City of Tacoma announcement.
The Tacoma City Council is looking to fill four seats on the Sustainable Tacoma Commission, including one youth position (ages 16-18). The purpose of the Commission is to bring community accountability to the implementation of Tacoma’s 2030 Climate Action Plan and to support public involvement in sustainability issues.
The Tacoma City Council is looking for Commission members who provide a balanced representation of various stakeholders, such as the environmental, business, labor, housing, industrial, port, transportation, education, building, and residential communities. This role serves to oversee, coordinate, and communicate suggestions regarding policy, budget, and program recommendations to City Council through letters, testimonies, and other means of formal reporting.
The time commitment expected for active participation as a Commissioner is generally between three to six hours per month in support of Commission meetings held on the third Thursday of the month at 5 PM. Meetings typically last two hours and are held both virtually via Zoom and in-person at the Tacoma Municipal Building, 747 Market St., Room 248.
The City is committed to creating an equitable and anti-racist community and wants its committees, boards, and commissions to reflect Tacoma’s diverse community. For these vacancies, Black and Indigenous community members, people of color, LGBTQ individuals, individuals with disabilities, seniors, immigrants, and refugees are especially encouraged to apply.
Additional information on the Sustainable Tacoma Commission is available here. Applications must be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office by end of day Sunday, March 12, 2023.
To apply, please visit cityoftacoma.org/cbcapplication. For questions about the application process, to request the application in an alternate format, or to submit additional documents, contact the City Clerk’s Office at servetacoma@cityoftacoma.org or (253) 591-5505.
Sustainability and DEI are two entirely separate things, yet you fantasize that they are one.
Sustainability is a mathematically-quantifiable thing.
DEI is whatever a certain gaggle of folks want it to be at any given time – fluid like gender these days in certain circles.
Any schemes you cook up which require funding outside of you own economic engine are not sustainable, no matter how much DEI you paper over it with.
There’s a reason our representatives have been reduced to beggars, bragging of the tax dollars (our tax dollars) they are able to retrieve from the other Washington – unsustainable, yet that house of cards grows, as it’s become the norm.
Politics is the only place you can be a victim and a Victor at the same time, but that ain’t sustainable either.
It’s not true that “Any schemes you cook up which require funding outside of you own economic engine are not sustainable”. This is head in the sand small thinking. Import, export, the global economy, mortgage and educational tax breaks, business grants, federal highway funding are all examples of funding from outside that can benefit entities and people. They aren’t always good or always bad. And sure there’s risk. Another example is that most rural areas are an economic drag and most cities generate more wealth and taxes than they consume. Fools talk about splitting eastern WA or eastern OR from their western parts. They forget that most rural areas are economically unsustainable – there are so few people making so little money that they’d never be able to afford to pave their roads, run power lines to their homes, or build schools. The federal government paid to run those powerlines, paid the down payment on those dams, pays those ag subsidies, and the state and feds pay for those highways, and schools. Maybe you think that’s bad.
Aside from the subsidies you mention, all those things are part of one’s economic engine.
Go ahead and halt farm subsidies. Food production will be stifled; people will get hungry; food prices will rise; and farmers will begin producing at a profit again.
In the meanwhile, they will be eating just fine.
It is politicians who artificially deflate food prices through subsidy, for political reasons.
The money is the same, it’s just a shell game with tax dollars.
As for public transportation and public schools, well I can’t think of a bigger boondoggle of bureaucracy.