News Feeds

May 14, 2026—Politico’s Eric He reports on Gov. Newsom’s May Revise budget proposal, which calls for deferring $3.9 billion in Proposition 98 school funding despite revenues coming in $16.5 billion above projections. The move has drawn swift condemnation from teachers unions, school boards, and Democratic lawmakers who argue the constitutionally-guaranteed funding is urgently needed — including by Los Angeles Unified, which is counting on state dollars to honor $1.2 billion in new union contracts. On the positive side for education advocates, the governor preserved $1 billion for community schools expansion. Public Advocates Managing Attorney John Affeldt weighed in on the deferral, saying that while restraints are warranted, it’s “not a crazy maneuver given the volatility of our revenue picture.”

Read the Story

The post Politico Pro: Newsom sticks with controversial funding deferral in mixed-bag schools budget appeared first on Public Advocates.

By Simon Pirani Russia’s political prisoners are “outcasts in their own land,” Sergei Dudchenko, a biker tortured and framed by the security services, told his trial judges this month before being handed a seven-year prison sentence. Those arrested for opposing the war on Ukraine had “fewer rights than a stray dog, and on top of […]

Red Stone Movement Goes Public: Tribal Nations Demand Protection of Sacred Pipestone Site FLANDREAU, SD – The controversial Magellan Pipeline issue is heating up again. The pipeline, owned by OneOk of Tulsa, Oklahoma, had its construction permit rescinded by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission on January 7, 2025. The proposed route would build a new […]

May 15, 2026 Read the story on MSN.com Greenaction blasts the Navy over continued botched “cleanup” at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Superfund Site Click here to read the Article on MSN.com

May 14 2026

Bay City News Article on the Latest Scandal with the U.S. Navy and the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard Superfund Site

Click Here to read the Bay City News Article

“SF: Cabinet Storing Radiological Materials Discovered At Former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard”

May 15, 2026 Read Capital & Main news story with Greenaction and allies: California Hazardous Waste Rules Criticized as Years Late and Polluter Friendly

May 1, 2026—EdSource reporter John Fensterwald covers Governor Newsom’s May Revision and its mixed implications for California schools—including a higher COLA, a historic $2.4 billion special education increase, and a $5 billion discretionary block grant, offset by the governor’s continued withholding of $3.9 billion in Proposition 98 funds that school groups say belongs in classrooms now. Managing Attorney John Affeldt is quoted warning that the budget’s reliance on AI-driven tax revenues is not a stable foundation: “Our state cannot continue to rely on temporary AI stock market bubbles.” Affeldt calls for more robust, permanent revenue streams—and makes clear that the same teachers being asked to transform students’ lives are being priced out of the communities they serve.”

Read the Story

The post Edsource: California schools could get billions more in Newsom’s final budget plan — with one catch appeared first on Public Advocates.

TORONTO — Rachel Doran, executive director at Clean Energy Canada, made the following statement in response to the Implementation Agreement for the Canada-Alberta MOU:

“The long-awaited agreement between the federal government and Alberta was promised to strengthen Canada’s competitiveness and the effectiveness of key climate policies—but is, in reality, a step backward. This is true not only when it comes to reducing climate-change-causing emissions from big industry, but also on the aspiration laid out yesterday to double Canada’s electricity grid as the economic backbone of our future.

“Indeed, the federal government’s goal of a net-zero grid by 2050 may be fundamentally at odds with the details in this MOU. Alberta, once the Canadian capital of renewable investment, has not made any concrete commitments to unleash its once-booming free market. It has, conversely, secured a commitment that natural gas generation will be expanded and is likewise not dropping its legal challenge against Canada’s Clean Electricity Regulations. Furthermore, the federal government’s suggestion that the regulations will be ‘in abeyance’ until after all court cases have been finalized—a process that may take years—will create significant investment uncertainty. 

“Alberta policy changes have already undermined tens of billions in renewable energy investments in the province. Despite leading the country in wind, solar, and energy storage deployment early this decade, private investment in renewables has fallen by nearly 99% since 2023 due to changes introduced by Premier Smith’s government. 

“On the Clean Electricity Regulations, Alberta has agreed only to negotiate an equivalency agreement if courts uphold the policy’s constitutionality. If Alberta does not negotiate in good faith and the agreement has no teeth to prevent future debate, the result could be a provincial race to the bottom, leaving Canada’s vision of a competitive, unified electricity grid back where it started: fragmented and increasingly failing to realize its potential.

“And while the government’s press release and implementation agreement suggest that Alberta will make changes to its Restructured Energy Market to facilitate more investment in renewables, the MOU makes a far weaker commitment: that changes will only be considered if warranted.

“None of this adds up to meeting the vision laid out by the federal government only yesterday to double Canada’s relatively clean electricity grid as a way to electrify industry and Canadian homes: an essential play both for the future of our economy and household affordability.

“The agreement similarly falls short in delivering on effective industrial carbon pricing, which modelling by the Canadian Climate Institute found to be doing the most heavy lifting toward our climate targets. While changes to Canada’s industrial carbon pricing system were meant to strengthen the actual impact of the policy, if not the optics of it, the dials here are turned too low to result in the better outcome that was promised. 

“The agreement makes an attempt to ensure the real carbon price that companies pay comes closer to the so-called ‘headline price,’ and yes, setting a carbon price floor is a good idea, as is signing contracts for difference to ensure governments stick to their promises for an effective carbon price. But when it comes to the actual numbers needed to empower these changes, the agreement offers too little, too late. 

“An industrial carbon price serves as an incentive for companies to invest in cleaner methods of production. If increasing this price to meaningful levels is pushed down the road, then so will be any related investments. Industrial carbon pricing is tied to over 70 major projects worth more than $57 billion. And this does not just affect Alberta. By striking this deal with one province, the federal government has potentially opened the floodgates for a lowering of ambition across all provincial industrial carbon pricing systems, affecting the incentives for steel mills in Ontario, potash mines in Saskatchewan, and cement plants in B.C.

“Canada is falling out of step with key trading partners in the transition to a global clean energy economy. Whereas the agreement aims for an effective carbon price of $130 by 2040, the European Union carbon price is close to that amount already today. And while the agreement sets tightening rates of 2% or lower, the EU has set rates of over 4% every year. 

“The EU knows where it needs to go, launching a comprehensive set of new measures—including electricity tax cuts and investments in renewables—that cement clean energy as the path to energy security. EV sales are unsurprisingly skyrocketing globally, including here in Canada: March EV sales were up 75% year-over-year. 

“More than 40 countries are currently rationing energy, and it’s no wonder. As International Energy Agency head Fatih Birol put it, ‘the damage is done…. There will be a significant boost to renewables and nuclear power and a further shift towards a more electrified future,’ adding that ‘this will cut into the main markets for oil.’

“In other words, the same forces driving up oil prices today are destroying the fossil fuel demand of tomorrow. This government has suggested that it’s making certain short-term concessions while keeping its eye firmly on building for the future. But the reality is that, once again, Alberta is making promises while the federal government is making commitments. Canadians need policies that strike a better balance.”

The post Response: Lopsided MOU undermines yesterday’s clean electricity strategy appeared first on Clean Energy Canada.

May 13, 2026,

Moab Times Independent article
“Protest Planned near La Sal over Uranium Mining Concerns”

https://www.moabtimes.com/articles/protest-planned-near-la-sal-over-uranium-mining-concerns/

Like The Price Of Gas? Trump Did That!

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.

VANCOUVER — Joanna Kyriazis, director of policy and strategy at Clean Energy Canada, made the following statement in response to newly released federal vehicle sales data for March:

“We knew March would be an important month for EV sales: it was the first month that fully captured the return of the $5,000 federal EV rebate in February, and it was the month the war in Iran began driving up gas prices. 

“The anecdotal evidence that Canadians were increasingly looking to go electric was strong, but today’s numbers are unmistakable: Canada saw a 75% increase in EV sales in March compared to the same month last year.

“Regionally, this was a phenomenal 136% year-over-year increase in Quebec, a 53% increase in B.C. and the territories, and a 40% increase in Ontario.

“That amounts to 12.2% of new vehicle sales in Canada (compared to 6.5% last March), but provincial numbers tell another story. Roughly a quarter of British Columbians and those in the territories (23.5%) purchased an EV in March, 21.8% of Quebecers did likewise, while Canada’s largest province, Ontario, continues to catch up with EV sales at 8%.

“While price matters, clarity is similarly important. Last year’s EV rebate pause caused many would-be EV buyers to wait on the sidelines, artificially deflating normal EV demand. That is now being rectified.

“To build on this momentum, Canada must ensure that it’s not only providing consumers with rebates but also access to affordable models. The introduction of a limited number of Chinese EVs is already having an impact, with Tesla recently significantly dropping the price of its popular Model 3 after shifting production back to Shanghai. Hopefully, new models from Chinese companies will give Canadians even more budget-friendly options and, critically, keep other automakers on their toes. The forthcoming $35,000 import price quota for a sizable percentage of these vehicles can help realize this important goal.

“Likewise, ensuring Canada’s forthcoming tailpipe standards are designed to achieve roughly 75% EV sales by 2035 is the other, massive piece of this puzzle. Like improving competition, the regulation will compel automakers to meet the market with more affordable EVs.

“Affordable EVs exist, and Canadians are hungry for good options that make financial sense in the short term as well as the long term. Recent Clean Energy Canada analysis found that EVs still save typical drivers about $23,000 to $32,000 over 10 years of ownership. But not everyone can afford to save money a few years down the road. Upfront price matters, and where it works, Canadians are ready to hit the accelerator.

“The proof is in the numbers.”

The post 75% EV sales spike in March a strong signal that 2026 will be Canada’s EV comeback year appeared first on Clean Energy Canada.

TORONTO — Evan Pivnick, associate director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada, made the following statement in response to the release of Powering Canada Strong: A National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy: 

“Today’s strategy sends an important signal that electrification and growing our electricity system is the nation-building effort we need to enhance our country’s economic competitiveness and energy security in a rapidly changing world. But while the strategy highlights the strength of Canada’s existing and relatively clean and affordable electricity system, it overstates the role of natural gas and understates the long-term energy security and affordability benefits of clean energy.

“We are pleased to see Canada’s focus on doubling Canada’s electricity grids.  Electrification offers a transformative opportunity to improve the lives of Canadians: it underlies affordability, energy security, and competitiveness. As consultations proceed, it’s critical that Canada does not lock in its exposure to fossil fuels as the rest of the world takes fuller advantage of the affordability and energy security benefits of clean power.  

“Clean electricity accounts for the majority of new demand growth globally not because it’s clean, but because in most markets around the world, solar or wind represent the cheapest available source of new electricity generation. Renewables are set to meet about 95% of global electricity demand growth between 2025 and 2027. Backed by the rapidly falling price of batteries, these resources are able to meet an ever-increasing share of the growing demand for electricity. The government’s focus should be on maximizing the cheapest resources available.

“The strategy contains some strong signals regarding forthcoming initiatives for everyday Canadians. We welcome the commitment to introduce measures to retrofit and electrify one million Canadian homes. Clean Energy Canada analysis consistently finds that Canadian households across the country can save hundreds of dollars per month by switching to clean energy options, including  heat pumps. These measures must apply broadly across households and heating types to help more Canadians access cost savings and cooling in a warming world. Young families must also not be forgotten in policy design, which should be careful not to exclude them, for example by setting overly strict income or housing type requirements.

“We also welcome the government’s commitment to provide further financial support to help double Canada’s electricity grid by 2050 at the lowest cost to ratepayers. The inclusion of demand-side measures (also known as distributed energy resources) such as heat pumps and two-way EV chargers is critical. As our research shows, these technologies play an essential role in meeting growing power demand and lowering the costs of grid build-out by allowing the electricity we have to be managed smarter, especially during peak periods.

“Transmission is rightfully prioritized in the strategy, and we welcome the referral of a new Transmission InterConnect Investment Strategy to the Major Projects Office, alongside the extension of the Clean Electricity ITC to major high-voltage intra-provincial transmission ties, complementing existing support for provincial interties. The strategy also gets the details right about the role the federal government must play in supporting new interties between provinces.

“Doubling the size of Canada’s electricity system is also an economic opportunity in its own right. Underpinning this goal are the wires, components, and technologies that a modern electricity system requires. Supply chains that Canada’s manufacturing sector could feed into. It is vital that the government move quickly on its planned analysis of Canada’s electricity component supply chain and on its commitments of further support for domestic manufacturers.

“But the details will be important. The strategy includes a worrying focus on natural gas, including proposing major changes to the Clean Electricity Regulations. Natural gas has a specific short term role, but only after we’ve maximized clean power solutions. “Renewables offer greater security and lower cost and, when paired with batteries and transmission lines, can address many of our energy system needs. Natural gas prices are subject to continental and global price fluctuations.

“This strategy will work in tandem with the further details promised tomorrow on the government’s plan to strengthen carbon pricing and incentivize industry to electrify. We look forward to Budget 2026 announcements supporting this strategy.

“As Prime Minister Carney recently stated, ‘Canada has a clean energy advantage.’ Let’s make sure the implementation of this strategy adequately capitalizes on it.”

The post Federal electricity strategy recognizes electrification is the name of the game—but misses the bullseye  appeared first on Clean Energy Canada.

Ashish Kothari

Originally publish by Meer on 13 May 2026.

Grassroots movements from across the Global South gather in Indonesia to confront war, inequality, and ecological collapse through collective alternatives.

Hope. Esperanza. Harapan. These words were frequently invoked by …

May 13, 2026 For Immediate Release:
Ute Mountain Utes, Navajos/Dine, Greenaction & Allies to Protest Energy Fuels’ uranium mines and the mill/dump next to White Mesa Ute Community – Saturday, May 16, noon

 

 

Click Here To Download the Press Advisory –> PRESS-ADVISORY_WMCC_La-Sal_Protest (1)

Click Here to Download Flyer –> May 16 No Uranium Protest at La Sal Junction

Image Description: PPT Members speaking and holding signs at a summer rally for transit funding

PPT Members are invited to join the leadership team to coordinate the strategic direction of Pittsburghers for Public Transit. Nominations open until July 5th. Voting open from July 8th to August 12th.

Pittsburghers for Public Transit is a grassroots union of transit riders, transit workers and neighbors. We fight for a public transit system that is expanded, reliable, accessible and affordable to all in Allegheny County, with no community left out. We operate as a member-led organization, which means it’s our members who elect our Board of Directors, develop and approve our annual strategic plan, and participate in our different committees to win our campaigns.

Our Board Election Season is a special time for PPT! Every year, the membership holds elections to choose a new round of leaders to serve on our Board of Directors.

to who understand the importance of our work for transit justice in Allegheny County, and are looking to get more involved in directing the course of our campaigns, communications, and actions. Nominations are open until July 6th. If you think you know what it takes to lead our Union, nominate yourself or someone else! The nomination of transit riders, transit workers, Youth, Black people, Indigenous people, People of Color, LGBTQ People, People with Disabilities, Immigrants, and Women are strongly encouraged.

Nominate yourself or someone who inspires you with their leadership, vision, and commitment to transit justice. Nomination Form More about nominations and voting:
1 seat is open for a PPT Member who is a unionized transit worker.
The PPT Board is accepting nominations from any General Members who are interested in running to join the board, but it will soon announce how many seats will be open for election.

See the list of current Board Members here.

The current board members whose seats are up for election are Andrew Hussein, Bill McDowell, Pearl Hughey, and Verna Johnson (who, after three successful terms is not eligible to run again for election).

Our bylaws require that each year’s election reserves a seat for a union transit worker. This person will be elected to the seat that is currently being filled by Sue Scanlon,

Nominations for these seats are open until July 5th. All current PPT Members are welcome to nominate themselves or another PPT Member. Outgoing board members who have served fewer than three terms are able to self-nominate or be nominated by another to serve another term.

PPT members are all those who support the Transit Bill of Rights, have participated in a PPT action or meeting, and have given dues of at least $2.75 cents within the last year (the cost of a single PRT fare).

PPT staff will confirm with each nominee whether they accept the nomination to be on the ballot. Each nominee will also be invited to submit up to 250 words about their background, experience, and vision for the organization. This can be submitted through the nomination form, email, or via phone and PPT staff will transcribe.

All nominee bios will be sent to PPT Members the second week of June and again the first week of July. Bios and photos will also be included in the ballot. Nominees will have 3 minutes to speak at the July PPT member meeting before votes are cast to highlight their vision for PPT and how their skills will help build the organization.

Voting in the 2025 Board of Directors election will open at PPT’s monthly meeting on July 10th, and remain open until the Summer Picnic on August 13th. PPT members cast their vote via an online form that will be shared at the July meeting and emailed, or by calling PPT’s Director.

PPT Board Structure and Expectations

Each July, PPT members vote for leaders to fill seats on PPT’s 5-15 member Board of Directors. Board Members serve a 2-year term. 2 seats must be filled by members of the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 85 (the union that represents all of the Port Authority’s bus operators and maintenance workers) or another transportation union that represents workers in Allegheny County because strong community/labor solidarity is a central belief of the organization. The other seats are filled by members who have had previous experience with PPT’s work, and are looking to bring their involvement to the next level.

Members of the Board are expected to attend quarterly Board meetings and should also stay engaged with General Membership Meetings on the second Wednesday of each month. Additionally, Coordinating Committee members will need to maintain active lines of communication with PPT staff and other PPT members to advise and assist with the organization’s strategy, tactics, structure, and financial sustainability. Board Members should also serve on one of PPT’s three committees (Organizing Committee, Communications Committee, and Research Committee).

An excerpt of Article IV of PPT’s bylaws with full detail of the expectations and powers of PPT’s board is included at the bottom of this blog.

2025 PPT Board of Directors Election Schedule

• Nominations are open until July 6th.
• Bios and photos of current nominees will be sent to members before the June PPT meeting and again before the July PPT meeting. Bios will also be included on the ballot.
• July 9th, 7pm: PPT Monthly Meeting with Board Nominee introductions and Elections, voting opens
• August 13th, 11:59pm: Final deadline for PPT members to submit their ballots online or via phone

Submit nominations through the link below, or by calling PPT’s Director, Laura Wiens, at 703-424-0854: Nomination Form Excerpt from Article IV of PPT’s Bylaws explaining expectations and operations of our Board: Article IV – Board of Directors  Section 1: Board Role, Size and Composition

The PPT Board of Directors shall hereinafter be referred to as the Board.

The Board is responsible for managing the business affairs, property, and policies of PPT. The Board shall be composed of five (5) to fifteen (15) members representing diverse interests and areas of expertise that strengthen the knowledge base of PPT. A minimum of two (2) seats will be reserved for members of the Amalgamated Transit Union or any union representing mass transportation workers in the Greater Pittsburgh Region. One of these reserved transportation union seats shall be elected in every second year. The Board shall have charge of the proper, normal, and usual expenditures and other business of the corporation; they shall enforce the provision of these bylaws; they shall abide by the policies and procedures set forth in the Policies and Procedures Manual, and shall enforce the rules and regulations set forth for the management, care, and governance of the property and affairs of the corporation. The Board may employ or appoint such person or persons, or agents, as they deem necessary to further the business of the corporation and shall set and adjust the compensation of all persons or agents so employed or appointed. 

The Board will hire an Executive Director who may hire such paid staff as they deem proper and necessary for the operation of the Corporation. The powers and duties of the Executive Director shall be assigned or delegated by the Board of Directors. The powers and duties of the paid staff, other than the Executive Director, shall be as assigned or as delegated by the Executive Director and/or the Board of Directors, in accordance with PPT personnel policies.  

Section 2. Qualifications for Board of Directors

Board members shall be elected from the eligible voting, dues-paying membership, and only dues-paying members are eligible to run in the elections. Candidates for the board must have been a dues-paying member for six (6) months prior to an election. 

Section 3. Compensation

The Board of PPT shall serve without compensation. Board members may be reimbursed for pre-approved expenses reasonably incurred on behalf of PPT. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to preclude a Board member from receiving compensation for their service to PPT in some other capacity, provided that the transaction has been reviewed and approved by the Finance Committee in compliance with PPT’s conflict of interest policy.

Section 4. Recruitment and Elections

Nominations for new Board members will be made and publicized by the Board, Membership, and/or staff, at least two (2) months before the Membership meeting at which the election will take place.  Elections for the Board shall take place every year, with five (5) seats elected in even years, and six (6) seats elected in odd years.

Elections shall be announced verbally at the two (2) immediately preceding membership meetings before the election.

Dues paying members in good standing are eligible to vote. 

Bios and platforms of candidates shall be distributed by email to members one month in advance of the vote, and publicized on PPT’s website. Candidates will have three (3) minutes to address the general membership in advance of the election during the general membership meeting. Voting will be open for a minimum of one (1) week.

Section 5. Powers

The government of PPT, the direction of its work, and the control of its property shall be vested in the Board. The Board shall be authorized to adopt such rules and regulations as may be deemed advisable for the government of the Board, the proper conduct of business of PPT, and the guidance of all committees, officers, and employees. The Board shall be empowered to do whatever in its judgement may be calculated to increase efficiency and add to the usefulness of PPT; and to carry out the main purpose of this association provided such action is not in conflict with these bylaws. 

Section 6. Limitations

PPT shall be non-partisan and non-sectarian in its activities. 

Section 7. Term of office and Maximum number of terms  

Directors shall be elected to a term of two (2) years. Board members shall serve a maximum of three (3) consecutive terms. 

Section 8. Meeting Attendance Requirement

Board members must attend a minimum of three (3) out of the four (4) quarterly board meetings per year by phone or presence. Failure to fulfill minimum board obligations may be accepted by the board as a de facto or implicit resignation. The Board member will be informed before the publication of such de facto resignation to the members.

The post Join Our Board! Nominations Are Open for PPT’s 2026 Board Elections appeared first on Pittsburghers for Public Transit.

Author: Tumsifu Robert

The Maasai communities of Emboreet and Loiborsoit A in northern Tanzania face an existential threat from a government proposal to convert over half of their communal land into the Lolkisale-Simanjiro Game Reserve, transferring land governance from village councils to the Tanzania Wildlife Management Authority. For a people whose cultural identity and economic survival are rooted in pastoralism and rotational grazing, losing this land would be catastrophic. Framed by authorities as a conservation measure, the proposal is widely seen by villagers as a pretext for elite interests in trophy hunting, ecotourism, and luxury development.

This case study documents community voices, examines the socio-economic and environmental stakes, and calls for inclusive, rights-based approaches to land management that recognize indigenous peoples as conservation partners rather than obstacles.

Read the case study here

Author: Zuwena Shame Khatib

Following a 2024 memorandum of understanding between the Tanzanian government and the Oman Airports Authority to develop luxury infrastructure at Kilimanjaro International Airport (KIA), more than 20,000 Maasai residents from eight legally recognized villages in the Hai and Arumeru districts were forcibly evicted from land they had inhabited for generations. Compensation was grossly inadequate — some families received the equivalent of $300 USD — and the process was carried out under military coercion. Relocated communities were left without schools, health centers, or grazing land. Legal challenges have been largely stonewalled by government authorities.

The case exposes a recurring pattern of state-sponsored dispossession of Maasai communities in the name of tourism and development, and raises urgent questions about the accountability of foreign investors.

Read the case study here

Author: CICODEV Africa

In Senegal’s Thiès region, the expansion of phosphate and mineral mining by SEPHOS (a subsidiary of FERTINAGRO NUTRIENTES) and GCO (a joint venture between France’s Eramet and Mineral Deposits Limited) has devastated the agricultural communities of Koudiadiène, Pambal, Diogo, and neighboring villages. Since 2009, land acquisitions have proceeded with minimal transparency and inadequate compensation, forcing farming families off ancestral lands.

The resulting displacement, water contamination, loss of livelihoods, and social fragmentation paint a stark picture of development prioritized over human rights. The case calls for stronger legal protections for customary land rights, greater corporate accountability, and more inclusive models of extractive development.

Read the case study here

In the Dakar suburb of Rufisque, the 56-hectare Lendeng market gardening zone — a vital “green lung” supporting 185 farmers, over 2,000 direct jobs, and approximately €1.8 billion in annual turnover — faces encroachment from private investors and urban developers. Despite a presidential decree protecting the area for agricultural use, fraudulent land acquisitions, including a 2024 bid to build a petrol station on the site, have sparked community-wide resistance.

Led prominently by women, local farmers organized protests, legal actions, and civil society coalitions to defend their land, their agroecological practices, and their food sovereignty. The case highlights the vulnerability of communities without formal land titles and the power of grassroots mobilization.

Read the case study here