Comment Log Display

Comment Log Display

Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 70 for Public Input on Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Second Investment Plan (investplan2-ws) - 1st Workshop.


First Name: Katie
Last Name: Valenzuela Garcia
Email Address: kgarcia@sacbreathe.org
Affiliation: Breathe California

Subject: Cap and Trade Auction Proceeds Triennial Investment Plan for 2016-2019
Comment:
Dear Chairman Mary D. Nichols and Executive Officer Richard Corey,

Thank you for the hard work that Air Resources Board (ARB) staff
has done to make the Auction Proceeds Triennial Investment Plan for
2016-2019 possible. We are writing as a coalition of groups serving
the Sacramento Region to recommend changes to the 2016-19 draft
Investment Plan. As a region, we have formed a coalition of public
agencies and organizations working together to support and advance
applications for key Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grants, and have
complimented that effort with a robust public engagement process in
“disadvantaged communities.” Our comments are directly informed by
those efforts.

We appreciate that the current draft plan includes strategies for
generating green jobs, making businesses and multi-family housing
developments eligible for energy improvements, investments in
natural and working lands, and promoting community solar and
alternative transportation. These strategies will go a long way in
helping California achieve our climate goals, and directly reflect
the priorities of stakeholders in our region.

We also continue to affirm following principles:
- Center proposed efforts around “disadvantaged communities,” or
those most impacted
- Advance a systems approach to maximize greenhouse gas reductions
as well as co-benefits 
- Increase coordination among agencies in investment decisions to
allow for collective decision-making and effective programming

We have identified several additional strategies that we think will
further the goals of the plan while also achieving significant
co-benefits for residents of our state’s “disadvantaged
communities”:
- Ensure that community centers are eligible for all programs,
particularly regarding electric vehicle charging stations.
“Community Centers” should include school sites (operational and
non-operational), churches, and any large space used for
community-benefit purposes. These gathering places for the
community are centrally located within “disadvantaged communities.”
Investments at those sites would greatly advance California’s
climate goals.
- Include urban agriculture as a strategy for both carbon
sequestration and greenhouse gas emission reduction. And dedicate a
greater percentage of auction proceeds to urban and rural farms
that enhance soil health. In addition to the significant benefits
to the environment, urban agriculture can facilitate community
compost programs that reduce food waste, increase urban greenspace,
reduce the need to drive long distances to grocery stores or
markets, and create meaningful economic development opportunities
for residents of “disadvantaged communities.”
- Expand and clarify language in the current plan to ensure
inclusion of successful agricultural climate strategies. Improving
the health of agricultural soils with the use of compost, cover
cropping, crop rotations, conservation tillage, and other improved
farming practices can increase the carbon storage capacity of soils
and reduce overall GHG emissions while reducing air and water and
synthetic fertilizer use 
- Create a new goal to layer as programs as much as possible. Any
new improvement or development funded by the Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund should be able to take advantage of other funded
programs and services to ensure maximum impact. This may require
more cohesion in the application process, or allowing funded
programs under Urban Forestry, Transit, Energy Efficiency and
Weatherization, and Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities
to directly collaborate to ensure the creation of effective
referral processes.

Finally, we would respectfully ask ARB and administering agencies
to allow at least three weeks of review for new policy documents
before closing public comment or holding public meetings. While we
understand the production of these documents is a monumental task,
a longer timeframe for public review would better facilitate the
full and meaningful participation of residents and groups located
within “disadvantaged communities” as required by Assembly Bill
32.

Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments.


Sincerely,

Brenda Ruiz
Slow Food California

Brenda Ruiz
Slow Food Sacramento

Christal Waters, Resident
City of Davis

Jonathan Ronald Tran, Organizer
Hmong Innovating Politics

Marti Brown, Executive Director 
North Franklin Business District Association

Marti Brown, Executive Director 
North Franklin Community Development Fund

Matt Read, Director of Government Relations
Breathe California

Michael Blair, President 
South Oak Park Community Association

Michelle Pariset, Organizer 
Capital Region Organizing Project

Paul Towers, Organizing & Media Director
Pesticide Action Network

Rachel Rios, Executive Director
La Familia Counseling Center

Ray Tretheway, Executive Director
Sacramento Tree Foundation

Richard Guerrero, President 
Environmental Council of Sacramento

Richard A. (Tony) VanCuren, Professional Researcher
UC Davis Air Quality Research Center

Rick Bettis, Natural Resources Director 
League of Women Voters Sacramento County

Attachment: www.arb.ca.gov/lists/com-attach/75-investplan2-ws-UzIBdVAzVFgFagdp.pdf

Original File Name: ARB InvestPlan 11.13.15_FINAL.pdf

Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2015-11-13 15:17:43



If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.


Board Comments Home

preload