
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Scientific American reports a disturbing new Rockefeller Foundation initiative, to green city administrations, by funding senior “Chief Resilience Officer” positions in town hall bureaucracies.
Coastal Cities Look to Resilience Chiefs to Combat Climate Change
Global warming has created a hot new job in U.S. coastal cities
…
More communities are seeking not just reassurance but leadership in the face of climate change. Often it’s coming in the form of a chief resilience officer, an emerging job title in cities, counties and even in states and at universities and businesses. Cities as large as Boston, San Francisco, Chicago and New York have chief resilience officers, as do smaller cities and towns like Berkeley, Calif., and Minot, N.D. In U.S. cities, the chief resilience officers, or CROs, often report directly to the city manager or mayor, depending on the form of government, and have broad authority to work across departments.
The job goes far beyond figuring out how governments or institutions should reduce greenhouse gas emissions or how to adapt to climate change—although climate change is the fundamental crisis fueling the need for the role in many cities. Chief resilience officers are being asked to help transform communities that face threats from sea-level rise or other stressors. They’re trying to find ways to create better-educated communities, to address chronic poverty and decades of inequity, to identify shoddy housing conditions, and to diversify their economic base, so that when the inevitable climate-related changes occur, people don’t get left behind.
Most chief resilience officers are funded by the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities program, which coined the term several years ago and started paying for the salaries of such positions in cities worldwide, as well as for the creation of resilience strategies. Cities compete to join the program, which is set on May 25 to announce its third and final round of cities.
Mayors desperately want their cities to be part of the program; 330 cities applied last year for 35 slots. The foundation pays for the chief resilience officer the first two years, and cities must commit to certain guidelines, including participating in a close-knit network of peers all working on many of the same challenges.
…
So the Rockefeller Foundation is funding a few jobs in town hall. Why do I think this is a bad thing?
Imagine if say the nuclear lobby offered to fund hundreds of senior bureaucrat jobs in local city governments across America, jobs with “broad authority” to work across city departments. The response would be outrage – there would be concerns about undue influence, concerns, however unjustified, that the nuclear industry was using this insider access to influence decisions about planning approval for new nuclear power plants.
Why should we feel any differently, about greens placing their own people into senior town hall management positions?
It is one thing to openly support political candidates who advocate a favourable policy position. In my opinion it is an entirely different thing to fund the placement of senior bureaucrats, people who are relatively immune to the electoral cycle, and who potentially have less than transparent access to local government implementation of policy.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“there would be concerns about undue influence, concerns, however unjustified, that the nuclear industry was using this insider access to influence decisions about planning approval for new nuclear power plants.”
I don’t see why you would consider such concern to be unjustified. The only purpose for creating such position is so that they can exert influence. Influence that is bought and paid for by those who are funding the positions.
It doesn’t matter who is doing the funding or what the job title is, it is almost by definition, undue influence.
This is similar to a the soviet era “political officer”. No doubt that its more than about resilience. This office will no doubt affect city planning and zoning also. The bigger problem is what happens when none of these threats materialize? These cities find that their ability to expand and grow has been hampered by purposeful political correctness.
So, what we have here is bonafide Big Green backed appointees and experts quite literally on Big Green’s payroll. What could go wrong.
A great idea, only not carried far enough. All governments should be funded by Rockefellers (or Steyers or their ilk.) Then we could forget about that long obnoxious word (‘democracy’) altogether and our lives would be so much easier.
As a first step, it looks very promising. Who would suspect a chief resilience officer to be in cahoots with a professor of climate change? True, they get paid by the same billionaire, but only skeptics would look for a conspiracy. Oh, and who pays Mr. Cook?
All those cities have an engineering dept with a Sr Civil Eng, PE. Working with state and Feds to flood control and disaster prep is part of what they do. This seems to dilute that tesponsibility to someone who, not paid by the city, may not be fully accountable. That position, if it is created, must be answerable (and fire-able to the Mayor and/or council, the elected officials who answer to the People, not the Rockefellers). That CRO needs to be a PE to boot, to ensure he/she understand engineering responsibilities.
Finally, what happens to the funding for those positions when the Climate Hustle finally finally collapses?
If the pause turns into decline, then they can recast themselves as Chief Excuse Officers (CEO).
Shall each have the adopted name of “Wormtongue”?
Every council should have an externally funded activist advising their wisdom.
As I keep finding, these people are beyond parody,have zero empathy and are way beyond ethically challenged.
Beyond parody , The Gang who cannot shoot straight.
Green Gangsters.
Gang Green by action.
Amputation via banishment is the only social cure.
On second thought, is this not what Donna LaFramboise found when she investigated both the IPCC and Environment Canada?
Activists first,public troughers second.
Is this the same Rockefeller Foundation that advocated and heavily funded another pseudo-scienctific endeavor called Eugenics a few decades ago? Yes it is.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796
Should there be a sunset clause on tax exemption of nonprofits like the Rockefeller Foundation?
I’m sure that you would find huge support for such a move from the “progressives.” That is, as long as the sunset clause applied only to non-“progressive” nonprofits.
Not sure if this directly relates or not but the city I work for has an active EMS program.
(Now we can’t rake leaves off of our intakes screens and send them downstream where they would have gone anyway. I guess once we touch them they aren’t “organic” enough?8-)
http://www.cscaweb.org/EMS/sector_team/support_files/page_1/History_of_EMS.pdf
A number of years ago, I was involved in a business that entered into an agreement with a state government agency. The state attorney general later ruled that agreement in violation of the state Constitution because it made funds available to that agency outside of the legislative appropriation process. In hindsight I had to agree.
Government must keep to government and business must stay out of government. That is how we get massive cronyism. Because cronyism requires people on both sides to collude to the effect that government violates the public trust, there is no such thing as “crony capitalism”. There is only cronyism.
In a different form, wen private business pays to get government to do its bidding, we call that corruption, plain and simple. It matters not that some in government are happy to agree.
If it is a form of corruption when private businesses pays to get government to do it’s bidding, what is it when government pays to get private busineses to do ITS bidding?
When a city pays Hayhoe $116,000 for a 2 page whitepaper regurgitating known data modeling, privately funded “Resilience Chiefs” will just make the wait longer for a pull from the peace pipe. The tribe is already under the influence…
http://media.swagit.com/podcasts/2016/04/21/04212016-603.360.mp4
Welcome to United Nations Agenda 21. These people are un-elected, so the voters can’t get rid of them – they can’t vote them out. For a more thorough explanation by an expert on emanate domain and local zoning laws, watch the first half of this video by Rosa Koire:
It’s very informative and entertaining too…
I am submitting this for a 2nd time. If it appears twice, please remove one of them – Phil:
Welcome to United Nations Agenda 21. These people are unelected, so the voters can’t get rid of them – they can’t vote them out. For a more thorough explanation by an expert on emanate domain and local zoning laws, watch at least the first half of this video by Rosa Koire:
It’s very informative and entertaining too…
This is commercial lobbying. I assume they will equally accept a hookers group funding a street sexual entertainment officer as it is if anything a higher moral standing than any climate science output.
“Chief Resilience Officer” positions: Sounds like a work program for ex EPA managers.