1

CENTERING EQUITY IN THE SUSTAINABLE BUILDING SECTOR

COMPREHENSIVE SUMMARY: CESBS LAUNCH SUMMIT

AUGUST 2018

2

Contents Introduction: Why this? Why now? Why us? .............................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 7

The Imperative for Equity in the Sustainable Buildings Sector .................................................... 8

Key Principles for Centering Equity in the Sustainable Buildings Sector ...................................11

Key Lenses ...............................................................................................................................12

Health and Safety ..................................................................................................................12

Equity in Building Standards ..................................................................................................17

Federal, State, and Local Policies .........................................................................................22

Affordable and Multifamily Housing .......................................................................................26

Education ..............................................................................................................................29

Equitable Economic Development .........................................................................................32

Finance Mechanisms .............................................................................................................35

Communications ....................................................................................................................38

Promising Equity-Based Sustainable Building Model Projects ...................................................40

Conclusion: Let Us Begin ..........................................................................................................43

Cover Page Images (Clockwise from Top): Via Verde ("Green Way") New York City Alice Ferguson Foundation: The Morris & Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation Environmental Center American Geophysical Union: Building Demolition Workers Table of Contents Image (Right): Belfield Avenue Townhomes Philadelphia

What is a sustainable building? Sustainable buildings have excellent energy efficiency, water efficiency, ecosystem protection, waste management, indoor environmental quality, access to the community, and more. The terms “sustainable,” “green,” “healthy,” “regenerative,” “high-performance,” and “living” buildings are often used interchangeably.

What is equity? According to PolicyLink, equity is “just and fair inclusion into a society in which all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential.”

3

INTRODUCTION: WHY THIS? WHY NOW? WHY US? Communities of color and low-income communities bear the brunt of the impacts of unhealthy, energy-inefficient, and disaster-vulnerable buildings through poor health and financial impacts of high energy bills, as well as the disproportionate negative effects of climate change, to which buildings contribute as a major consumer of fossil fuel-based energy. Yet, as one looks around the tables or worksites of the sustainable and regenerative building sector, there is little representation of the populations most impacted by our current proliferation of unsustainable, inefficient, sometimes unsafe, and often unhealthy building stock. Whether it’s as policy makers, advocates, architects, project managers, contractors, or even in the construction workforce, the most impacted communities are underrepresented in the design, construction, and occupancy of sustainable, regenerative, healthy buildings. Given the huge import of buildings in reducing the demand on energy production, plus the co-benefits that regenerative design has for building occupants and the community, not to mention the environment, all of this points to the fact that this gap in access and uptake must drastically change, and quickly, to build a big tent and universalize sustainable, regenerative buildings. Our aim as the nation’s oldest and largest civil rights organization is to be a beacon of inspiration and transformation in centering equity in the sustainable building sector. In doing so, we can catalyze the building of a bigger, broader tent for the sustainable building movement, towards the betterment of the building users, the communities, the economy, and the planet.

In actualizing our commitment to ground our operations in the principles and practices of our environmental and climate justice platform, the NAACP will establish its headquarters as an exemplar for an Equitable Living Building Project. Through this effort, we will develop a replicable model of ensuring the centering of equity in all aspects of sustainable, healthy, safe, and regenerative buildings, including access, affordability, co-benefits, cultural resonance, inclusive decision-making, financing, service provision, procurement, contracting, employment, communications, monitoring and evaluation, and so much more. Our first step was to establish a project level Equity Committee and to engage an Equity Fellow to do a desk review of the existing green and living building guidance documents, standards, and actual projects that have been implemented with the aim of examining, documenting, being grounded in, and building upon, what’s already happening.

4

Next, we pulled together thought leaders and practitioners to determine how we go beyond having equity as merely a petal or an optional aspect of the green and living building sector, and to advance an action agenda to have equity at the foundation and center of the sustainable building movement. As such, we assembled people and organizations who are currently leading in this sector and those who should be engaged around green buildings but aren’t, to begin to shift the narrative of the sector. This gathering, which took place in August 2018, then launched an initiative to advance this transformation in the sector, with the NAACP Headquarters Project as the Flagship Luminary for Comprehensive Implementation of an Equity Based Green Building Project. Through this collective, consultative, process, the plan is for this initiative to be the catalyst and vehicle for institutionalization of policies, programming and practices that center equity in the sustainable building sector.

--- We have built out our dynamic NAACP Environmental & Climate Justice team to include a dedicated staff member for this work, and we now embark together upon a CESBS Initiative start-up phase. Here is what you can expect to see from us and work with us to achieve in 2019:

CESBS Initiative Action Plan

Monthly Implementation Working Group E-Meetings

Monthly Educational Webinars

CESBS Reports o Baseline of Equity in Sustainable Building Standards o Expanding Equitable Access to Sustainable Affordable Multi-Family Housing o Strategies for a Diverse Workforce in the Sustainable Buildings Sector

Dynamic Equity Resource List and Toolkit

Policy Platform for Equity Based Sustainable Building Sector

Maryland and Baltimore Policy/Regulatory Model Reform Plan

Model Design for a Flagship Equity Based Green Building—The NAACP National Headquarters

Second CESBS Summit Will you join us in this work? Derrick Johnson President and CEO

Jacqui Patterson Senior Director, Environmental and Climate Justice Program

Mandy Lee Program Manager, CESBS Initiative

Stay informed and get engaged: https://www.naacp.org/climate-justice-resources/

5

This isn’t just a document of text. Here is what you will encounter as you read.

Please enjoy graphic notes from Emily Simons, an illustrator, graphic designer, arts educator, graphic facilitator, and cultural organizer. Beginning at the Beehive Design Collective, Emily has been making and using pictures as political teaching tools for over a decade, including the wildly

successful True Cost of Coal graphics campaign.

6

Get to know CESBS Champions, a small and mighty representation of the many incredible thinkers and leaders in this space who shared their perspectives at the Summit.

This report contains the key lessons and takeaways from the Summit, as well as new concepts and supporting research from the CESBS program to continue to grow our collective

understanding.

CESBS Champions

Derrick Johnson has served as the NAACP’s President and CEO since

October 2017. President Johnson is a veteran activist who has dedicated his career to defending the rights and improving the lives of Mississippians. Starting with recovery efforts after Hurricane Katrina, he has elevated sustainable development as a critical social justice movement. “Sustainable, regenerative development is a continuation of the African-American reliance on closed-loop systems. I grew up eating oxtail because it was part of the animal and therefore should be consumed. The media said to eat fast food, despite being more expensive, less healthy, and much less delicious. In time, I came to understand that oxtail was the better, more sustainable choice. Nothing goes to waste, and we return to our values. We

have gotten where we are today through confusing waste with abundance.”

Leon Russell was elected the Chairman of the NAACP Board of Directors

in February 2017, after serving as a board member for 27 years. Chairman Russell directed the Office of Human Rights for Pinellas County Government, Clearwater, Florida from 1977-2012, implementing the county’s Affirmative Action and Human Rights Ordinances which provide for the development of a racially and sexually diverse workforce. Together with President Johnson, he has charted a vision for a sustainable and living headquarters building for the NAACP to embody its goals for environmental and climate justice. “The climate crisis disproportionately impacts communities of color, whether it’s flooding, displacement or proximity of industrial pollution sites near our communities increasing health-related problems or the failure to have equal access to economic opportunities in the green economy – our communities are suffering and caught in the middle.”

Image: Luis Ayala

7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

To center equity is to truly embody sustainability. Our buildings radically define our health and wellbeing. We need community transition, not green buildings in isolation. Sustainability standards have paved a way for change in the building industry. Equity is a culture, not just a single policy. We must prioritize low-income communities, communities of color, and women at the heart of a better building industry. Better representation in the sector starts with more inclusive education and professional development pathways. Creativity, partnership, and political will must drive our investments. Every story about a building is a story about people. Equity champions and models show us what is possible.

CESBS Summit: By the Numbers

2 Days

104 Attendees

73 Organizations Represented

27 Participant Categories

11 Partners & Sponsors

47 Speakers

8 Panels

8 Equity Strategy Groups

3 Working Sessions

The CESBS Initiative seeks to: 1. Make sustainable buildings universally

accessible to all communities. 2. Integrate equity-based strategies into

building standards for sustainability. 3. Deepen diversity, equity, and inclusion in

sustainable building professions.

8

THE IMPERATIVE FOR EQUITY IN THE SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS SECTOR

When we think about the landscape of the United States, we must first remember that the nation

was founded through the displacement of indigenous peoples from their land and the

enslavement of Africans and African-Americans, whose labor contributed to an untold amount of

infrastructure, including some of the nation’s most iconic buildings like the White House and the

United States Capitol.1

Like many other sectors, the building industry has

traditionally followed the path of least resistance and the

path of greatest profit, at the expense of communities.

At times, it has systematically disenfranchised and

marginalized people; for example, we know that

construction is among the top 25 U.S. industries in which

human trafficking and modern slavery take place.2 We

also know that more than 550,000 people are estimated to be experiencing homelessness on

any given night, despite that more than 12% of the national housing inventory is vacant.3,4

In addition to forced labor and lack of access to housing, there is a pervasive equity impact from

buildings on the health and wellbeing of communities. While too rarely framed this way,

buildings themselves contribute to life and death in a very tangible way:

Americans spend 90% of their time indoors, where pollutants can be much more

concentrated than in outdoor environments and contribute to serious acute and chronic

When morality comes up

against profit, it is seldom

that profit loses.

Shirley Chisholm

9

health impacts.5 People who are most susceptible to health impacts from pollution tend

to spend even more time indoors.

Almost one third of U.S. households experienced energy insecurity in 2015, meaning

they paid a disproportionate amount of their household income on utilities.6 One in five

households reported making trade-offs between paying energy bills and sustaining

adequate heating and cooling or paying for basic necessities like food and medicine.

Around 20% of worker fatalities in private industry in 2017 were in construction, taking the lives of 971 individuals that year.7

Buildings account for about 30% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, thereby driving global climate change.8 Among many other types of impacts, climate change affects human health by increasing illnesses, diseases, injuries, and deaths from extreme heat, reduced water access and quality, wildfire, intensified air pollution, extreme precipitation, rising sea levels, and storm surge.

Older, lower-cost homes, especially those with deferred maintenance, are less able to withstand disasters and extreme weather, which are increasing in frequency and intensity every year from climate change.9

Low-income communities, communities of color, and women bear the brunt of these injustices.

Life expectancy gaps based just on one’s zip code reveal the human toll of environmental

injustice, segregation, and disinvestment in these communities.10,11

---

A driving force of change in the building industry has been the rise of environmentalism, with

prominent rating systems like Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)

propelling a new vision of responsible building design, construction, and operations.12 According

to the U.S. Green Building Council, the emerging trend of green building is “the practice of

designing, constructing and operating buildings to maximize occupant health and productivity,

use fewer resources, reduce waste and negative environmental impacts, and decrease life cycle

costs.”13

While a wave of better, more sustainable building practices has swept some companies and

communities across the United States in the past two decades, it has yet to fully reach,

empower, and center the people suffering the most from buildings that are unsafe, unhealthy,

unaffordable, and unsustainable. Instead, sustainable building remains a nascent concept, often

promoted in the context of luxury markets serving a small constituency of more affluent,

environmentally-minded builders, property owners, and tenants. In fact, when green buildings

arrive in low-income neighborhoods and communities of color, they often lack cultural

resonance or even contribute to economic displacement from gentrification in some cases.

“Black America isn’t

missing from this sector,

this sector is missing us.”

Tamara Toles O’Laughlin North America Director, 350.org

10

What’s more, the environmental movement has fallen

short on promises to diversify, resulting in a “Green

Insider’s Club” for White Americans.14 As reported by

Green 2.0, people of color have not broken the 16%

“green ceiling” in environmental organizations,

despite comprising more than 30% of the U.S.

population and supporting environmental protections

at higher rates than White Americans. Meanwhile,

environmental non-profit boards were only 5% people

of color in 2014. Assuming they can overcome the

barriers to education for sustainable building

professions, subsequent alienation, discrimination,

insular recruiting, and unconscious bias often hamper

recruitment, retention, and leadership development of

talented people of color and women in these fields –

which include architecture, design, engineering,

construction management, consulting, policymaking,

and standards development.15 The green economy

maintains the status quo in terms of where power and

revenue currently rest, unless intentional shifts occur.

The built environment comprises a third of the global

economy and the U.S. construction industry is

growing, but the anticipated benefits from maturing

green enterprises are not on track to be in the hands

of the most affected communities and workforces

who should be in charge of advancing an equitable

and just transition. Finally, fragmentation and ego can

unnecessarily divide the sector and further reinforce

isolation rather than partnership and inclusion.

Sustainable and regenerative design are not new and

should be recognized for their history and

significance within communities of color and low-

income communities. Regenerative design intends to

provide for fundamental human needs while

producing no waste and sustaining future generations

of humans and the ecosystems upon which we rely.

The use of natural, local materials and reliance on

human labor (rather than industry) to build low-

footprint, healthy living spaces long predate Western

construction methods and continue to inform and

sustain communities around the world.16,17,18 From

historic home design for ventilation and raised

basements in New Orleans to electrical microgrids in St. Croix, for example, we must embrace

the history of intuitive resilience thinking to fit to local climates and systems. In reality, an ethic

Equity has never been at the center of

anything, and it’s time. We need to put it at

the center of every sector.

Sustainability needs to be a part of equity,

not the reverse.

We are what we habitually practice.

Equity benefits everyone.

It’s the right thing to do and the expedient thing to do; investing in the most impacted

communities achieves the most bang for the buck.

We can’t afford to waste human resources.

More inclusive decision-making results in

better decisions and solutions.

We must ensure intergenerational equity – that our children and grandchildren have

opportunities to thrive and be healthy.

We need to raise the baseline functioning of people and places.

We can prevent future conflict.

More people could enjoy meaningful and

fulfilling work.

We are interdependent. This is about

transformation so that humanity can survive.

We can elevate from a broken system and

decolonize and decentralize our economy.

PERSPECTIVES: WHY CENTER EQUITY IN THE SUSTAINABLE

BUILDINGS SECTOR?

11

of not wasting anything and adapting and maximizing the functionality of building space has

permeated many low-income communities for generations. It is due time for recognition of

African and African American architectural style, culture, and influence in the sector as well.

To center equity in the sustainable buildings sector is to live up to the true meaning of

sustainability. A small community can start a movement, but alone it cannot resolve our biggest

existential threat of climate change, which disproportionately harms disinvested communities on

the frontlines. We can only survive and thrive in a rapidly-changing world by including and

empowering all people. Together, it is possible to transform the places in which we live, work,

and play and to transform the way the building industry does business. In doing so, we can

finally liberate and experience a stronger, more vibrant sector and society.

KEY PRINCIPLES FOR CENTERING EQUITY IN THE SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS SECTOR

In order to transform the narrative and norms of the sector, it is necessary to orient around new

principles that center equity. These include:

Fundamental human rights to healthy and safe housing, air, water, and food

Radical inclusion, self-determination, and community ownership, which prioritize

the communities most impacted by unsustainable buildings and least represented in the

green building movement

Multidimensional definition of well-being that considers social, economic, and

environmental health

Universal accessibility and availability of sustainable buildings, regardless of ability,

income, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, age, and identity

Asset- and place-based community development grounded in history, locality,

abundance, ownership, healing, and regeneration

Uphold local knowledge as the best source of understanding of community and

environmental needs and assets

Recognition of lived experience on equal footing with quantitative data

Right-to-know and transparency of research, processes, decisions, and practices

driving the sector

Acknowledgment of and investment to remedy past, present, and future injustice for

frontline communities struggling against structural oppression

Mutual support and empowerment to cultivate and nurture a diversity of champions

and a broad movement

Accountability and enforcement of standards to achieve intended goals and outcomes

Intergenerational, interspecies commitment to build communities that will foster and

protect human and non-human life for generations to come

12

KEY LENSES

Health and Safety The link between the nation’s health, our buildings, and the environment is unequivocal. Since 1900, life expectancy of Americans has increased by approximately 40 years.19 Only seven of those years can be attributed to better treatment of disease; the additional 33 years are the result of improved prevention and environmental conditions, including improved living spaces with better sanitation and water services. The material conditions and social supports in the places in which people live are called social determinants of health. According to the World Health Organization, health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.20 Healthy places, according to the Centers for Disease Control, are those “designed and built to improve the quality of life for all people who live, work, worship, learn, and play within their borders” and “places where every person is free to make choices amid a variety of healthy, available, accessible, and affordable options.”21

The physical design and maintenance of our buildings and communities can significantly improve or worsen our health. Unhealthy homes and buildings are caused by mold, pests, toxic chemicals, lead, asbestos, inadequate carbon monoxide and fire prevention, and outdoor air pollutants such as ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter.22 These exposures and risks, in turn, are caused by poor ventilation and filtration, accumulation of moisture, deferred maintenance, and proximity to polluting neighborhood facilities, such as factories, power plants, highways, and bus depots. Additional indoor air pollutants can be produced by building materials, consumer products, paints, furniture, tobacco smoke, pest and rodenticides, cleaning supplies, and even cracks in the building foundation.23 Ambient air pollution causes hundreds of thousands of excess deaths each year. In some cases, simple strategies, such as providing air quality monitors in homes and educating families when to close their windows, can save lives.

13

However, while much is known about certain air pollutants, such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 85% of the 82,000 chemicals in commercial use do not have any available health data. Moreover, healthy buildings can be characterized by good water quality, thermal comfort, natural daylight, visual comfort, appealing views, access to nature and community, noise control, physical safety, opportunities for physical activity, restorative design for mental health, access to healthy food, and universal design.24,25,26 Due to unjust housing practices, there are far more unhealthy homes in low-income communities and communities of color.27 Income barriers and housing discrimination often force people to choose unhealthy homes, and this trend can lead to pattern of instability and displacement, in addition to acute and chronic health concerns. In neighborhoods that experience a wave of new construction, low-income people are pushed out when they can no longer afford their own homes nor the new homes being built. The process begins again when these families move to a different neighborhood where unhealthy homes are again the only affordable option. In particular, asthma is a prevalent health issue in unhealthy homes, as it is worsened by outdoor and indoor air pollution and allergens. Communities of color have more facilities that aggravate asthma in their neighborhoods, and African Americans are three times more likely to be hospitalized or die from the issue.28 Children of color are more likely than any other group in the U.S. to experience asthma, with indoor allergens posing the greatest risk to children. Asthma is also a deeply expensive equity issue, costing the country tens of billions dollars per year. Lead exposure, commonly from tap water and old paint, presents another major challenge for tens of millions of households, with disproportionate impacts based on race and income.29,30 Lead is invisible, odorless, and tasteless and has no safe threshold for exposure. Lead poisoning has developmental impacts on children, as well as nerve, joint, heart, and muscle problems for both children and adults.

---

CESBS Champion

Summer Lee is a lifelong resident of Pennsylvania’s

34th district near Pittsburgh, where she is a tireless advocate for environmental justice as State Representative. In the Pittsburgh region, air quality monitors show that the city is among the worst; it ranks in the 6th percentile nationally and experiences bad air quality 2/3 of the time (249 days of the year). Many of the communities in her district bear the brunt of regional air and water pollution, with 35% of children in the local school district suffering from asthma (compared to 8% nationally). District residents live amongst hundreds of blighted homes that are left untouched due to cost, and many struggle with household health risks from lead paint and asbestos. Environmental and economic conditions in the district, perpetuated by cyclical racism, cause hopelessness, depression, and a mentality of scarcity. “When I left home for college, I noticed the air felt different. Many people have never left this community, so this is the world they know. Breathing the air in my community is the equivalent of smoking two cigarettes a day. This is not only not normal, but not okay.”

Since ousting an incumbent of 20 years, Summer has been fighting for a moratorium on fracking and petrochemical plants, full state funding of lead water line replacement, restoring PA Department of Environmental Protection funding, and transitioning to 100% renewable energy across the state.

Image: Friends of Summer Lee

14

You can often see the health and wealth of a place; the abundance and quality of community amenities like parks, sidewalks, and farmers’ markets often map to historical patterns on segregation and disinvestment. In some cases, development and design is more explicitly racist, as with the decisions of New York City real estate powerhouse Robert Moses’ orders to bulldoze minority neighborhoods and construct bridges too low for buses in the mid-20th century.31 Almost a century later, the impacts of those infrastructural decisions persist.

Consider the following outcomes of broader community design on Americans’ health and safety:32

Physical inactivity, a known risk factor for diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity is the cause of an estimated 11% of total health care expenditures.

58,000 premature deaths every year are associated with long-term exposure to road transportation pollution, which is linked to asthma and cardiovascular disease.

5,000 pedestrian and bicyclist deaths and tens of thousands of injuries from collisions with vehicles occur every year.

Health impact assessments (HIAs) can be used as an objective evaluation of the potential health effects of a project before it is built. The HIA process brings public health issues to the attention of decision-makers about areas that fall outside of traditional public health arenas, such as transportation or land use, providing recommendations to increase positive health outcomes and minimize adverse health outcomes. We know that the health benefits of better community and building design outweigh the costs. For every dollar invested in transportation infrastructure, such as off-street trails, dedicated bicycle lanes, and pedestrian bridges, between $1.20 and $3.80 is saved as a result of reduced health care utilization and fuel consumption.33 Sidewalks alone yield a cost-benefit ratio of 1.87 over a decade.

---

Other very direct considerations for health and safety for buildings include worker safety and structural resilience of buildings in the face of climate change impacts. More than 6 million people work at approximately 252,000 construction sites on any given day in the U.S.34 In 2017, one in five worker deaths in private industry were in construction, making the fatal injury rate for this industry higher than the national average for all industries.35 The “fatal four” causes of death on the job are falls, being struck by objects, electrocution, and being caught in or between elements on site; eliminating these issues would save 582 workers' lives

Image: Monadnock Development

15

every year, not to mention prevent thousands of injuries. In addition to extensive best practices resources, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) supports numerous voluntary protection programs and partnerships to assist and recognize efforts to eliminate serious hazards and achieve a high level of construction worker safety and health. Intentional efforts to form partnerships and prioritize worker safety demonstrate the potential for improving standard practice. During the rebuilding and renovation of New York City's renowned Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), daily safety inspections, on-site incentives, and safety committee meetings contributed to two impressive safety and health outcomes: the number of Days Away Restricted and Transferred (DART) and the Total Case Incident Rate (TCIR) were 90% and 92% below the national average, respectively.36 The renovation of the Green Bay Packers' Lambeau Field in Wisconsin prioritized a health and safety program for all contractors, 100% fall protection at six or more feet, daily hazard audits and corrections, and increased training for supervisors. More than 4,000 workers completed OSHA’s 10-hour construction training, four workers were saved by their harnesses during the project, and workers’ compensation costs were reduced more than 20%. Notably, harassment based on identity can be rampant in the building trades. 66% of women report experiencing sexual harassment, 60% have witnessed sexual harassment, and 31% say it is a constant or frequent experience.37,38 31% of women of color face additional racial harassment. 37% of people who identify as lesbian, gay, or transgender report harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity. This is only the beginning of the story, with other identities yet to be studied. Harassment discourages people from entering the sector, makes them fearful for their safety, and produces anxiety and trauma.

--- As demonstrated at an alarmingly exponential pace from Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana to Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico, inequity characterizes disaster preparedness, response, and recovery in the U.S. It is clear that low-income families and people of color communities “have

16

borne a disproportionate burden and have received differential treatment from government in its response to health threats such as…hurricanes, floods and related weather-related disasters, and a host of other man-made disasters.”39,40 The number of disasters each year is increasing, but only half of these events trigger Federal assistance.41 Meanwhile, we know that every $1 invested in mitigation saves $4 that would have been spent on a disaster, on average.42 Buildings that can withstand stronger winds, rainfall, earthquakes, power outages, and other threats can prevent injury, death, and other kinds of health and safety concerns. As long as buildings remain a top contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, the very places we inhabit are causing the world’s biggest public health crisis: climate change. Every day a new report about extreme and deadly heat, rainfall, wildfires, droughts, or storms reminds us that our buildings are inherent to our short-term and long-term survival. Buildings can and must be designed for carbon neutrality, resilience, and adaptability to serve many generations to come. Instead, far too many North American buildings are demolished before they reach even half of their expected lifespans of about 76-100 years, largely to drive profit.43 Simple design strategies, such as shading from tree canopy and battery storage for on-site renewable energy, are already known to both mitigate and adapt communities to climate change.

We know that we can’t have healthy people without healthy buildings. We stand together in declaring that everyone has the right to a quality and affordable home. To ensure that buildings are healthy and safe, the industry must adopt the following best practices:

Provide incentives for environmental and public health practitioners to enter into the building sector

Provide healthy equity education and accessible solutions and technologies to all actors in the building industry, as well as students and policymakers

CESBS Champion

Kathy Egland has been a leader in the NAACP

since she began confronting segregation as a youth organizer, and she now serves on the National Board of Directors and chairs its Environmental and Climate Justice Committee. A firsthand advocate for environmental justice, Kathy has lived alongside and resisted chemical and coal-fired power plants and witnessed the increasing intensity of hurricanes for more than 40 years along the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Her home was one of the few in her community in Gulfport to survive Hurricane Katrina intact, but a low-quality roof replacement soon led to water damage and her hospitalization from pathogenic mold. Kathy has again demonstrated resilience firsthand; she is pictured here in front of a new, storm-resistant FORTIFIED roof, certified by MyStrongHome and financed from insurance savings. “Green building is not about modernization, it’s about democratization.”

Never forgetting the human and economic costs of coastal storms on poor and uninsured families, Kathy fights for climate adaptation nationally within communities of color. Image: MyStrongHome

17

Early and ongoing assessment of well-defined health metrics for buildings and surrounding neighborhoods

Universal adoption of HIAs, Health Action Plans,44 long-term community benefits agreements, neighborhood equity councils, and preparedness planning

Sustain a culture of good maintenance, strong and comprehensive codes and standards, performance-based testing, and proactive and community-led enforcement

Leadership within public and affordable housing, building market preference for builders that go above code

Health disparities have been a prominent issue for decades, but the public health community has only just begun spotlighting the root causes. A healthy building must be defined holistically through the lens of environmental sustainability, climate resilience, physical safety, social cohesion, economic equity, and community connectivity. It is time to acknowledge the harms of unhealthy and unsafe buildings, while empowering owners, managers, and tenants to prevent and remedy risks to community wellbeing.

Equity in Building Standards Voluntary rating systems and model codes for green, living buildings have flourished in the past

two decades in the United States, providing abundant options for encouraging and recognizing

best practices for sustainability within building projects, programs, and ordinances. These

standards elevate the dialogue about sustainability within the building industry and allow a triple-

bottom-line to be integrated within the entire real estate development process.

Image: Onion Flats

Images: Harvard University; Global Green

18

Figure 1. Several prominent green building rating and certification systems available in the United States.

Yet, the impact of green building standards in advancing equity has been mixed. Even as

awareness and uptake of these standards have grown exponentially since the late 1990s, only a

small percentage of all buildings in the country have been constructed or renovated to meet

these guidelines. Among the 123.8 million commercial buildings and residential housing units

(primary residences) in the country, only a few hundred thousand certifications have been

awarded.45 For many programs, compliant buildings are largely commercial and new

construction projects, leaving behind the vast majority of U.S. residents whose daily

experiences are defined by residential buildings and older, existing buildings. In many cases,

sustainable buildings are confined to luxury markets where sustainability features earn a

premium for tenant leases or rent prices.

WELL

Living Building

Challenge

LEED SITES

BREEAM

Green Globes

Energy Star

Passive House

Institute US

Green Communities

Criteria

A community is democratic only when the humblest and weakest person can enjoy the

highest civil, economic, and social rights that the biggest and most powerful possess.

A. Philip Randolph

19

A shining exception to this story has been the Green Communities Criteria program, a

framework and certification developed by Enterprise Community Partners to bring the improved

health, economic and environmental benefits of sustainable construction practices to low-

income families and address the unique needs of the affordable housing sector.46 While this

program is also in an emergent phase in terms of the percentage of the market participating, it

has resulted in 127,000 certified, affordable homes – a sizeable share compared to an

estimated 470,000 residential units certified under LEED – and $3.9 billion in investment.47

In recent years, standards developers have begun prioritizing equity considerations for building

projects seeking certification. Notably, the International Living Future Institute requires various

equity “imperatives” for Living Building Challenge projects, addressing concepts such as

Equitable Investment, Just Organizations, Inclusion, and Universal Access. The U.S. Green

Building Council developed three experimental credits, called pilot credits, to encourage LEED

projects to promote social equity within their project teams, surrounding communities, and

supply chains. While these are critical steps in the right direction, there is a long way to go to

fully integrate and center the concept of equity within sustainability for the building industry. For

example, while many standards have optional criteria to consider health, resilience, and equity

for occupants, almost none require the project to produce a robust, equity-based, mutually-

developed agreement about community and worker benefits. Moreover, certification often does

not have any restrictions based on use types, such that structures intended to confine people

(e.g. prisons or detention centers) can be certified sustainable. In an accompanying CESBS

report, we dive deeper into existing best practices and case studies of equitable green buildings,

with a vision for progress to center equity within these programs.

20

An emergence of community-scale programs has also

begun in the past decade, including new offerings from

standards developers for buildings such as the Living

Community Challenge (ILFI) and LEED for Cities and

Communities (USGBC). Within this ecosystem, various

certification programs, such as Ecodistricts and STAR

Communities, explicitly centered equity in their

requirements, offering a more comprehensive

framework for urban and community development from

policy and planning to implementation.

Codifying equity within building standards is important because it sets up a mechanism for

accountability and establishes a baseline for improvement. Industry standards can make equity

more tangible and visible, as well as incentivize greater investment in progressive practices.

Eventually, standards are intended to become the norm and subsequently evolve to push the

bar even higher. In parallel with the growth of voluntary certification programs, it is promising to

see the refinement of model green codes, such as the 2018 International Green Construction

Code (IgCC), and the adoption of mandatory green building codes, the first of which took root in

California (CALGreen).48

Rather than sustainable and equitable buildings being a differentiator for expensive projects, we

seek a transformation of the market to expect sustainability and equity as basic necessities in

any building project.

Standards development organizations themselves are not immune to the inequities that

characterize the broader sustainability and building sectors in terms of representation and

access. As thought leaders, these organizations carry the responsibility of defining the frontier of

Sustainability without equity is sustaining inequities.

Image: Jonathan Rose Companies

21

the building industry. To ensure they are rooted in an equity lens, these organizations must

prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion practices for staff and stakeholders; build and maintain

relationships with justice organizations and leaders; and cultivate or expand commitments to

equity in strategic planning and certification criteria. They must become “consciously competent”

in equity thinking and practices, rather than “unconsciously collusive” in inequitable systems.

Moreover, standards organizations should ensure that their resources, including rating systems,

educational products, and professional credentials, are accessible to all regardless of income,

education, language, ability, and other factors.

In the short-term, an ecosystem of inclusive and empowering building certification programs and

standards development organizations would support a diversified workforce, greater economic

opportunity in the industry, and stronger stakeholder awareness, participation, and advocacy.

Standards developers must also engage with policymakers and leverage constituents to adopt

minimum sustainability and equity requirements in building codes and drive uptake in the

communities most impacted by environmental injustice. Standards organizations must work with

partners to expand funding and technical assistance for building projects with fewer resources

and grow their own programs to provide direct project support to underserved communities.

22

Federal, State, and Local Policies A promising evolution in the sustainable building sector has been the adoption of green building

standards and regulations in federal, state, and local policy. At least 709 policies related to

sustainable buildings are in force around the country; the large majority of these policies are

legislated at the municipal level, target commercial buildings, and set enforceable requirements

rather than goals or incentives.49

In terms of equity, we must first look at affordable housing. Through the Low-Income Housing

Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, states are granted federal funding in order to leverage investment

in affordable rental housing. State housing financing authorities are required to outline criteria to

determine funding priority for projects seeking funding under the LIHTC program in the form of a

Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP). Each state determines its own competitive criteria for its QAP,

which can include green building certification. According to Global Green’s 2017 QAP Analysis,

the adoption of green building practices has increased each year since reporting began in

2006.50 A total of 32 states have incentivized third-party green building certification programs in

their QAPs, up from 25 states in 2016. Several states like Georgia go a step further, requiring

third-party green building certification for LIHTC applicants.

Examples of requirements, incentives, and programs for sustainable and affordable housing

include the following:51

The first known program was adopted in 2003 by the San Diego City Council to expedite

permits for private sector affordable green building projects that adhere to standards

referenced in the city's Sustainable Building Policy.

23

In 2005, the Pasadena City Council

began requiring all new commercial,

residential, and public buildings

above certain sizes to achieve LEED

certification. Additionally, developers

who exceed the minimum certificatio

n and include affordable housing

earn rebates.

In 2006, the Mayor of Seattle signed

zoning legislation that gives a height

or density bonus to commercial or residential projects that achieve at least LEED Silver

certification and contribute to affordable housing.

In 2008, the Tampa City Council adopted a sustainability ordinance that encourages

developers of multi-family and single family homes through any of the City's affordable

housing programs to follow the Florida Green Building Coalition's Green Home

Standard.

Later that year, the City of Rolling Hills Estates, CA, required applicants for mixed-use

developments in certain commercial zones to demonstrate commitment to sustainability

via written intent to attain LEED certification. Applicants are also required to assist the

city in "meeting requirements of its regional housing needs assessment (RHNA)

especially with regard to affordable housing."

In 2010 and 2011, Philadelphia, North Las Vegas, and Simi Valley (CA) began

providing housing developments eligibility for a density bonus if the dwellings are

affordable for low-income households and earn LEED certification at certain levels. In

Philadelphia, floor area bonuses are also awarded for incorporating public art, public

space, mixed-income housing, transit improvements and underground parking and

loading at different rates in different districts.

In 2011, Florida began requiring counties and municipalities to describe initiatives in the

local housing assistance plan that encourage or require innovative design, green

building principles, storm-resistant construction, or other elements that reduce long-term

costs from maintenance, utilities, or insurance for affordable residential units.

In 2012, Alabama set energy efficiency, green and healthy design, and other

environmental and sustainability measures as evaluation criteria for affordable housing

applications via the Alabama Affordable Housing Act, the Alabama Housing Trust Fund,

and the Alabama Housing Trust Fund Advisory Committee.

In 2013, Arkansas established new standards for the Housing Credit Program QAP,

requiring energy efficiency criteria for proposed projects.

In 2014, the state of Washington Housing Finance Commission requires minimum

energy efficiency standards as a condition of eligibility for housing finance assistance, or

the commission may make single-family mortgage purchase bond proceeds available for

rehabilitation or home improvement loans for energy efficiency enhancement. In 2005,

the state had already approved a code requiring all affordable homes receiving money

from the state's Housing Trust Fund after July 1, 2008, to be built in compliance with the

Evergreen Standard for Affordable Housing.

24

California (2013), Virginia (2014), and Pennsylvania (2017) updated their QAPs to

offer sustainable building certification as a voluntary option for projects to earn points

under the plan’s competitive scoring criteria. In California, additional points can also be

awarded for the inclusion of solar photovoltaic panels and building systems

commissioning practices.

Under the terms of Georgia’s 2019 QAP, sustainable building certification is now a

mandatory requirement for projects. In addition, projects must engage in tenant and

building manager education in compliance with the chosen program.

As of 2016, the U.S. Green Building Council reported that more than 40 percent of the almost

200,000 LEED-certified homes in the United States were affordable housing units.52 While these

advancements are a welcome sign of progress, they are still too few and overly-dependent on

voluntary efforts.

Images: Alice Ferguson Foundation

Returning to a more universal starting point, a coalition of environmental and climate justice

advocates in Maryland galvanized residents to push for a constitutional Green Amendment for

the state starting in 2018.53 First seen in Pennsylvania and Montana, green amendments in the

state bill of rights or declaration of rights mandates state protection of the right to

uncontaminated water, breathable air, and a healthy environment for present and future

generations. The state must hold and maintain these rights in trust as stewards for all individual

residents into perpetuity, or else face challenges in the court of law. In this way, green

amendments can protect against violations of state agency mandates and missions to protect

human health, such as: exposure to pollution, challenges to land use and ownership, and

prevention of additional climate change contributions.

25

When feasible, stakeholders also see new pathways to leverage existing federal policies to

promote universal sustainable buildings, such as the pending Cantwell-Hatch bill to expand the

LIHTC, updating the Community Reinvestment Act to anchor sustainability and equity, and

Affordable Care Act modifications. In addition to passing and improving legislation, we must

renew our commitment to implementation and enforcement of policy. In a tragic example, only 1

in 5 households eligible for the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program

(LIHEAP) gets the assistance they need to pay their electric, natural gas, or other heating bills.

What’s worse, more LIHEAP funding goes to the northeast than to the south, which has led to a

perception that the life-saving value of air-conditioning is less worthy than that of heating.

A vision for policy to support equity in the sustainable building

sector includes the following:

Universally sustainable and resilient affordable housing

through a federally-standardized green building QAP

incentive

Enhanced commitment to addressing sustainability in

existing buildings and anchor institutions (place-based

entities such as universities and hospitals that are

rooted in their local communities by mission, invested

capital, or relationships to customers, employees, and vendors54)

Enhanced tenant protections, landlord accountability, and community ownership within

multifamily housing

Stronger transparency and accountability among utilities; reversing the practice of lower

rates for the biggest consumers; and equitable distribution of the benefits of grid

upgrades when their costs are distributed among all ratepayers

Empower ratepayers in the more than 950 nonprofit electric cooperatives across 47

states to participate in the democratic process available to them

Expansion of sustainability programs in K-12 schools and a strong pipeline for green

building professionals, measured by the number and diversity of young people entering

the industry

HIAs and/or Environmental Impact Assessments with health equity components for all

new developments and policies, particularly as related to planning and zoning

New and improved codes for ventilation and filtration, off-gassing of toxic chemicals from

products and materials, and passive survivability in emergencies

It takes roots to

weather the storm.

Climate Justice

Alliance

Image: Blokable

26

Affordable and Multifamily Housing

Strong public policy is necessary to moderate housing market forces driven by profit and

expediency, rather than human need and dignity. A complex web of federal, state, and local

regulations and subsidies for renters, landlords, homeowners, and home-buyers have yet to

help us realize a vision of plentiful, diverse, high-quality, and stable housing options across the

economic spectrum.

The U.S. has only 35 affordable units for every 100 low-income people, and severe housing

cost burden (spending more than half of one’s income on housing) is substantially higher among

renters, low-income households, and African American households.55 Nearly 1 in 4 African

American households experience severe housing cost burden, which contributes to food

insecurity, more child poverty, and more people in poor health in these communities. We also

see higher rates of severe cost burden for all households in communities with greater racial

segregation. In response to this crisis, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate

Housing, Leilani Farha, sent a letter to the U.S. government and corporate leaders to condemn

the trend of turning affordable homes into profit-making schemes by displacing residents, in

violation of international human rights obligations.56

While we consider methods to promote sustainable design within affordable housing

communities, it is necessary to consider how to make basic improvements to affordable housing

development and systems in the first place. We must maximize funding for housing programs at

all levels; establish trust funds with dedicated revenue sources; improve inclusionary zoning;

promote cost-effective multifamily housing development through land use regulations; connect

low-income families with essential resources to ensure housing is supportive; address

residential segregation and housing discrimination; and protect renters from unnecessary

27

displacement. Until we have a healthier and stronger affordable housing sector, we will not be

able to make the kind of impact from sustainable design that we desperately need.

The key question in thinking about affordable housing is: affordable for whom? Standard

practice in the U.S. has been answering this question through a metric called Area Median

Income (AMI), also called Median Family Income (MFI). AMI is the midpoint of a region’s

income distribution. Housing policy identifies households eligible to live in income-restricted

units and the affordability of housing units to low-income households by setting income

thresholds relative to AMI. However, AMI is a poor metric in the context of equity.

We can use Washington, D.C., the most gentrified American city by percentage of gentrifying

neighborhoods, as a case study.57 As AMI is regional, the city’s calculations of affordability take

into account two of the wealthiest counties in the nation, Montgomery County (MD) and Fairfax

County (VA). While the city’s median income in 2018 for a family of four was $75,506, the AMI

was $117,200.58,59 Recently, D.C.’s AMI has been the highest in the country, by multiple

thousands of dollars, for years at a time.60 In Ward 7 and 8, predominantly African American

communities that have experienced long-term segregation and disinvestment, median income in

2018 was $38,559 and $31,139, respectively. A 2014 study revealed that 250,000 low- or

moderate-income households in the city, including 150,000 rentals, were severely cost-

burdened and paying more than 50% of their gross income on housing costs.61 By 2023, an

additional 149,000 low-income households will be drawn to D.C. by jobs in growing sectors such

as retail, hospitality, healthcare, and construction will need affordable housing.

Inclusionary zoning policy in D.C., which helps ensure that most new housing developments

include a certain amount of affordable units, only requires that 8-10% of space in a building

includes units affordable to households earning 50-80% of AMI – between $41,000-$65,650 for

an individual, or $58,600-$93,750 for a family of four.62 While a Housing Production Trust Fund

was established to produce and preserve housing that is affordable to households earning 50%

of AMI or less, there is still a massive gap in available housing for the lowest-income individuals

and families.63 Only 65% of the need for rental housing between 30-50% AMI is being met, and

only 40% of the need below 30% AMI is being met.64 What’s worse, AMI has increased by more

than $40,000 between 2006 and 2017 and continues to rise; about 90% of all new units coming

online in the city are studios and one-bedroom apartments that do not serve families; more

priority is being given to “workforce housing” for those making 60-120% percent of AMI; and

developers routinely use work-arounds and ex tensions to avoid full implementation of

affordability requirements. In the worst case scenarios

of gentrification, as in D.C., AMI does not serve

residents in need of deeply affordable housing and

perpetuates economic displacement.

More equitable frameworks for affordable housing

address:

Strong attention to the needs of renters, with

accessible pathways for renter benefits from

28

property value increases and long-term ownership of homes and land for wealth-building

Distribution of affordable housing throughout communities (de-segregation) and easy

access to opportunity and services, such as employment, education, healthy food,

transit, and anchor institutions

Acknowledgment and dismantling of institutional racism in planning

Social and community bridging to prevent cultural displacement

Permanent affordability without any sacrifice of quality, stability, and neighborhood

opportunities

Self-defined communities that uphold dignity, pride, and comfort

Immediate steps for policy and practice include:

Hire equity and sustainability experts in existing agencies or their own departments

Always pair a public health expert, community member and political champion in

positions of advisory, decision-making, and communication

Cultivate community ownership over multifamily housing through mechanisms such as

cooperatives and land trusts

Develop Displacement-Free Zones in which the government will freeze or provide funds

to offset any property tax increases for low-income homeowners

Promote non-profit and public affordable housing development over private development

Exclude homeowners from calculations of AMI and localize median income calculations

Require health, environmental, and resilience standards for all affordable housing and

rehabilitation of private properties upon vacancy; require notification and public warning

about exposures to listed chemicals

Offer diverse and adequate financing for landlords to invest in their properties

Adopt property-specific utility allowances that encourage energy-efficiency upgrades without increasing cost burden of tenants, as well permit managers to pass on savings to tenants

Prioritize community-oriented spending, such

as local employment minimums

Uphold multicultural and public-interest design

strategies

Carry out eviction reform and stronger

education about and enforcement of tenants’

rights

Demonstrate how green buildings are used by

diverse communities, benefitting all

29

In addition to the health and wellbeing benefits of sustainable buildings, a 2015 study in Virginia

concluded that residents of energy-efficient apartments save an average of $54 a month, or

$648 annually, on their electricity bills.65 For families experiencing energy insecurity, these

savings could make a significant difference in their monthly budgets and allow greater flexibility

to meet urgent needs.

Education Whether we think about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM),

architecture and design, or green building professions more specifically, education pathways

into the sector must be diversified, simplified, and supported with a targeted approach to

reverse inequities in terms of access and opportunity. In order to enter this sector, low-income

individuals, women, and people of color must overcome existing barriers to higher education,

followed by additional barriers to specialization in sustainable building fields and yet more

barriers to employment, retention, professional development, and leadership.

Over a third of African American, Latinx, and Native American students enter college with an

interest in studying STEM, but only 16% go on to obtain bachelor’s degrees in these fields.66

African American and Hispanic STEM professionals account for only 9% and 7% of the sector.67

Among engineers (including architects), 12% are Asian, 8% are Hispanic, and 5% are African

American. Meanwhile, women make up half of all STEM professionals, but the share of women

30

in engineering (including architects) has stagnated from 12% in 1990 to 14% in 2016. Despite

growing interest in diversity, equity, and inclusion in environmental fields, an analysis of more

than 1,000 U.S. environmental organizations found diversity pathway programs in only 16.7% of

them, and these programs are not effectively connected to jobs and post-program support.68

Since 2009, the percentage of people of color enrolled in pre-professional, undergraduate and

graduate architecture programs has rarely exceed 25%.69 Only 7 of 175 schools of architecture

are located at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), and about 1% of professors

of architecture are African American. Less than 2% of registered architects are African

Americans, and less than 0.4% are African American women.70 While 1 in 5 new architects

identify as a racial or ethnic minority and 1 in 3 new architects are women, White American men

continue to dominate the field by large margins, especially in higher-level, supervisory positions

where gender equity and diversity is most minimal. In addition to architecture education,

experience, and examination requirements for licensing, sustainable building professionals are

expected to be fluent and credentialed in one or more green building certification programs,

which can cost hundreds of dollars per program to earn and maintain each year.

Data about racial and gender representation among sustainable building practitioners, including

architects, engineers, landscape architects, interior designers, planners, consultants, and other

disciplines, is not yet available. However, it is clear that sustainable building expertise poses an

added educational and cultural barrier. Given the trend of just 12-15.5% people of color

employed by environmental NGOs, government agencies, and foundations, we expect and

anecdotally witness similar underrepresentation in sustainable building fields.71,72

Other key barriers to advancement in education and credentialing for emerging green building

professionals include:

Availability of strong programs and visibility of the sector for underrepresented students

Financial access and literacy of systems for specialized and higher education

Rigid and costly standardized testing and application processes

Exclusionary cultures and unwelcoming environments in higher education institutions

and STEM programs

Lack of resonance with role models and organizational norms based on poor work-life

balance and prestige

CESBS Champion

Dale Glenwood Green is the Chair of the Historic Preservation

Program and a Professor of Architecture at Morgan State University. He joined the faculty with a mission to infuse historic preservation education, research and scholarship within the curriculum. Green’s teaching and research explores the essence of context, resulting in engaging, inspirational, and evocative historic built and natural environments that embody, rather than simply contain, the stories being told. Green is also a Historical Architect and LEED Accredited Professional and chairs the Maryland Commission on African American History and Culture. “Shaping the environment is best done by the people who live in it." Image: MD Commission on African American History and Culture

31

As a first step, the industry must reconsider the language it uses. When terminology itself is a

barrier to people understanding and participating in a movement, elitism is dominating. Many

green building programs are self-referential systems with unique jargon that require significant

time and money to learn and internalize. Stronger public awareness and access could be

achieved through stakeholder advisory boards and “translators” to facilitate better

communication regardless of education or income level. Similarly, data from property owners

and managers, companies, regulators, and standards developers should be publicly-accessible

for research and interpretation by a wider network.

Where possible, we should expand access to green building knowledge through experiential

learning – i.e. learning by seeing and doing. A simple and powerful lever of change is to

incorporate sustainable design practices into the very places where we send children to learn.

Starting in schools, we can spark better health, sustainability thinking, and preparation for 21st

century careers within coming generations. In addition, more and better portals for informal

education are needed outside of professional or traditional academic learning models. As an

example, the YouthBuild program helps low-income young people who are unemployed and not

in school learn construction skills through formal and informal approaches, eventually resulting

in them building community assets like affordable housing, schools, and community centers.

Community engagement can also function as an education tool, but we need more spaces with

intentional room for mutual learning and open dialogue. As practitioners go into communities,

they must be open to listening and adapting their agendas, not just bringing tools or pet projects

from outside.

Next, the sustainable building industry, like other STEM and design fields, needs deeper and

broader diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and mentorship opportunities. Simply put, we

need more experts who look like the children, students, and young professionals we seek to

embrace in the sector, particularly through project-based learning. What would it take and feel

like to say that the green building community provided funding for every minority architect to

become accredited in sustainable design?

While sustainable buildings are already interdisciplinary endeavors in practice, the sector would

benefit from more intentional collaboration within education programs to prepare all emerging

practitioners to think holistically about social and economic implications of buildings. We can

only center equity by leading our education with a civil rights and environmental justice lens.

Just over fifty years after his iconic speech to the American Institutes of Architects, we should

still be guided by the words of Whitney M. Young, Jr., the executive director of the National

Urban League at the time: “We are going to have to have people as committed to doing the right

thing, to inclusiveness, as we have in the past to exclusiveness.”73

32

Equitable Economic Development When we think about the sustainable building workforce, we must also center blue-collar workers who work outside of the higher-profile heart of planning and design, but who are critically needed to normalize sustainable practices and who often confront some of the most serious inequities. For construction, landscaping, manufacturing, maintenance, and janitorial workers across the sustainable building sector, we must ensure that the benefits of a growing green building economy improve quality of life for all. First, living wage provisions and wage theft prevention through company or government policy can help ensure that employees are paid wages that keep pace with the cost of living. Training programs to increase knowledge and skills for sustainable building, regardless of quality, are inherently limited by the time, cost, and capacity constraints of the workers they intend to serve. A shift must occur to normalize responsibility among employers to provide free on-site programs and apprenticeships that are integrated into the work day, or at least provide subsidies and flexibility in scheduling to encourage workers to take advantage of off-site or digital training programs. Unions can leverage certifications for sustainable building for better compensation, just as developers have leveraged certifications to receive premiums for their properties. The Coalition of Black Trade Unionists even takes on responsibility to mobilize workers for community action and trains additional trainers for environmental justice projects.

When leveraging energy efficiency investments, which are driving job growth in construction and manufacturing, training for soft skills and remedial education is a good starting point, but it is even better to pursue industry-recognized certification through occupational skill training. In the best case scenario, workers are paid prevailing or living wages and connected to career pathways through partnerships with colleges and industry, skill re-training programs, and apprenticeships. Policy tools to spur these changes include project labor agreements, community workforce agreements, and procurement policies.

33

In Texas, the Workers’ Defense Project offers hope for improvement in an oppressive construction environment. Its coalitions have passed groundbreaking policies requiring paid sick days for all employees in Austin and San Antonio and paid rest breaks for construction workers in Austin and Dallas; won a Houston ordinance requiring developers receiving tax abatements to provide construction workers with OSHA safety training; ensured fair wages and safe working conditions for more than 19,000 construction workers through the Better Builder certification program; and recovered more than $2 million in back wages or injury compensation for more than 1,900 low-wage workers through legal and direct action.74 Moreover, expanding ownership over wealth-generating entities will strengthen equity and resilience in the context of sustainable building industries. The evolving green economy offers a window of opportunity for people of color and women to be owners and leaders in sustainable building fields. These voices can lead and benefit from the adoption of sustainable building, rather than being exploited. In the short term, greater alignment is needed for local and inclusionary hiring standards for minority and women-owned business enterprises.75 Hiring programs must also be designed thoughtfully to build career pathways, rather than offering temporary, low-advancement work to local residents one neighborhood and one project at a time. While bidding for contracts and funding is getting higher-tech, tracking of results is still elusive due to the variety of different systems being applied; federal funding is not being used efficiently; and

compliance must be better enforced and involve community-based organizations.

Image: International Living Future Institute

“Let your abundance

be a supply for your

neighbor in need.”

Kimberly Lewis SVP, Market Transformation and

Development, North America, U.S.

Green Building Council

34

In 2018, for example, the City of Boston announced a new requirement for all Requests for Proposal for public land to develop a Diversity and Inclusion Plan that will prevent displacement and increase meaningful opportunities for people of color, women, and for minority enterprises in construction, design, development, financing, operations, and ownership.76 As older, baby boomer business owners retire in dramatic numbers in the so-called “Silver Tsunami,” the national business landscape will need to adapt. About half of all privately-held businesses, including those within the construction, professional services, manufacturing, and other sustainable building-related industries, will need to confront a challenging ownership transition or quietly close down in coming decades.77 However, an equity-building opportunity to switch to broad-based employee ownership exists. With cooperative employee ownership comes the benefits of better compensation, participation in governance, higher productivity, lower turnover, increased local spending, community wealth-building, and improved longevity. The New Deal Home Improvement Company in Brooklyn, NY, is one such example. As a worker-owned green construction and remodeling company, they build with sustainable and energy-efficient practices.78 They also commit to developing a skilled workforce in home improvement construction through pre-apprenticeship, union apprenticeship, and green jobs training. The cooperative was founded after several of its members collaborated on the New York-Nicaragua Construction Brigades in the 1980’s, and they continue this ethic of solidarity through projects with Habitat for Humanity, Homesteading and Squatting LES (South Bronx), hurricane relief, Standing Rock, and much more. New Deal is also a graduate of the Coop Academy at Green Worker Cooperatives and holds certification for Passive House, GPRO Fundamentals for green building (Urban Green Council), and EPA Lead-Safe paint renovation. Cooperative models can also apply to renewable energy and other green businesses, as seen in the pioneering Cooperative Energy Futures, an energy efficiency and community-owned solar energy cooperative serving members across Minnesota.79 The Evergreen Cooperative Initiative in Cleveland, Ohio, is working to create living-wage jobs in six low-income neighborhoods through large-scale cooperatives for sustainable energy solutions, fresh produce, and laundry cleaning.80 Finally, community development corporations (CDCs) with resident shareholders offer low-income residents the opportunity to own equity in real estate projects spearheaded by these organizations.

CESBS Champion

Huda Alkaff is the Founder and Director of the Islamic

Environmental Group of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Green Muslims). An ecologist, educator, and sustainable development expert, she advocates for environmental justice from Milwaukee, the most segregated area in the 2nd most segregated state in the U.S. Among other campaigns, Huda leads an interfaith effort to support congregations across the state in raising awareness, analyzing their buildings, and securing financing to bring energy efficiency upgrades and solar energy to their communities. Informed by the Qur’an’s call to “stand for justice,” Huda prioritizes inclusion and equity for marginalized communities in each campaign. She was named one of the 2015 White House Champions of Change for her work. “We are going back to our roots. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, used to pray outside. We want to have the design of our buildings connect with nature more. We are uplifting how people used to live.” Image: Milwaukee Independent

35

Similarly, collective land and housing ownership, through community land trusts and limited equity housing cooperatives, encourages permanent affordability and wealth-building, while better enabling communities to resist exploitative practices.81 For this reason, the Oakland City Council dedicated $12 million in its fiscal year 2019-2021 budget to fund community land trusts and limited-equity housing cooperatives. According to the Councilmember who authored the proposal, Nikki Fortunato Bas, “We can’t solve [Oakland’s housing crisis] by tinkering at the margins, dedicating resources only a fraction the size of the challenges we face. This fund is a bold investment in a visionary solution that takes land off of the speculative market and puts it permanently in the hands of Oaklanders.”82 Sustainable buildings themselves can promote economic vibrancy, particularly through long-term cost savings from efficiency, preventative health improvements, and enhanced community connectivity, but we recognize that we must work towards equity regardless of the potential of superior growth and profit from this new model of development. After all, sustainability is not defined by growth. It is defined by the long-term, balanced conditions under which “humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations.”83

Finance Mechanisms In order to realize a vision of sustainable buildings for all people, we must mobilize resources to prioritize communities in which there has been disinvestment. We recognize that for many families with lower incomes and debt, upfront costs are a dead end for sustainability investments for efficiency, health, or resilience, regardless of any significant long-term savings that could be realized from these upgrades. Creative and collaborative financing approaches must overcome placing the financial burden for sustainability on those most impacted, by engaging governments, developers, utilities, local banks, credit unions, foundations, worker cooperatives, CDCs, hospitals, insurance companies, and other partners.84 Rather than relying on disempowering structures and temporary subsidies, the sector should establish a new finance network that also empowers communities themselves to aggregate resources from within and keeps wealth within. We must accompany investment with training and clear job pathways, invest in enterprises as well as projects, and seek to form long-term relationships rather than one-time grants. Financial vehicles should be aligned with each recipient, as one size does not fit all when it comes to equity-building work. In the end, equity must be visible as a priority in the budget. We can no longer call it dysfunction when we talk about the dollars and cents that are not flowing into underserved communities; we must acknowledge that financial systems are working as they were designed. Instead, we must embark upon a redesign of these systems. The following models provide a variety of perspectives on ways to strive for an integrated, equity-based approach to financing:

New York City recently set ambitious greenhouse gas emission rules for buildings, the largest emitters in the city, which is being called a “downpayment on the future.”85 The new mandates require large existing buildings (of 25,000 square feet or more), which account for 60% of emissions citywide, to make efficiency upgrades or pay significant penalties.86 Meanwhile, smaller and lower-income buildings, such as houses of worship and rent-regulated apartments, are exempt from emissions caps and instead will implement low-cost measures such as insulation and temperature controls.

The master’s tools

will never dismantle

the master’s house.

Audre Lord

36

Between 2003 and 2009, the Kresge Foundation awarded dozens of planning grants worth more than $4 million "to increase the awareness of sustainable or green building practices among nonprofits and encourage them to consider building green."87 In this way, mission-driven organizations could embody their values in their physical spaces and use them as catalysts for further uptake. Foundation funding can play a critical role in raising awareness across sectors, in the design and construction professions, and

in the physical communities where sustainable building projects are located. Financial incentives for individual homeowners range from tax rebates for energy-

efficient appliances or the installation of alternative-energy systems to adoption of fuel-efficient cars. Fannie Mae even offers a product known as an EEM (Energy Efficient Mortgage), which factors cost savings from an energy-efficient house into a homeowner's mortgage; the greater the energy savings, the more the homeowner is allowed to borrow.

Craft3 is a nonprofit community development financial institution (CDFI) that makes loans to strengthen economic, ecological and family resilience in Oregon and Washington. Lending to more than 6,800 businesses, families, and nonprofits, including those without access to traditional financing, Craft3 has invested more than $510 million, leveraged more than $1.1 billion in additional capital investments, and assisted 5,602 homeowners with upgrades since 1994.88

37

The Illinois Solar for All program provides incentives for solar development for nonprofits and public agencies, as well as residential communities and community solar projects serving customers with low incomes.89 There are no upfront costs to participants and any ongoing costs or fees do not exceed 50% of the value of the energy produced. The program prioritizes providing job training opportunities for economically disadvantaged individuals and environmental justice communities. The program is financed by existing funds from Renewable Energy Resources Fund that was established by collected money from Illinois customers’ electric bills over several years, for the statutory purpose of building renewable energy projects as defined in the Renewable Portfolio Standard.90

Community solar is defined as a solar-electric system that is owned or provides power and financial benefits to multiple community members through a voluntary program. Federal tax incentives are typically the primary source of financing and drive community solar project design, as with other solar programs, but other federal incentives are available in the form of grants, bonds, and loans.91 Creative approaches that incorporate various elements of community solar include: bulk purchasing efforts in Portland, OR (Solarize Portland!) and nationwide (1BOG); solar services co-ops such as Cooperative Community Energy, CA; and utility-owned distributed generation on customer rooftops, such as the Arizona Public Service Community Power Project.

Energy efficiency improvements and distributed renewable energy projects financed through on-bill financing or lending use the utility bill as the repayment vehicle, rather than relying on big upfront costs. This mechanism has been used for more than 30 years, with almost $2 billion lent out in 25 states through 2014, of which nearly 60% went toward residential financing.92

Developer exactions are used by cities and towns in the approvals process to offset impacts and public costs on the communities neighboring new development. The fees collected are used to fund the construction and maintenance of infrastructure connected to the new development or off-site.93 Similarly, real estate transfer taxes are localized taxes from property sales used to generate revenue that can be devoted to specific efforts, such as affordable housing development or other community benefits.94

Land banks are nonprofit entities that cooperate with local governments to quickly

acquire and hold foreclosed and vacant properties, subsequently aggregating them to

build value and create community assets, such as improved housing or new public green

space. In the case of New York State Attorney General’s Land Bank Community

Revitalization Initiative, land banks have received more than $30 million since 2013,

which was collected from settlements with the nation's largest banks over misconduct

that contributed to the housing crisis.95

Another settlement provides an example of redistributing resources for sustainability. A $2.9 billion Environmental Mitigation Trust was established following VW’s 2016 settlement for allegations of cheating emissions tests and misleading customers.96 States received between $8-422 million, based on their number of related vehicles, to spend on electric vehicle infrastructure and cleaner vehicles for public fleets.

Climate Action 100+ is a global investor initiative that has mobilized more than $33 trillion to ensure the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitters take necessary

38

action on climate change.97 More than 42% of the focus companies are in energy, transportation, and construction materials sectors.

The Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund will raise $54-71 million in new revenue from a one percent surcharge on the retail sales of certain large retailers. The Fund finances clean energy projects, clean energy jobs training, and other climate justice programs prioritizing Portland’s under-served populations and neighborhoods.98

Communications In addition to key principles for centering equity in the sustainable building sector, we need clear, compelling messages:

Inequalities have been institutionalized in the very design of our communities. They have daily social, health, and economic impacts on communities that do not have access to sustainable buildings.

Without unprecedented action, we face life-threatening environmental and climate crises that will disproportionately harm low-income communities and communities of color.

Our society has a historic responsibility to invest in solutions in response to past harms, which continue to inhibit us, and invest sufficiently to protect future generations.

Sustainable buildings have tremendous health and economic benefits for their occupants and neighbors, as well as for our natural ecosystems.

The sustainable building sector has remarkable women leaders, leaders of color, and affordable housing communities. This sector is actually the intersection of many sectors. There is a deep desire for environmental and social stewardship within all communities.

The sustainability movement is everyone’s.

39

Communication and Outreach Strategies:

Start the conversation by talking about people, not technology or abstract

environmental problems.

Break the false paradigm of jobs vs. health in unsustainable industries.

Reframe “affordable housing” as “accessible, attainable, quality homes for all.” Reframe “green buildings” as “healthy and sustainable buildings.” Reconsider public information to eliminate elitism and exclusivity.

Communication must emphasize both short-term and long-term consequences of

inaction. We are building a movement, not responding to a single moment.

40

Academics and urban planners should be collaborating with community leaders,

journalists, and influencers to get the word out about project plans. We must budget for

inclusive workshops and media plans for each susta inable building project.

We will uphold women, people of color, and people with less income rather than

championing “white saviors.”

Elevate sustainable buildings to become part of the national political consciousness and

a standard campaign demand for elected officials.

The first line of contact for telling the story of a sustainable building must be its own

occupants, neighbors, and community leaders. We need trusted ambassadors and

translators, and peer-to-peer networks.

Create grassroots platforms to empower people to report violations of building

practices, engagement promises, development agreements, regulations, and

expectations for ethical funding.

Practitioners should ask questions and listen more than they offer information or

guidance, unless clearly requested.

Highlight effective and relatable projects for your audience. We need more stories from

schools, faith organizations, affordable homes, and small businesses, the places with

which most Americans resonate.

Work with existing organizations in the sector to center equity in their strategies and

communications, and train their sustainability professionals in participatory facilitation.

PROMISING EQUITY-BASED SUSTAINABLE BUILDING MODEL PROJECTS What does equity-based sustainable building look and feel like? We offer a few examples to

start the conversation, with more case studies to come.

The Gulf Coast Community Design Studio (GCCDS) is a professional service and outreach

program of Mississippi State University’s College of Architecture, Art + Design. GCCDS was

established in Biloxi, Mississippi, in response to Hurricane Katrina and now provides

41

architectural design services, landscape and planning assistance, educational opportunities,

and research to organizations and communities within and beyond the Mississippi Gulf Coast.99

The studio has proven deeply effective in building and rehabilitating hundreds of homes due to

its innovative and equity-based strategies; these include comprehensive case management,

inclusion of and decision-making by prospective homeowners; and housing options and design

in keeping with each community’s character.

Groundswell develops community solar projects and programs that connect solar power with economic empowerment in five states and the District of Columbia.100 Groundswell’s model is designed to help neighbors share power with neighbors; project hosts and subscribers paying market rate for energy make solar savings available to low-income households struggling with the burden of high energy bills. Complementing the community solar programs, Groundswell also offers affordable wind power and energy efficiency in states across the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast; improves resilience by incorporating energy storage; and incorporates workforce training and apprenticeship opportunities into every project through collaborative local partnerships.

Images: GCCDS

42

Images: Groundswell

In 2015, the Washington State legislature expanded its investment in healthy, safe and energy-efficient low-income weatherization in an initiative called Weatherization Plus Health (Wx+H).101 The program provided $2.3 million to eight grant projects around the state in its pilot phase, combining energy and cost-saving weatherization improvements with measures that help to improve the home environments for children and adults who have asthma (such as ventilation, green cleaning kits, vacuums, carpet-flooring replacement, dust mite covers, and air flow sealing). The program partnered with community health education providers for client recruitment, assessment, and intensive home education and follow-up. The large majority of households reported better respiratory health, quality of life, and fewer medical visits, and implementation of follow-up activities. The program is now expanding across the entire state, with 15 local agencies investing an additional $1.3 million for more than 300 homes.

Images: Wx+H

Rural Studio is an off-campus design-build program part of the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape Architecture at Auburn University. The program, established in 1993, gives architecture students a more hands-on educational experience while assisting an underserved population in West Alabama's Black Belt region.102 The Studio became known for establishing an ethos of recycling, reusing, and remaking, as well as focusing largely on community-oriented work. The students work within the community to define solutions, fundraise, design and, ultimately, build projects. The Studio “continually questions what should be built, rather than what can be built,” and has completed more than 200 projects and educated more than 1,000 "Citizen Architects."

43

CONCLUSION: LET US BEGIN The CESBS Summit was the beginning of what we hope to be a massive culture shift. We envision a country in which building projects and processes dismantle systemic forms of oppression and empower all community members to thrive within their homes and neighborhoods. We aspire to accessible, attainable, quality buildings for all people, regardless of their race, gender identity, class, ability, sexual orientation, religion, citizenship status, and beyond. Our buildings will uphold our identities and sense of place, encourage self-expression and joy, and protect families from changing environmental conditions. Our buildings will not inhibit our potential, but instead heal us and provide a strong foundation to lead full, impactful lives. Since we met in August 2018, we have seen, learned, and done much. Six distinct billion-dollar climate and weather disasters have struck the U.S., including Hurricanes Michael and Florence, drought across Southwestern and Plains states, California wildfires, storm impacts from the Southeast to the Northeast, and historic Midwest flooding.103 In October, a landmark report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that we have until 2030 to take unprecedented action and cut emissions in half to prevent the worst consequences of climate change. In parallel, the concept of a Green New Deal has taken hold of national politics, with leaders putting forward a vision to address “the interwoven crises of climate catastrophe, economic inequality, and racism at the scale that science and justice demand.”104 The landmark Juliana vs. United States court case presses ahead with its arguments from 21 youths that it is our constitutional right to live in a world safe from climate change.105 Lastly, LEED and the Living Building Challenge both had their first major overhauls in five or more years, with new versions of the standards intended to engage more projects.

44

Our kickoff summit was designed to heavily emphasize active, participatory dialogue, agenda setting, and action planning. Our engagement doesn’t stop at conferences; we invite you to participate in our shared work by:

Amplifying the outcomes and stories from the Summit and this report with your networks

Participating in ongoing working groups and education opportunities

Identifying existing champions and cultivating new ones across sectors to help carry

forward the initiative

Together, we will establish and uphold the principles, policies, programs, and practices that center equity in the sustainable building sector.

45

We encourage you to continue to report back and inform our work. Sign up for the CESBS Initiative and email slee@naacpnet.org to contribute stories and ideas for CESBS materials.

Revolution is about the need to re-evolve political, economic and

social justice and power back into the hands of the people,

preferably through legislation and policies that make human sense.

Bobby Seale

46

END NOTES

1 "Q&A: Did Slaves Build the White House?" The White House Historical Association. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://www.whitehousehistory.org/questions/did-slaves-build-the-white-house. 2 "The Typology of Modern Slavery." Polaris. August 16, 2018. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://polarisproject.org/typology. 3 "State of Homelessness." National Alliance to End Homelessness. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report/. 4 “Annual Statistics: 2013 (Including Historical Data by State and MSA).” Annual Statistics: 2013 (Including Historical Data by State and MSA) - People and Households - U.S. Census Bureau. May 21, 2012. www.census.gov/housing/hvs/data/ann18ind.html. 5 "Indoor Air Quality." EPA. July 16, 2018. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://www.epa.gov/report-environment/indoor-air-quality. 6 "U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis." RECS: One in Three U.S. Households Faced Challenges in Paying Energy Bills in 2015. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/reports/2015/energybills/. 7 Ibid. 8 "Decarbonizing U.S. Buildings." Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. July 25, 2018. https://www.c2es.org/document/decarbonizing-u-s-buildings/. 9 "Vulnerable Populations." Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. https://ibhs.org/public-policy/vulnerable-populations/. 10 Dwyer-Lindgren, Laura, et al. "Inequalities in Life Expectancy Among US Counties." JAMA Internal Medicine. July 01, 2017. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2626194. 11 "National Vital Statistics System - United States Small-Area Life Expectancy Estimates Project - USALEEP." National Center for Health Statistics. August 2018. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/usaleep/usaleep.html. 12 Vierra, Stephanie. "Green Building Standards and Certification Systems ." Whole Building Design Guide. May 06, 2019. https://www.wbdg.org/resources/green-building-standards-and-certification-systems. 13 “LEED Green Building Certification.” U.S. Green Building Council. https://new.usgbc.org/leed. 14 "Green 2.0." Green Diversity Initiative. https://www.diversegreen.org/. 15 Diversity in the Profession of Architecture. PDF. Washington, DC: The American Institute of Architects, 2016. 16 "African Design Centre." African Design Centre. https://www.africandesigncentre.org/. 17 Aragon, Madonna Negosa. "Indigenous Design Planning Institute." https://idpi.unm.edu/. 18 “Sustainable Native Communities Collaborative.” Highlights. www.sustainablenativecommunities.org/. 19 National Center for Environmental Health Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services. Designing and Building Healthy Places. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, November 2006. 20 “World Health Organization.” World Health Organization. www.who.int/. 21 National Center for Environmental Health Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services. Designing and Building Healthy Places. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, November 2006. 22 "Home Health Hazards." Green & Healthy Homes Initiative. https://www.greenandhealthyhomes.org/home-and-health/home-health-hazards/. 23 Allen, Joseph G., Ari Bernstein, and H. H. Building Evidence for Health: The 9 Foundations of a Healthy Building. PDF. Boston: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 2017. 24 Ibid. 25 "WELL V2™ Pilot." WELL. https://v2.wellcertified.com/v/en/overview. 26 National Center for Environmental Health Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services. Health Issues Related to Community Design. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, November 2006.

47

27 Protecting Renters from Displacement and Unhealthy and Climate-Vulnerable Housing. PDF. Strong, Prosperous, and Resilient Communities Challenge. 28 Forno, Erick, and Juan C. Celedon. "Asthma and Ethnic Minorities: Socioeconomic Status and beyond." Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology. April 2009. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3920741/. 29 Moody, Heather, Joe T. Darden, and Bruce Wm. Pigozzi. The Racial Gap in Childhood Blood Lead Levels Related to Socioeconomic Position of Residence in Metropolitan Detroit. PDF. American Sociological Association, 2016. 30 Sampson, Robert J., and Alix S. Winter. The Racial Ecology of Lead Poisoning: Toxic Inequality in Chicago Neighborhoods, 1995-2013. PDF. Hutchins Center for African and African American Research, 2016. 31 Caro, Robert A. The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. Knopf, 1974. 32 National Center for Environmental Health Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services. Built Environment and Health Initiative. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, November 2006. 33 National Center for Environmental Health Division of Emergency and Environmental Health Services. Data on Healthy Community Design. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, November 2015. 34 "United States Department of Labor." Worker Safety Series: Construction. 2005. https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3252/3252.html. 35 "United States Department of Labor." Commonly Used Statistics. 2018. https://www.osha.gov/oshstats/commonstats.html. 36 "United States Department of Labor." Worker Safety Series: Construction. 2005. https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3252/3252.html. 37 “Women in Construction: #MeToo in the Building Trades?” Institute for Women's Policy Research. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://iwpr.org/women-construction-metoo-building-trades/ 38 “#MeToo in Construction: 66% Report Sexual Harassment in ENR Survey.” Engineering News-Record. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.enr.com/articles/45452-metoo-in-construction-66-report-sexual-harassment-in-enr-survey 39 Bullard, R. “Equity, Unnatural Man-Made Disasters, and Race: Why Environmental Justice Matters.” Equity and the Environment Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 2007, 51–85., doi:10.1016/s0196-1152(07)15002-x. 40 Maxwell, Connor. "America's Sordid Legacy on Race and Disaster Recovery." Race and Ethnicity. April 05, 2018. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2018/04/05/448999/americas-sordid-legacy-race-disaster-recovery/. 41 "What Is Mitigation?" FEMA. https://www.fema.gov/what-mitigation. 42 "What Are Protected Homes and Communities?" FEMA. https://www.fema.gov/what-are-protected-homes-and-communities-0. 43 O’Connor, Jennifer. Survey on Actual Service Lives for North American Buildings. PDF. Vancouver: Forintek Canada Corp., October 2004. 44 "Health Action Plan." Enterprise Community Partners. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.enterprisecommunity.org/solutions-and-innovation/health-and-housing/affordable-housing-designed-for-health/health-action-plan. 45 "U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis." Consumption & Efficiency. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://www.eia.gov/consumption/. 46 “Green Communities.” Enterprise Community Partners, 2019, www.enterprisecommunity.org/solutions-and-innovation/green-communities. 47 Ibid. 48 "Green Building Codes." USGBC. https://new.usgbc.org/green-codes. 49 "Public Policy Library." USGBC. https://public-policies.usgbc.org/. 50 Gittlin, Madisen, Chathurika Thenuwara, and Walker Wells. 2017 QAP Analysis: Green Building Criteria in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Programs. PDF. Global Green USA, November 2017. 51 "Public Policy Library." USGBC. https://public-policies.usgbc.org/policy-index?f%5B0%5D=field_policy_content%3AAffordable%20Housing. 52 Kuo, Christina. "In Oregon, a Sustainable Path out of an Affordable Housing Crisis." USGBC. February 26, 2016. https://www.usgbc.org/articles/oregon-sustainable-path-out-affordable-housing-crisis.

48

53 Toles O’Laughlin, Tamara. "Go Big or ‘no Home’: We Need Green Amendments in State Constitutions." Forum. April 3, 2019. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.bayjournal.com/article/go_big_constitutional_amendment_needed_for_climate_change. 54 "Anchor Institutions." Democracy Collaborative. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://democracycollaborative.org/democracycollaborative/anchorinstitutions/Anchor%20Institutions. 55 "2019 County Health Rankings Key Findings Report." County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. 2019. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://www.countyhealthrankings.org/reports/2019-county-health-rankings-key-findings-report. 56 Farha, Leilani, and Surya Deva. Mandates of the Working Group on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises and the Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing as a Component of the Right to an Adequate Standard of Living, and on the Right to Non-discrimination in This Context. PDF. Geneva: United Nations, March 22, 2019. 57 Richardson, Jason, Bruce Mitchell, and Juan Franco. "Shifting Neighborhoods: Gentrification and Cultural Displacement in American Cities." NCRC. March 19, 2019. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://ncrc.org/gentrification/. 58 Empower DC. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://empowerdc.org/. 59 "Household Income by Race and Ward." DC Economic Strategy. January 08, 2018. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://dceconomicstrategy.com/household-income/. 60 Zou, Manyun. "The DC Area Has the Highest Median Income in the US Again | Washingtonian (DC)." Washingtonian. September 27, 2016. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/09/21/the-dc-area-has-the-highest-median-income-in-the-us-again/. 61 "Housing Leaders Group of Greater Washington." Resources. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.housingleadersgroup.org/. 62 "Inclusionary Zoning Affordable Housing Program." DC.gov. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://dhcd.dc.gov/service/inclusionary-zoning-affordable-housing-program. 63 “Housing Production Trust Fund.” DC.gov. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://dhcd.dc.gov/page/housing-production-trust-fund 64 "District of Columbia." National Low Income Housing Coalition. March 13, 2019. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://reports.nlihc.org/gap/2017/dc. 65 "The Impact of Energy Efficient Design and Construction on LIHTC Housing in Virginia (2015)." Virginia Center for Housing Research. Accessed June 11, 2019. https://www.vchr.vt.edu/projects/impact-energy-efficient-design-and-construction-lihtc-housing-virginia-2015. 66 "Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering." NCSES. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/. 67 Funk, Cary, and Kim Parker. "Diversity in the STEM Workforce Varies Widely across Jobs." Pew Research Center's Social & Demographic Trends Project. January 09, 2018. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/diversity-in-the-stem-workforce-varies-widely-across-jobs/. 68 Taylor, Dorceta E., Kit Price, and Ember McCoy. Diversity Pathways: Broadening Participation in Environmental Organizations. PDF. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability, October 2018. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dorceta_Taylor/publication/329222642_Diversity_Pathways_Broadening_Participation_in_Environmental_Organizations/links/5bfef8f6a6fdcc1b8d49f21a/Diversity-Pathways-Broadening-Participation-in-Environmental-Organizations.pdf 69 "ACSA Atlas of Architectural Education." Resources. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.acsa-arch.org/resources/data-resources/acsa-atlas-project. 70 "Data & Resources." NCARB. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.ncarb.org/data-resources/ncarb-by-the-numbers. 71 "The Challenge." Green 2.0. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.diversegreen.org/the-challenge/. 72 Grandstaff-Rice, Emily, et al. Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Commission Executive Summary. PDF. New York: The American Institute of Architects, January 25, 2017. http://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2017-01/Diversity-EquityDiversityInclusionCommission-FINAL.pdf 73 "Commemorating 50 Years: Whitney M. Young Jr.’s 1968 AIA Convention Speech." AIA. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.aia.org/resources/189666-commemorating-50-years. 74 "Workers Defense Project (Proyecto Defensa Laboral)." Workers Defense Project. Accessed June 12, 2019. http://www.workersdefense.org/.

49

75 Fairchild, Denise, and Kalima Rose. Inclusive Procurement and Contracting: Building a Field of Policy and Practice. PDF. Washington, DC: Emerald Cities Collaborative, February 2018. http://files.emeraldcities.org/media/news/Inclusive_procurement_report_03.28.18.pdf 76 “New Measures Aim to Increase Diversity in Development, Prevent Displacement.” City of Boston. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.boston.gov/news/new-measures-aim-increase-diversity-development-prevent-displacement 77 "Small Business Closure Crisis." Project Equity. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.project-equity.org/communities/small-business-closure-crisis/. 78 “New Deal Home Improvement.” New Deal Home Improvement Company Inc. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.newdeal.coop/ 79 "Cooperative Energy Futures." Cooperative Energy Futures. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://cooperativeenergyfutures.com/. 80 “Evergreen Cooperatives.” Evergreen Cooperative Corporation. Accessed June 12, 2019. http://www.evgoh.com/ 81 "Equitable Development Toolkit." Equity Tools. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://edtk.policylink.org/. 82 “We win $12 million in FY 2019-21 budget for community land trusts to preserve affordable housing!” City of Oakland. July 2, 2019. Accessed July 12, 2019. https://www.oaklandca.gov/news/2019/we-win-12-million-in-fy-2019-21-for-community-land-trusts-to-preserve-affordable-housing 83 "Learn About Sustainability." EPA. October 18, 2016. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/sustainability/learn-about-sustainability#what. 84 "Anchor Institutions Help Build Community Health, Wealth, Climate Resilience." Emerald Cities Collaborative. December 4, 2017. Accessed June 12, 2019. http://emeraldcities.org/media/news/anchors-in-resilient-communities-arc-case-studies-now-available. 85 Kusnetz, Nicholas. "New York City Sets Ambitious Climate Rules for Its Biggest Emitters: Buildings." InsideClimate News. April 18, 2019. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/18042019/new-york-city-climate-solutions-buildings-energy-efficiency-jobs-low-income-greenhouse-gases. 86 "Action on Global Warming: NYC's Green New Deal." NYC. April 22, 2019. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/209-19/action-global-warming-nyc-s-green-new-deal#/0. 87 "Kresge Green Building Initiative." The Kresge Foundation. April 29, 2012. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://kresge.org/library/kresge-green-building-initiative. 88 "By the Numbers." Craft3. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.craft3.org/results/by-the-numbers#subp. 89 "Illinois Solar for All." Illinois Solar for All. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.illinoissfa.com/. 90 "Illinois Solar for All Resources." Illinois Solar Energy Association. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.illinoissolar.org/Illinois-Solar-for-All. 91 Coughlin, Jason, et al. A Guide to Community Solar: Utility, Private, and Non-profit Development. PDF. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, November 2010. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49930.pdf 92 "On-Bill Energy Efficiency." ACEEE. February 16, 2017. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://aceee.org/sector/state-policy/toolkit/on-bill-financing. 93 Equitable Development Toolkit: Developer Exactions. PDF. Washington, DC: PolicyLink, February 2002. https://edtk.policylink.org/sites/default/files/developer-exactions.pdf 94 Equitable Development Toolkit: Real Estate Transfer Taxes. PDF. Washington, DC: PolicyLink, January 2003. https://edtk.policylink.org/sites/default/files/real-estate-transfer-taxes.pdf 95 "Land Bank Community Revitalization Initiative (Land Bank CRI)." Initiatives. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://ag.ny.gov/feature/land-bank-community-revitalization-initiative-land-bank-cri. 96 "Volkswagen 2.0L Settlement." Federal Trade Commission. February 01, 2017. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/refunds/volkswagen-settlement. 97 "Global Investors Driving Business Transition." Climate Action 100. Accessed June 12, 2019. http://www.climateaction100.org/. 98 "Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund." Portland Clean Energy Initiative RSS. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/revenue/78324. 99 "Community Design Studio: Building Resilience through Partnerships." Community Design Studio. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://gccds.org/our-work.

50

100 Richmond, Terrell, and Nina Lobo. "Groundswell Builds Community Power." Groundswell. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://groundswell.org/. 101 "Weatherization Plus Health (Wx H)." Department of Commerce. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.commerce.wa.gov/growing-the-economy/energy/weatherization-and-energy-efficiency/matchmaker/weatherization-plus-health-wxh/. 102 “Rural Studio.” Auburn University. Accessed June 12, 2019. http://www.ruralstudio.org/about.html 103 "U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters." National Climatic Data Center. 2019. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events/US/1980-2019. 104 "Green New Deal." Sunrise Movement. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.sunrisemovement.org/gnd. 105 Van Der Voo, Lee. "Youth Climate Activists Set for Nationwide Rallies Ahead of Landmark Case." The Guardian. May 31, 2019. Accessed June 12, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/31/i-am-juliana-climate-protests-youth-activism.