital services to be normalized.”

On March 19, the 23rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, About Face coordinated national visits to senators to push for a repeal of the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force that opened the door to the “forever wars,” and for a vote against further supplemental military spending. A couple days later, members joined the Nuestra América relief convoy to Cuba, bringing supplies and challenging Trump’s saber-rattling. 

#support-block_2626a6ed01b1b55f66c9cf25de6ee6a8 { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

Waging Nonviolence depends on reader support. Make a donation today!

Donate

About Face has also been incubating Veterans Against Fascism, a politically diverse coalition of vets united behind the call for No ICE, No War, No Cuts. “Fascism is everywhere, spread throughout the entire government. We have a responsibility to make it grind to a halt,” explained Joseph Funk, a member of About Face and leader in Veterans Against Fascism. “That means we have to defeat it anywhere it wants to exercise its power. That might look like opposing war and international violence, and that might look like standing against federal goons hunting children. It will probably look like a lot of things in the future.”

Winning public opinion

The Trump regime is not attempting to manufacture approval or even consent for its wars, but they are fighting on the narrative and cultural fronts. Nonpartisan organizations like About Face, which has challenged U.S.-led wars under every administration for the last 20 years and is not scared of calling out Democratic leaders, are laying a critical foundation. Those of us who remember Obama’s presidential victory on a platform of ending Bush’s wars, and the subsequent abdication of the forces who might have pushed him to follow through, know we need an antimilitarist movement bigger than opposition to Trump’s caricatured shock and awe. 

“Despite the fact that both parties have had a shitty track record on war and militarism, in the last 10 years MAGA has claimed to be the true antiwar standard-bearer,” Howard said. “We are in a moment where the betrayal of Trump’s base is really clear. They thought they voted in a peace time president and are finding out it was another empty talking point. For movements who have been committed to an antiwar politic, no matter who was in office, there is an opportunity to use our credibility to undermine authoritarianism and contest for people who are waking up.”

The good news: There is leadership and vision. Antiwar veterans are increasing their ranks, building collective power in campaigns and coalitions, and taking strategic aim at multiple pillars of the war machine. 

“Veterans can help focus public energy into concrete demands,” said Katie Chorbak, from 50501 Veterans. “If opposition is going to be effective, it has to be organized, informed and sustained. Veterans can help anchor that effort. What is needed right now is seriousness, discipline and sustained engagement. Change rarely happens because people are upset for a week. It happens when people stay organized long enough to matter.”

This article From ICE to Iran, veterans are challenging US militarism  was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Four EWG-backed California bills clear key appropriations panels, advancing protections Ketura Persellin May 14, 2026

SACRAMENTO – Stronger safeguards for families and the environment are moving forward after four bills sponsored by the Environmental Working Group cleared California Legislature spending committees. The bills address consumer protection, food safety and clean energy.

“Today is a great day for California families,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, EWG’s senior vice president for California. “Four bills that would make a real and lasting difference in people's lives just cleared a major hurdle.”

Three of the bills are pending in the Assembly and must now pass a floor vote by May 29 to proceed to further debate and approval before getting sent to the governor. 

One bill is pending in the Senate and faces the same deadline for a floor vote ahead of further action.

The bills address some of the most urgent and unresolved threats to California consumers:

• The toxic “forever chemicals” known as PFAS used on produce as pesticides 
• Mystery ingredients in baby diapers
• No clear way for consumers to identify harmful ultra-processed food, or UPF
• Electricity bills that are straining California ratepayers’ pocketbooks

“Californians are being exposed to toxic chemicals in their food, their baby products, and their water. And their electricity bills are bleeding them dry,” said Del Chiaro. 

“The legislature has a historic opportunity to act on all of these urgent issues this year. We are calling on every legislator to vote yes on each of these four bills,” she said.

“The clock is ticking,” said Susan Little, EWG director of California legislative affairs. “These bills now go to the full Assembly and full Senate for votes that will determine whether California continues to lead the nation on consumer protection or lets the moment slip away. 

“EWG will be fighting for every vote between now and May 29,” she added.

Potential for groundbreaking change for consumers 

Assembly Bill 1603: Banning PFAS pesticides 

California, which grows half the nation’s produce, applies more than 2.5 million pounds of PFAS pesticides to crops every year, contaminating fruit and vegetables, soil and water. State test results have already found PFAS pesticide contamination on nine out of 10 samples of non-organic peaches, nectarines and plums grown in California. 

AB 1603 would ban the use, sale and manufacture of PFAS pesticides used on crops statewide by 2035. The bill, authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank), would immediately pause new state approvals of these pesticides, set a 2030 deadline for phasing out use in the state of PFAS pesticides not allowed in Europe and require public disclosure of all PFAS pesticide applications.

“Consumers have no idea that PFAS pesticides are being deliberately sprayed on California crops, contaminating produce soil and water,” said Del Chiaro. 

“California grows food for the entire country. When forever chemicals are so pervasive on produce, that is not a California problem. That is a national food safety problem.”

Assembly Bill 1901: Baby diaper ingredient disclosure  

Parents and caregivers have a right to know what chemicals sit against their baby’s skin 24 hours a day, seven days a week, for the first years of life.

Authored by Assemblymember Mark Berman (D-Menlo Park), AB 1901 would set a first-in-the-nation requirement for manufacturers of children’s diapers sold, distributed or manufactured in California to fully disclose all ingredients on the product packaging and online.

Recent tests found diapers can contain potentially harmful ingredients like phthalates, which are linked to hormone disruption, and bleaching agents linked to skin and respiratory irritation. 

Infants and toddlers are especially vulnerable, because their bodies are still developing and their skin absorbs chemicals more quickly.

“A baby wears a diaper every minute of every day for years, yet parents are forced to make purchasing decisions with zero information about what’s in them,” said Little. 

“AB 1901 is the most straightforward consumer protection bill you can imagine. It just requires manufacturers to tell parents what is in their product,” she added. “There is no good reason to vote against it.”

California already proved with baby food that this approach works. When the state required disclosure of heavy metal test results, manufacturers lowered levels in the food.

Assembly Bill 2244: Ultra-processed food certification seal 

Ultra-processed food makes up more than two-thirds of children’s diets and more than half of the typical adult diet in the U.S. Research consistently links high UPF consumption to obesity, metabolic disease and other serious health harms. 

But it’s hard for consumers to know what is and isn’t UPF at a grocery store or supermarket.

AB 2244, authored by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino), would establish a California certification system for foods free from the additives, emulsifiers, artificial dyes and flavors that characterize UPF. 

This system would be based on the state’s trailblazing UPF definition enacted last year. Products meeting the standard could carry a certification seal, a clear, at-a-glance tool to help consumers make healthier choices.

“Parents are trying to feed their kids better, but the food industry has made it nearly impossible to know what you are actually buying,” said Del Chiaro. 

“AB 2244 gives consumers a simple, trusted signal at the point of purchase – no chemistry degree required.”

“California already defined ultra-processed food. Now it is time to bring that definition to the grocery aisle. This bill could change how millions of American families shop for food, starting in California,” she added

Senate Bill 868: Balcony solar  

California ratepayers face some of the highest electricity bills in the country, as well as some of the worst air pollution. Solar energy can help solve both problems.

Small, portable balcony solar panels offer a practical, affordable alternative that is especially suitable for renters because they’re not permanently fixed to a home. But complex rules make the systems largely unavailable in the U.S., even as balcony solar markets thrive in Europe.

Authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), SB 868 would streamline and accelerate access to balcony solar by removing unnecessary regulatory barriers while establishing consumer safety standards. 

Setup is simple – comparable to plugging a small appliance into a wall outlet – and affordable enough that most consumers could recoup their investment within a few years.

“Electricity bills are crushing California families’ finances, and the solution could be sitting not just on rooftops but also on balconies and patios across the state,” said Del Chiaro. 

“Balcony solar puts clean, affordable energy within reach of millions of California consumers. SB 868 removes the red tape standing between California families and lower electricity bills. There is every reason to make clean energy easier to access for everyone,” she added.

Protein bill fails to advance

Another EWG-backed bill, to require manufacturers to disclose levels of heavy metals in their protein supplement products, failed to advance after the Senate Appropriations Committee held it in suspense.

Millions of Californians consume protein shakes, powders and bars every day but don’t know whether the products contain dangerous levels of lead, cadmium, mercury or arsenic. 

SB 1033, authored by Sen. Steve Padilla (D-San Diego), would have followed similar ingredient transparency state laws for baby food and prenatal vitamins.

A recent study found about half of protein supplement products tested exceeded at least one state or federal safety limit for heavy metals. These substances are potent toxins, and even at low levels, repeated exposure can cause lasting and irreversible harm, particularly to pregnant people and the developing fetus.

Next steps for remaining bills

The four remaining EWG-backed bills must pass their respective chambers – the three Assembly bills in a full Assembly floor vote and the Senate bill in a full Senate floor vote – by May 29. 

Following floor passage, the bills would be sent to their respective other chambers for committee hearings and votes before heading to Newsom’s desk for signature in September.

EWG is urging all California Assembly and Senate members to vote yes on all four bills.

Californians can contact their state legislators directly at legislature.ca.gov to urge a yes vote on the bills: AB 1901, AB 1603, AB 2244 and SB 868.

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Ultra-Processed Foods Energy Renewable Energy Children’s Health Pesticides PFAS Chemicals California Legislation targets PFAS pesticides, energy affordability and more Press Contact Monica Amarelo monica@ewg.org (202) 939-9140 May 14, 2026