AIA Components in States Bordering Mexico Reject Wall on Ethical, Environmental Grounds
The proposed $25 billion wall along the US/Mexico border raises questions that have proven divisive to society. Experts and pundits alike have responded in several ways as to the propriety of such a wall. But, more specific questions about the economic, environmental, and security implications of a border wall continue to vex observers for several reasons, not least of which is a dearth of details from the Trump administration or the Department of Homeland Security.
In 2017 and 2018, AIA state components and chapters in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas wrote resolutions and letters with the support of their boards of directors opposing a border wall and questioning its cost-benefit relative to infrastructure projects all over the country that they deem higher-priority.
Avoiding the partisanship of immigration policies and border security, the AIA state components and chapters in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas focused instead on areas that underscore the architect’s expertise: programming, design analysis, environmental impact assessments, and community engagement as they relate to infrastructure at different scales.
Robert Miller, AIA, 2018 president of AIA Arizona, led the charge in drafting a template articulating his component’s concerns, which he shared with AIA chapters in Arizona and, ultimately, components in Texas, California, and New Mexico. Keeping the AIA Code of Ethics at the forefront, Miller says, helped him conceptualize the statement as something that members could support outside the context of their own partisan views. Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico have submitted statements to their respective Congressional delegations, while California plans to do so in the near future.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE, WITH LINKS TO STATEMENTS BY NEW MEXICO, ARIZONA, TEXAS AND CALIFORNIA COMPONENTS.
