Pleasant Hill Planning Commission forwards citywide Climate Action Plan to council, urges advisory commission and quicker timeline

The Pleasant Hill Planning Commission on Feb. 10 heard a presentation from consultants on the citywide public review draft of the Climate Action Plan and voted to recommend the plan to city council with an amendment asking that the council establish an advisory climate engagement commission and consider accelerating the plan’s timeline.

Kristen Kushman, CEO and founder of Blue Strike Environmental, presented the plan’s findings and implementation tracker. “Our inventory shows the city is actually achieving a 66.5% reduction in emissions from the 2005 baseline,” Kushman said, noting the team used 2005 as the baseline year for the consultant analysis and that the plan aims to align with state goals such as SB 32 and AB 1279. Kushman said the consultants emphasized leveraging regional rebates and programs rather than city-enforced reach codes, and described a mix of quantitative and qualitative strategies the plan recommends.

The consultant team’s outreach included a kickoff, a 115‑response community survey, two public workshops attended by roughly 65–80 people and about 30 stakeholder focus‑group meetings, Kushman said. The inventory allocated 51.5% of community emissions to transportation and 30.7% to natural gas, leading the team to prioritize transportation and building electrification strategies. The plan’s tracker lists more than 86 actions, assigns partners and funding options, and shows a cost increase in 2027 tied to evaluating and upgrading public facilities into resilience hubs.

Members of the public urged the commission to push for a faster timetable. “We need to be thinking about being as aggressive as we can now,” Courtney, a Pleasant Hill resident, said during public comment, urging the commission to move beyond a 2045 net‑zero target and to prioritize reducing vehicle miles traveled through walkability and active transportation. Another resident, Mora, praised the plan’s practicality but urged stronger attention to walkability, transit frequency and permeable surfaces.

Commissioners engaged the consultants on specific measures and implementation details. Commissioners sought clarity on transportation items such as TR142 (prioritizing city‑contracted deliveries during off‑peak hours) and TR61 (shared e‑bike programs), funding assumptions for federal incentives such as the Investment Tax Credit, and whether the city can expand or fund EV charging at city‑owned sites. Staff and consultants pointed to possible funding and partnership options through MCE, PG&E and Measure J and said some implementation would rely on incentives and partnerships rather than direct city capital.

Commissioners also debated the use of bans versus incentives. The draft includes proposals related to single‑use materials (styrofoam, non‑recyclable delivery materials) and references regional restrictions on the sale of some gas‑fired appliances; consultants and staff noted some regional actions (Bay Area Air Quality Management District, CARB) already restrict the sale of certain gas equipment at the district level, and that local reach codes have faced legal challenges in some jurisdictions.

On a procedural motion, the commission voted to forward the plan to city council with a recommendation to establish an advisory climate engagement commission to help implement and monitor the tracker and with a request that council consider accelerating the timeline for deeper emissions reductions. The motion passed with Commissioners Chiang, Weber and Wiler voting yes and Chair Field voting no.

What comes next: the Planning Commission’s action is a formal recommendation to the city council; staff and consultants said materially accelerating the net‑zero target (for example, to 2035) would require revisiting the plan’s modeling and strategies and likely additional analysis. Staff also said the internal tracker was intended for implementation tracking but that records are subject to public records rules and council could request periodic public reporting.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to Pleasant Hill’s City Council for consideration, and the council will decide whether to adopt the plan as recommended, request edits, or direct additional study.