This is a mailer that the Sierra Club will be sending out contrasting the environmental records of Martin O'Malley and Bob Ehrlich.
Showing posts with label Sierra Club. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sierra Club. Show all posts
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Sierra Club: "A Clear Choice for Governor"
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
MCEA/Sierra Club Mailer, District 19 House, 2010
Here's a joint independent mailer sent by MCEA and the Sierra Club on behalf of District 19 Delegate candidates Bonnie Cullison and Jay Hutchins this past summer. Both candidates were endorsed by both groups, making the collaboration possible.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Ballots, Ballots Everywhere
MCEA is the acknowledged master of precinct day ballot handouts with its famous Apple Ballot, but now several other groups are getting into the act today. Will it mean anything?
We have heard that six groups will be distributing ballots listing their endorsed candidates today: Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35, SEIU Local 500, Casa in Action, the Volunteer Fire Fighters, the Sierra Club and Progressive Neighbors.
Here’s a copy of the Volunteers’ ballot.
Here’s the District 15 version of SEIU’s Purple Ballot.
Here’s the Sierra Club poll piece.
Here’s a copy of Casa in Action’s ballot.
And here’s Progressive Neighbors’ ballot.
Just because these organizations intend to distribute ballots does not mean they will actually do so. Montgomery County is a huge jurisdiction with 246 voting precincts. A group that wishes to cover them all would ideally field three shifts of two volunteers each, or 1,476 total distributors. Not even MCEA, which maxes out at somewhere around 500-600 distributors, can get anywhere close to that number. Alternatively, a group could simply leave its ballots on the precinct tables, but that almost guarantees they will not be read.
Some of the above groups may be able to deploy several dozen volunteers if they work really hard. Others may only be able to send a couple dozen, and yet others are probably just blowing smoke. But some of these “little Apples” will get passed out. The big question is where. More than one ballot group will be targeting the District 14 Senate race in an effort to get rid of incumbent Rona Kramer. (The Volunteers are the only organization listed here who endorsed her.) But that district may not have many members of these groups. This sort of unpredictability makes it hard to believe that any ballot other than the Apple will have a big impact on any state legislative race.
But there is one contest in which geography is irrelevant: Council At-Large. Every ballot handed out in every precinct has the potential for affecting that race. Here are the at-large candidates who are listed on each of the ballots.
Apple Ballot
Marc Elrich
George Leventhal
Hans Riemer
Becky Wagner
Other Ballots
Marc Elrich: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Casa, Neighbors (5)
Hans Riemer: Police, SEIU, Sierra Club, Volunteers, Casa (5)
Nancy Floreen: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
George Leventhal: Police, SEIU, Casa (3)
Duchy Trachtenberg: Sierra Club, Neighbors (2)
So if these ballots have any impact at all on the at-large primary, it is likely to benefit Elrich and Riemer (who is the only at-large candidate listed on the Volunteers’ ballot) and damage Trachtenberg. We may not be talking about a lot of affected votes, but there does not have to be very many. On primary election night in 1998, Steve Silverman led Pat Baptiste for the fourth at-large seat by just 640 votes. In 2002, challenger George Leventhal defeated incumbent Blair Ewing for the fourth at-large seat by 1,140 votes. With Riemer looking strong, Floreen holding steady, Trachtenberg having problems and Becky Wagner going negative, anything can happen in this election. And any factor that swings a few hundred votes here or there could make the difference.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Endorsements 2010
Want to know who's endorsing whom? You have come to the right place!
Following are the endorsements of MCEA, the Post, SEIU, Progressive Maryland, Equality Maryland, the Sierra Club, the Maryland League of Conservation Voters and NARAL for all MoCo Democratic primaries in which there are more candidates than seats.
Notes:
1. The Post has not yet endorsed in state legislative contests.
2. Progressive Maryland, Equality Maryland, LCV and NARAL have not yet endorsed in County Council races. The latter three may not endorse in those contests at all.
3. Equality Maryland, the Sierra Club and LCV have not finished making endorsements.
4. So far, just ten candidates have swept all available endorsements in this group. They are:
Roger Berliner, Council District 1
Marc Elrich, Council At-Large
Hans Riemer, Council At-Large
Anne Kaiser, D-14 House
Bill Frick, D-16 House
Susan Lee, D-16 House
Ana Sol Gutierrez, D-18 House
Tom Hucker, D-20 House
Heather Mizeur, D-20 House
Kirill Reznik, D-39 House
Riemer is the only challenger in this list.
5. We will add these endorsements to our tabulation as they become available: MCGEO, Fire Fighters, Police, AFL-CIO, Progressive Maryland (council), Post (state legislative), Gazette and the MoCo Business PAC, as well as updates to the above. We are not adding NOW as they often endorse far more people than there are seats (including eight D16 Delegate candidates). And we are not going to include "groups" that are little than more five people sitting around a table endorsing their buddies, or worse, each other. Fuhgedaboudit!
Friday, July 02, 2010
Sierra Club Endorsements: County Council
In the MoCo County Council races, the Sierra Club is supporting:
District 1: Roger Berliner
District 2: None yet
District 3: Phil Andrews
District 4: Nancy Navarro
District 5: None yet
At-Large: Marc Elrich, Hans Riemer, Duchy Trachtenberg
The endorsements for Navarro, Riemer and Trachtenberg were decided on 6/30. The others were decided earlier. It's unclear whether the club will make an endorsement in District 2.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Sierra Club Endorses Berliner
Following is the Sierra Club's letter of endorsement to District 1 County Council Member Roger Berliner.
May 25, 2010
Roger Berliner, Councilmember
100 Maryland Avenue
Rockville, MD 20850
Dear Mr. Berliner:
I am pleased to inform you that the Sierra Club’s Montgomery County Group has endorsed your candidacy for the District 1 County Council election seat. Our Group assesses each candidate based upon their past record and present commitment to help us achieve our main goals to: conserve energy and address climate change, reduce sprawl and promote public transportation, and preserve high quality land and water resources and conserve biodiversity.
We are extending our endorsement of your candidacy because the positions you have taken support our goals. Your leadership on climate change reduction and energy efficiency legislation over the last 4 years has been critical for our County and establishes us as a model for other jurisdictions. Most recently, we supported the bill you introduced that passed and levies a carbon tax on large carbon emitters in the county. We are also proud supporters of legislation that you authored that requires new homes to be significantly more energy efficient, requires the Planning Department to estimate the impact on greenhouse gas emissions of master plan revisions and sets up a revolving loan fund to be used for energy efficient retrofits of existing buildings.
We would also like to note your support of public transportation related initiatives such as the Purple Line, the proposed bus rapid transit system and the major redesign of Rockville Pike into a boulevard that promotes walking, biking and surface public transit. We will work with you to expand these and other critical investments in our community.
As you know, the Sierra Club endorsement means a lot to our members in the county and to the general voting public. Our endorsement sends a message to voters that you strongly support improving the environment and it highlights your proven track record in advancing environmental protection.
Please be informed that our endorsement can be used by your campaign in many ways:
a) You may use the Sierra Club name in your campaign materials.
b) Mailing labels of the Sierra Club members in your district/area can be made available for use in your campaign (within Club guidelines).
c) Press events announcing the Sierra Club endorsement can be conducted in close coordination with our Chapter Political Chair and staff/Chapter Compliance Officer.
d) Requests for volunteers to help in campaign activities can be coordinated through our Chapter/Group Political Committee.
The Sierra Club encourages your efforts to raise environmental issues during your campaign and we are confident that you will continue working on protecting and improving our environment.
Sincerely,
Political Chair
Sierra Club Montgomery County Group
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Post vs. Apple: Endorsement Record by the Numbers
Yesterday, nearly half of the elected state and county officials in Montgomery County debated the relative endorsement value of the Post and the Apple Ballot. Today, we’ll look at the recent comparative record of those endorsements as well as others.
Below, we show the results of all state legislative and county races in MoCo since 2006 as well as the endorsements of the Washington Post, the Gazette, the Montgomery County Education Association (MCEA), Progressive Maryland and the Sierra Club. All races are primaries unless otherwise indicated.
All five organizations had winning records overall. But the big differences came in races in which they chose to endorse non-incumbents. The two newspapers trailed the three other endorsers, with the Gazette having almost as many losers (ten) as winners (twelve). So much for the claim in a recent Gazette article that it is a “rarity” for anyone to win without the backing of the Gazette.
Now we should not make too much out of these records. Progressive Maryland and the Sierra Club sat out a lot of races, including all of the school board contests. Progressive Maryland's requirement that two-thirds of its Board of Directors agree to its picks probably kept it out of several close races. And out of these five organizations, few would disagree that the Teachers give the most tangible aid to their favored candidates. After all, the Washington Post does not dispatch hundreds of its employees to hand out “Post Ballots” on election day.
It gets more interesting when the Apple is compared to the newspapers on endorsements on which they disagree. Here is the Apple’s record against the Post since 2006:
And here is the Apple’s record against the Gazette since 2006:
Reasonable observers can disagree on the relative merit of each endorsement. But the majority of MoCo politicians have picked the Apple over the Post and we agree. Our hunch is that even given the Post’s bloody and misinformed campaign against MCEA, Montgomery voters still have more respect for teachers than for the anonymous mandarins of the Post.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Sierra Club to Score Gaithersburg West
In a recent email to Council Members, the Sierra Club states that it will score candidates' positions on Gaithersburg West in determining its endorsement. We reprint the email below.-----Original Message-----
Our Take:
From: David Hauck
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 10:40 AM
To: Floreen's Office, Councilmember; Knapp's Office, Councilmember; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember; Andrews' Office, Councilmember; Elrich's Office, Councilmember; Trachtenberg's Office, Councilmember; Navarro's Office, Councilmember; Berliner's Office, Councilmember; Ervin's Office, Councilmember
Subject: Sierra Club adds Gaithersburg West to its voting scorecard
Dear Council members:
The Montgomery County Group of the Sierra Club is developing a scorecard of Council votes over the last four years. This scorecard will be an important element as we decide on our endorsements for Council in the 2010 elections.
The scorecard is unfinished but we want to alert you to one issue that will weigh heavily on our endorsements. This issue, the Life Sciences Center within the Gaithersburg West master plan, will come to you for decisions within the next few months.
The Countys development pattern and the associated transportation investments are the most environmentally consequential decisions that officials make. If balanced urban growth around our Metro stations reflects our hopes for a more sustainable future, then sprawl-inducing, car-demanding, unbalanced growth on our suburban fringes embodies the worst of our fears. The damage is compounded when the plan allows sprawl development at urban densities, proposes an uncertain and inadequate transit system to serve the development, and calls the result smart growth. Worst of all is creating de novo a large, dense center far from any Metro station, at the request of an ambitious land owner.
As we have said many times, our issue is not with a Life Sciences Center as such. There are proposals on the table to enhance the Life Sciences Center(s) without creating such havoc with sustainability.
We will watch closely the outcome of Council decisions on this plan. We expect the Council to agree on a plan that, to paraphrase the late Council member Betty Ann Krahnke, represents not a compromise but a solution, that promotes prosperity and sustainability.
Sincerely,
David Hauck
Chair
Sierra Club, Montgomery County Group
In the past, the ICC was the number one issue for MoCo environmentalists. But the Sierra Club's opposition to the project was largely washed out by the Washington Post's support for it and when their endorsements clashed, they at least partially neutralized each other. So both ICC supporters (like Nancy Floreen and George Leventhal) and ICC opponents (like Phil Andrews and Marc Elrich) - all of whom were strong candidates in other respects - got elected. Now that the ICC is headed for completion, the Sierra Club and the Post will have to move on to other criteria for endorsements.
If the Sierra Club is serious about shrinking and/or altering Gaithersburg West, one possible result is that a decision on the project's master plan could be put off until after the election. The issue could also affect the at-large County Council race. The District Council Member who represents Gaithersburg is Phil Andrews, who opposes the significant increase in density contained in the plan and would like to spread jobs to other parts of the county. If both Andrews and the Sierra Club wind up basing their support for at-large candidates on their positions on Gaithersburg West, that will make this issue a weighty one in the election.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Sierra Club Opposes I-270 Widening
Following is a letter from the Montgomery County Sierra Club to the County Council opposing I-270 widening.
July 19, 2009
Dear Councilmember ,
Re: Montgomery County Sierra Club Statement on I-270 / Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT) Project Planning Study
The plans for widening I-270 reflect a business-as-usual philosophy, a throw-back to a 1950s “roads first” approach rather than a forward-looking one that emphasizes transit and smart growth. We know now that increasing road capacity inevitably leads to greater car use, and then to car-centric residential and commercial construction alongside the new capacity.
We do recognize that I-270 is congested as far out as Frederick, including traffic caused by diffuse employment centers in Montgomery County. But road widening is not the way to solve it and the options the Council is being asked to choose among represent a false choice. Right now you can either choose the straw-man “no-build” option or select one of the remaining options that differ from each other largely in how many new lanes of highway are built and whether any of the lanes will charge dynamic tolls or not. The impact on I-270 congestion of making improvements to public transportation is limited to looking at the Corridor Cities Transitway. The possibility that more extensive and robust additions to the County’s public transit system (over and above the CCT) might be as effective at reducing traffic congestion on I-270 as adding more lanes is not even considered.
The consequences of reaching a wrong decision within the confines of a false choice are serious. The financial cost of any of the alternatives is in the billions of dollars. Just as important are the environmental costs of choosing an alternative that will add several additional lanes of traffic traveling the length of the county.
In order to escape the confines of the false choice now before you, it is necessary to create and then analyze the impact on congestion of a comprehensive transit alternative serving the Corridor Cities and Frederick County. Such an alternative may cost less than widening I-270. A comprehensive transit solution would have a smaller environmental impact. It would support concentrated development at transit stations instead of promoting car-dependent, low-density development. It has the potential to help Montgomery County achieve the 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions called for in county legislation passed in 2008—something that having additional lanes of traffic on I-270 will never do.
We ask that you not select a Locally Preferred Alternative at the July 21st County Council meeting. Instead we request you postpone selecting a Locally Preferred Alternative until a comprehensive transit option is developed and its impact on projected congestion on I-270 is fully analyzed and compared to I-270 widening alternatives.
This is an opportunity for Montgomery County and Maryland to move away from the unsustainable approach of always responding to congestion by building more lanes of highway. At a time when destructive climate change seems increasingly likely in the not-so-distant future and rising oil prices affect our economic welfare today, we truly are at a fork in the road.
Sincerely,
David Hauck
Chair
Sierra Club, Montgomery County Group
301-270-5826
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Sierra Club Endorses Navarro
Following is the press release from the Sierra Club.
For Immediate Release
Contacts: David Hauck (301) 270-5826/ David Sears (301) 233-6690
Sierra Club Endorses Nancy Navarro
(ROCKVILLE, MD)- April 15, 2009 – The Sierra Club of Montgomery County is pleased to endorse Nancy Navarro in the District 4 County Council special election. She is smart, articulate, and will be a strong advocate for expanding public transit, directing future growth to areas well-served by transit, and promoting energy efficiency and other actions that will help Montgomery County address climate change.
Nancy Navarro, although not an environmental expert, demonstrates a good intuitive understanding of the key environmental issues facing the county. With many Master Plans coming before the County Council in the coming months, it is important to have someone like Ms. Navarro as a strong advocate for walkable communities, sensible growth, and environmental protection.
Ms. Navarro “gets it” that “going green” needs to serve all groups in the County. That means training workers for jobs in the green economy. It also means locating more employment opportunities in eastern Montgomery County to reduce the need for long commutes from the eastern portions of the county, where there is more housing than jobs, to the west where jobs outnumber homes. She understands that a renewed emphasis upon affordable and convenient public transit is vital for all, especially in places like District 4, which is population dense but transit poor, and particularly for low income commuters and others with few transportation options.
Ms. Navarro’s statements supporting transit-oriented, walkable communities are very strong, reflecting a good understanding of what is needed to move Montgomery County toward a more viable future: “As a councilmember, I will be a strong advocate for environmentally sound land-use decisions that promote transit over road construction and transit-oriented development over sprawl. This will be the first step toward pulling people out of cars and into mass transit, while channeling residents into walkable, transit-accessible communities and away from our auto-dependent lifestyles.”
District 4 is relatively poorly served by public transit. Nancy Navarro is outspoken in her support of expanded and improved transit. “If we are going to relieve some of the congestion on our roads and reduce our carbon footprint, we need to have a forward-thinking approach toward transportation policies that gets people out of cars and into mass transit as much as possible. That’s why, as a member of the County Council, I will prioritize transit projects over new road construction.” Her actions indicate that these are not just words. In December 2008, Ms. Navarro testified before the Maryland Transit Administration in support of the light rail option for the Purple Line. She also has publicly supported the Corridor Cities Transitway between Shady Grove and Clarksburg.
Ms. Navarro’s record on local action to address climate change is strong. While President of the Board of Education, she promoted energy efficient new schools that far exceed building code requirements. County schools are now installing solar panels on any properly-sited school at the time it is re-roofed and the school system is entering into long-term contracts to sell unused renewable energy into the grid.
We believe that Ms. Navarro will draw upon her expertise in the education arena to help others understand the importance of facing our environmental challenges. For instance, she told the Sierra Club that investing in energy efficiency is very much like investing in early childhood education: what you spend today pays for itself in future benefits and savings.
Her record as leader on the Board of Education shows she will be a coalition builder on difficult issues.
The Sierra Club encourages all District 4 voters who support smart growth, expanded public transit and strong local action to reduce the effects of climate change to vote for Ms. Navarro on April 21 in the Democratic primary election.
Sierra Club of Montgomery County •
103 North Adams Street • Rockville, MD 20850
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
District 4 Republicans Slam "Segregated" Debate
At last night's Action Committee for Transit/Sierra Club District 4 forum, Democratic and Republican candidates were told to debate in separate rooms before members of their respective parties. But since almost no Republicans showed up, the Republican candidates held no debate and milled around in the hallway outside the Democrats' room. Today, they are blasting ACT and the Sierra Club for "segregation."
This fellow, who is probably not a Democrat, has been showing up at the debates.
Ben Ross, President of Action Committee for Transit, explained:The debate was organized for the benefit of the voters, not the candidates. How does a debate between candidates who aren't running against each other help voters make up their minds?
We asked each of the three Republicans to comment. Here's what they said:
We learned the lesson of last year's presidential primary debates. Ten candidates on one stage is too many for effective exchange of views.
I'm sure that if John Edwards had been on the stage when John McCain was debating Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee, there would have been some entertaining moments. But how useful would it have been for Republican voters who disagree with Mr. Edwards' premises?
Andrew Padula:I posted my ACT questionnaire, wrote a column at www.allaboutrace.com, and I was linked this week all over the left's blogosphere. Policy relating to Green energy initiatives was my forte' as an adviser to a national campaign. I have a stronger record of human rights, civil rights, and environmental activism than most of the Dems... They probably didn't want a real debate with facts so they celebrated April fools a day early.
Robin Ficker:Separate but equal is inherently unequal. Segregation was practiced last night. What are the Democratic candidates afraid of? It is very difficult to believe that the Democratic candidates were not the moving force behind this exclusion. We received an email invitation a month ago to "a forum." There was no mention of any segregation. Then the afternoon before, I received a phone call saying that there would be segregation. This is very unfair to the voters of District 4 who want to make an informed choice. Act/Sierra, the Bird Society, nobody has scheduled any forum after the primary. All there was last year was a 1/2 hour on Channel 16 after the primary. There is ideological unanimity on the council now and the push is to have ideological unanimity in the campaign too. Robin Ficker, 301-919-9068. ACT/Sierra leaders are simply Democratic precinct chairmen and should be treated as such.
Lou August:As an invited Republican Candidate to this event, a couple of phrases come to mind:
We'll have full coverage of the first wave of debates next week.
Separate but Not Equal
Forced to Ride in the Back of the Bus
There needs to be an investigation into the circumstances that led up to tonight’s “Debate.” As a Republican candidate, I received no information from the organizers in advance that the Republican and Democratic candidates would have separate debates in separate rooms. That runs contrary to every debate I’ve attended as a candidate. The Republican attendees I spoke with received no information that the parties would be separated and they wanted to see all the candidates. This was the most highly publicized debate, and to my knowledge, there is no debate scheduled for the winners of the Primary election. Even the conveners of this debate admitted that they had no plans to hold another debate with the Republican and Democratic winners of the primary election. Thus in all likelihood, this would be the attendees’ only chance to see ALL the candidates, which was the expectation of every attendee I spoke to.
As we Republican candidates were arguing the issue with the organizers to no avail, the organizers urged me to go to the back room as the Republican attendees were waiting for us. In respect to these attendees, I complied. That’s when I met the Republican attendees... all four of them! That makes three Republican candidates with four people watching them. I estimated that there were 60 Democrats watching the Democratic debate already underway. Even with a county that is as highly Democratic as ours is, those ratios just don’t hold up: 60 to 4? Who was doing the inviting? Again, there really needs to be an investigation conducted here, as the potential manipulation of the democratic process by parties posing as objective conveners must not be tolerated.
Andrew, Robin and I could not honor the event by remaining in attendance. Robin Ficker and I left together, encouraging all the Republicans that came down (and would not see us debate) to attend the widely advertised Republican-only debate scheduled for this Thursday at the Bauer Center (Bauer near Norbeck) at 7:00pm. In respect for those attendees that could not make it on Thursday, and their significant inconvenience, I invited them all to Starbucks near Leisure World where we talked politics over coffee until the Starbucks closed for the night.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Sierra Club and ACT Sponsor District 4 Debate
From Cavan Wilk of Greater Greater Washington.
In order to raise voters' awareness on transportation, land use, livable/walkable communities, climate change, habitat protection/restoration, and other key environmental and quality-of-life issues, you are invited to participate in a Candidates' Forum on these issues. The Sierra Club of Montgomery County and the Action Committee for Transit (ACT) are co-sponsoring this Forum on Tuesday March 31 at 7:30 pm at John F. Kennedy High School. Kennedy HS is a 15 minute walk from the Glenmont Metro and is served by the C7, C8, and C9 Metrobus routes.
The parameters of this Candidates' Forum are as follows:
* The forum will start promptly at 7:30 pm and will end promptly at 9:30 pm.
* All Democratic and Republican candidates have been invited.
* Approximately two-thirds of the questions will be chosen by the Sierra Club and ACT; approximately one-third of the questions will come from the audience.
* Each candidate will be allowed two minutes to respond to each question.
* The moderator will ask follow-up questions to one or more candidates when appropriate.
* We will allow each candidate to make a final one-minute statement during the closing minutes of the Forum.
* The moderator will enforce all time limits.
* We will invite the voters of District 4 and the general public and the press to attend this event.
Thank you for your willingness to support the democratic process in Montgomery County's District 4. The Action Committee for Transit and the Sierra Club of Montgomery County hope that you will attend and embrace the March 31 Candidates' Forum as an important element of the political process.
Earlier this month, David [Alpert] posted a list of candidates. During the post, David also described an underlying issue that will be discussed at this forum:The county is struggling with the same debates over the future of our communities as in many other parts of the nation. Does it want to strengthen and increase its walkable neighborhoods and transit options? Or should it restrict all growth inside the Beltway to keep existing suburban communities just as they are? On Greater Greater Washington, we have our opinions. East County voters have to make their decision, and that seat on the Council could tip an important balance for the entire county.
A thorough Greater Greater Washington post about the issues surrounding land use planning in Montgomery County can be found here.
I look forward to seeing everyone there.
Cavan Wilk
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Sierra Club: No Need for LEED
The Washington Business Journal reported this tidbit about the Sierra Club:The greenest of green organizations, the Sierra Club, is buying an office condominium in NoMa. But it won’t be joining in the green building craze — or at least it won’t be seeking the imprimatur of the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED certification.
I could point out that LEED-certified buildings have lower long-run energy costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage the creation of green jobs - but why should I have to explain those things to the Sierra Club?!?
The Sierra Club is under contract to buy three floors — 28,000 square feet — of J Street Development’s office condominium project at 111 K St. NE in the neighborhood north of Massachusetts Avenue.
The nonprofit’s build-out will have green and energy-efficient elements, but the space will not be certified under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program. The building itself will not be certified either.
The Sierra Club declined to comment on the decision to forgo review and certification under the LEED program.
On top of this, J Street Development, the owner/builder/developer of 111 K Street NE, is not a union contractor.
So I guess one black eye is not good enough for the Sierra Club. They had to go for the twofer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
