Policy in Motion

Sacramento Launches Electric Vehicle CarShare Program in Three Affordable Housing Communities

In partnership with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (AQMD), Policy in Motion is pleased to announce the launch of Our Community CarShare Sacramento, a new electric carsharing pilot program serving disadvantaged communities. This Sacramento AQMD program is funded by California Climate Investments: Cap-and-Trade Dollars at Work and operated by Zipcar with the goal of increasing access to zero-emission vehicles and enhancing clean mobility options.

Our Community CarShare provides hundreds of residents in three Sacramento affordable housing complexes with free access to eight electric Kia Souls. Six of the zero-emission vehicles are stationed at the residential communities and two additional vehicles will be available for reservation by registered users at the Sacramento Valley Train Station.

Eligible residents of Alder Grove, Edgewater, and Mutual Housing at Lemon Hill will have access to these exclusive community cars for short trips like errands, appointments, and meetings. The first 300 qualifying members will receive a free membership and may use the cars up to three times a week, with a maximum three hours reservation period (9 hours per week total). Zipcar operates the reservation system and will maintain the fleet. Residents are currently signing up for the program at www.ourcarshare.orgor with printed surveys at our workshops, and will soon be reserving the vehicles using Zipcar.com or self-service kiosks on site. There will be no cost to use Our Community CarShare for the residents.

Photos, articles, and videos from the press event and community outreach can be found on our Facebook page at Facebook.com/ourcarshare. Here’s what some of the residents are saying about the program:

“I can’t wait. It will help a lot of people out who currently have no means of transportation!”

“I’m really excited. I’m going to be the first customer! It helps you feel more independent.”

Policy in Motion partnered on this pilot project to create the unique branding and marketing of Our Community CarShare Sacramento, including the development of the logo and website, www.ourcarshare.org and Facebook.com/ourcarshare. Policy in Motion is also working with the residents at all three communities on outreach and education to help ensure the participants can successfully use the program. This includes generating educational materials regarding carsharing and electric vehicle trip planning — as well as conducting multi-lingual workshops on the membership process involving participant eligibility, surveys, and program-specific Zipcar registration. Additional trainings will take place to help residents understand how to charge, use, and reserve the cars. Other elements of the program outreach include the development of site-specific information binders for on-site housing staff, working individually with staff to understand the program, and identifying resident “Community Ambassadors” at each location who are volunteer champions for the program, assisting other residents and helping to monitor that the cars are plugged in when parked. Policy in Motion is also tracking the successes and challenges in implementing this innovative pilot project so that the program may expand and improve in future years and be replicated in other cities.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) provided a $1.3 million grant through California Climate Investments, a statewide program that invests cap-and-trade proceeds, particularly in disadvantaged communities. The Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD was awarded the project funding through a competitive grant process.

“Our Community CarShare Sacramento provides access to clean, free transportation to residents of disadvantaged communities,” said Larry Greene, Sacramento AQMD’s Executive Director. “Mobility is vitally important in today’s economy, and bringing zero-emission transportation options to all residents is critical to protecting air quality and health.”

Other program partners include Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, Mutual Housing California, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, and the City of Sacramento.

“All Californians deserve to have access to the very cleanest vehicles, especially in the neighborhoods that need them the most,” said CARB Chair Mary D. Nichols. “This investment is a triple play: It helps clean the air, fights climate change and improves the quality of life for those who live in these communities. That’s a good use of cap-and-trade proceeds by any measure.”

Vehicle emissions contribute more than 70 percent of the pollutants that form ground-level ozone in Sacramento. The region does not meet federal health standards for ozone. High ozone concentrations trigger asthma attacks and damage lungs. Reducing transportation emissions is Sacramento’s best path toward protecting air quality.

The Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD protects air quality on behalf of the residents of Sacramento County. For more information, visit airquality.org.

California Climate Investments

Our Community CarShare Sacramento is part of California Climate Investments, a statewide program that puts billions of cap-and-trade dollars to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the economy and improving public health and the environment – particularly in disadvantaged communities.

The cap-and-trade program also creates a financial incentive for industries to invest in clean technologies and develop innovative ways to reduce pollution. California Climate Investments projects include affordable housing, renewable energy, public transportation, zero-emission vehicles, environmental restoration, more sustainable agriculture, recycling and much more. At least 35 percent of these investments are made in disadvantaged and low-income communities. For more information, visit www.caclimateinvestements.ca.gov.

 

 

2015-16 Cap and Trade Expenditure Plan

California Governor Jerry Brown’s May Budget Revision released last week includes a proposal to increase Cap and Trade expenditures by $1.245 Billion due to higher than anticipated AB 32 auction revenue. This proposed increase brings the total amount of Cap and Trade expenditures to $2.237 Billion, with the Transportation sector accounting for 72% of total funds.  SB 375 related programs — including SGC’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program ($400M), CalSTA’s Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program ($265M), and the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program ($100M) — account for 35% of the total cap and trade expenditures.  Additional proposals for transportation investments include CARB’s Low Carbon Transportation Program ($350M) and the High-Speed Rail Authority’s Project ($500M).

Details of the entire May Revise Summary can be viewed here:

Cap and Trade Resource Center
For an overview on how California’s cap and trade program works and a summary of 13 cap and trade funding programs, check out Policy in Motion’s “Cap & Trade 101” materials on-line at the Institute for Local Government’s website, download as a full brochure, and/or view as an Infographic!

$130M Approved Today for Sustainable Communities in California!

Policy in Motion would like to applaud the Strategic Growth Council and agency partners for taking the time to revisit the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program Guidelines (AHSC) and approving them at today’s hearing.

The principle change in the guidelines was to make greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction per dollar the primary criteria for project selection.  While the public testimony was dominated by a discussion over the weight of scoring the affordability vs GHG reduction of projects, the SGC approved the updated guidelines to include the amount of GHG reduction achieved per grant dollar requested as a major focus of scoring criteria in order to ensure this program maximizes our limited dollars in the most effective way to meet our AB 32 and SB 375 goals.  Given this is the FIRST year we have done this brand new program, it is essential that we have metrics in place to assess the success of this program next year – GHG per dollar levels the playing field between large urban projects and smaller rural projects to equitably ensure that all applicable projects are competing based on how much GHG reduction they are getting from the amount of grant dollars requested.  Additionally, being able to point to this particular metric is critical for the long-term viability of the AB 32 Cap and Trade Program.  The first year AHSC program is going to yield 13-25 projects across the state that will be looked at next year as pilot examples for whether the process worked or didn’t – and the overall GHG reduction that was achieved from the total grant program will be pointed to by the Legislature, Administration, and stakeholders.

In addition to maximizing the investment in this program by highlighting GHG reduction as scoring criteria, the updated guidelines also include a greater role for the Metropolitan Planning Organizations in reviewing the applications to ensure that we are implementing regional SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategies to best meet the needs of our communities.

GHG Methodology

Some concerns were also raised at today’s hearing regarding the use of perhaps outdated data in the CalEEMod and CMAQ tools that are to be used to score applications’ GHG reduction quantification.  CalEEMod doesn’t account for affordable housing very well, nor does it account for urban land use characteristics like the “8D’s” (major factors that reduce VMT).  These “8’Ds” are: density, diversity, design, destination, distance to transit, development scale, demographics, and demand management.  These D-factors are critical if we are to really examine how an integrated, land use and transportation project will reduce GHG emissions.  That said, new data that has been peer reviewed could be incorporated into CalEEMod.  However, why not use some of the latest tools SGC and nearly all of the state’s MPOs have been using for SB 375 GHG reduction quantification from land use already?: UrbanFootprint. What is unique about UrbanFootprint is that it is a platform that can hold whatever latest data is out there – whether that’s affordable housing or land use characteristics.  In fact, UrbanFootprint already includes a rigorous transportation and land use component based on the “8Ds.”  And what’s even cooler is that it has the capacity – with the help of pioneers like TNC and Sonoma County carving the path – to build a rigorous conservation and agriculture component so we could use ONE platform for both the AHSC program and its complimentary (smaller yet equally important younger brother program) Sustainable Agricultural Conservation and Lands Program. That way we can really look at both sides of the coin in a holistic way to implement SB 375 through both urban infill and rural conservation of land.

So What’s Next?

Project concepts are due in one month so time to roll up your sleeves!

Want More Background Info?

Check out Policy in Motion’s previous blog posts on this topic:

• SB 375: Still Ambitious & Achievable?
• ICP is the new TOD
• Top 5 Ways SGC Can Score Big for California
• California Budget Deal on Cap and Trade Program Reached : Transportation Comes Out on Top

Lauren Michele, Principal/Founder, Policy in Motion.

Lauren earned a Master’s of Science degree from the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies after working as a transportation planning professional at Fehr & Peers, a climate change policy analyst at the Center for Clean Air Policy in Washington D.C., and an air quality program assistant at the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.  At the UC Davis Urban Land Use and Transportation Center (ULTRANS) she focused on the links between California’s Senate Bill 375 and developing federal climate/energy legislation and the transportation reauthorization.  Her academic work includes teaching undergraduate courses in Transportation Policy at UC Davis and experiential learning while living and researching multi-modal transportation planning in Europe.

Lauren organized and served as Policy Director for the Transportation Coalition for Livable Communities — a coalition which includes the California Alliance for Jobs, California Transit Association, National Resources Defense Council, League of California Cities, State Association of Counties, and the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Councils of Governments throughout the state. The Coalition promotes the investment of cap and trade revenue to address both the greenhouse gas reduction goals of AB 32 and critical transportation system maintenance and operation needs that build on the framework of SB 375 and other GHG reduction strategies.

Her firm, Policy in Motion, specializes in sustainable transportation policy.  Policy in Motion offers planning practitioners, policy makers, and public agencies an understanding of how to integrate sustainability policy into transportation infrastructure and land use decisions.  Lauren Michele’s 2011 book, “Policy in Motion: Transportation Planning in California after AB 32” explores the State’s evolving policies for sustainable living through transportation planning, and identifies how outdated regulatory frameworks must be aligned with supporting paradigm shifts if California is to move forward in a truly unified vision for “People-Oriented Development” and transportation.  Lauren’s 2012 film documentary, “Policy in Motion: Growing Beautiful Communities” continues to explore how an integrated approach to transportation planning and funding based on “People-Oriented Development” (POD) can improve community quality of life while meeting California’s environmental and economic goals. Policy in Motion’s book and film are available for purchase on-line at Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and www.policyinmotion.com.

 

Hope everyone had a Thanksgiving full of love and gratitude. Hard to believe it’s already the last month of 2014! Approaching a new year is a great time of reflection on where we’ve been and what our goals are going forward. I’d like to take this opportunity to offer some reflections on one of the key areas in the transportation sector: SB 375.

In 2008, California established a process and program for regional GHG reduction from land use — SB 375.  SB 375 was crafted to be a performance-based, yet flexible, approach to meeting greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. It successfully blended the need for “ambitious” GHG reduction goals with an “achievable” and practical approach so that cities and counties could ultimately create significant changes in land use patterns.  Because it is actually land use, not transportation investments, that create the most GHG reduction impacts.  This successful approach emerged not magically overnight, but after a year of collaboration via the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Regional Targets Advisory Committee who examined the best approach to create meaningful GHG reduction goals for SB 375.  And it was that process that led to every MPO creating a Sustainable Communities Strategy that actually hit the State-assigned GHG target for their region.  Remember the Alternative Planning Strategy?  That was supposed to be the Plan B for any MPO who couldn’t create a Regional Transportation Plan that hit its target — but because of the performance-based approach in the crafting of these plans, MPOs were all able to make it happen.

Now it’s time to help those responsible for IMPLEMENTING these plans — local cites and counties.  Local governments deserve the same thoughtfulness and approach that worked for the MPOs if we want to see SB 375 be truly successful.  It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that the all the great work done to date follows in the original spirit of SB 375:  tackling these ambitious GHG goals through an achievable, performance-based approach — maximizing GHG reduction while creating ample flexibility for the communities who must now implement these regional plans.

As we approach 2015 in an era of cap and trade funding possibilities, we have an incredible opportunity to make this happen.  But only if we do it right.  Lack of funding for the SB 375 process presents a threat to AB 32 and all of the existing work that CARB and the MPOs have done since 2008.  Funding individual transportation and housing projects alone that happen to be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan isn’t really what SB 375 is about, nor is that the way to maximize ambitious GHG reduction.  Funding should be prioritized to projects that create the greatest GHG benefits under the Sustainable Communities Strategy. While the cap and trade program is a start, it needs not only more attention in the administration of the first year funding, but significantly more funding for future years.  And the only way to make the case for more funding is to show that we can do a really good job with limited resources in the first year.

So what do we need to do?  I think we need to look backward before we can look forward.  Six years ago we decided to pass a landmark bill that included in it a process for collaboration with technical, policy, and political experts.  We then identified what was needed: better transportation and land use modeling so that we could create these plans.  The Strategic Growth Council allocated $12 million in Prop 84 funding to the MPOs so that they could build modeling capacity to make this process actually take off. That’s what we need now, but it’s time to shift focus from the MPOs who have been so successful in helping us get this far and figure out how we can empower local communities to do the implementation side.  Because local agencies and institutions are at the front lines of implementing SB 375. Let’s ensure that local government gets the chance it now needs to create “ambitious and achievable” SB 375 implementation.

Cap and trade is our one shot this decade to make SB 375 work.  For the next year let’s focus on giving locals maximum flexibility to achieve maximum GHG reduction.  And the great thing?  When we empower communities to come up with their own innovative solutions they not only reduce GHG emissions even more than expected, but they maximize other community benefits like better health, better access, and better quality of life.

For more background on SB 375 check out the policy blog archives on www.policyinmotion.com for articles such as this one from 2011: “Targets and Goal Setting”

 

Introducing three new words: Integrated Connectivity Projects.

Kudos to the Strategic Growth Council for coming up with a new acronym in their Draft Program Guidelines for the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC).

The concept of the ICP is to expand the definition of TOD to include areas that have the potential to improve transit by improving other transportation infrastructure that provide access to existing or new public transit or shuttle stops.  An ICP would include at least one of the following infrastructure-related capital uses of funds:

• Housing Developments (e.g. construction of green/vegetated roofs)
• Housing-Related Infrastructure (e.g. water, sewer or other utility service improvements and relocation)
• Transportation- or Transit-Related Infrastructure (e.g. the reconstruction or resurfacing of sidewalks and streets; bicycle paths; traffic calming projects like roundabouts)
• Green Infrastructure (e.g. easements and rights of way)
• Or Planning Implementation if combined with any of the above (e.g. analysis to update adopted General/Specific Plans, zoning ordinances which are required to implement a capital project)
• Note: Policy in Motion strongly recommends that commercial-related infrastructure development be eligible given that commercial use near transit reduces VMT even more than housing development near transit

There would also be a variety of eligible applicants that could apply for grant funding for an ICP in their community. The Public Agency that has jurisdiction over the Project Area would be a required applicant, either by itself or jointly (co-applicant) with any of the following: Joint Powers Authority, Public Housing Authority, Transit Agency/Operators, School District, facilities district or other special district, developers (profit and/or non-profit).

The guideline’s 81 pages of flow charts and matrices are far from simple to understand at first glance (or second), but the reality is integrating land use and transportation projects are not simple problems with simple solutions.  I don’t think any of us fully understand the SGC’s guidelines at this point, but I would say that’s actually an excellent indication that we are on track to a meaningful program with real-world implementation that works.  I’d also like to give kudos to SGC for taking on an extremely complicated approach to integration of infrastructure and programs that will be difficult — but certainly not impossible — to quantify GHG emissions and co-benefits.  Leveraging the incredible work done by California’s regional and local governments will be not just important, but essential, in achieving a flexible and durable program that maximizes our goals under this program.

The purpose of the AHSC Program is to reduce GHG emissions through projects that implement land use, housing, transportation, and agricultural land preservation practices to support infill and compact development.  The AHSC Program is supported by auction proceeds derived from the California Air Resources Board’s Cap and Trade Program, and appropriated in the annual State Budget to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. $130 million has been allocated to this program for this fiscal year.  The guidelines recommend that no less than 30 percent of these funds be allocated to Integrated Connectivity Projects and no less than 40% to Transit Oriented Development projects.  The total dollar amount is likely to double next year and see significant increases after that.

 

Lauren Michele, Principal/Founder, Policy in Motion.  Lauren earned a Master’s of Science degree from the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies after working as a transportation planning professional at Fehr & Peers, a climate change policy analyst at the Center for Clean Air Policy in Washington D.C., and an air quality program assistant at the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.  At the UC Davis Urban Land Use and Transportation Center (ULTRANS) she focused on the links between California’s Senate Bill 375 and developing federal climate/energy legislation and the transportation reauthorization.  Her academic work includes teaching undergraduate courses in Transportation Policy at UC Davis and experiential learning while living and researching multi-modal transportation planning in Europe.

Lauren currently serves as Policy Director for the Transportation Coalition for Livable Communities — an organization which includes the California Alliance for Jobs, California Transit Association, National Resources Defense Council, League of California Cities, State Association of Counties, and the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Councils of Governments throughout the state. The Coalition promotes the investment of cap and trade revenue to address both the greenhouse gas reduction goals of AB 32 and critical transportation system maintenance and operation needs that build on the framework of SB 375 and other GHG reduction strategies.

Her firm, Policy in Motion, specializes in sustainable transportation policy.  Policy in Motion offers planning practitioners, policy makers, and public agencies an understanding of how to integrate sustainability policy into transportation infrastructure and land use decisions.  Lauren Michele’s 2011 book, “Policy in Motion: Transportation Planning in California after AB 32” explores the State’s evolving policies for sustainable living through transportation planning, and identifies how outdated regulatory frameworks must be aligned with supporting paradigm shifts if California is to move forward in a truly unified vision for “People-Oriented Development” and transportation.  Lauren’s 2012 film documentary, “Policy in Motion: Growing Beautiful Communities” continues to explore how an integrated approach to transportation planning and funding based on “People-Oriented Development” (POD) can improve community quality of life while meeting California’s environmental and economic goals. Policy in Motion’s book and film are available for purchase on-line at Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and www.policyinmotion.com.

STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL TO OVERSEE MILLIONS IN GRANTS FOR COMMUNITIES

With over $100 million now dedicated in the State Budget to sustainable communities and 20% of future cap and trade revenues secured, our attention turns to the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC) who will establish guidelines and oversee the implementation of this program.

The vision of the Strategic Growth Council for “healthy, vibrant, and resilient California communities” is one that lends itself to innovation, partnership, and empowerment of those communities the Council seeks to activate.  This Sustainable Communities Cap and Trade Program is a perfect opportunity to advance the vision that SGC has set forth to accomplish.

Communities and the elements that make them vibrant are complex – as much as we would like to have the same silver bullet solution across the state, the reality is that we need a funding program as robust and innovative as the communities it will serve. Likewise, we need to have a Strategic Growth Council that understands the complexities of land use, transportation, and travel behavior interactions and how to implement on the ground transformation. And that’s not simple despite how much we would all wish it to be. We need regional expertise and local engagement on our side – and that means an SGC that empowers and leverages those technical and political resources. Unfortunately, the statute passed by the Legislature to guide the spending of the cap and trade funds is ambiguous and incomplete.  It will be up to the SGC to fill in the gaps to make this program an effective complement to SB 375 and a transformative force in California land use and transportation policy.

Considering these 5 approaches could help SGC score big for California:

1) Evaluate proposals based on the regional GHG impact of the transportation investments.

2) Encourage and reward projects that are integrated with land use changes. Land use is where the big gains in GHG reduction can be found and this linkage is at the heart of SB 375. Isolated, single purpose projects don’t get the GHG reductions we need.

3) Provide local flexibility in project design. The state shouldn’t try to limit the types of projects local governments develop so long as they reduce GHG emissions and contribute to community goals.

4) Develop rigorous modeling and monitoring protocols and make the results public. Allowing flexibility at the local level works if we evaluate to a common goal—reducing regional GHG emissions—and select projects on that basis.

5) Empower the regions. SB 375 requires regions to develop and implement workable plans.  Cap and trade dollars should support those goals and help the regional agencies do the job the state has given them.
Lauren Michele, Principal/Founder, Policy in Motion.

Lauren earned a Master’s of Science degree from the UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies after working as a transportation planning professional at Fehr & Peers, a climate change policy analyst at the Center for Clean Air Policy in Washington D.C., and an air quality program assistant at the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.  At the UC Davis Urban Land Use and Transportation Center (ULTRANS) she focused on the links between California’s Senate Bill 375 and developing federal climate/energy legislation and the transportation reauthorization.  Her academic work includes teaching undergraduate courses in Transportation Policy at UC Davis and experiential learning while living and researching multi-modal transportation planning in Europe.

Lauren currently serves as Policy Director for the Transportation Coalition for Livable Communities — an organization which includes the California Alliance for Jobs, California Transit Association, National Resources Defense Council, League of California Cities, State Association of Counties, and the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Councils of Governments throughout the state. The Coalition promotes the investment of cap and trade revenue to address both the greenhouse gas reduction goals of AB 32 and critical transportation system maintenance and operation needs that build on the framework of SB 375 and other GHG reduction strategies.

Her firm, Policy in Motion, specializes in sustainable transportation policy.  Policy in Motion offers planning practitioners, policy makers, and public agencies an understanding of how to integrate sustainability policy into transportation infrastructure and land use decisions.  Lauren Michele’s 2011 book, “Policy in Motion: Transportation Planning in California after AB 32” explores the State’s evolving policies for sustainable living through transportation planning, and identifies how outdated regulatory frameworks must be aligned with supporting paradigm shifts if California is to move forward in a truly unified vision for “People-Oriented Development” and transportation.  Lauren’s 2012 film documentary, “Policy in Motion: Growing Beautiful Communities” continues to explore how an integrated approach to transportation planning and funding based on “People-Oriented Development” (POD) can improve community quality of life while meeting California’s environmental and economic goals. Policy in Motion’s book and film are available for purchase on-line at Barnes & Noble, Amazon, and www.policyinmotion.com.