Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Experts and advocates outline competing proposals for GGRF spending: nature, agriculture, transit, housing and revolving infrastructure funds
Summary
Panelists and public commenters urged lawmakers to prioritize different sets of greenhouse‑gas‑reduction fund programs — from nature‑based solutions and agricultural climate investments to transit, affordable housing near transit and clean‑energy infrastructure that could be financed as revolving loans.
SACRAMENTO — The hearing featured a detailed debate over which GGRF investments should be guaranteed and which should remain competitive or discretionary. The choices carry practical trade‑offs: some programs deliver low cost per‑ton greenhouse‑gas reductions; others deliver local co‑benefits that build political support.
What witnesses proposed:
- Nature‑based solutions: The Nature Conservancy and other groups proposed a dedicated, ongoing allocation (panelists suggested figures in the neighborhood of 25% of GGRF in testimony) to scale forest health, natural and working lands and other sequestration projects. They…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
