RSS
Home
Ecopolitics 101: Hollywood's Green Revenge
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
California has many environmental firsts. From being first with its own state Endangered Species Act and climate change regulations, to first with regular vehicle smog checks, first with requisite seasonal gasoline blends and first to require state-level coastal development permits. In 1970, the California Environmental Quality Act first required environmental impact reports for actions that may significantly impact the environment. While many of these green regulatory initiatives have had tangible environmental benefits, all have added to (inflated) the costs of living and doing business in the Golden State.
Environmental impact reports (EIRs) are public documents, and are predominantly prepared by environmental consulting firms, with processing and final editorial review by a California governmental “lead agency.” EIRs are paid for by the sponsor (developer) of “a project” being reviewed for “significant“ environmental impacts. For EIR approval and project construction permission, impacts must be mitigated or compensated for at the expense of the developer – in dollars and/or loss of property rights. In 1973, each EIR cost developers $85,000 to $150,000 (Cunning, 1973). The growth in green regulations has inflated EIR costs to between $100,000 and $3 million (Joseph, 2009) each on average today. California government processed over 11,575 EIR and related filings in 2007.
Ecopolitics is the politics of the green movement (environmentalism) and .jpg)
governmental responses to environmental issues. Today, news and entertainment mass media have become indistinguishable and readily exploitable as a propaganda vehicle for ecopolitics. EIRs require public hearings that can become a theatre for project opponents to advance their technical, business and personal grievances.
governmental responses to environmental issues. Today, news and entertainment mass media have become indistinguishable and readily exploitable as a propaganda vehicle for ecopolitics. EIRs require public hearings that can become a theatre for project opponents to advance their technical, business and personal grievances. For example, the massive, 1,400-acre Playa Vista development of homes and commercial uses in coastal Los Angeles has been seen has the most contentious and protracted war of environmental issues ever to involve the EIR process. The development lands were originally owned and occupied by Howard Hughes interests. In the over two decades of Playa Vista negotiations with local, state and federal government environmental regulators, dozens of established national, international and California environmental groups objected to the project. In addition, a succession of new local environmental groups protested the project for issues ranging from archeology to zooplankton to toxics.
Every time one environmental group’s issue was settled, another new or offshoot protest group and issue would miraculously appear. Protestors picketed the Playa Vista site daily, and packed public hearings. Numerous lawsuits were threatened and filed. Particularly persistent and vocal wetland environmentalist attacks reached a crescendo after three legendary Hollywood movie and music entertainment moguls (SKG) planned a new studio within the development. Here is where a little investigation into just who (or what) was behind the insidious green objectors revealed not just a competing commercial adversary (Disney) sponsoring eco-protestors, but something darker in the form of prickly personal revenge inside the entertainment industry.
Interviews with the Playa Vista environmental and public relations attorney yielded some insight into the profiles of the ever-emergent eco-agitators. The Playa Vista attorney revealed that some leaders in the parade of protestor groups were paid by certain disaffected celebrities to punish SKG. These leaders, mostly women living well on L.A.’s tony Westside and driving luxury cars, were contriving and publicizing environmental issues, and intervening to disrupt, confuse and stagnate the approvals process in public hearings, community workshops and lawsuits. Correspondingly, interviews with a board member of the original wetlands eco-group confirmed that some of the protest groups drew contributor money through law firm fronts in order to conceal contributors who were out to get personal and commercial revenge against SKG.
In addition, the Playa Vista development became such a large target for environmentalist exploitation to attract contributor funds, that the original wetlands activists found themselves competing heatedly with fellow green groups for issues, media publicity and contributions. It is also instructive to note that in early 1999 the SKG studio pulled out of the Playa Vista development; at which time many of the environmental protest groups faded back into the swamps. The calm following SKG’s exit from Playa Vista confirms that many of the radical environmentalist attacks were not about saving wetlands, but about punishing SKG. This is but one of many instances where the EIR approvals process is being used by elitist eco-groups, estranged individuals and commercial competitors for commercial advantage and personal revenge in the guise of saving the environment.
Related Articles:
Comments
.jpg)
The “climategate” incident of potential climate science manipulation has shaken the foundations of both the science and politics of global …
.jpg)
Last year, members of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) learned that the author of a critical study on diesel engine soot impacts, Hien Tran, …
