Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Letitia James is suing the world’s biggest meat company. It might be a tipping point for greenwashing

News Feed
Friday, April 5, 2024

When the office of the New York attorney general, Letitia James, announced that it would be suing the world’s largest meat company, JBS, for misleading customers about its climate commitments, it caused a stir far beyond the world of food. That’s because the suit’s impact has the potential to influence the approach all kinds of big businesses take in their advertising about sustainability, according to experts.It’s just one in a string of greenwashing lawsuits being brought against large airline, automobile and fashion companies of late. “It’s been 20 years of companies lying about their environmental and climate justice impacts. And it feels like all of a sudden, from Europe to the US, the crackdown is beginning to happen,” said Todd Paglia, executive director of environmental non-profit Stand.earth. “I think greenwash[ing] is actually one of the pivotal issues in the next five years.”Research suggests that citizens are increasingly demanding more sustainably produced goods, and big businesses are taking note. But rather than actually changing their practices, many instead turn to messaging that falsely implies their products are better for the Earth than they actually are in order to keep customers happy.That’s what the attorney general has asserted that JBS – a parent company that owns brands and subsidiaries like Swift, Certified Angus Beef, Pilgrim’s Pride and Grass Run Farms – is doing. The legal complaint notes that “the JBS Group has made sweeping representations to consumers about its commitment to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that it will be ‘Net Zero by 2040.’” But those claims aren’t grounded in reality, the complaint goes on to argue, not only because JBS isn’t taking concrete steps toward those goals, but because as recently as September 2023, the CEO admitted in a public forum that the company didn’t even know how to calculate all of its emissions. It follows that what can’t be measured won’t be mitigated.“Consumers are beginning to be aware of the fact that meat, and particularly beef, has a very, very high climate impact. JBS is fully aware of this, and trying to get ahead of that by telling consumers, ‘Oh, don’t worry, we’ve got it under control,’” said Peter Lehner, managing attorney of the sustainable food and farming program at Earthjustice. “But these emissions are so big and so hard to abate that JBS’s actions don’t show that it’s plausible that they’ll get to their claim.”Making food emissions countThe climate crisis is often framed as primarily a problem caused by fossil fuels, and they do play an important role in heating the planet. But even if we could magically reduce fossil fuel emissions to zero tomorrow, according to data scientist and Oxford researcher Hannah Ritchie, our current food systems mean we’d still blow “well past the 1.5 degrees carbon budget, and use up nearly all of our two degrees budget”. What that ought to tell us, she added, “is that we just cannot tackle climate change without also tackling food systems”.And beef, of which JBS is the largest producer in the world, far outpaces not only plant-based food, but other animal sources of nutrition as well, when it comes to climate impacts. Cows belch methane, and they’re largely fed grains that are grown in fertilizer-intensive monocultures where excess fertilizer causes water pollution or turns into nitrous oxide, another potent greenhouse gas, said Lehner. And that’s not even taking into account the slashing and burning of the Amazon to make room for more cattle, which JBS has been linked to many times over.Cattle ranching produces methane, and fertilizer runoff from the cultivation of the plants that cows eat causes water pollution. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty ImagesStill, for all the environmental stakes, Lehner highlighted that the suit is at its core a consumer fraud case first and foremost. This isn’t the first climate case to take on corporate greenwashing, he said, pointing to prior cases against Volkswagen, which was sued for lying about how “clean” its diesel engines were, and suits against Delta and KLM, which were taken to court for greenwashing the climate impacts of flying. But the JBS case marks “the first one against a beef company”, Lehner said.It’s also unique because of who filed the suit, according to Delci Winders, director of the Animal Law and Policy Institute at Vermont Law and Graduate School. While most of the other greenwashing cases have been brought by non-profits or even individuals, the JBS suit coming directly from a state attorney general stands out. “To see the government step in like this sends a strong signal,” Winders said.The pursuit of a case was perhaps spurred on by how flagrantly JBS has gone about making unsubstantiated claims, even ignoring the advice of the advertising arm of the Better Business Bureau, a self-regulating industry body, that warned JBS to be careful about its climate-focused messaging.The odds of the attorney general winning the case look good. Lehner, who worked at the New York attorney general’s office for eight years, said: “The evidence in this case is at least as strong, if not much stronger, than the evidence and many other consumer fraud cases that have been successful.”Paglia put it even more forcefully: there’s “no chance, really”, of the attorney general losing, in his estimation.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionImplicationsSo what will it mean if the biggest meat company on Earth loses a lawsuit aimed at tamping down greenwashing?First, it would mean that JBS can no longer claim to be some kind of climate hero. Rather than stating that it’s headed for net zero or climate neutrality, it would probably need to stick to saying “‘we sell meat,’ and that would be the extent”, said Paglia.Even if JBS were somehow to win the case in New York, it would still emerge from the battle on shakier ground if other US states, or countries elsewhere, decided to take the company to court. “They would be quite vulnerable under other state consumer protection laws,” said Winders.It’s not hard to imagine future suits down the line, especially since this is not the first action taken against JBS. Earlier this year, US senators wrote a bipartisan letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission asking that the company be blocked from listing on the New York Stock Exchange, essentially alleging that the company engages in investor fraud. And a call for a criminal investigation of banks invested in JBS was filed in France late last year arguing that the banks’ financial support for Brazil’s biggest beef companies was contributing to illegal deforestation in the Amazon.It’s not clear exactly how long the attorney general’s case will take, and that could be affected by whether JBS’s legal team sees it as more advantageous to be minimally cooperative to slow the case down or whether it tries to settle quickly to get the issue out of the public eye, noted Winders.But whatever happens, the repercussions will probably affect how more and more businesses operate – or at least what they tell the public – about their climate bona fides in the future.“If JBS loses – and they’re going to – I think it’s already sending a signal to major companies that you cannot just say ‘We’re Paris [agreement]-aligned.’ You cannot just say ‘We’re going to be net zero in 2030’ when you have no plan, and the curve for your climate pollution is going straight up,” said Paglia. “You cannot keep lying like this.”

New York attorney general’s lawsuit accuses JBS of deceiving customers about being climate-friendly – and the implications could be far-reachingWhen the office of the New York attorney general, Letitia James, announced that it would be suing the world’s largest meat company, JBS, for misleading customers about its climate commitments, it caused a stir far beyond the world of food. That’s because the suit’s impact has the potential to influence the approach all kinds of big businesses take in their advertising about sustainability, according to experts.It’s just one in a string of greenwashing lawsuits being brought against large airline, automobile and fashion companies of late. “It’s been 20 years of companies lying about their environmental and climate justice impacts. And it feels like all of a sudden, from Europe to the US, the crackdown is beginning to happen,” said Todd Paglia, executive director of environmental non-profit Stand.earth. “I think greenwash[ing] is actually one of the pivotal issues in the next five years.” Continue reading...

When the office of the New York attorney general, Letitia James, announced that it would be suing the world’s largest meat company, JBS, for misleading customers about its climate commitments, it caused a stir far beyond the world of food. That’s because the suit’s impact has the potential to influence the approach all kinds of big businesses take in their advertising about sustainability, according to experts.

It’s just one in a string of greenwashing lawsuits being brought against large airline, automobile and fashion companies of late. “It’s been 20 years of companies lying about their environmental and climate justice impacts. And it feels like all of a sudden, from Europe to the US, the crackdown is beginning to happen,” said Todd Paglia, executive director of environmental non-profit Stand.earth. “I think greenwash[ing] is actually one of the pivotal issues in the next five years.”

Research suggests that citizens are increasingly demanding more sustainably produced goods, and big businesses are taking note. But rather than actually changing their practices, many instead turn to messaging that falsely implies their products are better for the Earth than they actually are in order to keep customers happy.

That’s what the attorney general has asserted that JBS – a parent company that owns brands and subsidiaries like Swift, Certified Angus Beef, Pilgrim’s Pride and Grass Run Farms – is doing. The legal complaint notes that “the JBS Group has made sweeping representations to consumers about its commitment to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, claiming that it will be ‘Net Zero by 2040.’” But those claims aren’t grounded in reality, the complaint goes on to argue, not only because JBS isn’t taking concrete steps toward those goals, but because as recently as September 2023, the CEO admitted in a public forum that the company didn’t even know how to calculate all of its emissions. It follows that what can’t be measured won’t be mitigated.

“Consumers are beginning to be aware of the fact that meat, and particularly beef, has a very, very high climate impact. JBS is fully aware of this, and trying to get ahead of that by telling consumers, ‘Oh, don’t worry, we’ve got it under control,’” said Peter Lehner, managing attorney of the sustainable food and farming program at Earthjustice. “But these emissions are so big and so hard to abate that JBS’s actions don’t show that it’s plausible that they’ll get to their claim.”

Making food emissions count

The climate crisis is often framed as primarily a problem caused by fossil fuels, and they do play an important role in heating the planet. But even if we could magically reduce fossil fuel emissions to zero tomorrow, according to data scientist and Oxford researcher Hannah Ritchie, our current food systems mean we’d still blow “well past the 1.5 degrees carbon budget, and use up nearly all of our two degrees budget”. What that ought to tell us, she added, “is that we just cannot tackle climate change without also tackling food systems”.

And beef, of which JBS is the largest producer in the world, far outpaces not only plant-based food, but other animal sources of nutrition as well, when it comes to climate impacts. Cows belch methane, and they’re largely fed grains that are grown in fertilizer-intensive monocultures where excess fertilizer causes water pollution or turns into nitrous oxide, another potent greenhouse gas, said Lehner. And that’s not even taking into account the slashing and burning of the Amazon to make room for more cattle, which JBS has been linked to many times over.

Cattle ranching produces methane, and fertilizer runoff from the cultivation of the plants that cows eat causes water pollution. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Still, for all the environmental stakes, Lehner highlighted that the suit is at its core a consumer fraud case first and foremost. This isn’t the first climate case to take on corporate greenwashing, he said, pointing to prior cases against Volkswagen, which was sued for lying about how “clean” its diesel engines were, and suits against Delta and KLM, which were taken to court for greenwashing the climate impacts of flying. But the JBS case marks “the first one against a beef company”, Lehner said.

It’s also unique because of who filed the suit, according to Delci Winders, director of the Animal Law and Policy Institute at Vermont Law and Graduate School. While most of the other greenwashing cases have been brought by non-profits or even individuals, the JBS suit coming directly from a state attorney general stands out. “To see the government step in like this sends a strong signal,” Winders said.

The pursuit of a case was perhaps spurred on by how flagrantly JBS has gone about making unsubstantiated claims, even ignoring the advice of the advertising arm of the Better Business Bureau, a self-regulating industry body, that warned JBS to be careful about its climate-focused messaging.

The odds of the attorney general winning the case look good. Lehner, who worked at the New York attorney general’s office for eight years, said: “The evidence in this case is at least as strong, if not much stronger, than the evidence and many other consumer fraud cases that have been successful.”

Paglia put it even more forcefully: there’s “no chance, really”, of the attorney general losing, in his estimation.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

Implications

So what will it mean if the biggest meat company on Earth loses a lawsuit aimed at tamping down greenwashing?

First, it would mean that JBS can no longer claim to be some kind of climate hero. Rather than stating that it’s headed for net zero or climate neutrality, it would probably need to stick to saying “‘we sell meat,’ and that would be the extent”, said Paglia.

Even if JBS were somehow to win the case in New York, it would still emerge from the battle on shakier ground if other US states, or countries elsewhere, decided to take the company to court. “They would be quite vulnerable under other state consumer protection laws,” said Winders.

It’s not hard to imagine future suits down the line, especially since this is not the first action taken against JBS. Earlier this year, US senators wrote a bipartisan letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission asking that the company be blocked from listing on the New York Stock Exchange, essentially alleging that the company engages in investor fraud. And a call for a criminal investigation of banks invested in JBS was filed in France late last year arguing that the banks’ financial support for Brazil’s biggest beef companies was contributing to illegal deforestation in the Amazon.

It’s not clear exactly how long the attorney general’s case will take, and that could be affected by whether JBS’s legal team sees it as more advantageous to be minimally cooperative to slow the case down or whether it tries to settle quickly to get the issue out of the public eye, noted Winders.

But whatever happens, the repercussions will probably affect how more and more businesses operate – or at least what they tell the public – about their climate bona fides in the future.

“If JBS loses – and they’re going to – I think it’s already sending a signal to major companies that you cannot just say ‘We’re Paris [agreement]-aligned.’ You cannot just say ‘We’re going to be net zero in 2030’ when you have no plan, and the curve for your climate pollution is going straight up,” said Paglia. “You cannot keep lying like this.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Illinois passed a law to clean up coal ash 5 years ago. What’s taking so long?

In one Chicago suburb, people have been waiting for relief for years.

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between WBEZ and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. Sign up for WBEZ newsletters to get local news you can trust. Celeste Flores can tell you the good news about living in Waukegan, Illinois: The air is safer to breathe now. “Thankfully, we are no longer breathing coal being burned,” said Flores, a co-chair of Clean Power Lake County, or CPLC, an environmental justice organization serving the mostly Latino suburb about 40 miles north of Chicago. The explanation behind that is simple: The Waukegan Generating Station near the shore of Lake Michigan closed in 2022 after decades of pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and coal ash into the ground.  Flores can also tell you the bad news: The toxic coal ash is still there, dangerously close to the groundwater.  But the explanation behind why the pollution remains in the ground is more complicated than shutting a plant down. Coal ash is a cocktail of hazardous pollutants leftover from coal combustion. Across the country, plant operators dumped that heavy metal-laden sludge into holes in the ground, sometimes called ponds or impoundments. Sometimes these ponds are lined, and sometimes they aren’t. None of the ponds in Waukegan that are lined meet current state and federal standards.  In 2019, the state confirmed what advocates like Flores had long suspected: that coal ash had leached into nearby groundwater. Worse yet, the coal ash was stored right near Lake Michigan. That same year, Flores helped push Illinois lawmakers to pass landmark coal ash regulation, which compelled managers of coal ash owners to submit plans to either clean up their operations or shut down.  About three years ago the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) finalized exactly how operators had to submit these proposals. But plans are on hold for securing the three coal ash storage pits in Waukegan. The IEPA hasn’t finalized permits for those sites, so they continue to threaten groundwater. “When it comes to the implementation of these rules, it’s 2024 and we don’t have permits yet,” said Flores. “And I don’t think anyone was expecting that.”  Celeste Flores, left, said the air is easier to breathe now in Waukegan, Illinois. Both she and Dulce Ortiz, right, worked to get a coal-burning plant in their suburb shut down. Now they’re trying to remove the coal ash that threatens their drinking water and Lake Michigan. Juanpablo Ramirez-Franco / Grist Illinois set itself apart from the majority of the country when it finalized its coal ash rules back in 2021. Most states, save for a handful like North Carolina and Michigan, relied on 2015 federal guidelines designed to monitor and clean up only some coal ash residuals.  For years, the federal rule excluded inactive coal ash ponds and landfills from oversight. An analysis by Earthjustice found that the 2015 rules grandfathered in over 300 of these sites across 48 states. Illinois’ more protective mandate, however, brought them into the state’s regulatory orbit. Even so, advocates say the forthcoming permits are dragging. “The Illinois EPA has been reviewing these proposed permits for almost two years,” said Andrew Rehn, the director of climate policy at Prairie Rivers Network in Champaign. “And that’s, like, a long time for these permits to sit and just be under review.”  The Illinois EPA is currently reviewing 44 separate coal ash surface impoundment permit applications for 25 current or former power plant sites across the state. Earlier this month, two and a half years since the first permit applications were submitted, the agency issued its first two draft permits.   The agency said in a statement to Grist and WBEZ that, “due to the complexity of the information required in the applications, in most cases [the] Illinois EPA has requested additional information or clarification from the applicants.” The statement went on to say that it can take weeks to months to “gather additional information or to analyze groundwater modeling data.” Coal power plants have sought to make exceptions for their permits and have effectively stalled the permit process until the Illinois Pollution Control Board is able to resolve the requests. According to the IEPA, this is the major holdup with the Waukegan permits.  Meanwhile, new federal regulations issued last week give the nation’s fleet of coal power plants and new natural gas plants an ultimatum: adapt or shut down. The power plants have eight years to come up with a plan to capture 90 percent of their greenhouse gas emissions or commit to closing by 2039.  Advocates with the Waukegan group see this long awaited move as a step closer to phasing out coal for good. Although the coal business is in decline, it still has an outsized role in driving climate change and polluting surrounding communities. More than half of the country’s carbon dioxide emissions from electric power generation are attributable to burning coal, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  Read Next EPA finally takes on abandoned coal ash ponds — but it might be too late Gautama Mehta Almost every coal power plant operator in the country is now staring down the same finish line in 2039. Included in the new rule are stricter safeguards for the coal ash pollution those plants will leave behind in the meantime. “With the 2015 rules, there was a circle of ponds and landfills that were subject to regulation,” said Megan Wachspress, a staff attorney with the Sierra Club. “That circle of ponds and landfills and other dump sites just got bigger.” Inactive coal ash ponds and landfills are now part of the family of coal ash dumps that the federal government demands operators monitor and clean up when they threaten water resources.  If it was just a coal plant in Waukegan, Flores said, her organization’s fight might be more manageable. “But there’s so many other things.”   There are five Superfund sites scattered in and around the north shore suburb. These are abandoned lots so contaminated with hazardous materials that the federal government has taken over cleanup. Pointing in several directions, Flores said there are Superfund sites immediately north, south, and west of the old coal plant. And that means generations of Waukegan residents have had to struggle with medical problems and even premature death because of their toxic environment.  There’s no question for Flores about what comes next: The coal ash must be removed from the ground. But to do that, state and federal agencies need to pick up the pace.  “It’s about making sure that we know that we’re leaving behind a community that’s healthier than what we received,” Flores said. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Illinois passed a law to clean up coal ash 5 years ago. What’s taking so long? on May 3, 2024.

Business
Climate
CO2

Why a CA campaign finance law could get blown up

In 2022, California lawmakers tried to stop “pay to play” by local elected officials — taking campaign money from various groups and then approving licenses, building permits and other goodies for the same donors.  The law passed easily, but business groups sued to kill it in 2023. They failed, but now, there’s a move afoot […]

The floor of the state Senate chambers at the state Capitol in Sacramento on April 29, 2024. Photo by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters In 2022, California lawmakers tried to stop “pay to play” by local elected officials — taking campaign money from various groups and then approving licenses, building permits and other goodies for the same donors.  The law passed easily, but business groups sued to kill it in 2023. They failed, but now, there’s a move afoot in the Legislature to roll it back, as CalMatters politics reporter Yue Stella Yu explains. The law at issue limits campaign contributions to $250 to local office holders from a donor with official business before those officials. Senate Bill 1243, which got through the Senate elections committee on Tuesday, would raise that limit to $1,000 and loosen other restrictions — which the current law’s defenders say would gut it. The committee debate got spicy: The bill’s author, Sen. Bill Dodd, a Napa Democrat, rammed it through without any amendments, over the objections of chairperson Catherine Blakespear, an Encinitas Democrat, who wanted to treat all groups equally and not have special carve-outs for housing and unions. Dodd told Stella that he believes legislators didn’t understand the implications of the 2022 law when he voted for it. Now, however, “it has become very apparent that there are problems.” Dodd, during the hearing: “The idea that our local elected officials can be bought and sold for $250 is both laughable and frankly offensive.” But Blakespear, who cast the lone “no” vote in committee Tuesday, said Dodd’s bill “has too many problems.” California Common Cause and California Clean Money Campaign argue that the proposal favors certain industries and reduces transparency. And what does the author of the 2022 law think of all this? Sen. Steve Glazer, an Orinda Democrat, told Stella that Dodd’s bill “makes it easier to corrupt local officials and it is wrong.” Read more about the debate in Stella’s story. In other Capitol happenings on Tuesday: Food insecurity: As part of #HungerActionDay, food banks and anti-poverty organizations gathered to speak out against potential cuts to CalWORKs programs, as well as to expand food assistance programs such as CalFresh. According to the California Budget & Policy Center, 1 in 6 California children are food insecure. Victims’ rights: The California Partnership to End Domestic Violence rallied with other victims advocates and legislators to push back against potential funding cuts to crime victim services. In addition to the state’s budget shortfall, federal funds for these services are declining, leaving California nonprofit programs and domestic violence shelters at risk. Offshore wind: Several Assemblymembers pushed for a proposed $1 billion bond issue to finance port improvements for offshore wind turbines. Assemblymember Rick Zbur, a Los Angeles Democrat and a co-author of the proposal, said securing funding for wind energy projects “is a crucial step” to meet the state’s climate goals. Your favorite state, in photos: CalMatters has teamed up with CatchLight to launch California in Pictures, a new monthly newsletter that highlights compelling photojournalism from across the state. Sign up to receive it. And read more about it from our engagement team. Spring member drive: We rely on your support. Join our nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom today, with a tax-deductible donation, to build a better California for tomorrow. Give now. Other Stories You Should Know Wildfires and insurance Donna Yutzy cleans the gutters of her home of flammable debris in the Magalia area of Butte County on Nov. 4, 2023. Photo by Manuel Orbegozo for CalMatters As some major insurers continue to halt or stop offering policies — leaving California homeowners struggling to find coverage — legislation pushing companies to consider wildfire mitigation efforts are underway, writes CalMatters economy reporter Levi Sumagaysay. Research shows that mitigation, such as altering a roof’s shape, installing vents or clearing out nearby trees and bushes, is effective at reducing wildfire risk — at times by as much as 75%. Three bills underscore the weight legislators put on mitigation as a way to ease the state’s insurance market mess.  SB 1060 would require insurance companies to incorporate mitigation when considering whether to write or renew policies. AB 2983 calls for the state Insurance Department and the California Office of Emergency Services to determine whether investments in mitigation have any impact on the availability of insurance policies. AB 2416 would require the insurance department to regularly determine whether to update its 2022 Safer from Wildfires guidelines, which detail steps property owners can take to protect their homes. According to the department’s website, adopting its measures “can help you save money on your insurance.” Sen. Josh Becker, a Menlo Park Democrat who authored SB 1060, told Levi that “we believe that if you do the homework, you should get the credit.”  But others are skeptical how seriously insurers take these prevention efforts into account. At a public hearing on insurance issues last week, Nevada County Supervisor Heidi Hall said that residents in her community have spent “tens of thousands of dollars” protecting their homes, and that the county has spent millions to curb wildfires. And yet, “we’re not seeing discounts from insurance companies. They’re still leaving,” she said. Read more about the bills in Levi’s story. CA Forever gets closer to vote Land where California Forever plans on building its new city in Solano County on Feb. 16, 2024. Photo by Loren Elliott for CalMatters Also from CalMatters economy reporter Levi Sumagaysay: The tech billionaire-backed initiative to create a new community in Solano County believes it has collected enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot, California Forever CEO Jan Sramek said Tuesday.  California Forever submitted 20,472 signatures to the county registrar, more than the 13,062 valid signatures needed for the controversial measure to be put on the ballot. If it makes it on the ballot, voters will be asked to rezone farmland for the proposed development between Travis Air Force Base and Rio Vista. At a press conference in downtown Vallejo, Sramek said the number of signatures collected is higher than he expected and is “a testament” to how much support there is for the project. The project promises to bring to northeast Solano County a walkable community, help toward down payments for new homes and more. Sramek added that by signing the petition, supporters said “we want to end long commutes. We want (more) homes now.” California Forever also promises thousands of jobs paying at least 125% of the average wages in Solano County — or more than $80,000 annually — but has not named employers that will provide those jobs; Sramek said the company will be “talking about” possible employers in the next few weeks. Greg Ritchie, vice mayor of Vacaville, at the press conference: “The new city will enable people to experience upward mobility… not just gigs, but employment that can turn into amazing careers.” Solano Together, a coalition of community residents, officials and environmental groups against the project, pointed to its recent poll that showed overwhelming opposition, and said a new city “would increase traffic while paving over valuable agricultural lands and diverting valuable resources from existing communities.” Fairfield Mayor Catherine Moy said she wants to protect Travis Air Force Base, the county’s “way of farming” and its open space. Moy: “I’m not convinced at all that this is good for Solano County.” The county registrar released a schedule of what comes next: It will count the signatures through May 6, and conduct a random review of 3% of the signatures to verify them through June 11. If the number of approved signers falls within 95% to 110% of 13,062, the registrar will conduct a full review of the signatures through Sept. 5. How did colleges spend COVID cash Mikala Hutchinson, a MiraCosta College student who received financial aid, prepares dinner with her children at home in Oceanside on April 26, 2024. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters After receiving a multibillion-dollar windfall from Congress during the COVID pandemic, how did California public colleges and universities spend all their cash? California colleges struggling with steep enrollment drops and lost tuition dollars received more than $8 billion from the federal government in 2021, according to CalMatters reporter Adam Echelman. The schools had limited guidance on how to spend the money, though they were required to give about half towards “institutional” needs and the other half directly to students. With the final June 30 deadline to spend the money looming, most schools have burned through the cash, often through major purchases. UCLA, for example, reported spending most of its institutional funds to recoup “lost revenue” from tuition and dorms. And Evergreen Valley College in San Jose spent its institutional needs dollars on new technology, tuition discounts and waivers for students with fines and fees.  The money for students went to those most in need, typically less than $1,000 each. According to federal reports, students often spent it on daily necessities, such as housing, food and transportation. For more details on how colleges and students spent their COVID relief dollars, read Adam’s story. CalMatters Commentary CalMatters columnist Dan Walters: California’s perpetual political war over housing has two new battlegrounds: one on the San Francisco peninsula, the other in Southern California. Ideas festival: CalMatters is hosting its first one, in Sacramento on June 5-6. Featured speakers include Julián Castro, CEO of the Latino Community Foundation; Nicholas Johnson, public policy director for Lyft; and Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney and MSNBC legal analyst. Find out more from our engagement team and buy tickets here (early bird prices end today). Other things worth your time: Some stories may require a subscription to read. CA budget deficit could get worse for Gov. Newsom // The Sacramento Bee CA population grows, slightly, for first time since COVID pandemic // Politico  State cancer research ‘success story’ ends quietly // Capitol Weekly CA college protests: What’s happening at each campus // San Francisco Chronicle Basic income could get thousands off the streets, researchers say // Los Angeles Times Mercury News, other papers sue Microsoft, OpenAI over AI // The Mercury News CA’s new junk fees law bans restaurant surcharges, fees // San Francisco Chronicle Jury convicts three Aryan Brotherhood CA prison gang members // The Sacramento Bee Mexicans in San Diego could help decide national election // The San Diego Union-Tribune SF mayor proposes $360M bond for infrastructure, seismic safety // San Francisco Chronicle San Leandro to pay $3.9M settlement in beating of mentally disabled man // East Bay Times

Business
Climate
Food

Embattled Clackamas County commissioner Mark Shull makes bid for reelection after controversial term

Shull, whose political career is marred by controversy, faces three challengers for his seat on the Clackamas County board.

A Clackamas County commissioner whose first term has been marked by controversy and a failed recall is running for reelection — but declining to raise any money for his campaign.U.S. Army veteran Mark Shull, who was condemned by his fellow commissioners in 2021 for Islamophobic social media posts and comparing vaccine restrictions to Jim Crow laws, among other things, is being challenged by three local business leaders in the May primary.Commission Chair Tootie Smith, a fellow Republican to Shull on the commission, is also up for reelection. Clackamas County commissioners are elected countywide, as opposed to being elected in separate districts, like in Multnomah County.Shull faces challenges from business professionals Melissa Fireside and Tina Irvine, as well as former county employee Rae Gordon, who worked in tourism for 10 years. Fireside has taken the lead in campaign financing and lists endorsements from U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley and former Clackamas County Chair Charlotte Lehan. Irvine carries the endorsements of Clackamas County District Attorney John Wentworth, the Portland Metro Chamber and the Clackamas County Peace Officer Association.Irvine, former managing partner of Express Employment Professionals’ Oregon City branch, wants to improve public safety, lower the cost of living and expand affordable housing to address homelessness. A daughter of a police officer, Irvine said she is a strong supporter of local law enforcement.Irvine does not have previous government experience, but she has served on the board of Oregon City-based Children’s Center, a nonprofit that offers child abuse and neglect evaluations, and as chair, secretary and treasurer of nonprofit Clackamas Workforce Partnership, which aims to create equitable and inclusive work environments.Tina Irvine, former managing partner at Express Employment Professionals, poses at work site in Clackamas County.Courtesy of campaignShe’s raised $49,700 for her campaign.“I am a well-respected and a trusted leader within the county,” Irvine wrote in response to a questionnaire from The Oregonian/OregonLive. “Over the past 20 years, I haven’t just talked about the issues; I have rolled up my sleeves and done the work to help make families, businesses and nonprofit organizations thrive.”Fireside, endorsed by the Democratic Party of Oregon’s gun owners caucus in the nonpartisan race for Position 4, is the owner of a construction management consulting company and a former member of Clackamas County’s advisory Mental Health & Addictions Council. She also chaired the county’s board that recommends pay levels for elected officials. In 2020, Fireside ran unsuccessfully for the Lake Oswego City Council.“As a small business owner, educator, and working mom, I believe we need leaders that value and champion our workers, families and communities so everyone has an equal opportunity to thrive,” Fireside wrote in a response to an Oregonian/OregonLive questionnaire.Melissa Fireside, owner of a construction consulting business, speaks about her goals if elected.Courtesy of campaignHer campaign focuses on economic development, community health and increasing housing availability. Fireside has raised $67,600 for her campaign and is endorsed by Democratic state Rep. Jules Walters of West Linn as well as the Democratic Party of Clackamas County.Gordon, the third challenger, worked for the county’s tourism and cultural affairs department for a decade. She left that role in 2015, but returned on a one-year contract in 2021 to help manage the county’s COVID-19 response, which included overseeing supplies and working as an analyst for vaccine clinics. She previously owned a marketing company in Oregon City and serves as president of two nonprofits, including the Cascade Blues Association, a low-budget nonprofit that promotes blues music.Gordon’s bid focuses on developing wrap-around mental health and substance use treatment and family mediation services. She also highlighted a need for effective public safety responses and accountability. Her campaign has raised $15,400.“What we need now in Clackamas County and frankly throughout our nation are community-driven leaders who are approachable, bring people together and are advocates for every voice,” Gordon wrote. “I have honed these skills.”Rae Gordon, a blues singer and former Clackamas County employee, hands a flier to a voter.Courtesy of campaignShull, who declined an opportunity to respond to questions from The Oregonian/OregonLive, ran into controversy soon after winning office for the first time in 2020. He defeated incumbent Ken Humberston in a runoff, 50.6% to 48.7%. In January 2021, backlash erupted in the county after residents discovered Shull had posted derogatory comments about Islam and Muslims as well as transgender people and the Black Lives Matter movement on social media.Less than two weeks after he took office, he faced calls to resign.In a commission meeting, Smith, the chair, read aloud a resolution that condemned Shull for “bigoted statements” and called for his resignation.He apologized and voted for the resolution but remained on the board. Legally, the board could not force a resignation.Outrage resurfaced again six months later, when Shull compared COVID-19 vaccine passports to Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation. Smith and the other three commissioners at the time voted to strip Shull of all liaison duties and committee assignments.In September 2021, Shull shared a meme on Facebook that appeared to compare COVID-19 health restrictions to the Holocaust. The post, which was quickly taken down, once again drew disapproval from members of the Clackamas County board. Shull defended his actions, saying the post was sent to him by community members who were concerned about potentially losing their jobs if they did not get vaccinated.Although his actions caused rifts with fellow commissioners, his policy stances have not always been so divisive. Like most Clackamas County officials, he was a strong opponent of plans to toll improved Oregon interstates. Gov. Tina Kotek paused those plans last month but tolling is sure to resurface in 2025 as state lawmakers debate how to finance needed transportation improvements.Shull is calling for an audit of the Oregon Department of Transportation to find solutions that don’t involve tolling. He has also vowed to fight any new taxes on Clackamas voters.Shull was a leading force in dismantling the county’s Equity and Inclusion Office last year. He voted to strike the office’s nearly $830,000 budget. Shull did not respond to calls, messages or emails for comment.Due to Shull’s controversial term and his opponents’ inexperience in elected office, the race could go into a run-off. If one candidate does not secure at least 50% of the vote, the top two vote-getters will move on to the November ballot.Below are answers from Fireside, Irvine and Gordon to five key questions posed by The Oregonian/OregonLive. Some responses have been lightly edited for style or to comply with word limits.Tell us three concrete goals you have for Clackamas County in the next two years if elected or reelected.Irvine: Permanently stop tolling: We simply cannot put more financial burden on the backs of our constituents. Even with the governor’s pause to a regional tolling plan, we need to stay diligent on this issue. I do not support tolling now and I will not support tolling in the future. Drive economic development: We must be strategic to attract, retain and grow our employer base. Build stronger community: Working families need quality child care. Developing an early child care business accelerator program will do just that. This program assists aspiring child care providers to build business plans to open neighborhood centers.Fireside: Enhance labor and economic development: Create union (jobs) and living wages across Clackamas County through partnerships with the trades, community colleges and business while enhancing opportunities for career bound youth. Diversify housing options: Get our (Metro homelessness tax) dollars out the door and build to scale supportive and workforce housing. Everyone deserves to have access to the generational wealth, mobility and security homeownership provides. Protect our natural resources: Our workforce must be empowered to get our Climate Action plan off the shelf so our communities see an immediate investment in natural disaster preparedness, infrastructure, and services through a climate change lens.Gordon: Family-homeless relative mediation: We need to be more creative in our approach and utilize existing county mediation services to (help homeless individuals) build bridges to family members. Mental health/illness: More than 50% will be diagnosed with a mental illness or disorder. County leaders need to model open and honest communications regarding mental illness to take the stigma off of pursuing mental health services. I intend to increase access for all citizens and homeless individuals. Public Safety: Citizens deserve to feel safe in their community and to trust and respect their providers. I would hold those who disrespect the badge accountable.Clackamas County has reported significant results in decreasing homelessness — how would you build on that and what additional solutions will you bring to the table?Irvine: Our leadership within the region is unmatched: The board along with county agencies, a wealth of nonprofit partners, and community outreach teams make up our Coordinated Housing Access System. The success we have seen occurs when coordinated access points convene and act quickly using the supportive housing dollars efficiently. As commissioner, I will specifically focus on veterans, youth and those in imminent danger of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking. Too often these highly vulnerable populations are forgotten but they deserve our full support.Fireside: Clackamas County saw a point in time decrease of 65% in homelessness. We still have, for example, over 300 students in one school district alone facing housing insecurity in Clackamas County. Our constituents must have access to services that bring stability to their lives. This includes opening up paths to homeownership, expanding our rent voucher program, stewarding the redevelopment of our HUD sites and empowering our cities to access the funding they need to meet their unique needs. Local control in this equation is paramount to success so we continue to see a decrease in homelessness.Gordon: It was recently announced that homelessness has decreased 65% since 2019 according to homeless counts. While I applaud that, I know when I was involved in helping conduct those counts, we weren’t able to interview everybody. Thus, we cannot be idle. The additional solutions need to address the individual and their unique circumstances that contributed to their current situation. More foundation needs to be laid to make it possible to step up into permanent housing that addresses family connections and counseling to give them a better chance at self-sufficiency, self-respect and success.What is your view of the closure of the Clackamas County equity office?Irvine: As a business leader and community advocate, I have built my career, family and social network in Clackamas County. The role of local government is not just to provide essential services like infrastructure, public health and safety, and economic development, but to also serve all people with dignity, respect and provide equal opportunity. I have dedicated my life to helping others and I hope that if I win, it is not because I’m a woman of color, but because people see my track record of success, leadership integrity, business acumen and believe I am the best person for the job.Fireside: I do not support the closure of the Equity and Inclusion Office. Good government requires a lens that considers all impacts and seeks to level the playing field. Opportunity must be available to all, which requires a realistic assessment of the roadblocks/barriers many of our fellow Oregonians face. It is incumbent on the county to provide services to all of us and to do so equitably. Many of the office’s services were designed to reach underserved folks in our county but without an equity and inclusion lens, those services will go to waste (or will not be delivered as intended).Gordon: Regardless of your opinion, one thing is clear — voices were heard but not respected. The amount of opposition should have changed the trajectory. It should be a goal to someday not need services, but that time is not now. Vulnerable citizens don’t feel safe by this action. While working for the county, I led a group that worked to build morale and make everyone feel welcome. We coordinated inclusive events and activities with an equity lens. The result was a better workforce and better customer service. When both employees and citizens aren’t seeing proactive steps to inclusivity, we all lose.What investments do you feel the county needs to make to address current and future climate issues, such as extreme weather events?Irvine: How we approach and mitigate extreme weather events such as wildfires is vital. Having more control over forest management at the county level is essential to reducing wildfires in the future. With our growing population and over 1.2 million acres to manage, we have learned that during emergencies our resources are stretched thin. Ensuring our residents know their part in an emergency is essential. I would like to see our county work with city leadership and private citizens to create more Community Emergency Response Teams with increased points of distribution that can be deployed in times of need.Fireside: Our county’s Climate Action Plan must be fully implemented. Our county procurement standards must align with our climate goals so the goods and services we procure and the contracts we enter into for development meet these standards whenever possible. Our cities, rural areas, homeowners associations and community planning organizations must have access to grants to prepare their communities. Our dedicated firefighters and first responders have programs to educate our communities on the plans they need to be safe in extreme weather and natural disasters. These programs must be fully funded to keep our communities safe and also our first responders.Gordon: Vehicles: Model environmental stewardship by increasing their fleet with eco-friendly vehicles. Disaster management: This dedicated department is proactive in developing programs and outreach. When I worked there I saw additional opportunities not taken due to resource development and access. This needs to be made a priority. Volunteer: A volunteer program was recently dissolved. As a community-driven volunteer and leader who has led others in large-scale projects, that was disheartening and a move that will only serve to disconnect citizens. Volunteers are crucial in times of extreme weather events and disasters and the county needs to lean into that source.How do you think Clackamas County should address fentanyl and substance use disorder?Irvine: Having lost a sibling to an overdose last year; I truly understand the vicious cycle of addiction. Fentanyl is a killer, highly addictive and extremely dangerous for medics and first responders to manage. The revision of Measure 110, which recriminalized drugs was a good start, but we must initiate help for those who can no longer help themselves. Law enforcement needs the tools and resources to ensure drug dealers are held accountable and prosecuted. Our criminal justice system is an entry point to supportive services that those in recovery tout as a reason they are alive today.Fireside: Education, prevention, rehabilitation and enforcement. Our populations must know how dangerous drug use is and that one pill can forever change or end their life. Our law enforcement must have a focus on cutting the head off the snake and make sure drugs are not being pumped into our communities. Our first responders need resources to respond effectively to drug overdoses and provide education to our community at large. We need to make sure the experts in the space of prevention, rehabilitation and medical response are empowered to lead and have every resource they need to keep our communities safe.Gordon: Priority is addressing the source and the addict. There should be severe penalties for those who sell and campaigns that share stories and encourage anonymous reporting. We need to continue to work and elevate existing groups and organizations that are currently doing the hard and difficult work to connect with addicts, homeless and people who are struggling with mental illness and susceptible to self-medicating. Easy access to free or low cost mental health services and counseling both on-site and off-site should be addressed.— Austin De Dios covers Multnomah County politics, programs and more. Reach him at 503-319-9744, adedios@oregonian.com or @AustinDeDios.Our journalism needs your support. Subscribe today to OregonLive.com.

Business
Climate
Education

It’s time to strike an environmental grand bargain between businesses, governments and conservationists – and stop doing things the hard way

It shouldn’t take sustained public outrage to stop environmentally destructive projects. Nature positive offers us a way forward.

jenmartin/ShutterstockApril has been a bad month for the Australian environment. The Great Barrier Reef was hit, yet again, by intense coral bleaching. And Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek delayed most of her Nature Positive Plan reforms. True, Plibersek did reject the controversial Toondah Harbour proposal, but only after a near decade-long grassroots campaign to save the wetland from an apartment and retail development deemed clearly unacceptable by her own department. Rather than fall back into old patterns of developers versus conservationists, we have a rare chance to find a compromise. Labor’s embrace of “Nature Positive” – a promising new environmental restoration approach – opens up the possibility of a grand bargain, whereby developers and business get much faster approvals (or rejections) in exchange for ensuring nature as a whole is better off as a result of our activities. Sustainable development was meant to save us First, a quick recap. We were meant to have put the era of saving the environment one place at a time to bed a long time ago. Around 1990, governments worldwide took to the then-novel idea of sustainable development. We even had a special Australian variant, ecologically sustainable development, which our federal and state governments backed unanimously. This led to a national strategy and incorporation into well over 100 laws, including flagship laws like the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, passed in 1999. The basic idea was, and is, sound: encourage development to improve our quality of life, while maintaining the ecological processes on which life depends. Read more: Australia's long-sought stronger environmental laws just got indefinitely deferred. It's back to business as usual But it’s not what ended up being legislated. The 1990’s laws did not require developers to make their projects sustainable. Typically, sustainable development was watered down into principles ministers only had to “consider”. Meanwhile, our ecosystems have continued to go downhill. And in a 2020 review of the laws, Graeme Samuel pronounced the EPBC Act a failure. Nature, positive? When Labor was elected in 2022, it promised a new goal: “Nature Positive”. This idea is no mere slogan. Nature positive is a serious policy idea. Think of it as the biodiversity counterpart to net zero emissions. The goal is ambitious: stop the decline by 2030 and set about restoring what has been lost for a full recovery of nature by 2050. Rather than ticking boxes on whether principles had been considered, regulators would answer a much more basic question: will this development deliver a net positive outcome for nature? Measuring progress is core to nature positive. We would take an environmental snapshot at the outset and track the gains and losses from there. Like sustainable development before it, nature positive has been adopted with gusto by the Australian government, internationally and domestically. In 2022, Plibersek committed to “stop the slide” and to “bake [the Nature Positive reforms] into law”. Now, suddenly, we have lost momentum. The crucial part of the reforms – embedding nature positive in stronger environment laws – has been kicked down the road. Plibersek has blamed complexity, extensive consultation and the need to get it right. Others see political concerns. Could we strike a grand environmental bargain? By pushing these laws back, Plibersek has effectively turned the already extended consultation process into an open-ended negotiation. Given consultation will keep running indefinitely, we’re now in the realm of regulatory co-design, previously only on offer to First Nations representatives for new cultural heritage protection laws. Co-design implies proceeding by consensus. It would be politically embarrassing to run a consultation over years only to bring down the policy guillotine. Consensus in turn raises the possibility of a grand environmental bargain, built around nature positive. Could this work? Might environment groups settle for a limited form of nature positive? Might business, in return for much faster approvals or rejections, support much stronger legal protection, especially for particularly vulnerable or important ecosystems? Samuel certainly thinks so. At a recent Senate Inquiry, he recounted telling a meeting during his review: If you each stick to your aspirations 100%, you’ll end up getting nothing. If you’re prepared to accept 80%-plus of your aspirations, you’ll get them, and that will be a quantum leap forward from the abysmal failure that we’ve had for two and a half decades What might an 80% agreement look like? If we are to turn decline into recovery, we need to ensure each natural system is intact. That is, it retains the minimum level of environmental stocks (such as animals, plants and insects) and flows (such as water, nutrients) needed to sustain ecological health. If flows of water into wetlands drop below a certain threshold, they’re not wetlands any more. AustralianCamera/Shutterstock Such thresholds for ecological health are everywhere. For example, keeping the platypus off the endangered list would involve maintaining its population close to current levels and working out how much of its riverbank habitat should be conserved. For policymakers, this suggests environmental laws should define minimum viability thresholds. Some thresholds would be absolute; others would be crossable in one location provided equivalent restoration was done in another. Environmental groups could take satisfaction that thresholds would be maintained in most cases. Ecosystems would function, rivers would flow. But governments would still override thresholds for important economic and social reasons, say to approve a critical minerals project. What’s in it for corporate Australia? Business would gain upfront certainty about what can be approved and quicker approvals for projects. Environmental litigation would fall. But development options would be narrowed and offsets would become more expensive. The government would achieve a key goal: major environmental reform. But it would have to say no more often, and be transparent about crossing environmental thresholds. It would have to finance the science and planning needed. And it would need to boost investment in environmental restoration, to compensate for using override powers and for the cumulative impact of smaller-scale activities. A grand bargain along these lines would not deliver nature positive in full. We’d still be losing nature due to climate change. But it might go close enough to offer hope of long-term recovery. Is such a deal feasible? It depends on how players read the incentives for compromise. For example, business will not want to be locked out of prospective development areas, but will also be worried about the possibility of a minority Labor government dependent on the Greens next year. Nature positive in Australia is down – but opportunity remains. Read more: Out of alignment: how clashing policies make for terrible environmental outcomes Peter Burnett is a member of the Biodiversity Council, an independent expert group founded by 11 Australian universities to promote evidence-based solutions to Australia’s biodiversity crisis. This article does not necessarily reflect the Council's views.

Business
Conservation
Government

My Husband And I Went Looking For Pot. It Quickly Turned Into A Nightmare.

"The guy with glazed eyes neglected to tell me that the beginning dose should be no larger than half of a grain of rice."

At every social gathering of middle-aged people I’ve been to recently, almost everyone has an “I tried a THC gummy bear because I couldn’t sleep and found myself in the emergency room or about to call 911” episode to share. The weed from when my friends and I were younger pales in potency to the variants available today. And taking a hit, a slice or a pill can feel like dropping acid during the ’70s did. (At least from my limited experience, this seems to be a fair assessment.)A friend told me that she ate a gummy on vacation to relax and avoid getting seasick on a boat. But instead her teeth felt thick, she couldn’t keep up with the conversation around her, and she thought she was having a stroke. “I had a two-minute delayed response to everything, so I just went to bed and slept for 10 hours,” she said.One man I met told me he was having dinner at a country club with friends during Dry January. When he declined a drink, his waiter insisted that he try the club’s new seltzer, an artisan extract with the tag line “THC for the people” and the quote “Caution is the path to mediocrity” by author Frank Herbert on its website. He was unaware of how high he was — or that he shouldn’t be operating a motor vehicle — until, on the way home, his wife turned to him when he stopped at a green light and asked what he was doing. “I have no idea,” he said.More middle-aged people are using marijuana than in previous years. Meanwhile, poison control centers are receiving more calls and states are seeing increasing numbers of ER visits due to people passing out, hallucinating or experiencing other issues as cannabis (legal or not) becomes more readily available in many parts of the U.S.I had my own misadventure with the drug seven years ago, before it was legalized for recreational use in California, where I was visiting from Alabama for breast cancer treatment. My husband and I went looking for pot, but this hunt wasn’t like the ones I went on as a teenager. I needed cannabis to ease any post-chemo nausea I might experience and to help blunt my anxiety the night before I’d be hooked up to the “red devil” for the first time.Another patient had told us about a medical dispensary in Santa Ana. At the large, slick metal building tucked indiscreetly behind a shiny shopping center, I signed up for a membership with the dispensary’s club under the name “Lanier Insomnia” so a remote doctor would “prescribe” something for me. However, I quickly learned that it was illegal to dispense to anyone who was not a resident of the state.That’s how my husband and I found ourselves in late-afternoon traffic on the six-lane highway headed to a “church” of “cannabis ministries” in a low-slung building next to a motel and a tattoo parlor. There were several doors in the strip center with darkened windows but not one sign.It was getting dark, and as we stood on the sidewalk trying to figure out where the church was, a man appeared from a black SUV, asked us if we needed help, and took us to the right door. Inside a small waiting room with a receptionist behind a glass panel, I filled out a membership form for my new church, where I became a believer in cannabis and pot was a sacrament, and I waited while a TV played a program about waltzing black holes. Once I was buzzed into the next room, a young man behind a glass counter full of pipes and paraphernalia convinced me that all cancer patients needed “Ricky Simpson oil,” or RSO.I now know that Rick Simpson was a skin cancer patient who read about a study in which THC killed cancer cells in mice, so he came up with a process of extracting as many cannabinoids from the cannabis plant as possible, making a substance that was high in THC and extremely potent. The guy with glazed eyes neglected to tell me that the beginning dose should be no larger than half of a grain of rice.That night at the hotel with red curtains and scratchy carpet where we had been staying for several weeks, a weather map of California on the TV blazed wildfire red. My husband gallantly offered to do a test drive of the oil for me, which meant dabbing it on a joint. After a while, when he didn’t feel anything, he added more RSO, and at that point I insisted it was my turn.The next thing I knew, I’d become a thousand raw nerve endings. Everything took on a cartoonish feel. The only thing to do was to try to sleep, but the walls were breathing. I did doze off but woke up to my husband pacing the floor and yelling into the phone, “Hey, Siri, can you overdose on Ricky Simpson oil?” Siri didn’t respond, and I cannot tell you how many times he yelled at Siri while I kept thinking there were men with guns in the parking lot about to invade our room.The following day, we were both jagged. I was in the worst possible state to deal with chemo, but things were going OK until I accidentally ate someone else’s lunch from the refrigerator at the cancer center. When the hungry woman demanded to know why I ate her lunch, I could only sputter some nonsense and thank Ricky for my predicament. Later, when I started crying, all I could say to the bewildered nurse was: “I’m from the South. People cry there.”When I told the doctor what happened, she asked: “Why didn’t you say something? I could have prescribed you something less potent.” Studies have shown that cannabis can ease stress, nausea and pain; decrease inflammation; and help with certain health conditions like epilepsy. But if you’re going to partake — for medical reasons or just a good time — you should know that things are different from the Cheech and Chong days, when it took an entire joint to get high.Now, you don’t even need RSO to be launched into orbit. With just a few hits or a tiny piece of cannabis candy, you can become fully baked because, over the past 50 years, the average amount of THC in cannabis products has increased — sometimes as much as tenfold. Back in the day, smoking a bowl of brown sticks and stems was like eating Kraft cheese, while what’s sold today is more like fancy feta cheese. It’s great to get more bang for your buck, but you want to make sure you’re aware of just how much bang you’re getting.So, if you’re looking to buy some edibles, smoke some weed or drink some cannabis-infused tea from one of the thousands of dispensaries across the country, know your state laws. And when you travel to another state, get up to speed on its laws too. Make sure that the product you buy has a certificate of analysis to ensure quality control and low toxicity. Consider buying from a Black-owned business. (Despite the disproportionate number of weed-related arrests that Black individuals have historically faced, in 2021 under 2% of cannabis businesses were owned by Black entrepreneurs — all the more reason to support them.) Then, do some research to understand potency levels, learn the difference between the types of products, check for other ingredients and additives, and go slow. One of the great things about buying cannabis today is that there’s more variety, and most products list how many grams of THC you’ll be consuming per serving. That means you can slice that gummy in half, just have a few puffs, or devise whatever way feels right to customize your high. Lastly, it’s not a bad idea to talk to your doctor before using cannabis, especially if you’re taking medications that could interact with the drug.Since my disastrous experience in that hotel, I’ve tried weed gummy bears a couple of times for anxiety, but I didn’t like how disoriented I felt. During the teenage wasteland of the ’70s and ’80s, I loved that fun-house feeling and the ritual of smoking pot with my friends. Weed was everywhere, and my brother making hashish from a gadget he ordered from the back of High Times with the pot he grew in a friend’s basement, or our suburban backyard, wasn’t unusual. I now realize that when I smoked in my 20s, I was simply trying to take the edge off my stress. By the time I became a mother, I felt I couldn’t find real relief at the bottom of a bong — it just didn’t do anything positive for me anymore — and I found other ways to cope. Still, for many people, especially those my age, it’s a positive thing. Live and let live, right? But if you’re going to do it, make sure you’re as prepared as possible, and maybe skip the Ricky Simpson oil.Lanier Isom is a journalist and co-author of the award-winning memoir “Grace and Grit: My Fight for Equal Pay and Fairness at Goodyear and Beyond.” The film “Lilly,” based on her book and starring Patricia Clarkson, is in postproduction. Her work has appeared in Al Jazeera, The Los Angeles Times, The Lily, The Bitter Southerner, Scalawag and Salvation South. A frequent contributor to AL.com, she is an Alabama Library Association Nonfiction Award recipient and a 2023 Alabama State Council on the Arts fellow. She has completed a memoir about growing up in the South during the ’70s before #MeToo and is currently working on a project about environmental racism in a small Alabama town. A blue dot in a red state, she lives in Birmingham, Alabama, with her husband and three dogs, and has a college-aged daughter and grown son. She’s a Peloton addict, dog lover and psychic junkie. For more from Lanier, visit lanierisom.com and her Instagram page, @lanierisom.Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.Support HuffPostOur 2024 Coverage Needs YouYour Loyalty Means The World To UsAt HuffPost, we believe that everyone needs high-quality journalism, but we understand that not everyone can afford to pay for expensive news subscriptions. That is why we are committed to providing deeply reported, carefully fact-checked news that is freely accessible to everyone.Whether you come to HuffPost for updates on the 2024 presidential race, hard-hitting investigations into critical issues facing our country today, or trending stories that make you laugh, we appreciate you. The truth is, news costs money to produce, and we are proud that we have never put our stories behind an expensive paywall.Would you join us to help keep our stories free for all? Your contribution of as little as $2 will go a long way.Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.Dear HuffPost ReaderThank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?Dear HuffPost ReaderThank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you’ll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.

Business
Climate
Health

Suggested Viewing

Wake Up People!

Environmental activists have been camping in Sodros for more than four months with the purpose of stopping the trees from being cut down. In the past few days Chinese company CRBC workers have been showing up at the site accompanied by the police and gendarmerie forces. The activists have been requesting to see the permits and the documentation for the work they are planning to conduct from the CRBC workers. The CRBC workers haven’t shown any of the permits. Also, the work has begun without a construction board being clearly visible, which is mandatory by law.

Sustainable
Social Justice
Nature

Una Perla de la Revolucion (A Pearl of the Revolution)

A documentary short that focuses on a sustainability project in Cojímar, Cuba

Sustainable
Business
Documentary

1948 and Counting

Reports on Costa Rica's ability to manage without a military since 1948, despite invasions based in Nicaragua. Addresses the role of private armies serving multinational corporations, and whether the country's civil guard is a military by another name. Places Costa Rica in the context of Central and Latin American populist struggles against US backed regimes in El Salvador, Chile, Panama, Nicaragua and Honduras. Touches on the colonial history and explores whether Costa Rica depends on US military backing, and whether it is able to maintain independence from the US.

Government
Business

Let's talk about it! (International Politics is NOT a child's play)

The effects of the Human impact in the World can't be resolved through conflicts and wars. We need to talk about it!

Government
Business
Student

Green Waste

What if every person could actually make an impact on the world? “Green Waste” takes an in-depth look at the process of recycling and waste management in the community of Flagstaff. From recycling plastic bags, to re-using glass bottles, from recycling hazardous waste to the efforts of local businesses, the film shows how every contribution, no matter how small, can collectively make the difference for a better tomorrow. Filmed and Produced under the Emerging Filmmakers Program for youth filmmakers.

Waste
Business
Solutions

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.