Commission on the Environment urges mayor, supervisors to restore $346,000 and seek stable climate funding

The San Francisco Commission on the Environment on March 1 voted unanimously to ask the mayor and Board of Supervisors to restore $346,000 in interdepartmental work‑order funding that the department says was reduced by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.

President Stevenson opened the special meeting saying the Commission called the session so "the commissioners and the public can be briefed and updated" after the Department of the Environment learned about the work‑order reductions. The resolution the Commission adopted requests that the mayor and board "make the department whole" for the reduction and "acknowledge the importance of increasing funding for climate and EV initiatives," and it directs staff to work with elected leaders on next steps.

The department's finance manager, Joe Salem, told commissioners the cuts are material to the department's budget and operations. "We'll be receiving $248,000 less than expected from the PUC," he said, and the department anticipates losing another $98,000 from SFMTA, "reflecting a reduction in funding to our climate and EV work" of $346,000 across fiscal years 2021‑22 and 2022‑23. Salem said $271,000 of that reduction affects electric‑vehicle programming and $75,000 affects the climate program; he warned that the decrease imperils at least one funded staff position and could jeopardize the department’s ability to leverage federal grants.

"This is foundational funding that allows us to leverage other grants to support our core work," Salem said. He said EV funding fell from $417,799 in the prior year to $325,000 in the coming fiscal year, which he described as a severe reduction to non‑grant funding.

Debbie Raffel, the department director, described the agency's funding model and staffing losses in detail. Raffel said the Department of the Environment receives no general fund support and relies on refuse rates, work orders and grants tied to specific deliverables. "Because the Department of the Environment does not receive any general fund support, seemingly small variances can have an outsized impact," she said, using a Jenga analogy to describe how incremental losses have reduced EV and energy‑efficiency staff in recent years.

Raffel listed work the department can no longer pursue without restored funding, including large‑scale EV charging projects, citywide EV working groups, and implementation support for recent ordinances governing commercial parking and municipal garages. She said the department will continue required benchmarking and inventory tasks but that it lacks the capacity for forward‑looking outreach, technical working groups, and policy follow‑through.

Commissioners from across the ideological spectrum described the cuts as inconsistent with San Francisco's stated climate emergency and urged both short‑term and long‑term responses. Commissioner Wald proposed—and the Commission accepted—an amendment adding a paragraph that explicitly acknowledges the department's lack of stable funding and the need for action to sustain essential climate and EV work. Commissioners suggested staff draft a concise appendix listing programs that would be affected if the cut is not restored and consider a combination of letters, one‑on‑one meetings with supervisors, convenings of legal and fiscal experts, and public organizing to build political will.

Public comment was overwhelmingly in favor of restoring the funds. Dozens of callers, including department staff represented by IFPTE Local 21, climate advocacy groups, business representatives, and residents, urged the Commission to use federal stimulus dollars and the city's surplus to protect the department's capacity. Julia Harding of Local 21 said the city had resources available and urged the Commission to "secure current and future funding for the department." Several callers described the small size of the climate program—repeatedly noting it comprises a tiny fraction of the city's overall budget—and warned that cuts would undercut implementation of the city’s Climate Action Plan.

The Commission voted first to adopt Commissioner Wald's amendment and then to approve the amended resolution (motions seconded and both carried by roll call votes). The final action asks the mayor and Board of Supervisors to restore the specific $346,000 shortfall for the current budget cycle and to work with the department on accelerating efforts and identifying sustainable funding sources.

The Commission adjourned at 7:26 p.m.

What happens next: the resolution will be transmitted to the mayor's budget office and the Board of Supervisors; commissioners and staff said they will continue conversations with the mayor's office and consider follow‑up actions, including letters, supervisor outreach, and convenings to develop a long‑term funding plan.