Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Climate Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Grand jury urges accelerated climate actions; Board identifies points of agreement and disagreement

Government Audits and Oversight Committee, Board of Supervisors, City and County of San Francisco · September 10, 2007
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Civil Grand Jury recommended a suite of transportation, energy, building and solid-waste measures to meet the Board's 2012 greenhouse-gas reduction target; city officials outlined progress and remaining gaps, and the committee recorded full, partial and dissenting responses before forwarding amended resolutions.

The committee heard a Civil Grand Jury report calling for more aggressive city action to meet the Board's target of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to 20% below 1990 levels by 2012. Grand juror Shirley Hansen urged increased transit, bicycling, green building standards, renewable energy and funding mechanisms.

Shirley Hansen said transportation accounts for roughly half of the city's greenhouse gases and that steps to shift people off cars are essential. "Public transit should be made an attractive alternative to travel by car," she said. The report urged measures including congestion pricing, expanded transit funding, plug-in vehicle infrastructure, green-building codes and community choice aggregation.

City presenters acknowledged progress — including hybrid-bus acquisitions and waste-reduction achievements — but warned of large remaining gaps, especially in transportation and energy efficiency. Jared Blumenfeld (city presentation lead) explained an emissions baseline and quantified potential savings tied to congestion pricing, transit mode shift, biking and fuel-efficiency improvements.

During a line-by-line review, the committee accepted several recommendations, signaled partial agreement on items that require legislative or public hearings (for example, community choice aggregation and taxi incentives), and disagreed with a proposed local energy tax. The committee amended the resolutions to keep required Board responses and added a further-resolved clause asking departments to report implementation status within six months; the amended items will be sent to the full Board.