Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Urban Forestry
Citation preview
Is Urban Forestry at a Disadvantage?
Topics for today:
1.Recent developments in CAL FIRE’s Urban and Community Forestry Program
2.CAL EPA’s discussion draft for identifying disadvantaged communities
3.California Air Resources Board’s discussion draft for Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities
Acronyms and Abbreviations
C&T Cap-and-Trade Auction Revenues
UF Urban Forestry
CARB California Air Resources Board
DAC Disadvantaged Community
U&CF Urban and Community Forestry Program
GGRF Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund
SB 535 Legislation guiding cap-and-trade investments in disadvantaged communities
Proposed Results
• Unified message that a majority – not all – of CAL FIRE’s urban forestry funds in 2014-15 and beyond are for projects located in and/or benefitting DAC’s.
• Ensure CAL-EPA identifies what a DAC is in a way that maximizes opportunity for investments while remaining faithful to the CalEnviroScreen and SB 535 process.
• Support CARB discussion draft on proposed UF funding for DACs, and for scope of projects fundable by CAL FIRE with cap-and-trade auction revenues.
CAL FIRE’s C&T Dollars for 2014-15 U&CF
Program• California ReLeaf has supported up to 70% of all
C&T dollars directed to U&CF Program be used to meet the goals of SB 535 and benefitting disadvantaged communities.
• CARB suggested 75% in 2013 Investment Plan
• Administration intimated $10.5 million to $12.5 million.
• CARB states 55% in aforementioned discussion draft.
Updated Guidance for CAL FIRE’s C&T 2014-15
U&CF Program• CAL FIRE will triage all Urban Forestry grant applications to
ensure that all $18M of CAL FIRE’s allocation provides benefits to disadvantaged communities (either directly or indirectly). A minimum of $10.2M dollars of CAL FIRE’s C&T Urban Forestry allocation will be granted within disadvantaged communities.
• CAL FIRE will give preference to grant applications that benefit areas within disadvantaged communities; however, on a case-by-case basis, CAL FIRE Executive may grant dollars for projects that only benefit (are not located within) disadvantaged communities, after the $10.2M threshold in item #1 has been satisfied.
Challenges
• Underserved areas not on CalEnviroScreen top tier of DACs won’t be able to even compete for funds
• This includes significant portions of Sacramento, San Francisco, LA, San Diego, East Bay Area, and Central Valley
• Most Northern CA groups and central coast groups won’t likely be eligible to even apply (ie. Keep Eureka Beautiful, Goleta Valley Beautiful
ReLeaf’s Goal
Ensure majority – not all – of CAL FIRE’s urban forestry funds in 2014-15 and beyond are for projects located in and/or benefitting DAC’s.
CAL-EPA and DACs
• CAL-EPA Discussion Draft for how California identifies DACs offers 5 methods for manipulating CalEnviroScreen Data to create geographic template for the top 25% DACs in the state.
• All data is calculated as census-tract level instead of by zip code.
CAL-EPA and DACs
Pollution burden and population characteristics are multiplied into a single unified score
Method 1
Method 5
Sorts census tracts into high, medium, and low categories for both pollution and population.
Method 6
“Product of Ranks” multiplies all 19 indicators to identify DACs. Developed by BAAQMD as alternative to other methods.
CAL-EPA Issues to Consider
• Does “Method 6” really reflect DACs, or does it simply manipulate data to allow for more geographic coverage?
• If 100% of UF funds go to DACs, does that shift Network perspective on what constitutes a DAC?
• What is the appropriate “cutpoint” for DACs for purposes of allocating C&T auction revenues? 15%? 20%? 25% or more?
ReLeaf’s Goal
Ensure CAL-EPA identifies what a DAC is in a way that maximizes opportunity for investments while remaining faithful to the CalEnviroScreen and SB 535 process.
CARB and DACs
• CARB is responsible for determining what constitutes a “benefit” to DACs for purposes of compliance with SB 535
• SB 535 says 10% of all C&T auction revenues must be used for projects located within a DAC; 25% of all C&T must benefit DACs.
• Highlights of CARB discussion draft for Investments to Benefit DACs– Each agency will use its GGRF appropriation for both
project costs and the associated administrative expenses to implement the program
– Provide outreach to groups of potential project applicants in DACs to increase awareness of funding opportunities…
– Make assistance available to respond to questions from likely project applicants in a DAC to increase their ability to seek funding.
CARB and DACs
CARB and DACs
CARB and DACs
CARB Issues to Consider
• Is scope of eligible UF projects sufficient?
• Are UF projects that significantly reduce flood risk to one or more adjacent DACs eligible as “Provides Benefits To?”
• How are UF projects completed at facilities outside DACs that primarily “Provides Benefits To” factored into process (i.e. schools, workforce development centers)?
ReLeaf’s Goal
Support CARB discussion draft on proposed UF funding for DACs, and for scope of projects fundable by CAL FIRE with cap-and-trade auction revenues.
Call to Action
• CAL-EPA: Submit written comments by 9/15– Indicating preferred Method and why.– Indicate preferred cutpoint for DAC funding eligibility.
• CAL FIRE: – Sign on to California ReLeaf Letter– Call CAL FIRE Deputy Director of Resource Management Duane
Shintaku at 916-653-4298
• CARB: Submit written comments by 9/15 – Support $10 million in UF for DACs.– Change “tree planting” to “urban forestry projects.”– Encourage additional options for UF projects that “Provide
Benefits To.”
Tell Local Stories
On-Line Resources
http://californiareleaf.org/?p=7442
Access to:•Power Point Presentation•ReLeaf Network Sign-on Letter to Cal FIRE•CAL EPA discussion draft on DACs•CARB discussion draft on DACs•CalEnviroScreen Report 2.0•“Method 6” Synopsis for DACs•Directions to Submit Comments
