Council delays adoption of Climate Action and Resilience Plan amid implementation, legal and coastal-alignment questions

Pacifica—s City Council deferred final action on a draft Climate Action and Resilience Plan (CARP) after task-force members and city staff presented the plan and council members raised questions about implementation timelines, legal constraints and alignment with the city—s recently certified Local Coastal Land Use Plan.

Monica Maher, chair of the Climate Action and Adaptation (now "resilience") Task Force, summarized the panel—s work and said the plan is the product of nearly two years of community outreach. "Our task force was created in 2023, and the charter was to create a climate action and adaptation plan for adoption," Maher told council. Task-force members described extensive public engagement and technical analysis; staff supplied an emissions inventory and scenario modeling.

Council discussion centered on three practical concerns: how the plan—s goals will be sequenced against city work plans and budgets; the legal implications of proposed reach-code actions tied to zero-NOx standards (council was warned about a recent federal court ruling and pending state legislation); and how the CARP should align with the Local Coastal Land Use Plan (LCLUP) recently certified by the California Coastal Commission.

Management analyst Elizabeth Brooks asked council to consider a targeted change in two specific actions (E1.6 and E1.7) that had read as mandatory adoption of a zero-NOx reach code for new and existing construction. "Staff is recommending the wording be revised to change the phrase —adopt a 0 NOx reach code— to —consider potential adoption of a 0 NOx reach code,—" Brooks said, citing legal uncertainty from both the Ninth Circuit—s recent decisions and a bill in the state Legislature (AB 306) that could restrict local reach codes.

Task-force chair Maher and several presenters urged council not to "water down" the CARP. Maher said the task force had voted to rename the plan to "Climate Action and Resilience Plan" to better reflect adaptation and funding opportunities and to incorporate community input. "This CAP provides a list of recommended actions," she said in the presentation; staff and the task force also provided a web-based resource page and noted an intent to form an implementation subcommittee.

Members of the public urged adoption. Seven students from Ingrid B. Lacey Middle School read brief statements urging action on climate change; other public speakers recommended keeping directive language in the plan and moving forward rather than postponing. Several attendees representing arts organizations, open-space groups and neighborhood associations urged the council to preserve existing community facilities and to align planning documents so they do not conflict.

City Manager Kevin Woodhouse asked council to consider the plan—s role as an input into annual strategic planning and budget prioritization. "One question council may want to consider is whether the document should include a general statement that the plan—s menu of recommended actions will inform the council—s annual strategic planning and priority setting, to assess legal, financial and operational feasibility for inclusion on that year—s work plan," he said.

After extended discussion and public comment, the council voted to continue the item to a date uncertain so staff and the implementation subcommittee of the task force could present revised wording (for example, the suggested E1.6/E1.7 change and language clarifying coordination with the LCLUP) and a clearer red-line showing modifications. Mayor Pro Tem Bowles moved to continue the item; Mayor Sue Beckmeyer seconded the motion, and the council approved the continuance unanimously.

Staff said the intention is to return with a red-lined draft, a short implementation work plan (including who will take lead on year-one items), clarifying text about how CARP actions will be used during council goal-setting and budget cycles, and revisions that align shoreline-adaptation actions with the LCLUP and other regional studies already under way (including projects led by the San Mateo County Resource Conservation District and a Coastal Conservancy grant to the Pacifica Land Trust).