Who's interest's are being served

We must ask the question of who's interest is being served when an EIR is prepared by the developer or any company hired by the developer, this is a common sense no-brainer yet today we accept it as a standard practice. Los Angeles is one of the few remaining cities to still allow this obvious conflict of interest with no sign of changing it anytime soon. The EIR prepared for Elephant Hills (tract 35022) is no exception it was prepared by and certified as legitimate by a less than reputable geologist who in addition to being sued for faulty work has attempted to avoid paying judgements against them by hiding funds and changing the name of their firm. Fortunately for some of their victims these tactics have been unsuccessful and the firm has been forced into bankruptcy.

The stark and irreconcilable conflict of interest which exists if the developer's paid consultant prepares the EIR is manifest. Moreover, if a consultant in the business of conducting environmental studies knows that its continuing source of employment will be be developers desirous of obtaining approval of their projects, is there need to inquire where the consultant's interests lie? Clearly those interests will not lie in achieving unbiased, objective environmental analysis, or in revealing environmental dangers in the proposed development, but instead in achieving approval of the principal's project. It would require a level of conscious integrity and subconscious mental discipline rarely found to result in production of an objective EIR in such a circumstance. A report prepared in such a circumstance is more comparable to an advocates brief than an impartial observer's opinion. If, on the other hand, a consultant is under contract to, and consequently owes allegiance to, and has a hope of future employment from, a public agency, it expectable that the consultant will be more motivated to provide the public agency with comprehensive, unbiased environmental analysis.

No comments: