15 green-leaning mayors 17

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   ECOGRRL Posted 6:04 pm
   04 May 2009

   Yeah, Mayor Daley in the #5 slot is little too generous of a ranking for him. If I remember correctly he used his influence last summer to ram a plan through City Council to build a new childrens museum in the legally protected Grant Park. And this summer he is readying the bulldozers for the former Michael Reese Hospital campus, clearing it of 29 very stable, re-useable buildings. This all happening without any plan or re-use study done of the site. Several are fine examples of mid-century modern. For those two ill-guided policy moves alone, he should be knocked down to at least #11.

   Permalink

2. 

   Raisin'Hell Posted 6:15 pm
   04 May 2009

   I met current Spokane mayor, Mary Verner, fifteen years ago when we were both fighting Newmont Mining's plan to import more radioactive waste to the Dawn Mining uranium processing plant on the Spokane Indian Reservation. We won that fight, although Newmont has still not finished cleaning up the messes made at the plant or the Midnight Mine.
   Now, Mary is Mayor, and Spokane is making its first real progress on environmental issues since Expo '74. The city has made huge strides in the past few years on becoming bike-friendly. A sustainability plan is being fought over now in the city council. The Spokane River is still being treated badly, but even there there's been progress with phosphate-containing dishwasher detergent having been banned. A movement called Envision Spokane is proposing charter amendments that would install a Community Bill of Rights which would include renewable energy and river protection.
   It's a long hard fight to beat back the rabid developers and real estate interests, and a mayor can't do it alone. City council races this fall will be extremely important. All three seats up for grabs are currently filled by folks on the pro-development side of the aisle to varying degrees. Picking up even one of these seats will flip the council to pro-environment, and there's no reason all three can't be won.

   Permalink

3. 

   steve7138 Posted 11:16 am
   05 May 2009

   Jersey City's Healey is a POOR, seemingly unqualified Green choice for a public servant.Jersey City and most of urban New Jersey around NYC have terrific litter/trash removal problems.How can a mayor be ethically be called "Green" when he and city/state officials do not enforce/violate state laws and allow trash to pile up on public streets for years? Some of the worst such rubbish conditions anywhere in the United States, but recognized as Positive?Litter breeds vermin/dieseases and kills over 1,100 Americans annually in vehicle-related accidents (NHTSA stats) Go to Google and see my Powerpoint, "East Coast States with Bad, UGLY City/Urban Litter;"   "American State Litter Scorecard." 

   Permalink

4. 

   steve7138 Posted 11:22 am
   05 May 2009

   For an East Coast City-Providence is Clean! Unlike Mayor Healey of Jersey City, Mr. Cicilline deserves kudos for his work and for the Ocean State. 

   Permalink

5. 

   steve7138 Posted 11:38 am
   05 May 2009

   Houston's Mayor Bill White (and Mayor Phil Hardberger of San Antonio) are NOT worthy to be deemed Green mayors--in America, or Texas, for that matter.  Dallas and Austin are the two Texas cities with the most pronounced GREEN policies, but are sadly not recognized by GRIST. Houston and San Antonio have the lowest rates for total collected trash recycled for America largest cities (a terrible TWO and FOUR percent recycled total trash for Houston and San Antonio, respectively!) Also, Houston, on Mayor White's watch, received EPA's "Worst Urban Air Pollution" designation. Houston still notoriously lacks a citywide ordinance that protects both land use and the environment. Houston, is absolutely a POOR CHOICE for a large populated US city caling itself GREEN--its at the bottom, not top, of urban environmental performances.

   Permalink

6. 

   lukasherbert Posted 10:21 am
   07 May 2009

   If you have NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg at the top of your list as an "environmental" mayor, then you've obviously had the wool pulled over your eyes  by a slick media campaign.  PlaNYC 2030 is nothing but a media PR campaign intended to distract people while Mayor Bloomberg pursues a developer-friendly agenda that has been destroying our local environment.  It is not a "comprehensive plan" in the uban planning sense. It is a decoy, it has no substance or policy behind it.If you want evidence look no futher than the new Yankee Stadium project, which Mayor Bloomberg championed. That project involved erasing over 20 acres of public parkland from one of the poorest communities in the nation, and replacing it with a stadium and parking. The neighborhood, which has sky-high asthma rates, lost over 300 mature trees, which can not realistically be replaced in the immediate area.  The neighborhood will get new replacement parks, but years later - and most of those parks will have artificial turf made from recycled tire waste, not real grass and trees like the community had before. At a community meeting I asked how Yankee Stadium would comply with PlaNYC 2030 to one of Mayor Bloomberg's staffers.  All I got was a "deer-in-the-headlights" look.  Of course it's not consistent with PlaNYC 2030.  But then again, what is PlaNYC 2030 anyway?  It's whatever Mayor Bloomberg says it is.  He can be "green" one day, and then violate those ideas the next day. That's the great thing when you are a billionaire media company owner who becomes an elected official.  You can use your strength with media manipulation to manipulate public perception.The truth is, Mayor Bloomberg has been a fanatic when it comes to replacing naturally vegetated areas with artificial turf, particularly in poor neighborhoods that are not deemed worthy of adequate parks maintenance budgets. He has championed privatization of park space in favor of wealthy residents who can pay for the space instead of keeping them open to all. He has incrased parking requirements throughout the city, necessitating more space for asphalt and less for open space. True, he supported congestion pricing, but think about it - everyone knew that idea was D.O.A. in our famously unprogressive State Legislature, including him. Maybe, just maybe, he just pushed it to beef up the illusion that he cares about the environment at a time he was thinking about a Presidential run?  Maybe, maybe not.  He's not going to fess up about it.The bottom line with Mayor Bloomberg is that if you live in a wealthy part of town, being wealthy himself, he'll really go the extra mile for you.  But if you live in those outer areas of the city, watch out - you might lose all of your green space to a developer. How is that progressive? How is that protecting the environment?  How is that environmental justice?  It's not - and you people at Grist have been duped. Check your facts next time!

   Permalink

7. 

   Simmons Buntin, Terrain.org Posted 10:41 am
   07 May 2009

   I'm surprised not to see Denver mayor John Hickenlooper on this list.  I think his work in Denver, see http://www.terrain.org/columns/17/guest.htm, is pretty great and just as extensive and "green" as the good work of these other mayors.

   Permalink

8. 

   Tonic42 Posted 11:05 am
   07 May 2009

   I wish we had a green mayor where we live. They all seem to be about personal gain and not even care about the evniroment. :( Learn how to make cheap renewable energy for your home or solar power for your remote cabin.

   Permalink

9. 

   mikeyohare Posted 1:43 pm
   13 May 2009

   Good luck to the green mayors, in my experience a mayor can make all the difference to whether a city really does put its people, the environment and the economy first.  See these stories on Curitiba + Jaime Lerner and the Western Harbour Malmo for a little inspiration.

   Permalink