Category: Backyard Talk

By Sharon Franklin.

In 1980 national press coverage made Lois Gibbs a household name, but her work did not end with Love Canal.  After receiving thousands of letters from people experiencing similar problems, she created what is today known as the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (CHEJ).  As many know, she was among the community leaders instrumental in the creation of two bills relating to Superfund. Lois is often referred to as “The Mother of the Superfund”.

Today, as reported recently by Stephen Lee, Bloomberg reporter, a history of delays in cleaning up hazardous waste sites across the country is driving the Trump administration to find new ways to act faster, according to the EPA’s second-highest-ranking official.  However, for communities and stakeholders on all sides of the political divide agree on the importance of cleaning up Superfund sites to shield local residents from toxins, but clean-up projects often get bogged down in legal disputes, sometimes blocking action for decades.

Superfund sites are all over the country,  https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/superfund/search-superfund-sites-where-you-live_.html . The fact that the EPA uncovers and addresses this legacy pollution is a testament to Lois Gibbs’s and CHEJ’s hard work, not just in the 1970’s but for decades on and into the present day.  Over the decades, we have learned the effects of Superfund sites and their damage to human health.  Because of the continued exposure to the hazardous substances released from Superfund sites into the air, groundwater, and surface water the damage can be incredibly detrimental to human health in communities within and surrounding the site.  Because of this higher rate of toxicant exposure, as well as their lessened ability to metabolize and excrete toxicants, children living or going to school on or near Superfund sites are particularly vulnerable to health issues.

As we take crucial steps towards cleanup and environmental justice, the legacy of frontline fighters, like Lois Gibbs and CHEJ highlights the resilience of communities fighting for a healthier future.  Moving forward, we as Americans have an obligation to ensure that no community is left behind or forgotten.  Everyone has the right to a clean, safe environment. 

What is Happening Now with Superfund?  Some local activists in the Houston, Texas area say they’re already seeing changes in delays at sites that have long frustrated them, but still haven’t approved a cleanup design.  Jackie Medcalf, Executive Director of Texas Health and Environment Alliance recently met with EPA headquarters staffers who have told her they “want to move this site to action, and it’s taken way too long.” Similarly, the community group near St. Louis, Missouri, Just Moms/SL are finally getting action after languishing on the national priority list since 1990, said Dawn Chapman, co-founder of Just Moms STL Additionally, Karen Nickel, Just Moms/SL co-founder stated the EPA’s new plan is for a cleanup is scheduled for groundbreaking to start in spring 2027,“For us, it never mattered who was going to come in and clean us up.”   

Resources for Blog:

Center for Health, Environment and Justice link to Superfund Information https://chej.org/superfund  

Trump’s EPA Turns to New Tools for Faster Superfund Cleanups

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/trumps-epa-turns-to-new-tools-for-faster-superfund-cleanups

Search for Superfund Sites Where You Live

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/superfund/search-superfund-sites-where-you-live.html

This is not the current EPA website. To navigate to the current EPA website, please go to www.epa.gov. This website is historical material reflecting the EPA website as it existed on January 19, 2017. This website is no longer updated and links to external websites and some internal pages may not work.

About the Superfund Cleanup Process

https://www.epa.gov/superfund/about-superfund-cleanup-process#npl

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.

For over four decades, the Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) has empowered everyday people to fight toxic pollution and environmental injustice. Founded by Lois Gibbs after the Love Canal crisis, CHEJ has led countless grassroots victories to protect public health—especially that of children and low-income communities.

One of its most impactful efforts? The PVC-Free Campaign.

The Problem with PVC

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC), often called “the poison plastic,” is found in everything from school supplies to shower curtains. It’s not just the plastic itself that’s dangerous—it’s the toxic additives like phthalates, lead, and cadmium, which can leach out and harm children’s health. Even worse, producing and disposing of PVC creates dioxins, among the most toxic substances known, disproportionately impacting communities near vinyl plants.

Realizing PVC’s widespread use and hidden danger, CHEJ launched a campaign to educate the public, push for safer products, and hold companies accountable.

Grassroots Power Starts in Schools

The campaign began with a focus on schools, where vinyl was found in backpacks, lunchboxes, and flooring. Mike Schade led the charge by developing CHEJ’s “Back-to-School Guide to PVC-Free School Supplies”, which helped thousands of parents choose safer products. School districts began phasing out PVC, sparking a wider consumer movement.

Thanks to this awareness, retailers started offering non-toxic alternatives. What began as a classroom safety initiative grew into a nationwide push for PVC-free living. Schools and PTAs began making purchasing changes. Parents swapped out vinyl products for safer alternatives. The campaign sparked consumer awareness and retailer demand for safer materials.

Creative Tactics, Real Wins

CHEJ’s strength has always been grassroots organizing with a creative twist. From giant inflatable ducks outside Target stores to educational rallies and shareholder pressure campaigns, the movement forced major retailers to listen.

These tactics paid off:

• Microsoft (2005): Eliminated PVC in packaging, removing over 360,000 pounds of it in just months.
• Wal-Mart (2005): Announced phaseout of PVC in packaging for store-brand products.
• Target (2007): Committed to remove PVC from baby products, lunchboxes, shower curtains, and packaging.
• Sears/Kmart (2007): Pledged a phase-out and began labeling PVC-free items.
• Johnson & Johnson, Kaiser Permanente, Lego, Gerber, and Toyota also joined in.

By 2009, Congress banned key phthalates in children’s toys—cementing a cultural shift that CHEJ helped create.

Lasting Legacy

The PVC-Free campaign changed more than products—it changed minds. Parents, teachers, students, and activists now demand transparency in materials. Many learned how to organize, advocate, and win—skills they carry into other fights for clean air, safe water, and toxin-free homes.

Today, phrases like “PVC-free” and “phthalate-free” are common in marketing. Safer materials are the norm in many stores and classrooms. And most importantly, millions of children are safer thanks to CHEJ’s leadership.

A Blueprint for Future Victories

The campaign’s success proves that grassroots power works. By blending science, storytelling, and smart activism, CHEJ moved mountains—and major corporations. Their fight against the poison plastic stands as a template for future campaigns to make our world healthier and more just.

Sometime it’s good to reflect on how you got to where you are today. Here’s a short version of how CHEJ got to where we are today.

It all started in 1978, in Niagara Falls, New York. Lois Gibbs was struggling to raise a family, which included two children suffering from a number of rare illnesses. Soon she realized they weren’t the only ones suffering. Nearly every family in the Love Canal neighborhood was facing its own medical nightmare.

Lois discovered that her home, and those of her neighbors, sat amongst 20,000 tons of toxic chemicals. In response to this shocking news, Lois stepped up to lead her neighbors in the battle to protect their families from the hazardous waste in their backyards.

Lois and her neighbors developed strategies to educate and organize their community, assess the impact of the toxic waste on their health, and challenge corporate and government disposal policies. After a three-year fight, Lois’ leadership led to the relocation of 833 Love Canal households.

Through this experience, Lois realized that no local, state, or national organization existed to provide communities with the strategic advice, guidance, and technical assistance necessary to win such a batt le.

To ensure that no other community would have to face a toxic health threat alone, Lois founded the Citizen’s Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste (CCHW) on April 6, 1981. CCHW became known as the Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) in 1997 and in January 2017, we joined People’s Action Institute (PA I), as one of their projects.

The core of CHEJ’s mission is, and always has been, to prevent harm to human health. This is achieved by providing technical and organizing support to individuals and communities facing toxic hazards.

Today, CHEJ continues to harness the power of grassroots organizing to help communities protect their health – as Lois did many years ago. On average, CHEJ receives hundreds of requests for assistance each year. Over the past 44 years, CHEJ’s work has touched over 15,000 individuals and groups.

At CHEJ, we believe that everyone has a right to a clean and healthy environment; and together, we can create one powerful voice in favor of protecting our health and the environment, and promoting economic justice.

Don’t hesitate to reach out to us if you are having trouble dealing a with an environmental health problem.

By Leila Waid.

Environmental restoration does not need to be complex. You don’t need to have a bioengineering or chemistry degree to be involved in or even understand this topic of environmental justice. In fact, simple solutions that can be scaled nationally or internationally are just as important because they provide a method that is easy to replicate and implement.

Justdiggit is an example of an organization utilizing a simple restoration technique to help transform thousands of acres of dry, degraded land into a biodiverse haven.

Justdiggit collaborates with local communities in Sub-Saharan African countries to dig bunds to help conserve rainwater and re-green the environment. The method used is simple. Farmers and local stakeholders dig half-circles – which have been branded as “Earth smiles” by the organization (because if you look at them from a bird’s eye view, they look like smiles) – to help capture water in areas where the land is no longer able to soak up the water on its own. Seeds are then added to the dug half-circles, and they are covered with tree branches to help deter animals from eating the seeds. From there, Mother Nature takes over. The newly transformed land is able to capture water, and magic happens. Greenery and biodiversity come back to previously inhospitable lands. Here is a video LINK to a video showcasing just how easy this process is from beginning to end.

Although the technique promoted by Justdiggit is easy to follow and replicate, it still requires considerable physical labor and time to set up. Thus, environmental sustainability programs such as this cannot succeed without buy-in from the community. A peer-reviewed article published in E3S Web of Conferences researched how Justdiggit utilized community involvement to ensure the program’s success. The organization hosted community events, known as the “Raindance Project,” which included dance and music festivities. These events had the effect of bringing the community together and provided Justdiggit with a venue to educate the public about the project and promote buy-in.

Along with the Raindance Project, the Justdiggit project also used a variety of community engagement tools to ensure the program’s success. For example, they hosted community workshops where community members could attend to ask questions, provide feedback, and strengthen collaborative decision-making. They also identified individuals who could act as ambassadors and champions of the program to help unify the communities and disseminate the program’s message. To ensure program success, Justdiggit also utilized the power of social media to help spread the message about its mission.

The effects of this environmental sustainability initiative are many-fold. Because the program partnered with the locals where the re-greening efforts were being undertaken, this approach helped the local economy because community members were hired for the implementation of the program and helped dig the “earth smiles.” Once the re-greening efforts were realized, the local communities were also able to enjoy new farming opportunities and a greater biodiversity.

Along with the economic benefits, re-greening also has climate change mitigation and adaptation benefits. Increased greenery has a cooling effect on the area, which is essential during an intense heatwave. The greenery also provides a new source of carbon uptake, which, in turn, helps slow climate change.

The program has been so successful that its effects can even be seen from space. The screenshot below, taken from a Planet.com article, showcases how much the landscape has changed in just over four years.

By Sharon Franklin.

Amnesty International issued a report in April 2025 which addressed economic and climate injustice and the inter-connectiveness of the growing impact of severe weather events. Additionally, according to another report by First Street. Climate, the Sixth “C” of Credit , it is expected to increase home foreclosures.  The report was released following the latest tornadoes that swept through Missouri and Kentucky, leaving at least 25 people dead and scores injured.  Uninsured damage from flooding, as well as the depreciation of home values and rising insurance premiums from increasingly destructive climate disasters is still being calculated.  These climate events could lead to as much as $1.2 billion in credit losses in 2025, and estimates that mortgages on about 19,000 properties could be repossessed or foreclosed due to climate risk.

Key Points of the Climate, the Sixth “C” of Credit Report:

• Climate Driven Credit Losses Could Cost Banks Billions.
• Insurance Industry Bearing and Shifting Burden.
• Flood Risk Highlights Systemic Fragility.
• Household Absorbing Increased Climate Risk.  
• Floods Are the Leading Driver of Foreclosure Among Perils.
• Wind and Wildfire Damages are Insured, but Rising Premiums Drive Indirect Foreclosure Risk.   
• Macroeconomic Conditions Compound Climate Pressures. 
• Historical Climate Impacts Have Resulted in Hidden Credit Losses. 
• Escalating Flood Risks and Climate Drive Macroeconomic Changes Drive Future Foreclosures. 

As many of Americans already know the insurance industry is gradually shifting the costs of climate disasters onto homeowners, causing the financial stability of borrowers and the performance of their mortgages to be increasingly at risk.  In the most severe cases, this escalating burden can ultimately lead to foreclosure.

Why It Matters?  Studies have concluded that global warming and extreme natural disasters has immediate consequences on housing when it comes to home insurance and rebuilding destroyed properties.

What To Know   If 2025 turn out to be a particularly natural disaster year. Lenders could lose up to $1.2 billion this year.  It is estimated that Florida, Louisiana, and California alone are projected to account for 53 percent of all climate-related mortgage losses in 2025.  The main culprit would likely be flooding, and according to the report, foreclosures spike 40 percent among damaged homes following flood events.  Dr. Jeremy Porter, Head of Climate Implications Research, First Street Foundation stated “Flooding leads to higher foreclosure rates because many properties are uninsured, especially those outside FEMA’s [the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s] Special Flood Hazard Areas”.

Resources for Blog:

• The 12th National Risk Assessment  Property Prices in Peril
  https://assets.riskfactor.com/media/The%2012th%20National%20Risk%20Assessment.pdf
• Disasters Will Escalate Foreclosures and Create Systemic Financial Risk in Mortgage Markets, Study Climate, the Sixth “C” of Credit  
  https://firststreet.org/research-library/climate-the-sixth-c-of-credit  and   https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/climate-risk-foreclosures-report-first-street/
• Economic and Climate Injustice in Amnesty International’s 2025 Annual Report
  https://unipd-centrodirittiumani.it/en/news/economic-and-climate-injustice-in-amnesty-internationals-2025-annual-report
• US Housing Market Warned of Mortgage Rate Hikes, Foreclosures
  https://www.newsweek.com/us-housing-market-warned-mortgage-rate-hikes-foreclosures-2074671
• Climate Disasters Are Raising The Risk Of US Home Repossessions, Warns Research Group
  https://www.ft.com/content/c1d1ee7f-f34a-490d-bbd6-95b895ffd33e
• Tornadoes, storms kill more than 30: See photos from Kentucky, Missouri, other states https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/05/17/tornadoes-st-louis-kentucky-indiana/83691932007/

By Juliet Porter.

In 2025, about half of the U.S. population, or 156.1 million Americans, were proven to reside in communities with unhealthy levels of air pollution, marking a significant increase from 2024 (EcoWatch). This warning came from the American Lung Association’s State of the Air report, emphasizing the growing urgency of addressing air quality in American communities (ALA). Although air pollution is often invisible and therefore often overlooked, its effects are very real, impacting physical health, environmental stability, and community well-being. In this blog, we’ll explore the disproportionate burden of air pollution, the power of community-led monitoring, and the importance of supporting grassroots environmental justice.

As you may imagine, air pollution doesn’t impact everyone equally. Through an environmental justice lens, it becomes clear that low-income communities and communities of color bear the brunt of pollution due to their proximity to industrial sites and a lack of adequate regulatory enforcement (ShunWaste). These communities are often overlooked, yet they face the highest health risks. Long-term exposure to polluted air is linked to serious conditions like lung cancer, asthma, cardiovascular disease, and even early death. Even short-term exposure can trigger harmful effects, including hospital visits due to respiratory flare-ups and worsening allergies.

One of the most powerful tools in the fight for environmental justice is community-led air quality monitoring. When residents lead monitoring efforts, they take control of the narrative, gathering data that empowers them to advocate for meaningful change. Alarmingly, over 50 million Americans live in areas without air quality monitoring infrastructure (EcoWatch), making grassroots efforts even more critical.

A leading example of community monitoring is the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL), which recently launched the B.E.A.S.T.—the BREDL Environmental Air Sampling Trailer. This mobile unit is equipped with advanced air monitoring tools and travels across the Southeast to collect and share real-time pollution data. By putting scientific tools in the hands of the people, BREDL, funded by a grant from the EPA, is helping communities document local air quality and use that information to hold polluters accountable.

Despite the promise of community-led monitoring, there are significant barriers. In states like Louisiana, recent legislation, such as the Community Air Monitoring Reliability Act, has made it increasingly difficult for grassroots groups to monitor air quality, threatening them with fines and legal complications (AP News). At the federal level, proposed rollbacks to greenhouse gas regulations by the EPA could further erode national protections (Reuters). These developments are especially troubling in light of ongoing budget cuts to the EPA, which jeopardize not only enforcement but also the funding and support that make projects like BREDL’s B.E.A.S.T possible. Without robust federal support and environmental oversight, innovative community-led initiatives like the B.E.A.S.T., which empower residents with real-time data to hold polluters accountable, could become obsolete. This convergence of weakened policy, limited resources, and increasing pollution events paints a troubling picture for the future of environmental justice.

The Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) plays a vital role in advocating for and empowering community efforts. By providing resources, training, and organizing support, CHEJ helps local groups respond to pollution threats and resistance to anti-environmental policies. Moving forward, CHEJ will continue to amplify the voices of frontline communities and the  need for community-led action in addressing the harmful effects of breathing polluted air.

To ensure that every person in this country can breathe clean air, we must uplift community-led air quality monitoring and challenge policies that silence grassroots action. Environmental non-profits like CHEJ are uniquely positioned to bridge science, policy, and community engagement, paving the way for healthier, more just communities. Together, we can envision a future where clean air is not a privilege, but a guaranteed right.

The Center for Health, Environment & Justice (CHEJ) has a long history of championing environmental health, from its roots in the Love Canal fight to national campaigns against toxic chemicals. From the beginning, CHEJ focused on everyday threats to children’s health – including dangerous cleaning chemicals in schools and toxic plastics in consumer products. For young people passionate about environmental justice, CHEJ’s story shows how community activism can spur big changes. Two signature initiatives – the Green Cleaning and PVC-Free campaigns – stand out for their hopeful victories in reducing pollution and protecting vulnerable communities.

Green Cleaning Campaign: Safer Schools for Healthy Kids

CHEJ’s Green Cleaning campaign set out to make schools healthier by replacing harsh chemical cleaners with non-toxic alternatives. This effort grew in the early 2000s alongside CHEJ’s Green Flag Schools Program, which began in 2002 as a framework for students to lead environmental improvements in their schools. Students and parents learned that “clean” doesn’t have to mean dousing classrooms in industrial chemicals. In fact, CHEJ emphasized that many conventional cleaners (with strong fragrances and antibacterial agents) can do more harm than good, contributing to asthma and other health problems. By working with schools and daycare centers across the country, CHEJ helped introduce green cleaning – using products designed to eliminate hazardous ingredients – so that classrooms could be kept sanitary without putting kids and staff at risk. As awareness grew, green cleaning products became widely available and even cost-saving for schools, debunking the myth that safer cleaners are ineffective or expensive.

The Green Cleaning campaign achieved several inspiring victories. CHEJ provided resources and training to help school districts switch to certified green products, improving indoor air quality for students. Some forward-thinking states and cities adopted policies to require safer cleaning in schools – for example, in 2005 New York City passed an “environmentally preferable purchasing” law with CHEJ’s support, setting standards for energy efficiency and green cleaning products in all city agencies. This law also mandated phasing out certain toxic materials and was hailed as a huge victory for children’s health. By proving that schools can clean effectively without toxic chemicals, the campaign reduced countless daily exposures for children. It also empowered custodial workers (often in disadvantaged communities) with safer working conditions. CHEJ even took the fight to corporate giants: in 2009, activists with CHEJ’s “Disney Go Green” campaign rallied at Walt Disney’s shareholder meeting to urge the company to adopt a comprehensive green cleaning policy. Under public pressure, Disney did begin introducing greener cleaning practices, showing that even the “Magic Kingdom” could clean up its act for the sake of kids, families, and employees ecochildsplay.com. The Green Cleaning campaign not only made schools less toxic but also demonstrated the power of grassroots advocacy – from PTA groups to student Green Teams – in driving institutions to protect health.

PVC-Free Campaign: Tackling “The Poison Plastic”

Around the same time, CHEJ launched its PVC-Free campaign to eliminate another hidden danger in schools and homes: polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC), dubbed the “poison plastic.” In the early 2000s, CHEJ identified PVC – commonly found in school supplies like binders, lunchboxes, and art materials – as a significant health risk for children. PVC contains toxic additives (like phthalates and lead) that can leach out and cause cancers or hormone disruption. Mike Schade of CHEJ led a nationwide PVC-Free Schools initiative to raise awareness among parents, teachers, and school administrators about these dangers and to promote safer alternatives. Much like the green cleaning effort, this program combined education and advocacy to empower communities to take action. CHEJ offered free guides and tools – for instance, Back-to-School Guides to PVC-Free School Supplies – helping families and schools identify PVC items and replace them with PVC-free options. Students and parents were encouraged to ask questions: Where is PVC hiding in our school? Often the answers ranged from flooring and carpeting to playground equipment and even cleaning supplies. By shining a light on this “invisible” threat, the PVC-Free campaign motivated many communities to demand change.

The PVC-Free campaign scored remarkable victories that ripple far beyond individual schools. CHEJ helped build a large grassroots network of concerned parents, educators, and health advocates united in phasing out PVC. Through consumer pressure and corporate engagement, this network successfully pushed several major companies to reduce or eliminate PVC in their products. In fact, some of the world’s biggest corporations responded to the movement – companies like Wal-Mart, Nike, Apple, Microsoft, Target, Sears, and Kmart all adopted policies to phase out PVC, recognizing the hazards of its lifecycle. This represents a huge shift in the market, driven by people power and persistent campaigning. On the policy front, CHEJ and coalition partners convinced New York City to include PVC in its purchasing reforms: the city set a deadline to halt buying materials that create dioxin (one of the most toxic chemicals) when burned, effectively aiming to phase out PVC in city schools and agencies. This proactive stance – reducing PVC to prevent dioxin pollution – was a pioneering step that protected not only students but also fenceline communities near waste incinerators. Thanks to the PVC-Free campaign, today many students attend schools that have eliminated PVC materials, and parents are far more aware of toxic plastics in everyday products. The campaign even inspired individuals to make safer choices at home, proving that awareness can lead to healthier habits. Perhaps most importantly, this initiative showed marginalized communities that their voice matters: CHEJ’s work on PVC, like all its projects, focused on protecting vulnerable neighborhoods disproportionately burdened by pollution. By replacing “poison plastic” with safer materials, the PVC-Free campaign contributed to a broader environmental health movement that demands industry accountability and justice for all communities.

Empowerment and Environmental Health

Looking back at CHEJ’s Green Cleaning and PVC-Free campaigns, it’s clear that real progress is possible when people unite for change. These initiatives were historically significant in shifting how schools and corporations think about chemicals. Decades ago, few imagined that a school district would question its cleaning supplies or a retail giant would drop a type of plastic – but grassroots advocacy made the unthinkable a reality. Each victory, from a toxic-free classroom to a Fortune 500 company’s policy change, has helped protect children and other vulnerable groups from harm. Moreover, the campaigns have left a legacy of hope and empowerment. They trained a generation of young environmental leaders – from students who led Green Flag audits to parents who organized PVC-free school drives – demonstrating that anyone can have a voice in creating a healthier world. In the larger environmental health movement, CHEJ’s work has been a catalyst, proving that community-led efforts can influence policy and corporate practices on a national scale chej.org. For today’s young environmental justice advocates, the story of these campaigns is an inspiring reminder: when ordinary people band together to demand healthier products and practices, even the mightiest institutions will listen. The journey isn’t over, but the Green Cleaning and PVC-Free campaigns show that step by step, we are building a safer, more just environment for all. chej.org

Sources: The Center for Health, Environment & Justice archives and publications; Environmental Law Institute; EcoChild’s Play blog; New York City Council records; CHEJ Everyone’s Backyard newsletters.