Transitioning to Equitable Action - California Climate and Energy Collaborative

Barrier 3: Transitioning to Equitable Action

Barrier Statement

Implementing emission reduction measures is difficult due to budgetary and structural constraints limiting individual action and regional collaboration. Sufficient funding for key local mitigation measures is often not regularly accessible

How this barrier is experienced across the state

Local governments and their partners face significant barriers when transitioning from planning to implementing climate action measures, primarily due to inadequate and unpredictable funding, with competitive grant processes creating additional burdens for already-stretched staff. While many jurisdictions have developed emission reduction plans with strong community support, frontline communities disproportionately affected by environmental injustice are not being adequately prioritized in implementation. There is insufficient collaboration and alignment between regional, state, and local entities on climate action strategies, leading to fragmented efforts. Additionally, communities struggle to integrate climate considerations across all aspects of urban planning, land use, and infrastructure development, rather than treating it as a standalone issue.

Filterable Database

How communities are experiencing this barrier

View the details on what communities have shared with SLECC from across the state.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Compounded trust challenges: CBOs are often asked to serve as partners on grant applications led by local governments, but without guaranteed funding or long-term support, they experience burnout and financial strain. This creates a cycle where the same groups are repeatedly asked for support but have diminishing resources to give.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Lack of imagination in disinvested communities: Communities with a history of disinvestment often lack exposure to examples of successful local climate/energy projects, which makes it harder for residents to envision transformative change. This gap reduces participation in planning because people can’t see themselves in proposed solutions.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Equity mismatch in grant scoring: Cities without formally designated disadvantaged communities cannot access equity-based points, even if disadvantaged residents live/work there. This misalignment means that some frontline communities fall through the cracks because metrics like CalEnviroScreen don’t fully capture local realities. Cities described being locked out of funding despite clearly serving disadvantaged residents.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

There isn’t sufficient collaboration and alignment between regional and state entities on climate action strategies.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

Funding: The San Francisco Bay Area region has set ambitious climate goals, but faces significant budget and funding limitations that prevent adequate investment in needed emission reduction strategies, such as infrastructure upgrades and incentives.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

The San Francisco Bay Area region needs stronger integration of climate action into all aspects of urban planning, land use, and infrastructure development.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

While emission reduction plans exist across jurisdictions with high levels of community support, frontline communities that are disproportionately affected by environmental injustice are not adequately prioritized in the implementation of climate solutions.

Key challenge discussed in - Inland Deserts

Climate planning efforts risk leaving behind under-resourced, frontline, and tribal communities unless engagement processes are grounded in local lived experience and justice. Communities across the Inland Empire, particularly low-income neighborhoods and tribal nations, face disproportionate air-quality and climate burdens and disadvantaged, low-income, and tribal communities must benefit directly through clean mobility, financial savings, and workforce opportunities

Local Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by local leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

Local Solution

Highlight the need for truth-telling in engagement processes — acknowledging historical trauma as part of planning and implementation.

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Diego

Local Solution

Build long-term relationships with communities – Engagement should extend beyond grant cycles to foster trust and sustained collaboration with under-resourced groups

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Diego

Local Solution

Support CBO capacity – Fund and compensate community-based organizations (CBOs) equitably so they can participate fully in program delivery, avoiding burnout from being repeatedly tapped without resources

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Diego

State Solution Opportunities

SLECC stakeholders have brainstormed the following solution opportunities that can be taken by state leaders. Existing examples of progress or pathways to make further progress are highlighted if known.

State Solution

Direct state funding toward equitable, community-driven infrastructure planning and upgrades in rural and tribal communities—such as water and energy systems—to strengthen local climate resilience.

Existing Examples of Progress:

State agencies like the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) are advancing place-based funding through the Transformative Climate Communities (TCC) and Community Resilience Centers (CRC) programs, both of which require collaborative governance structures with CBO and resident representation. These programs prioritize under-resourced and tribal communities, including projects in Anza (Cahuilla Band of Indians), Banning, Adelanto, and Coachella

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): Inland Deserts, San Diego

State Solution

Stabilize funding streams – Establish recurring climate investment funds that are reliable year-to-year, instead of episodic appropriations

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Diego

State Solution

Require early engagement – Embed rules that ensure tribal, immigrant, and marginalized voices are consulted early in project planning, not as check-box afterthoughts

Existing Examples of Progress:

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Diego

Solution Spotlight

No results found.

Help us strengthen our knowledge base!

Help us to expand our database. Either share new ideas, best practices or general feedback via this form, or click on a particular item to share additional feedback, information, examples of progress on that particular item.

Feedback Form

Additional Resources

CARB’s Local Actions for Climate Change webpage
UC Berkeley: The Status of Local Climate Action in California
City Scale et al: State of Local Climate Planning
UCLA paper describes problems with 15/15 rule and data masking
Governor’s Office of Landuse and Climate Innovation’s Annual Planning Survey

Please share any additional resources you would like to include by emailing eecoordinator@civicwell.org.