1. Innovative Organization Models and Financing for Air Improvement Projects on the U.S.-Mexico Border By Dr. Stephen A. King, Western Kentucky University Prof. Maria Candelaria Pelayo Torres, Universidad Autonoma de Baja California Dr. Richard Ryan, San Diego State University, Imperial Valley Campus Report prepared for the 2008 Technical Conference, Southwest Consortium for Environmental Research and Policy. Tempe, AZ, Arizona State University, December 5-6.

2. 3 Innovative Organization forms for border air programs  1. House a B-inational Clean Air Trust Fund (Bi- CAT) within NADBank  2. Establish equivalent, border NGOs in key cities  3. Evolve Clean Air Districts (CADs): municipios & air pollution control districts

3. 1. Establish a Bi-CAT in NAFTA Generation Orgs.  Insert a Bi-CAT into NADBank. It would possess properties similar to the Border Enviro. Infrastructure Fund but would seek broader funding & wider public input Mexico & US federal direction NAD Bank Border Environmental Cooperative Commission Bi-National Clean Air Trust Fund

4. 2. Develop symmetrical border NGOs in key cities  Non-governmental organizations dedicated to seeking foundation & philanthropic funding for paired city air projects. These would be symmetrical, independent, cooperating NGOs (not US dominated) initially established in El Paso-Ciudad Juarez, and San Diego- Tijuana.

5. 3. Evolve toward shared Clean Air Districts  Composed of municipio-level agencies (e.g., Consejo de Urbanizacion Municipal de Mexicali) and Air Pollution Control Districts  Focus on the “low politics” of road paving, solid waste disposal, urban forestry to avoid sovereignty issues

6. Clean Air Districts  Smart municipal government delivers and pays for the service closest to users  Imperial’s APCD is charging developers to pollute. SD is considering such fees.

7. Table 1: Organizational Models and Actors Organization Type ActorsProbability 1. Bi-national Clean Air Trust Fund Transnational & federal Low 2. Symmetrical NGOs National & local NGOs High 3. Shared Clean Air Districts Local governments Medium

8. Table 2 : Revenue Sources and Jurisdictional Levels TypeJurisdictionProbability Border-crossing user fees federal, U.S.Medium-low Bi-CAT (NADB/BECC) enhanced federal funding Medium NGOs in US and Mexico national and local foundations High Clean Air District Bonds municipalHigh Clean Air District Fees municipalHigh

9. Concluding Points 1. NAFTA institutions are established and a Bi-CAT would gain legitimacy. Problem is flexibility and water project biases. 2. NGOs are easiest to establish. Philanthropic support is highly variable leading to asymmetrical NGOs. 3. Clean Air Districts will evolve in response to local cooperation and financing availability

10. Concluding points 4. Interviews and literature suggest a medium to high probability for border Clean Air Districts and paired NGOs 5. Reorganizing NADBank and BECC are more difficult tasks but they lend themselves to presidential infrastructure initiatives in 2009 6. It is quite possible all 3 forms will take shape in next 10 years