The Canadian Mental Health Association, Brant Haldimand Norfolk Branch (CMHA), is now accepting applications for membership to our Board of Directors. CMHA provides a wide range of community mental health services for people 16 years or older who are experiencing a serious or persistent mental health concern. Volunteers are asked to provide 3-4 hours of their time per month, and meetings always offer a virtual option.

We are committed to reflecting the diversity of the communities we serve, so we strongly encourage candidates with the following skills and life experiences to apply:

• Individuals from the TS & LGBTQIA+ community.
• Indigenous – First Nation, Metis, Inuit community members.
• Individuals from Racialized or Black communities.
• People with Lived Experience or their care partners
• Individuals with financial expertise.
• Individuals with fundraising expertise.
• Individuals with legal expertise.
• Gen Z/Zoomers
• People with Lived Experience or their care partners

www.bhn.cmha.ca

Please direct any enquiries to Jane Eyers from the Governance and Nominations committee at jeyers70@gmail.com.

The post Canadian Mental Health Association, Brant Haldimand Norfolk Branch (CMHA) appeared first on Capacity Canada.

Forests Canada is on a mission to conserve, restore and grow Canada’s forests to sustain life and community. For over 75 years, our ambitious, large-scale tree planting programs, landowner forest stewardship outreach, extensive education resources and programs, and decades of community outreach have resulted in millions of trees being planted each year.

Forests Canada works with a trusted network of partners to ensure the long-term health and resiliency of our forests today, and for future generations. From seed to survival to sustainability, we have proudly built the infrastructure and network needed to deliver forest restoration programs focused on improving forest health and advocating for healthy ecosystems, while also inspiring students, connecting communities with their forests, and supporting job growth and local economies.

As a nonprofit registered charity, Forests Canada is governed by a Board of Directors who represent a diversity of experiences, skills, regions and perspectives. We are actively seeking new board members that can bring new perspectives to the board and contribute to our mission. Our Board of Directors provides strategic leadership, vision, and maintains high ethical standards of governance. They engage in effective planning to respond to the needs of our communities and act as stewards of our resources.

We are currently seeking qualified candidates to serve on our volunteer board. Forests Canada’s current recruitment priorities include those individuals with experience in any of the following areas:

• Fundraising – Recognizing funding opportunities and identifying strategic individual and corporate contributors to establish long-term fundraising relationships; experience in developing brands, building and implementing strategic marketing and fundraising plans.
• Professional working experience in the government sector (all levels of government).
• Financial/Accounting/Audit – Certified Public Accountant, experience in corporate finance, audit and financial accounting and reporting standards.

Forests Canada welcomes all applicants. We believe that diversity and inclusion are key to innovation through the sharing of ideas, experiences, and abilities. All qualified applicants will receive consideration without regard to race, colour, religion, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, national origin, genetics, disability, age, or veteran status.

• Attend 3-4 Board meetings per year (1 in-person (full-day), 3 virtual (180-minute meetings)).
• Participate in standing and ad hoc committees (Nominations, Governance, Human Resources (NGHR) Committee, Audit and Finance Committee).
• Attend organizational events or meetings as a representative.
• Provide governance over the following key areas: strategic plan, by-laws, board recruitment and development, selection and evaluation of CEO, financial management, fundraising strategy, and ensure that services and programs meet the needs of the people that are served by the organization.
• Advocate among colleagues and peers for our organization.

Directors shall hold office for a term of 3 years and shall be eligible for re-election for two further terms of 3 years for a total of 9 consecutive years. The candidate will be presented to the board for approval in January 2027 with the first board meeting taking place in April 2027. An honorarium may be available.

Applicants should submit:

• A résumé / CV, and
• A letter of interest describing relevant skills, experience, and personal attributes.

Applications will be reviewed by the NGHR Committee. Selected candidates will be notified and interviewed. The application period will close October 15, 2026.

For more information and to submit your interest, please contact, Sylvia Nelson at snelson@forestscanada.ca. More about Forests Canada can be found at www.ForestsCanada.ca

The post Forests Canada appeared first on Capacity Canada.

The Davenport Community Land Trust (DCLT) is looking for five people to join our first volunteer Board of Directors. We’re looking for people who know and have connections with this neighbourhood. No board experience required, training provided.

DCLT’s purpose is to provide affordable, stable, and sustainable housing and community assets in Davenport and surrounding areas by acquiring, developing, and stewarding land and buildings for lasting community benefit and well-being.

DCLT envisions a Davenport where no one is under threat of displacement, where community members are housed with dignity, free from violence, and have access to spaces where they feel a sense of belonging.

DCLT incorporates as a non-profit in fall 2026. The Founding Board is DCLT’s first Board of Directors. The Founding Board, with the membership, will collaboratively set the vision, direction and operations of DCLT: bylaws, policies, compliance, financial systems, and membership. The Board serves until the first AGM (within 18 months of incorporation).

• Establish policies, bylaws and oversight
• Collaboratively set and uphold DCLT’s vision, mission, and strategy.
• Develop and set strategic and financial plans
• Be accountable to members and meet legal, ethical, and fiduciary obligations.

• Attend monthly Board meetings
• Ensure legal and regulatory compliance
• Steward financial planning and health
• Develop membership and community engagement
• Promote and grow DCLT’s assets and reputation
• Collaborate with DCLT’s committees and working group

Previous board experience not required. Board training is provided.

We want a board that reflects the community it serves. No one person needs every skill. As a whole, we are looking for coverage across:

• Knowledge of the Davenport neighbourhood, its history and its people
• Lived experience of housing insecurity, displacement, or tenancy
• Indigenous representation and knowledge
• Community organizing
• Real estate, development, or mortgage experience
• Architecture or urban planning
• Legal knowledge
• Fundraising
• Financial management, bookkeeping, or accounting
• Operational and organizational experience

• Be eligible under ONCA: 18+, never bankrupt, not deemed incapable under the law.
• Will become a member of DCLT upon incorporation.
• Has shown commitment to, or experience relevant to, DCLT’s mission or the community land trust sector.
• Lives, works, volunteers, or was previously displaced from within DCLT boundaries/community. Candidates with a meaningful connection to DCLTʼs area, who do not meet this criterion, may make a case through the application process.
• Aware, available and willing to take on Board responsibilities.
• Willing to contribute approximately 5-8 hours per month:
  • Monthly: 1-hour board meeting and 4–5 hours preparatory work. Periodic 2-hour working group meetings

An independent panel creates a shortlist. The Working Group elects five directors from it.

Application: Deadline Sept 15, 2026, 5:00pm EST

Link takes you to a Google Form; no google account is needed to apply.

If writing isn’t accessible for you, get in touch and we’ll take your answers by phone. Questions? Contact Bria Cole at bria.rogers.cole@gmail.com

The post Davenport Community Land Trust appeared first on Capacity Canada.

♦

Position Title: Volunteer Board Member (various positions)

Organization: Franklin Carmichael Art Group (FCAG)

Location: 34 Riverdale Drive Etobicoke, ON M9V 2T3

Term of Service: 3 years, renewable once Time Commitment: up to 15 hours/week

Founded by the late Dr. Ann Curtin, Franklin Carmichael Art Group (FCAG) is a charitable organization whose mission is to provide visual art opportunities in North Etobicoke.

FCAG serves the community by cultivating art appreciation and engagement by:

1. Providing classes, workshops and instruction in art and encouraging artistic talent.
2. Arranging art exhibitions, juried shows, establishing and granting prizes, awards and distinctions.

As a volunteer run organization, our Board members are much more than advisors. Board Directors are actively involved in bringing plans to life—leading initiatives, engaging the community and ensuring FCAG’s mission is realized in everything we do.

We are looking for passionate leaders to step into vital board roles this Fall. Positions include:
– President
– Secretary
– Director At Large

Directors are responsible for all business related to the day-to-day management and operation of the Corporation including, without limiting the generality of the following:

1. The establishment of policies and procedures
2. The supervision of the financial stability of the Corporation
3. All contractual obligations which have been authorized by the Corporation,
4. Ensuring that the objectives and management of the Corporation are properly carried out; and the management of the Corporation’s affairs.
5. Admission of members to the Corporation.
6. Attend monthly or quarterly board meetings and actively participate in shaping organizational goals.
7. Fiduciary Oversight: Review annual budgets, financial statements, and audit reports.
8. Committee Participation: Serve on at least one board committee (e.g., Fundraising, Governance, Finance).
9. Advocacy & Support: Act as an ambassador for the organization in the community and assist with resource development or fundraising.

Responsibilities of the President

1. The president shall, when present, preside at all meetings with the Board and members.
2. The president shall supervise the affairs and operations of the Corporation, sign all documents, except committee reports, requiring signature according to the Corporation’s Act, and have the powers and duties from time to time prescribed by the Board or incident to the office.
3. The president shall also act as a liaison with staff and volunteer committees.

Responsibilities of the Secretary

The Secretary is responsible for giving notice of all meetings of the Board and members and shall perform such other duties relative to the office as prescribed by the Board including:

1. Recording the minutes and reports and attending to correspondence pertaining to FCAG business;
2. Providing safe custody of the minutes of all meetings and supervising the safe keeping of the Corporate Seal, the letters patent. All books, papers, records, and correspondence belonging to FCAG;
3. Co-signing with the President, all by-laws, resolutions, Policies, Contracts and agreements of FCAG.

Responsibilities of a Director at Large

1. Active member and representative of the Board of Directors;
2. Supports and/or participation in special events, programs, and initiatives specified by the Board of Directors;
3. Undertakes special one-time projects or ongoing projects with the approval of the Board of Directors;
4. Fulfils other general Board duties as required.

1. Commitment to FCAG mission, vision, and values.
2. Able to commit the needed time to the position.
3. Ability to build strong relationships with members, volunteers and the Board.
4. Tech-savvy with access to a personal computer.
5. Experience in specialized fields like technology, law, operations, or non-profits is a strong advantage.
6. Prior board experience is an asset, but not required (we welcome first-time board members).
7. Strong communication and collaborative teamwork skills.

Additional Skills and Experience: Experience or knowledge in areas such as IT and website management, digital platforms, people resources, volunteer and member management, marketing and communications, partnerships and fundraising, sponsorship, community outreach, historic building facilities and operations, arts administration, cultural management, nonprofit and charitable organizations, or municipal services would be an asset.

Director-at-Large: Prior Board experience is an asset, but not required. We welcome first-time Board members.
Please submit a brief statement of interest or resume to The Franklin Board of Directors at fcag.art@gmail.com by Friday, October 23, 2026.

The post Franklin Carmichael Art Group appeared first on Capacity Canada.

The post BRAWL IN THE FALL appeared first on Grand River Rocks Climbing Gym.

 TRAC - Technical, Remediation & Advisory Committee

You have been and continue to be led by the nose by the above parties exactly like the original UPAC, followed by CPAC, RAC & TAG. There was a 4 1/2 year period  (2011- Aug. 2015) when CPAC wagged the dog versus Chemtura and the M.O.E.. Your colleague Sebastian Seibel-Achenbach was on that CPAC and for a very short while we had Chemtura and the M.O.E. on their heels, actually listening in trepidation to what we told them they had to do. And along came Sandy and Mark Bauman and Chemtura/M.O.E. breathed a sigh of relief as corporate order and control was restored. Under their first 21 years and last 11 years of total control over the cleanup, it has totally failed. Neither NDMA nor chlorobenzene much less DDT, dioxins and lots more solvents, chlorinated or otherwise, have been reduced to Ontario drinking water standards. Nor will they be and those parties knew that full well in 1990 and have lied to we the citizens ever since. Much greater expenditure of funds including specific DNAPL removal was needed as well as simply even following through on Target pumping rates of wells which they grossly failed to do.

Stand up and take their power, their credibility and their legitimacy away from them! They are not and have never been honest brokers. 

I sat across from a young woman last month who couldn’t have been more than 24, who told me she was thinking about leaving engineering. She was brilliant, Technical, sharp, and thoughtful.

But somewhere between her entry into the tech sector and her early days, someone made her feel like she didn’t belong there.

I recognized that feeling immediately.

Because I started as an engineer, too. Back when that world wasn’t exactly rolling out the welcome mat for women. I remember the meetings where my ideas landed differently when I said them versus when a male colleague presented something similar.

I remember the networking events where I was often the only woman in the room, and not in a powerful way, but in a way that made you hyperaware of every word you said. I remember thinking, more than once, that maybe this wasn’t built for people like me.

But here’s what changed everything: I found my tribe.

Not everyone discouraged me. Yes, there were voices that questioned whether women belonged in STEM, voices that made the path steeper than it needed to be.

But there were also people who were thoughtful and cooperative, who believed differently. Who saw my work, not my gender. Who invited me into conversations, opened doors I didn’t even know existed, and most importantly, treated me like I belonged there.

That support wasn’t loud. It was quiet, consistent, and reassuring.

These people became more than just colleagues. They became my tribe.

The kind of people who knew my strengths before I fully believed in them myself.

They pushed back on the assumptions in the room. They made space for different perspectives. They built something I didn’t see coming: they built the evidence that a woman’s voice mattered in engineering.

What I didn’t realize then was that I was learning something far more valuable than any technical skill.

I was learning what it looked like when someone believed in you enough to create space for you. I was learning how support actually works, not through grand gestures, but through small, consistent choices. Through showing up. Through believing first, and letting their belief become your foundation until you could build your own.

Years into building my career, I realized something: the crack in the system, the place where the assumption that women aren’t suited for STEM lives, wasn’t something to accept. It was somewhere I could shine my light.

I started asking myself a question: What if I became the person for someone else that my tribe had been for me?

What if every woman I met who was thinking about leaving or maybe doesn’t feel like she belongs here didn’t have to feel alone in that decision?

That’s when CodeGirls began.

CodeGirls is a project close to my heart, a place where young women can learn real, industry-ready tech skills that will help them in their careers.

It’s a transformative women’s empowerment initiative that equips young women with industry-ready coding and business skills to help them build careers and achieve financial independence. Since its inception, CodeGirls has delivered 2,000+ trainings, achieved a 70% placement rate, and helped graduates reach an average monthly salary of 55K+, with its work spanning Karachi, Skardu, and South Africa.

And alongside that, something even more essential: a community that believed they belonged there from day one.

Because here’s what I know now: the missing piece was never whether women could code.

Women can code.

Women have always been able to code.

The missing piece was the tribe.

The people around you who make space for your growth. Who see your potential before you’re finished. Who believe in you when the system doesn’t.

Through CodeGirls, we’ve watched this transformation happen over and over. We’ve seen women come in uncertain, often having been told by culture, by family, by the world that this path wasn’t for them. And then they work anyway. They build. They lead. They are breaking the stereotypes and proving most men wrong about women’s inclusion in tech.

I think about that 24-year-old woman across from me, and I think about thousands like her. Every time a young woman decides not to leave engineering because she found her people, that’s everything.

Every time a woman realizes that belonging isn’t something she needs to earn but something she gets to build with others, that changes the trajectory of her entire life.

The system hasn’t changed overnight. There are still cracks, still assumptions, still voices that question whether women belong in spaces built for technical thinking and leadership. But what has changed is this: more of us now know better. Who know what it feels like to be believed in.

Who are determined to be that belief for someone else.

Networking isn’t about collecting business cards or climbing the right ladder. Real networking is about finding your tribe. The people who see you. The ones who make space. The ones who believe in you enough to pull you into conversations you didn’t know existed.

And once you find them, the next step is simple but profound: become that person for someone else.

That’s the work CodeGirls does. That’s the work we’re committed to at Genetech Solutions, too.

That’s the work that happens every time a woman who made it decides to open the door for another woman who’s just beginning.

The cracks in the system are also the places where light gets in. I hope you can benefit from my learnings.

I’d love to hear about your experience when you started, struggles you encountered, the mentors who believed in you, the tribes you’re building, the spaces you’re creating, and the doors you’re opening.

And if you’re looking for a way to open a door for another woman, consider sponsoring a CodeGirl. Your support helps a young woman gain industry-ready tech skills and move toward a career in the technology industry.

You can also hire a CodeGirl and give a talented woman the opportunity to put her skills to work in the industry.

If you’d like to chat about how we can support more women in tech and entrepreneurship, I’d be glad to help.

If you made it this far, we’re probably thinking about the same things. Follow me on Medium so you don’t miss what comes next: medium.com/@shamim_rajani

Shamim Rajani, COO @ Genetech Solutions | 20+ years in tech | Sharing insights on AI, tech, business, and empowerment.

Let’s connect on LinkedIn, Substack, and Twitter

When Women Believe in Women, Everything Changes was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Seong, M., Kim, H. G., Yun, B., Kim, M., Kim, J.-W., Jeong, H., Kim, S., Kim, J. H., & Cho, K. H. (2026). Hybrid deep learning-numerical modeling framework for long-term prediction of groundwater discharge and radionuclide transport. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 504, 141346. doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2026.141346

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE.

“The model was trained to predict monthly groundwater discharge (GWD) and radionuclide transport (RNT), and its performance was evaluated against the results from HGS, which serves as a physically rigorous reference model.”

“Because real-world data for the hypothetical ADioS watershed were unavailable, the HGS model, which is a fully distributed, physically based, integrated surface–subsurface hydrological model, was used to simulate groundwater flow and radionuclide transport for target feature extraction.”

Graphical Abstract

We're pleased to highlight this publication by Minkyeong Seong and colleagues, which presents a hybrid deep learning–numerical modelling framework for improving long-term predictions of groundwater discharge and radionuclide transport. Using HydroGeoSphere (HGS) as the physics-based reference model, the researchers combined process-based numerical modelling with a graph convolutional long short-term memory (GC-LSTM) deep learning model to produce long-term predictions while dramatically reducing computational costs.

Long-term prediction of groundwater flow and radionuclide transport is essential for evaluating the safety of deep geological repositories used to store radioactive waste. While fully integrated numerical models such as HydroGeoSphere provide highly accurate simulations of coupled surface water, groundwater, and contaminant transport processes, these simulations can become computationally demanding for assessments spanning decades, centuries, millenia or even millions of years. Simpler models offer faster runtimes but often sacrifice accuracy by neglecting important processes such as unsaturated flow. This study addresses that challenge by combining the strengths of physics-based modelling with artificial intelligence to improve both efficiency and predictive performance.

Fig 1. Overview of the hybrid modeling framework: (1) data preprocessing from two numerical models: adaptive process-based total system performance assessment framework (APro-BIO) and HydroGeoSphere (HGS); (2) graph construction for the graph construction for the graph convolutional long short-term memory (GC-LSTM) model; (3) model development for predicting groundwater discharge (GWD) and radionuclide transport (RNT); (4) model training and eval uation; and (5) model interpretation using GNNExplainer.

The researchers developed a hybrid modelling framework using outputs from the Adaptive Process-Based Total System Performance Assessment Framework (APro-BIO), together with HydroGeoSphere simulations, to train a graph convolutional long short-term memory (GC-LSTM) model. HydroGeoSphere served as the benchmark model by generating groundwater discharge and radionuclide transport data that the deep learning model learned to reproduce. By incorporating hydrologic variables alongside key unsaturated soil properties, including van Genuchten parameters, the GC-LSTM captured the complex spatial and temporal interactions governing groundwater flow and contaminant transport throughout a hypothetical watershed representing a deep geological disposal system.

The hybrid framework demonstrated strong predictive performance, achieving Kling-Gupta Efficiency (KGE) values ranging from 0.67–0.85 for groundwater discharge and 0.60–0.81 for radionuclide transport. Compared to the simplified APro-BIO model, the GC-LSTM reduced discrepancies with HydroGeoSphere by up to 99%, closely reproducing both the timing and magnitude of groundwater discharge and radionuclide transport across the watershed. Once trained, the deep learning model generated predictions in less than one minute, providing more than a 3,000-fold improvement in inference speed compared to running new HydroGeoSphere simulations while maintaining excellent agreement with the physics-based model.

HydroGeoSphere played a central role in this research by providing the physically rigorous benchmark required to train and validate the hybrid modelling framework. Its fully integrated simulation of saturated and unsaturated groundwater flow, surface water interactions, and radionuclide transport enabled the researchers to accurately represent complex hydrologic processes that simplified models cannot capture. HydroGeoSphere also demonstrated the importance of unsaturated zone processes, showing that accounting for soil hydraulic properties significantly improves predictions of groundwater recharge, groundwater discharge, and radionuclide migration.

This research demonstrates how HydroGeoSphere can serve as the foundation for next-generation hybrid modelling approaches that combine physics-based simulations with artificial intelligence. By leveraging HGS to generate high-quality training data, the researchers developed a framework capable of maintaining the accuracy of fully integrated hydrologic modelling while dramatically reducing computational costs. The approach offers significant potential for long-term groundwater safety assessments, radionuclide transport studies, and other computationally intensive environmental modelling applications where both speed and reliability are essential.

Abstract:

Accurate long-term prediction of groundwater flow and radionuclide transport is critical for assessing the safety of deep geological disposal systems. This study proposes a hybrid modeling framework that integrates a numerical model with a deep learning approach to improve the predictive accuracy and computational efficiency. Outputs from the adaptive process-based total system performance assessment framework (APro-BIO) model, including water level, surface water flow, groundwater recharge, groundwater discharge (GWD), groundwater flow velocity, groundwater level, and radionuclide transport (RNT), together with van Genuchten parameters, were used as input features. Monthly groundwater discharge and radionuclide transport simulated by HydroGeoSphere (HGS) served as target variables, and a graph convolutional long short-term memory (GC-LSTM) model was trained to capture spatial and temporal dependencies. Model performance was evaluated against that of HGS, representing coupled saturated–unsaturated flow. The GC-LSTM achieved Kling–Gupta Efficiency values of 0.67–0.85 for GWD and 0.60–0.81 for RNT and reduced discrepancies relative to that of APro-BIO by up to 99 %. The model effectively reproduced temporal variability while reducing computational cost. Explainable AI analysis identified the van Genuchten β parameter as the most influential feature. These results demonstrate that the proposed framework provides an efficient and reliable alternative for long-term GWD and RNT prediction under computational constraints.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE.

The post Fall PD day camps appeared first on Grand River Rocks Climbing Gym.

First of all is it fair to call a compulsive, pathological thief by any such name each and every time they walk into a store? Is it fair to call CRA/GHD intellectual prostitutes each and every time they write an alleged scientific report. I described here a little bit about their latest (Sept. 3, 2026) effort titled "Bench Scale Study for Biodegradation of Chlorobenzene and NDMA" yesterday.  

I have confirmed with a past APTE coordinator that we had all been told decades ago by Uniroyal Chemical and their consultants that chlorinated solvents such as trichloroethylene, chloroform, chlorobenzene etc. do not easily degrade or break down on their own in soils. It turns out however that chlorobenzene is the exception to that rule. Now according to this latest report by GHD, chlorobenzene actually degrades very well on its' own in shallower, aerated soils and less so in deeper anaerobic soils as per pages 7 & 8. The Figures section, particularly Figures 1 and 5 also confirms this. This of course speaks very badly of Uniroyal and CRA because the inaccurate information was used to deny chlorobenzene's presence on the Varnicolor Chemical site when zero chlorobenzene was found in Varnicolor's shallow aquifer also known as the Surficial Aquifer (SA).  

Other problems exist including the premature thawing of frozen groundwater samples meant to be used in the Bench Scale Biodegradation Study. While I appreciate the admission of this unfortunate incident that occurred at U.S. customs I am less comfortable with GHD proceeding with their experiments using compromised groundwater samples rather than starting over. Another problem might be GHD's repeatedly advising that their Biodegradation Rates may very well be biased on the high side due to possible volatilization of compounds from the groundwater samples. I wonder if this so called volatilization didn't occur and they spiked the samples according to page 3 with 150 ppb. chlorobenzene and 2.4 ppb. NDMA, if their Biodegradation rates might actually be biased on the high side. Either way again I find their protocols surprising and disturbing. It seems to be a vey peculiar way to be conducting scientific experiments. It's almost seems to be a "seat of the pants" scientific protocol. Something goes wrong so instead of really fixing it or starting over they just make a change and continue on.

Assuming for the moment that their experiments have some validity what I conclude is that dissolved chlorobenzene degrades in both aerobic (oxygen) and anaerobic (low oxygen) environments. NDMA on the other hand seems much less capable of degrading via human intervention such as amendments and nutrients both in shallow and deeper soils. Of course as mentioned yesterday chlorobenzene has other characteristics and the issue is not what the dissolved chlorobenzene will do as much as what the Dense Non Aqueous Phase Liquid (DNAPL) chlorobenzene will do. The "Non Aqueous Phase" part of that acronym makes it clear that DNAPLS are NOT dissolved in water chlorobenzene but thicker, heavier pools or puddles probably residing in depressions of lesser permeable soils such as silts and clays. Likely some of these have dissolved over the last thirty years but any claims by Lanxess and fellow travellors that they are fully dissolved is nonsense, wishful thinking and maybe even intellectual prostitution. 

It allegedly took GHD a year from sampling groundwater to releasing their modest 34 page report titled "Bench Scale Study for Biodegradation of Chlorobenzene and NDMA". Actually from when the project was first proposed to TRAC (Sept. 2024) it took two years although of course our beloved and  besmirched MECP had to take a look at it first. What shocked me the most was the somewhat belated 37 YEARS that it took GHD or the MECP to advise citizens that chlorobenzene degrades so rapidly in shallow soils and at ground surface. I knew that it would volatolize (evaporate sort of) in the air as so many solvents do but it was only a week ago that I understood why chlorobenzene had allegedly never been found on the Varnicolor Chemical site in their Surficial Aquifer (SA) wells. It was not as I've long suspected that the Ontario Ministry of Environment actually fudged the results either by switching samples or by ordering their labs to improperly mark the results as Non Detect. It was due to the very rapid degradation of chlorobenzene by shallow soil bacteria in a well oxygenated (aerated) environment. This by the way is unusual and we were long told by Uniroyal/Crompton/Chemtura/CRA that chlorinated solvents do not degrade well by soil bacteria due to the tight chlorine bond combined with chlorine being a known bactericide (antiseptic if you will)   Now as we all know here in Elmira chlorobenzene has persisted for a very long time in our deeper aquifers and continues to do so well in excess of the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS).

 There likely is something else going on however as this study also claims on page 8 that chlorobenzene degrades under anaerobic (low oxygen) conditions. Indeed their Figures section seems to confirm that. If chlorobenzene degrades naturally on its own then why has nearly thirty years of pumping and treating not done the job? The answer is simple and this Susan Bryant is for you. It's called DNAPLS as I and Rich Clausi told  Sylvia Berg and the APTE co-ordinators in January 1994. Esther Thur, one of the three founders of APTE (Sandra Bray, Susan RUPERT, Esther Thur), knew the truth when she heard it but the others unfortunately relied on Sylvia. Chlorobenzene DNAPLS both on and off the former Uniroyal Chemical site are doing what DNAPLS do which is slowly dissolve into groundwater at greater than the ODWS and will continue to do so likely for decades and maybe much longer. 

This past Monday and Tuesday (Aug. 31 & Sept. 1/26)  I informed this Blog's readers plus about sixty other authorities (MECP, TRAC, Lanxess, Woolwich Twn., RMOW etc.)  and citizens that chlorobenzene   rapidly degraded in shallow soils. Lo and behold TWO DAYS LATER (last evening) I get the e-mail report from GHD explaining attempts to enhance degradation of NDMA and chlorobenzene combined with the data all citizens should have had decades ago about chlorobenzenes rapid natural degradation. Coincidence? If so an absolutely amazing one.  

September 15th kicks off National Hispanic Heritage Month in the U.S., a time to celebrate the histories, cultures, and contributions of Americans whose ancestors came from Spain, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central and South America.

It’s also a good opportunity to reflect on how to be better allies for our Hispanic coworkers.

Rocio Medina van Nierop, the co-founder and CEO of Latinas in Tech, offers this powerful suggestion: Practice everyday acts of sponsorship.

What does that look like?

• Advocate for someone to lead a project.
• Recommend them for a promotion.
• Give them a public shoutout or glowing review.
• Put in a good word when they’re not in the room.

In other words, when an opportunity comes up, say their name.

As Medina van Nierop notes, anyone can do this if you’re present when opportunities are being discussed. “Having our name floated at a table that we are not part of can make a HUGE difference in our life and career.”

Let’s be that person. Not just during Hispanic Heritage Month, but year-round.

Share this action on Instagram, LinkedIn, or YouTube.

Sponsor 5 Ally Actions and put your brand or business in front of 40,000 caring individuals in business, healthcare, education, and non-profits.

Or, say thanks to Karen and buy her a coffee ☕.

Speaking of Hispanic Heritage Month…

What if someone’s accent makes you see them as less capable?

That happens more than we might think.

A few years ago, IBM surveyed 1,000 Hispanic leaders and found that 87% had experienced discrimination because of their ethnicity. And 63% cited specific discrimination based on their accent, language, or speech pattern.

Of course, not everyone who is Hispanic has an accent. And accent discrimination isn’t limited to Hispanic people. It can happen any time someone speaks with a non-native linguistic intonation.

The impact is appalling. As Janice Gassam Asare explained in an article for Forbes, people might view someone as less trustworthy, truthful, intelligent, or capable of doing their job simply because of their accent.

If we witness someone making discriminatory comments or exhibiting bias based on an accent, let’s address it. For example, “I don’t think someone’s accent tells us anything about their ability to do the job. Let’s focus on their skills and contributions instead.”

In honor of Gloria Steinem who passed away this week, here’s a story from my archives.

Back in 2023, I listened to Gloria Steinem on the We Can Do Hard Things podcast. She shared a story that is particularly relevant for all of us striving to be better allies.

During a field trip for a college geology class, she noticed a huge snapping turtle making its way up a road. Thinking it might be lost, she picked it up and slowly carried it back to the river. She then explained,

“Just as I had slipped it into the water and was watching it swim away, my geology professor came up behind me. ‘You know,’ he said quietly, ‘that turtle has probably spent a month crawling up the dirt path to lay its eggs in the mud on the side of the road — you have just put it back in the river.’”

Steinem felt terrible. She couldn’t believe what she had done, but it was too late.

Years later, she realized this story was a perfect parable for organizing social justice initiatives.

Always ask the turtle.

Similarly, allyship isn’t about being a savior or thinking we know what’s best for someone else.

Instead of guessing what coworkers might need and making decisions based on conjecture, let’s ask them.

Taking time off for religious observance shouldn’t feel like asking for special treatment.

Nate Shalev recently shared a reminder about the upcoming Jewish holidays, explaining that work is prohibited during them.

“Asking for time off isn’t a nice to have, it’s a necessity for observance.”

Yet Shalev also described how stressful it can feel to ask for that time off. Will coworkers think you’re less committed? Will your manager judge you?

No one should feel like their identity is a liability at work.

And making religious observance easier for our coworkers doesn’t take much. For religious holidays that aren’t part of the standard company calendar, we can:

• Avoid scheduling major deadlines, meetings, or events during religious holidays.
• Proactively remind your team that it’s okay to shift schedules or take time off to observe.
• Advocate for floating holidays so everyone can take time for what matters to them.

Shalev also pointed out the upcoming Jewish holidays to keep in mind:

• Rosh Hashanah: September 11–13, 2026.
• Yom Kippur: September 20–21, 2026.
• Sukkot: September 25–26, 2026. (This is a week-long holiday that prohibits work on the first two days.)

Tatum at CBRE in Denver told me that my newsletter has given her the confidence to speak up and shared this story:

“When my parents sold one of their cars, my dad told me that the sale had gone smoothly and he was happy the car was going to ‘a nice Hispanic family.’ I explained to him that, while I’m sure the remark was well-intentioned, he likely wouldn’t have commented on the family’s race or ethnicity if they were white.”

Her dad was grateful for the callout, and it led to some important reflection. He shared this story and his mistake in a team meeting at work to call attention to othering (where we signal someone is different from us and doesn’t belong) and its impact.

Tatum wrote,

“It can be intimidating to speak up, and I’m so glad I did. It’s helped me a great deal to remember that most people mean well and truly do want to be better.”

Thank you, Tatum!

If you’ve taken a step towards being a better ally, please reply to this email and tell me about it. And mention if I can quote you by name or credit you anonymously in an upcoming newsletter.

That’s all for this week. I’m glad you’re on this journey with me,

Karen Catlin (she/her), Author of the Better Allies® book series

100% written by me. I use AI for researching a personal archive of my books and past newsletters, and for light editing.

Copyright © 2026 Karen Catlin. All rights reserved.

Together, we can make a difference with the Better Allies® approach.

• Say thanks to Karen and buy her a coffee ☕ (Need a receipt for educational reimbursement? Reply to this email, and we’ll take care of it.)
• Sponsor an edition of this newsletter
• Follow @BetterAllies on Instagram, Medium, or YouTube. Or follow Karen Catlin on LinkedIn
• Read the Better Allies books
• Tell someone about these resources

Say Their Name, and Other Actions for Allies was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Last year, I joined Oxford’s Women’s Leadership Programme, and one of the reasons I wanted to do it was that, after more than a decade in technology, I had accumulated far more questions about leadership than answers.

I had already experienced leadership from several different angles. I had been the engineer who wanted to stay close to the code, the technical lead trying to make architecture decisions that other teams could actually live with, the manager responsible for developing people, and the person in the room who had to translate a technically correct answer into something a client or senior stakeholder could understand. More recently, building a startup added another version of leadership altogether, where a “strategic decision” can mean discussing product direction in the morning and worrying about manufacturing details by lunchtime.

What I had not expected was how often the hardest decisions had very little to do with whether I was capable of doing something. They were usually decisions about what I was willing to give up in order to do it.

• Should I remain deeply technical or spend more time developing leadership skills?
• If I become a manager, how much technical depth will I lose?
• If I stay on the technical path, will my leadership be as visible?
• How much time should I spend mentoring other people when I am also expected to demonstrate my own impact?
• Should I keep building expertise in an area where I am already strong, or deliberately move into something new and temporarily become a beginner again?
• Is choosing stability sensible, or am I simply becoming very sophisticated at avoiding risk?

These are also the kinds of questions I hear from women I mentor, many of whom are early in their careers or have just graduated. They often ask me what the “right” decision is, and I increasingly find myself giving them a slightly inconvenient answer: there usually isn’t one.

There is a trade-off.

And then there are the contradictions that become particularly entertaining when you are a woman in technology.

You are encouraged to speak up, although preferably without appearing too confident. You should become visible, but nobody wants someone who is “self-promotional.”

You should be collaborative, supportive and generous with your time, while also making sure you own sufficiently strategic work for your next promotion.

You should become a leader, but remain technical enough that nobody questions whether you still understand the technology.

You should negotiate for yourself, mentor others, develop executive presence, stay current with AI, understand the business, contribute to the community and, according to most leadership advice, establish healthy boundaries somewhere between all of that.

Apparently, we are expected to achieve high availability with no redundancy cost.

The engineer in me has some objections.

In architecture, nobody seriously expects a system to maximize everything. We cannot simultaneously optimize cost, latency, consistency, availability, security, operational simplicity and speed of delivery without eventually discovering that physics, budgets, or both have opinions.

We start with constraints instead.

What actually matters? What are we optimizing for? What risk are we willing to accept? What becomes more complicated if we choose this option? What are we deliberately not optimizing right now?

And most importantly, what does this decision make possible that another decision would not?

The more I thought about it, the more I realized that careers work in much the same way. There is no architecture in which you can maximize technical depth, organizational influence, leadership, compensation, learning, stability, flexibility, visibility and personal time indefinitely. Something eventually competes with something else.

Yet a lot of career advice aimed at women still sounds as though we should.

That is why I have become much more interested in the trade-offs behind successful careers than in the usual list of things women should supposedly do more of. “Be more confident” is easy advice to give. It is much more interesting to ask what happens when becoming more visible takes time away from technical depth, when helping everyone else makes your own contribution harder to see, or when moving into management gives you more organizational influence while quietly taking you further away from the technical work that built your identity in the first place.

The trade-offs themselves are not uniquely female, of course. Men also decide whether to move into management, specialize, take a risky opportunity or prioritize stability.

What can differ is the environment in which those choices are made.

McKinsey and LeanIn.Org’s Women in the Workplace 2025 report shows that women make up 49 percent of entry-level employees but only 29 percent of C-suite roles. Representation narrows gradually as careers progress, which I find interesting because careers rarely change because of one enormous decision. They are shaped by many smaller opportunities, relationships, choices and trade-offs accumulating over time.

That does not mean every woman will face the same barriers, or that every career decision is harder for women. I also do not want younger women to begin their careers believing they are entering a twenty-year obstacle course.

Quite the opposite.

I think understanding the environment gives you more agency inside it. If visibility matters, you can learn to communicate your technical impact without turning yourself into a personal-branding department. If you want leadership, you can actively seek sponsorship and stretch opportunities. If you want to remain technical, you can look for organizations where senior technical leadership is genuinely valued.

That is why I prefer talking about trade-offs rather than limitations.

A limitation says, “This path is difficult.”

A trade-off asks, “What matters enough to me that I am willing to choose it anyway?”

That is a much more useful question.

Some of the biggest career decisions are really risk-management exercises wearing business-casual clothing.

Do you stay at the established company where the salary is predictable, the benefits are good and there is probably an internal wiki containing seventeen career frameworks?

Or do you join the startup where the job description is technically three jobs and someone says, “We move fast here,” which may mean exciting ownership or that nobody has configured backups?

Neither option is inherently smarter.

Large organizations can offer structure, strong peers, resources and predictable progression. Smaller organizations can offer disproportionate ownership, rapid learning, direct customer exposure and the opportunity to make decisions far beyond your title.

The same question appears when deciding whether to stay in an area where you already have expertise or move into something new. Specialization can build authority, while breadth can create adaptability. Going deeper can make you exceptional at something; moving sideways can expose you to problems you would never have encountered otherwise.

Instead of asking whether a move is simply safe or risky, I find another question much more useful:

What am I buying with the risk I am taking?

Learning? Ownership? A new industry? A stronger network? Access to a technology that may shape the next decade? A chance to operate at a larger scope?

If the upside is vague and the risk is concrete, that is probably not a particularly attractive trade.

If the upside meaningfully changes your future options, the calculation becomes much more interesting.

And choosing stability can be an intentional decision too. Not every ambitious career has to involve disruption, reinvention and dramatic announcements on LinkedIn.

Sometimes stability is exactly what allows you to do your best work.

The important thing is knowing that you chose it, rather than simply drifting into it.

There is a very specific form of career paralysis that appears when you read an interesting job description.

You meet seven of the ten requirements, and naturally your brain ignores those seven and becomes emotionally attached to the remaining three.

Within minutes, you have convinced yourself that every other applicant has spent the previous decade mastering exactly those technologies and probably configures distributed systems recreationally on Sundays.

Many roles are learned while doing them.

Nobody starts their first staff engineering position already knowing how to be a staff engineer. Nobody becomes a manager with complete confidence on day one. Nobody becomes an architect having already designed every conceivable system.

At some point, growth requires accepting an opportunity where the requirements are slightly ahead of your current experience.

This is something I especially want early-career women to hear, because “I have never done this before” and “I am not capable of doing this” are very different statements.

You are allowed to learn the next job while doing the next job.

You are allowed to become a beginner again after being an expert.

You are allowed to apply before you have collected every possible qualification.

And sometimes the most useful trade-off you can make is giving up a little certainty in exchange for a much larger learning curve.

When younger women ask me what the right career choice is, I increasingly resist giving them a formula.

Instead, I ask what they want to optimize for right now.

Learning? Technical depth? Leadership? Ownership? Flexibility? Stability? Impact? Something completely different?

Then we talk about the trade, not because I want them to become cautious, but because I want them to become intentional.

Understanding trade-offs does not make your career smaller. In many ways, it gives you permission to make bolder decisions because you stop waiting for the imaginary option where everything is perfect.

You can choose technical depth knowing that visibility may require additional effort. You can choose leadership knowing that you may spend less time coding. You can join something risky because the learning is worth it. You can choose stability because stability is genuinely what you value at that stage of your life, rather than because somebody told you ambition always has to look like disruption.

And you can change your mind later.

That may be the message I most want early-career women to hear.

You do not need to design your entire career at twenty-two, twenty-five or thirty. You only need to understand what you are optimizing for in the next version.

Requirements change. Priorities change. Technologies change. You change.

There will be imperfect choices, and there will probably be a few decisions you look back on and wonder what exactly you were thinking.

That is normal.

No good system reaches its final architecture in version one.

Neither do we.

Women in Tech: Choosing What to Optimize For was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.