Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Climate Bond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocates press for climate bond as supervisors and officials weigh delay costs
Summary
Public commenters urged a dedicated climate mitigation bond in 2024; supervisors asked staff to model emissions impacts tied to bond activities. DPH and HSH staff estimated that moving a March bond to November could add millions in escalation and interim design costs.
Advocates from the Climate Emergency Coalition and allied groups pressed the Budget and Appropriation Committee to put a climate mitigation bond on the 2024 ballot, arguing that the proposed 10-year capital plan lacks funded measures to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
Multiple speakers from climate and environmental organizations urged supervisors to delay finalizing the capital plan until it includes explicit climate-mitigation funding. "We need a climate bond in 2024," several commenters said during the public-comment period, urging the Board not to approve a plan that defers mitigation work for a decade.
Supervisors responded by asking staff to provide emissions estimates for capital activities. Supervisor Hillary Ronan suggested including estimated emissions reductions alongside project descriptions to help prioritize bond timing and content.
Municipal staff described fiscal tradeoffs if bond timing is changed. Greg Wagner, chief operating officer for the Department of Public Health, estimated about $9.9 million in construction escalation if the public-health bond moves from March to November and about $2—$2.5 million to keep projects moving during that interval (costs that DPH said could be reimbursed when the bond issues). Homelessness and Supportive Housing staff estimated about 5% escalation for their projects (roughly $5 million) and described a near-$6 million PAYGO request to reach 65% design to be ready to bid upon bond passage. Administration staff summarized combined escalation impacts at around $16 million in one estimate.
Supervisors and advocates said those estimates underscore the trade-offs between readiness, sequencing and larger priorities such as climate mitigation and affordable housing, and asked staff to return with more detailed fiscal and emissions modeling.
