Bend committee reviews CCAP action list, recommends funding and community grants to accelerate implementation

The Bend Environment and Climate Committee on Feb. 24 reviewed the updated CCAP (Climate and Community Action Plan) action list and recommended that the City Council consider two implementation measures: establish a permanent funding source for CCAP implementation and create a community partner grant program to support local organizations carrying out CCAP initiatives.

Committee members framed the meeting as a final substantive review ahead of a planned vote next month. Committee staff member Cassie (City staff) said, “what we want to do today, we’re getting to the point where we’re hoping that you all are ready soon to adopt the CCAP action list.” Laura (Vice Chair, Environment and Climate Committee) convened the meeting and directed discussion toward clarifying priorities and next steps for council consideration.

Why it matters: Committee members said the action list is broad and that adoption alone will not ensure implementation without a reliable revenue stream and a way to fund community-led projects. The committee’s recommended package would pair the action list with implementation tools—funding and a grant program—that staff and councilors could use to assign work and track progress.

Discussion highlights

• Timeline and next steps: Staff proposed bringing a finalized action list and the two implementation recommendations to council in April if the committee approves the update at its next meeting. Cassie said staff aim to return to the committee next month with a refined deliverable that includes members’ notes and methods clarifications.

• Electrification and the joint summit: Committee members confirmed an electrification joint committee summit is scheduled for Feb. 24 from 2–4 p.m. to review policy options and staff work plans; staff asked the committee to provide at least one member who can attend for the entire session. The committee intends to use the summit output to shape “electrification policies” included in the CCAP work plan.

• Energy navigator and outreach: Staff described an energy navigator program and a mid‑March website launch tied to a larger outreach and engagement effort. Megan (City staff, outreach lead) is leading the outreach work; staff plan to circulate draft website content to committee members in about two weeks for review.

• Costs, timing and modeling caveats: Members pressed staff and the consultant assumptions behind the greenhouse‑gas modeling. Cassie and other members emphasized that the model’s projected annual reductions are dependent on timing, adoption rates and a cleaner grid over time; as Cassie summarized, “the projected annual reduction in 2030 and 2050 are how much you would reduce in one year in 2030.” Committee member Neil warned that the last increments of decarbonization “are going to be very difficult and very expensive,” urging pragmatic sequencing to balance cost and benefits.

• Utility rates and affordability: Multiple members raised concern that rising electricity rates could undercut electrification incentives. Cassie noted cities statewide are tracking rate impacts and that advocacy or explicit affordability protections may be considered as part of future actions. Committee members suggested weaving affordability and rate‑impact considerations into the action that tracks utility compliance with clean energy targets.

• Waste, materials and consumption: The committee reviewed waste and materials strategies, including recycling improvements, food and construction‑and‑demolition recovery, and a new action to promote low‑carbon food choices. Members flagged methodological uncertainty about how imported (consumption‑based) emissions were represented and requested additional consultant documentation and possible pilot projects (for example, low‑carbon concrete trials) to test applicability in Bend’s climate.

• Transportation priorities: Staff presented transportation options including incentives for electric vehicle adoption, expanded public charging, bicycle and pedestrian investments, transit coordination, and land‑use measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Staff noted that transit electrification is not included because the local transit agency recently studied fleet electrification and determined it was not feasible in the near term.

Committee guidance and next steps

The committee coalesced around a short list of priorities to serve as the biennial work plan (2025–27): develop and execute outreach and education, launch an energy navigator program, develop electrification policies informed by the upcoming summit, expand public EV charging infrastructure, promote waste prevention and reuse, and encourage VMT reduction through land‑use and transportation planning. Members recommended that staff capture committee clarifications and modeling assumptions in the supporting materials that accompany the CCAP update.

On implementation mechanisms, the committee recommended that council consider:

• A permanent and sustainable funding source for CCAP implementation (staff noted pilot funds exist to test parts of the program but ongoing grants and programs would need dedicated funding). Cassie said the community partner grant program would be contingent on establishing that funding source, though a limited pilot could proceed with existing allocations.

• A Community Partner Grant Program to direct funds to local organizations that implement CCAP strategies. Staff proposed that the ECC play a role reviewing applications and making funding recommendations; the committee asked staff to return with program structure options (eligibility, award size, and flexibility in annual allocations).

No formal motions or votes were recorded during the meeting; members indicated readiness to vote on the CCAP update and implementation recommendations at the committee’s next meeting after staff incorporate today’s clarifications. If the committee approves the package next month and the stewardship subcommittee concurs, staff expect to present the CCAP update and the implementation recommendations to City Council in April.

Ending: Staff will return to the committee next month with a refined action table, method notes from the consultant, and a proposed structure for the community partner grant program so the committee can consider a formal vote.