Month: August 2025

Origins: From Love Canal to a National Campaign for Safe Schools

The Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) was born out of the Love Canal environmental disaster of the late 1970s, when 20,000 tons of toxic waste were found beneath a New York school and neighborhood. Lois Gibbs, the housewife-turned-activist who led that fight, founded CHEJ to help communities nationwide tackle similar threats. By the early 2000s, CHEJ had turned its focus to protecting children in schools from environmental hazards. It launched the Childproofing Our Communities campaign (often called the “Childproofing Our Schools” program) as a locally based, grassroots effort to address toxins in school environments. Under CHEJ’s guidance, a coalition of more than 70 community groups began organizing to ensure no child’s health was sacrificed for the sake of convenience or cost.

From the start, this movement highlighted a stark truth: children in poor or minority communities often attended schools plagued by pollution and “sick building” conditions. In 2001, CHEJ and partner groups published a landmark report, Poisoned Schools: Invisible Threats, Visible Actions, documenting hazards like toxic dump sites near playgrounds, pesticides in classrooms, and outdated facilities with mold and contaminants. The findings were alarming but galvanizing. Armed with data and personal stories, parents and teachers across the country began to push back, insisting that every child deserves a safe, healthy place to learn.

Building a Movement to Childproof Our Schools

What started as a report quickly grew into a national grassroots movement. CHEJ’s Childproofing campaign provided local activists with organizing toolkits, scientific expertise, and a unifying vision: “We can make our schools safe and healthy.” Community by community, concerned parents and educators stood up to ask tough questions: Is our school built on contaminated land? Does the air our kids breathe contain toxins? Are there harmful chemicals in our classrooms and playing fields? Too often, the answers were unsettling. But the campaign offered solutions.

CHEJ helped communities conduct research and soil testing, and it connected them with allies. In one early victory, activists forced officials to reconsider building a high school beside a cluster of Houston chemical plants. Across the country, families organized to stop schools from being sited on landfills, to demand removal of toxic building materials, and to improve indoor air quality. CHEJ’s Childproofing initiative united these local struggles into a cohesive campaign with national impact. By 2005, it had released Building Safe Schools and Creating Safe Learning Zones reports, complete with model policies to guide school siting and maintenance.

A hallmark of the movement was its grassroots leadership and creativity. CHEJ launched the Green Flag Schools Program, an awards initiative encouraging students to investigate and improve their own school’s environment. From switching to non-toxic cleaning products to starting recycling drives, students earned “Green Flags” for their schools by taking action. Even the U.S. EPA took notice, with senior officials attending student-led events and praising their achievements. This validation showed that even at the highest levels, the work of childproofing schools was seen as a model for positive change.

Renee Blanchard: Grassroots Leadership in Action

At the heart of the campaign’s most pivotal years was Renee Blanchard, who served as CHEJ’s Childproofing Our Communities Campaign Coordinator. A passionate environmental health advocate from Louisiana, Blanchard became the driving force propelling the program forward in the late 2000s. Under her leadership, the campaign’s tone was bold, urgent, and action-oriented. She often expressed disbelief that “there are currently no federal laws to prevent schools from being built in close proximity to toxic sites,” a situation she rightly called unacceptable. Blanchard’s vision was rooted in common-sense justice: no child should have to study in a toxic environment, period.

Blanchard galvanized a broad coalition of allies – parents, teachers’ unions, public health experts, environmental justice groups, and students themselves. She organized a National Safe School Siting Day of Action that brought together groups like MomsRising, the Pesticide Action Network, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, and community organizations from Appalachia to California. On that day, moms and dads across America wrote letters, held local protests, and shared stories demanding an end to “schoolyards on toxic dumps.” It was grassroots organizing at its finest.

Crucially, Blanchard also worked inside the policy process. When a 2007 energy bill directed the EPA to create national school siting guidelines, CHEJ fought to make sure those guidelines would be meaningful. She and her team didn’t sit back and wait; they kept the pressure on through every delay and setback. When EPA missed its first deadline to release the guidelines, Blanchard convened strategy calls, urged supporters to flood the agency with public comments, and even helped organize a Congressional briefing. Her belief that “it is up to us to engage our family, friends, and neighbors on this issue” underscored her conviction that change starts with community awareness.

One of Blanchard’s key contributions was developing practical tools for activists. In 2009, CHEJ rolled out a comprehensive Safe School Siting Toolkit, packed with sample policies, resolutions, and step-by-step organizing tips. Blanchard championed this toolkit as a way to “give regular people the ammunition they need to win” at the local level. She personally fielded countless calls and emails from parent leaders nationwide, advising them on how to push their school districts to adopt safer siting rules. Through her mentorship and responsiveness, Blanchard empowered others to become leaders in their own communities. Her tenure exemplified the idea that grassroots leadership isn’t about one hero at the top – it’s about catalyzing many new leaders on the ground.

Key Campaign Achievements and Victories

The Childproofing Our Schools effort notched several inspiring victories that demonstrate the impact of sustained grassroots advocacy. Perhaps the crowning achievement was the publication of the EPA’s School Siting Guidelines in 2011 – the first-ever federal guidance on how to safely locate new schools. This victory was years in the making. When the guidelines were finally released, CHEJ called it an extraordinary demonstration of “the power of the grassroots.” For the first time, school districts nationwide had a blueprint to identify environmental hazards before deciding where to build a school.

Equally important were the state and local breakthroughs sparked by the campaign. In Texas, a group of concerned moms formed the Clean Schools Initiative after discovering plans to construct a new elementary inside an old chemical factory. With CHEJ’s support, they helped introduce a state bill requiring environmental quality assessments for proposed school sites. Although it did not pass initially, the effort raised awareness and laid groundwork for future protections. PTAs also stepped up, passing resolutions in states like Alabama and Texas urging safe school siting policies. These actions proved that parents and teachers could lead even when elected officials would not.

The campaign also tackled toxic chemicals already inside schools. Major efforts targeted outdated building materials like PCB-containing light fixtures and PVC products. CHEJ pushed for PVC-free schools and safer alternatives in cleaning supplies. Their advocacy helped drive corporate changes and even won national awards for effective campaigns. At the same time, state legislatures passed green-cleaning laws, often using CHEJ’s reports and checklists as resources. Each of these victories, whether local or national, reinforced the growing norm that children’s health must come first.

Challenges Faced and Lessons Learned

The fight to childproof our schools was not without challenges. Awareness was a constant hurdle, as many school officials initially dismissed environmental concerns as exaggerated. Cost was another barrier, with districts tempted to choose cheaper, contaminated land rather than invest in safer sites. The campaign had to counter this logic with data showing the long-term costs to children’s health and education.

Policy change was slow and frustrating. EPA delays tested the patience of advocates, but persistence paid off. Activists learned that grassroots pressure must be relentless to break through bureaucratic inertia. The campaign also had to confront stark disparities: wealthier districts could often afford remediation, while poorer districts could not. This reality underscored the need for systemic solutions and laws, not just voluntary practices.

Through these challenges, the movement learned to frame the issue as a universal value – every child deserves a safe school. It also proved the importance of coupling personal stories with credible data, and of empowering those most affected to take the lead.

Ongoing Legacy and Inspiration for the Future

Though CHEJ’s Childproofing Our Communities program achieved many of its immediate goals, its legacy continues today. Many of the parent leaders first activated by the campaign are still fighting for safer schools in their communities. Organizations like the Healthy Schools Network and regional coalitions have carried forward its principles. School districts in major cities now require environmental reviews before construction. And whenever new threats emerge, from lead in water to mold infestations, there is a ready network of grassroots defenders to respond.

Within CHEJ, the spirit of the campaign lives on through resources, mentoring, and new initiatives addressing children’s health. Reports like Creating Safe Learning Zones remain essential tools for advocates, while newer projects build on its foundation to address climate resilience and water safety in schools.

Most importantly, the campaign left behind a legacy of inspiration. It showed that ordinary people – parents, students, and teachers – can demand and win systemic change. The story of Childproofing Our Schools is a reminder that the most powerful solutions to environmental injustice begin at the grassroots, and that together we can make safe, healthy schools the norm, not the exception.

Conclusion: Grassroots Leadership for Children’s Health

The journey of CHEJ’s Childproofing Our Schools program – especially under Renee Blanchard’s leadership – stands as a powerful testament to the role of grassroots activism in environmental justice. It transformed scattered concerns into a coordinated force that changed policies and mindsets nationwide. It uplifted the voices of parents and students, showing that those most affected by environmental harms must lead the charge in solving them.

Today, as environmental activists, we draw inspiration from this legacy. The fight is not over – new challenges like climate change and chemical threats continue to affect schoolchildren. But the campaign taught us how to face these challenges: with tenacity, collaboration, and the conviction that every child deserves a safe place to learn and grow.

---

Sources:
CHEJ newsletters and campaign reports (Everyone’s Backyard 2008–2011), MomsRising blog posts by Renee Blanchard (2009–2010), Education World reporting on school siting and environmental injustice, and CHEJ’s Childproofing Our Communities program materials.

“To each action, there is an equal and opposite reaction” 

– Sir Isaac Newton’s Third Law of Motion

You’ve just had your first meeting. Turnout was very good, spirit was high, and it looks as if your organization has a good plan. Naturally, your opposition will now just roll over and die, right?

Wrong! Isaac Newton’s law is only partly correct when applied to organizing: The opposition’s reaction can be overwhelming and unpredictable. When you develop both long-term strategies and short-term tactics for your group, you must try to calculate how the other side will react. Otherwise, you leave yourself open to being “blind-sided.”

Remember this general point: the men and women who represent government or industry and on whom you are pressing your case have probably thought about action/reaction too. In fact, if you are dealing with, for example, a company’s “Community Relations” representative, you can bet that they have received extensive training studying your psychology and your reactions. That individual’s job is to get the most for the company while giving in as little as possible to you. They often think they’ve seen it all; after all, they’ve probably done similar things in other communities – and they really believe you are all probably just a bunch of hysterical amateurs. As long as you keep reminding yourselves of the “rep’s” attitude, you can turn this smugness to your advantage.

With that in mind, here are some typical “reactions” you’re likely to meet:

1. Raising side issues

You want to talk about ground contamination. They respond by complaining about government regulations. The best “side issues” for them to get into are things that you know and they know they have no control over. 

Your response: stay on point.

2. Agreeing to something easy

Typically, they will look to give you something easy, like a promise that “we’ll take that under consideration,” or set up a study or advisory committee to look into it, or a promise to give you some information.

Demand action or a definite, conditional promise (i.e. “We’ll do ‘X’ if you can get so-and-so to do ‘Y’”).

3. Divide and conquer

As you may already have discovered, any citizen who decides to challenge people in authority is labeled a “radical.” They may try to call you or your group “socialist,” “woke,” or whatever; they know that this causes splits in the group. 

Other “divide and conquer” tactics include offering one faction a concession to entice them to “sell out.” They may also set out several inadequate choices and tell you, “You decide who should get the benefit of the limited resources we have to deal with this problem,” or they may match two citizens’ groups against each other, saying that one community will get the dump and it’s “up to you to choose.” 

Watch out for attempts to split your group by pitting one neighborhood against another, one race against the other, or one income group against the other. The best way to avoid “divide and conquer” tactics is to discuss very openly in advance and to be united, while being aware of differences between individuals and groups.

4. Symbolic satisfaction

Public officials know how to smile, nod, and use body language and words to give the impression of agreement, when in reality they have no intention of conceding. People can then leave thinking they’ve accomplished something, until, in later discussion of the overall picture, they realize they got nothing. 

Get agreements in writing on the spot so that everyone knows exactly what has been accomplished.

5. No money

How many times have you heard, “Sorry we just don’t have the money to deal with your very worthy problem.” As Cesar Chavez said, “Don’t tell us what you can’t do; tell us what you can do.” 

To tackle this one, analyze the budget and prepare alternatives in advance.

6. There’s something wrong with you

In this category there are a hundred little put-downs and insults that they will use to try and shake your confidence, split the group, and justify turning you down. Some examples are:

• “You don’t have all the information we have” (and if you did, either you’d agree with us or, if you didn’t agree, you just didn’t understand it).
• “You’re unreasonable and therefore we can’t continue this discussion. Come back when you’ve calmed down” (which means, when you’re ready to give in).
• “You’re too emotional. How dare you raise your voice or have any feeling for the issue that brought you here” (targets don’t like to talk to people who have a genuine personal stake in the issue).
• “Who does your organization really represent?” (The routine slap in the face. “You’re nothing but a bunch of radical crazies”).

7. If we do this for you, we’ll have to do it for everybody

Maybe so but so what? In this case, ask who else has requested it or who else needs it.

8. I’m only one vote, or I can’t make this decision alone

This may be true, but again, so what? Here you can ask, “Then what will you do?” or “Who is your superior?”

9. We need more information

Sometimes this is a simple stall. Your opponent is most successful with this excuse when he or she not only gets you to believe it, but also gets you to go running around collecting more information. 

Things You Can Do To Deal With “Reaction”

Discuss action/reaction among leaders in particular and with the membership as a whole if possible.

Carefully plan any encounter (meeting, action, etc.) you have with officials from the other side. If you’re planning a general meeting, invite the guest to show up one hour after the meeting starts so that everyone in your group can be clear about what the organization wants. If the guest shows up early, (as they often do, deliberately) don’t let him/her in until the appointed time.

Role play and practice the meeting or negotiation. This can be especially effective if either someone in your group knows the guest or if this is not the first time you’ve met.

Have a clear list of what you want.

Post a list of the things you want on large paper so everyone can see.

Summarize what was accomplished at the end of the meeting.

There is a growing array of groups, agencies, and experts that offer their help to groups dealing with toxics and waste issues. Often this help is sincerely offered, gratefully received and truly helpful. Sometimes it’s not.

Too much help, or the wrong kind, can be toxic to grassroots groups. CHEJ believes almost any “helper” can really help IF your group is aware of its own needs, is clear about the helper’s agenda, and stays in control of the relationship between the “helper” and you, the “helpee.”

TYPES OF HELPERS

Helpers you are likely to find knocking at your door include:

• State, regional or national groups who say they identify with your cause and offer activities on your issues (protests, canvassing, news events).
• Potential allies who want to form coalitions with you.
• Lawyers who offer to represent you.
• Technical experts or labs who offer to sell or donate their services.
• Businesses wanting to market products or services related to your fight (e.g. water filter or bottled water dealers, vitamin sellers).
• Writers or film makers who think they can get your story sold to major media outlets.

ANY OF THESE PEOPLE COULD BE USEFUL IF…

• You have an overall plan for your group.
• What they offer fits into that plan.
• You ask the hard questions and insist on concrete, specific answers.
• You make a clear agreement with the helper.
• You follow a simple rule: MAKE SURE you come out of any relationship in better shape than when you went into it.

PRNCIPLES FOR RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LOCAL AND NATIONAL GROUPS

1.  Recognize the right and necessity of each participant to survive and grow.

2.  Acknowledge that it is possible to work together in ways which are based on mutual respect.

3.  For this to happen, local groups need to stand up for their rights and control their own fights.

4. National groups need to be honest about their needs and what they want from local groups.

5.  Since the basis of our Movement is people power, we need to keep our eyes on the prize…will this (whatever you’re considering working with another group on) bring more people into active participation?

6.  One important measure of national and other coalitional activities needs to be: WILL THIS BUILD LOCAL STRENGTH?

7.  Complaints and criticism are important and should be offered directly and with caring.

8.  Bad mouthing is toxic.

9.  To respect differences, we must first recognize them and then struggle around them but not paper them over.

QUESTIONS TO ASK ABOUT HELPERS

1.  Who approached whom first? Did you ask for help or did the helper offer?

2.  What is the helper’s agenda? What does the helper want from the deal?

3.  What do you have to gain from being helped? What will it cost? Will being associated with the helper be a plus or a minus? Will the benefits outweigh the costs? Does the “help” fit into your plan? Can you do without the help?

4.  Who controls the relationship?

5.  Where has the helper provided this sort of help before?

6.  Who’s paying for the help?

QUESTION # 1: WHO APPROACHED WHOM?

Did you ask for help, or did the helper solicit you? It’s common for a group that gets its first major media coverage to then be approached by other organizations, lawyers, technical experts, lab services, water filter dealers and radical political groups who offer to “help.” At Love Canal, Lois Gibbs had to contend with helpers who didn’t even bother to make an offer – they just parachuted in, did their thing and left her to mend the damage. It’s often better to let other groups or individuals make the first move. That way, you can control the relationship right from the start. Not everyone who comes to you unsolicited is bad – just remember, check out the helper before you accept the help.

QUESTION # 2: WHAT DOES THE HELPER GET OUT OF THIS? WHAT’S THE HELPER’S AGENDA?

Everyone has an agenda. Some helpers are sincerely altruistic. Others want to rip you off. Some are funded to provide the services they offer. Others want your money. Always ask helpers what they expect to gain. For instance, what does CHEJ want? We want to help you win locally and link you with other groups to build a movement for environmental justice. As you may know, we were founded as a result of Lois’s struggle at Love Canal and her determination to help local groups FIGHT BACK. For a long time, we did this without getting paid. Now, in addition to member support, we get funding from foundations that helps pay for our work and our salaries.

QUESTION # 3: WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO GAIN?

What exactly does the helper have to offer? How much will it cost? Will you benefit by being associated with the “helper”? Will the benefits outweigh the costs – for example, what if the helper is linked to another cause or institution that might embarrass you? How does the help fit into your plan? Can you do what you need to do, get what you need to get, without them?

QUESTION # 4: WHO CONTROLS THE RELATIONSHIP?

Here’s where we see a lot of problems: where the helper, in return for the help, starts to run the group. Examples: the lawyer who diverts the group’s energy from organizing to working on the case (from which the lawyer stands to make big bucks); the national organization that gets you working on their national issues, taking time and energy away from your local fight; the “helper” with little understanding of what your community is all about, who starts dictating strategy and tactics; or the helpers who play off one leader of the group against another, in order to manipulate the group into following their agenda.

QUESTION #5: WHERE HAS THE HELPER DONE THIS BEFORE?

What were the results?  Ask for references. To be doubly sure, you can check with us to see if we know folks who have worked with that helper. For example, there are lots of characters running around who claim they helped out at Love Canal or take credit for other big toxics fights. Some really did help. Some were no help at all. Some simply happened to show up one day. Others are simply lying. You’ll never know unless you check out their references.

QUESTION #6: IF THE HELP IS BEING OFFERED AT NO CASH COST TO YOU, HOW IS THE HELP BEING FUNDED?

This is a good question people ask us all the time. The answer is CHEJ is supported by you, our members, and mostly private foundations. We take no government money and no money from corporate polluters. Some groups fund their help by canvassing your community door-to-door. This could be a big help to your community group – or it could leave the community drained of money when you try to do your own fundraising. Other organizations get grants to support their help and may want to use your story to get more foundation support. There may not be anything wrong with that provided they tell a true story and aren’t in direct competition with your own fundraising plans. In addition to membership support that’s how CHEJ funds itself.

THERE IS – NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH

We all need a helping hand from time to time. Most of us were brought up on the old saying about not biting the hand that feeds you. But we’ve learned that while you’re taking the food from the one hand, you should watch to make sure the other hand isn’t picking your pocket.The principles for relationships between local and national groups were written by the late Tom Sampson, Oakland, CA.