The most cynical lawyers say that the best client is angry, rich, and wrong.
While that sad truth sinks in, one can’t help but wonder if the Ohio senators who introduced Concurrent Resolution 25 (SCR25), the pending legislation urging that LEED be banned in Ohio, see how well this description fits the special interest groups who influenced them to do so.
Ohio is #1 in the U.S. in green school construction, prudently investing tax dollars in buildings that are designed to be 35% more efficient and use 37% less water than buildings built to previous standards and diverted over 188,000 tons of construction waste from landfills, thanks to state policy for new public school buildings to earn minimum LEED silver certification.
Enter a small but well-funded faction of protectionists who complain that the latest evolution of LEED, called “v4,” puts them at a competitive disadvantage. This faction of vinyl, plastic, chemical, and other carbon-intensive industries, is angry, rich, and dead wrong.
They are so angry that they are pushing legislation to ban LEED v4 in Ohio without offering any better alternative. Following recitals that whisper sweet nothings about jobs and green building rating systems, SCR25 delivers its punch line, “RESOLVED: That the LEED v4 green building rating system no longer be used by Ohio’s state agencies and government entities…”
LEED hasn’t been good for Ohio. It’s been great for Ohio. In addition to those energy and water savings, and diversion of waste from landfills, Ohio’s green schools have obtained 35% of material from regional sources, benefitting the local economy while curbing transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. Yesterday a diverse group of sustainability-minded professionals, and one inspired and inspiring high school student, delivered powerful testimony against SCR25.
But this faction of protectionists is angry with LEED v4, and they’re rich. So rich that they could afford to hire one of Ohio’s leading influence-peddlers to curry favor with well-placed senators who are championing their cause through SCR25.
So why is this faction so angry, and what makes them so wrong? They complain that LEED v4 creates a “blacklist” of certain products that unfairly discriminates against their stuff. Only problem: The blacklist doesn’t exist. Strike one.
They complain that LEED v4 doesn’t meet “American National Standards Institute voluntary consensus standard procedures.” Only problem: An independent, multi-year study commissioned by the United States General Services Administration and prepared by division of Battelle, confirms that LEED is indeed a “consensus” standard:
Strike two.
They complain that their concerns weren’t heard during the LEED v4 development process. Only problems: Their own literature details their extensive input into LEED v4, which was approved only after an unprecedented six comment periods resulting in over 22,000 public comments, with 86% of overall membership in favor of adoption, including majority approval from each major stakeholder group (89% of producers/contractors/builders, 90% of users, and 77% in the general interest category of utilities, manufacturers and organizations). As I routinely explain to my daughters, there’s a big difference between not being heard and not getting your way … this is the latter. Strike three, you’re out.
This attack on LEED in Ohio is a tired rerun of the same industry attack against LEED at the federal level. In response to that study cited above, the GSA decided to keep LEED along with Green Globes as rating systems of choice. Yet Ohio stands poised to ban LEED v4 without conducting any independent investigation and solely at the behest of the angry, rich, and wrong.
LEED isn’t perfect. Some say it should be stricter, some say it should be more lax. But it is the consensus worldwide standard for making better buildings, and banning LEED v4 in Ohio at the whim of a small but powerful group of protectionist lobbies who offer no data to substantiate their scare tactics about jobs and economy would be a short-sighted and tragic mistake.
Ed: The views of his article are exclusively those of Ohio Green Building Law and this author, a member of the Board of Directors of the Central Ohio Chapter of USGBC
Thanks for the thorough commentary David!
Check out this from Jeremy Sigmon at USGBC:
http://www.usgbc.org/articles/today%E2%80%99s-truth-check-green-building-good-ohio#comment-1475
Unfortunately but accurately, Angry, Rich and Wrong rightly sums up the forces behind the proponents of SCR25, and this is not something new. Perhaps new to Central Ohio, but certainly not new to the rest of the country’s regions who fighting similar battles against the Vinyl Institute, the Lumber Industry and other trade industry organizations who are funding the attacks against proposed change to ‘business as usual’.
The very definition of Sustainability challenges us to change the way we use and abuse our resources and infuse the environment with toxic practices under the guise of supply, demand and consumption. The statistics and the data are not lying. We need to transform the way we do business, plain and simple, or we leave nothing for our next generation to build upon. Not our ‘future’ generations, but our NEXT generation. It’s that close.
Ohio has proudly made a name for itself in leading the nation in Green Schools building initiatives, and has attracted the attention of these industrial bulldogs who can squelch our progressive distinction in the name of Saving Jobs within these very industries. But market transformation will of necessity create new jobs – particularly in regions that are already leading the charge.
So ask yourselves, how can we make such great strides in influencing change with such proven results and national recognition through an industry proven sustainable design toolkit such as LEED, and then, what? Vote it out because trades lobbyists say its not good for us? Who doesn’t see through that?
The USGBC’s latest version of LEED takes a stand against using products and practices that harm the environment, as did its previous versions on Materials Resources – there is nothing new here. These trade industries hated that stand when LEED was launched in 2001, and it continues to hate it now in 2014 – only with more money and with more political finesse.
What argument and whose best interests are we listening to in SCR25?
The Angry, the Rich, and the very Wrong’s – certainly, no one else’s.
Jerry Smith, FASLA
Columbus, Ohio
David, Questions for you on concurrent resolutions. My understanding is that a concurrent resolution lacks the force of law as they are not given to the Governor to sign. If this is correct this is more of the Legislature voicing their opinion. Also assuming this is correct, even if passed nothing would change as the current LEED system in Ohio was put in place y Governor Ted Strickland by executive order. I would appreciate a clarification on this.
Thanks for your insightful comment, Adam. You’re basically correct in that a concurrent resolution lacks the force of law. So it’s reasonable to ask why Ohio’s legislature should bow to the whims of a small yet well-funded industry segment and “voice their opinion” that LEED v4 should be banned without conducting any kind of investigation (like the GSA did), and without offering any better alternative.
And if passing SCR25 is such a meaningless exercise that “nothing would change,” then why aren’t our leaders spending their time on something more productive? In addition to being short-sighted and wrong for the reasons addressed in the post above, passing SCR25 would create confusion and uncertainty in Ohio’s state agency regarding whether or not they should continue to use LEED v4.
Here’s an idea: Rather than mindlessly doing the bidding of a special interest faction, Ohio’s leaders should invest in a meaningful evaluation of the cost/benefit of LEED. If the ROI is there, keep it. If not, then figure out a better way to fulfill the flowery aspirational recitals that camouflage SCR25’s nefarious true intent.
Thank you for covering this. I am from Pittsburgh, and I had no idea this was going on (I don’t live in the Northeast anymore). Terrible news.
If this law passes, there will be no green building rating system that meets the new requirements, since Green Globes is not actually based on the GBI/ANSI standard. http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2013/12/2/Green-Globes-Board-Member-Quits-Over-ANSI-Claims/
[…] is the third post in a series on Ohio Senate Concurrent Resolution 25 (“SCR25″), which earlier today was passed by the Ohio Senate and will now be […]
[…] materials don’t like LEED very much — they are behind a push for federal agencies and state governments to ban use of LEED certification. Just this month, LEED Exposed released a new report claiming […]
[…] this fourth installment of our series on Ohio Senate Concurrent Resolution 25 (“SCR25″), the anti-LEED legislation which […]