REACH San Diego - California Climate and Energy Collaborative

REACH San Diego

REACH’s long term mission is to leverage the collective power of state, federal and regional capacity and resources to advance place-based energy, climate, and land use priorities through lasting regional hubs. It is community-driven (local gov, tribal gov, academic institutions, philanthropy, CBO/NGOs) and partners and engages with State and federal agencies.

In the effort to continue engagement in the San Diego Region, REACH is intended as an ongoing series. To that end we have created the opportunities below to stay engage and begin to plan future events.

Join the Listserv

Share Organizations you think should be at the table

REACH Resources

CCEC and SGC will continuously work to build on what we are learning from San Diego to build a landscape analysis and assistance guide for the region. These materials are intended to support community and state leaders as they seek to understand and serve the region and will evolve over time as we continue to engage. Like we said, Regional Energy and Climate Hubs (REACH) are intended to be more than just a convening!

Regional Assistance Guide

The Regional Assistance guide is a constantly updated guide showcasing organizations in the inland empire that provide FREE funding, incentives, or technical assistance to local, tribal, CBOs, NGOs, or schools in San Diego. Feel free to add your information or edit your organization as desired directly into the guide.

View the Guide

Regional Organizations

To increase visibility of the organizations in the San Diego Region which are already participating in REACH San Diego or who have been suggested by others to participate are shared in this filterable spreadsheet. Also available is information on the topic areas that the organizations need assistance with as well what topic areas they provide assistance. Feel free to add additional suggestions here on organizations that should be included on future REACH events.

View Regional Organizations

Landscape Analysis

CCEC is actively working to compile and analyze what we learned at the March 2025 Catalyst Convening and additional materials to build an initial landscape analysis. Check back soon for more information!

Key Priority Areas for the San Diego Region – Defining Challenges and Identifying Solutions

The priorities, barriers, challenges, solutions and best practices brought up in the San Diego Region during the 2025 Catalyst Convening can be found below. CCEC is working to continuously update this information based on what we learn from the region. If you live or work in the San Diego region please let us know how we can expand and refine our information. 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.

The Climate Action priority area in San Diego drew from roundtables on Data and Evidence, Regional Governance, Enhancing Community Voice, and Streamlining Regulations. Discussions showed that local ambition is high, but limited staff capacity, fragmented coordination, and legal exposure constrain progress. Local governments know what to do—what’s missing are resources, alignment, and defensible pathways to act.

Key challenges include small jurisdiction capacity gaps, limited staff to update and implement Climate Action Plans (CAPs), and the loss of regional support such as SANDAG’s GHG inventory program. Disinvested communities face “imagination gaps” that hinder participation, while equity metrics exclude many disadvantaged residents. Legal risks and inconsistent CEQA requirements further discourage jurisdictions from adopting or maintaining defensible CAPs.

Local and regional solutions emphasized shared staffing, pooled legal and technical resources, and regional coordination to align CAPs with state guidance. Building long-term trust with community-based organizations and investing in local capacity were seen as critical. State actors were urged to standardize CAP and CEQA guidance, provide regional technical assistance, reform grant scoring to include disadvantaged residents, and move toward stable block-grant funding.

Best practices include SANDAG’s former regional GHG inventory program, shared sustainability staff models, and community-led planning efforts that build trust through small, visible wins. These examples demonstrate that coordinated capacity, equitable engagement, and consistent support can turn local climate goals into sustained, defensible action.

Barrier 1: Planning Capacity

Too much local capacity (staff time/resources) and technical expertise is needed to develop/ track/ update greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories and climate action plans (CAPs), which takes away from implementation.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, Inland Deserts, San Diego

Many small or rural jurisdictions operate with extremely limited staff—sometimes only one or two people, or even just a part-time planner—yet they are responsible for reviewing CEQA documents, updating multiple required plan elements (housing, climate, safety), and managing complex grant applications. Without dedicated grant writers, climate specialists, or adequate planning staff, these jurisdictions struggle to develop and meaningfully integrate Climate Action Plans (CAPs) and related requirements. Existing statewide resources, such as the 500-page General Plan Guidelines, are often written for larger cities and are not user-friendly for small jurisdictions. Clearer examples, tools, and regionally relevant templates are needed to help local governments embed climate resilience, equity, and adaptation into all elements of their general plans—not just a separate “climate” chapter.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Regional agencies (e.g., SANDAG) once provided consolidated GHG inventories for cities, but those programs are no longer funded, leaving jurisdictions scrambling for replacements

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Fragmentation of responsibilities: Local governments hear about state-level regulatory decisions (e.g., CPUC) after the fact, leaving them without capacity to adapt requirements into local CAPs. This creates duplicative work, with local CAPs forced to replicate or reinterpret requirements rather than align efficiently. Overlapping reviews between state, regional, and local agencies increase the burden on small staff teams.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Difficulty maintaining ordinances and rules: Local agencies struggle to keep rules, ordinances, and CAP updates current; this falls to the bottom of staff workloads and creates inefficiencies

Local Solution Opportunities

San Diego 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 or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

There should be funded staff positions for sustainability in underserved jurisdictions.

State Solution Opportunities

San Diego 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.

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Invest in regional and local staffing support by funding shared regional positions and providing dedicated grants or resources that enable small jurisdictions to develop Climate Action Plans (CAPs), maintain core climate staff, engage with state agencies, and implement high-impact, emission-reducing measures.

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

All state level guidance docs should have default options that meet state recommendations for each region

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Long-term monitoring and evaluation – Adaptation and mitigation projects need funding for long-term tracking of CAP outcomes, but current grants end after 3–5 years

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Cross-agency governance coordination to reduce fragmentation of responsibilities: Discussions recommended regional governance structures or coordination tables to bring state, regional, and local representatives together regularly and reduce fragmentation

Barrier 2: Transitioning to Equitable Action

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

Key Challenges Identified

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 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.

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

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

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Invest in long-term community capacity – State should design programs that provide multi-year operating support for CBOs and tribes, not just short-term project funds

Barrier 3: Legal Hurdles

Local governments are discouraged from developing or implementing CEQA-Qualified CAPs due to potential lawsuits, litigation, and compliance enforcement of CEQA mitigation measures in an EIR.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Ongoing costs of defensibility: Once adopted, CEQA-qualified CAPs require continuous monitoring and updating to remain legally defensible. Smaller jurisdictions cannot afford the long-term costs of keeping CAPs defensible against legal scrutiny.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Inconsistent and duplicative requirements: Multiple jurisdictions and agencies require different CAP references, slowing permitting and increasing legal vulnerability

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Compliance enforcement burdens: Tracking and enforcing CEQA mitigation measures requires expertise many local governments lack. Compliance is ongoing, not a one-time effort, which strains already limited staff.

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

LCI should create database to review CEQA litigation by topic (infill exemptions in. Middle income communities near the coast)

Drawn from the San Diego Catalyst Convening’s opening panel, breakouts on Traditional Ecological Knowledge/Nature-Based Solutions & Local Food and Capacity Building, and afternoon roundtables on Data & Evidence, Enhancing Community Voices, Energy Affordability, and Streamlining & Reducing Regulations, this priority centers one clear emphasis: resilience succeeds when place-based knowledge, inclusive governance, and steady funding move in lockstep.

Key challenges. San Diego communities face overlapping risks—wildfire, heat, flooding, storms, sea-level rise—and short-term funding that limits sustained adaptation. Engagement often excludes tribal, immigrant, and rural voices, while TEK is underused or tokenized. High energy costs and long waits for grid connections undermine resilience in tribal and unincorporated areas, and fragmented governance slows coordinated action on land, water, and infrastructure.

Proposed solutions. Locally, participants called for shared air-quality and outage monitoring, multi-hazard planning, Indigenous co-stewardship of lands, and expanded resilience centers pairing solar and storage. Community-led training, storytelling, and cross-border collaboration were seen as key to building trust and capacity. State actions should include stable funding, recurring climate programs, tribal and CBO support, standardized vulnerability metrics, and utility accountability for distributed resilience investments such as microgrids and storage.

Best practices. Examples include multilingual cultural signage (Hear Our Names), resident empowerment programs (Groundwork San Diego), Indigenous co-stewardship initiatives, bioregional collaboration (Wellspring Consortium), and SGC’s Community Resilience Centers. These models show how sustained, community-led planning and state-aligned investment can translate resilience goals into real-world protection.

Barrier 1: Climate Vulnerability

Communities need to better understand and address both short-term, medium-term, and long-term climate impacts and challenges facing the regions like extreme heat, water scarcity, wildfires, and air quality.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Environmental contamination in Baja Kumeyaay territory: Industrial contamination affecting both land and ocean ecosystems underscores cross-border inequities, since US based programs do not extend into Mexico.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Extreme heat and community resilience funding opportunities (e.g., through Prop 4, SGC) are short-term and competitive, creating instability for building lasting adaptive capacity

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Community engagement sessions pointed to air quality concerns as a pressing local vulnerability, requiring monitoring and response structures that match community experiences

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Adaptation measures (e.g., dunes for coastal protection) are still experimental, and most grants only last 3–5 years. Without long-term monitoring, communities cannot evaluate effectiveness across short-, medium-, and long-term climate events

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Support long-term monitoring – Extend state-funded programs beyond 3–5 year cycles to enable long-term monitoring of adaptation measures (e.g., dunes, wildfire recovery)

Barrier 2: Inclusive Planning

More meaningful community engagement and collaboration, especially with marginalized groups, tribes, and local governments that may not traditionally be involved in climate planning efforts.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Erosion of Trust, Safety, and Long-Term Commitment: Communities expressed that competitive funding structures pit groups against each other, weakening collaboration and reinforcing mistrust. In neighborhoods with generational disinvestment, residents have little faith that engagement will translate into meaningful action, which suppresses participation. Fear of law enforcement, intimidation, and violence — particularly among undocumented residents — prevents safe civic participation and deepens distrust of public processes.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Insufficient integration of Indigenous leadership and knowledge: Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) is often siloed or extracted from Indigenous communities without Indigenous leadership guiding the process. This diminishes trust and undermines the legitimacy of climate plans

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Breakdowns in communication across government levels: Community organizations, local governments, and state agencies often communicate in silos, creating gaps in information flow that limit collaborative climate action

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Structural barriers to participation: Timelines, lack of translation and interpretation, limited child care and food support, and weak recognition of data sovereignty for tribal communities were all cited as barriers that prevent authentic involvement

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Cultural, Geographic, and Cross-Border Exclusion: Tribal, immigrant, rural, and binational communities often feel excluded from regional decision-making, lacking the networks and access enjoyed by wealthier stakeholders. Immigrant, refugee, and cross-border groups in San Diego are particularly affected, as climate and energy transitions rarely include their voices despite direct impacts. Indigenous peoples described ongoing exclusion from preserved lands, which prevents cultural practices such as gathering food and materials.

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Partnership with trusted navigators – Work with local trusted organizations and CBOs that already have credibility with residents, ensuring engagement is not extractive but rooted in long-term relationships.

Barrier 3: Energy Resilience

Wildfire, PSPS events, increasing capacity demands, and aging grid infrastructure are increasing the frequencies and severity of outages across CA communities, affecting health and safety, as well as affordability and economic stability.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Capacity and Funding Limitations: Stakeholders raised concerns about the need for blanket or formula-based funding to sustain resilience investments, as current funding is competitive and fragmented. Federal funding uncertainty also creates instability

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Local Energy Supply and Procurement Barriers: Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) like San Diego Community Power are mandated to source 15% of their renewable supply locally. But locally sourced energy is significantly more expensive, making it hard to scale local resilience projects

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Funding discussions highlighted that unincorporated areas and tribal communities struggle to afford solar, battery, and electrification upgrades, leaving them disproportionately exposed to heat impacts and energy insecurity

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Health and Safety Risks from Affordability Gaps: High energy bills reduce resilience during extreme heat events—residents face heat-related illness, displacement, and bad health outcomes when they cannot afford cooling or electrification upgrades. Families are forced to make trade-offs between paying energy bills, rent, and food, worsening vulnerability.

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Fund equitable resilience programs – State programs should expand targeted funding for rural, tribal, and unincorporated communities, recognizing disproportionate exposure

Barrier 4: Energization

Rural and tribal lands face significant barriers to grid connectivity, with some homes waiting years for connection

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

In some tribal regions, the cost of bringing clean energy infrastructure to remote homes can reach $400,000 per connection. These costs are prohibitive and make widespread deployment financially unfeasible without major subsidies.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Equity and geographic isolation: Reservations are often located away from population centers, which makes utilities less willing to invest in distribution lines and makes energy infrastructure more costly and less prioritized by the state

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Unique sovereignty and governance challenges Tribes have a distinct legal relationship with the federal and state governments, often misunderstood by agencies. This misunderstanding complicates efforts to address energization barriers and requires tribes to repeatedly re-explain their context in state forums

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Technical support for small jurisdictions – Offer state-funded staffing and technical capacity to help small agencies and tribes navigate interconnection applications

Barrier 5: Fire-Adapted Infrastructure

Climate change has outpaced the ability of built infrastructure to protect communities. Traditional hydrology systems were not designed to handle the intensity of current wildfires.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Infrastructure and siting conflicts: Community members noted concerns about battery storage and other clean energy infrastructure catching fire, underscoring that even “green” solutions can pose new fire-related risks, particularly for tribes and ecologically sensitive areas

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Construction/Installation/Procurement )

Expand distributed resilience projects – Promote localized microgrids, battery storage, and water system improvements to ensure communities can withstand wildfire-related outages and infrastructure strain

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Support tribal and rural resilience programs – Target state resilience funding toward tribal and unincorporated communities most at risk from wildfire and infrastructure failures

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Update design standards – Revise statewide building and infrastructure codes to reflect wildfire-driven hydrology and resilience requirements

Barrier 6: Natural and Working Lands

Protecting natural ecosystems, farming and food systems.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Extractive urban-rural relationship: Stakeholders identified a structural extractive relationship, where urban areas take resources from rural regions in unsustainable ways, undermining both cultural integrity and biodiversity

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Infrastructure needs for tribal enterprises: Tribal enterprises face basic infrastructure deficits, including water and water system resources, which limits their ability to expand sustainable agriculture and resilience efforts.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Siloed tribal economic development: Despite 13 bands in San Diego each having their own economic development agencies/corporations, there’s limited coordination and collaboration between them.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Infrastructure and siting conflicts with ecosystems: Community concerns surfaced about energy projects (e.g., battery storage) threatening land and ecosystems due to fire risks and siting in ecologically sensitive areas

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Indigenous land stewardship overlooked: Tribal leaders emphasized that state-led decisions often ignore Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), which has historically sustained ecosystems. This exclusion undermines ecological resilience and protection of working lands

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Fragmented governance over land management Regional governance discussions highlighted that different jurisdictions and agencies control land, housing, and energy decisions in silos, making integrated protection of natural and working lands difficult

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Support experimental adaptation – State should extend funding for pilot projects (e.g., dune restoration, regenerative agriculture) with multi-year monitoring to measure resilience benefits

This priority emerged from a breakout on Energy Resilience & Affordability and roundtables on Energy Affordability, Streamlining & Reducing Regulations, Regional Governance, Funding Gaps, Capacity Building, Data & Evidence, and Enhancing Community Voices. The core emphasis: San Diego can decarbonize faster if grid upgrades, fair investment rules, and household affordability move together—so communities aren’t asked to electrify on an aging, centralized, and costly system.

Key challenges. Aging grid infrastructure, high energy costs, and fragmented planning slow electrification and resilience. IOUs prioritize centralized projects over distributed energy, while siting and permitting often exclude tribal and rural communities. Residents face confusing incentives, slow interconnection, and rising rates that make retrofits and electrification unaffordable. Data restrictions, legal risks to local codes, and limited capacity compound delays.

Proposed solutions. Locally, participants called for regional coordination among CCAs, utilities, and governments; streamlined permitting; community-led retrofit and microgrid programs; and culturally accessible outreach through trusted CBOs. State recommendations included reforming IOU incentives to support distributed energy, stabilizing CPUC policies, requiring data center accountability, expanding affordability and retrofit funding, and mandating transparency in utility and siting decisions.

Best practices. Examples include San Diego Community Power’s locally controlled renewable programs, Solar Battery Savings installations improving resilience, tribal energy initiatives like Viejas and San Pasqual, and TECC’s tribal–state collaboration on clean energy. These models show how shared governance, equitable funding, and community-driven deployment can make California’s clean energy transition both affordable and resilient.

Barrier 1: Grid Infrastructure

Insufficient and aging infrastructure (e.g. battery storage, smart grid, transmission) cannot adequately support or optimize growing energy demand (e.g EVs, VPPs, AI, data centers, housing), the rapid transition to renewables, abundant day-time energy, and reliability as climate impacts increase.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Extreme heat, wildfires, and storms increase strain on already insufficient infrastructure. As electrification accelerates, these climate-driven stresses threaten reliability further, compounding affordability and resilience challenges.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Communities experience complex, piecemeal grid upgrades without cohesive planning, leading to higher costs, inefficiencies, and lack of alignment with electrification and resilience goals

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 or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Local monitoring and coordination – Calls for community-level monitoring and planning to align infrastructure upgrades with electrification and resilience needs, instead of fragmented project-by-project upgrades

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Stakeholders emphasized the need for policy to require data centers to cover their own increased load, rather than passing costs to households.

Barrier 2: Investment Decisions

Despite state goals related distributed, localized energy resources, investments, regulatory decisions, and policies often discourage or hamstring clean energy deployment or favor centralized utility infrastructure

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Utilities lack incentives to invest in local resilience solutions (e.g., microgrids, VPPs, distributed storage) and instead focus on centralized assets, slowing the shift to decentralized clean energy

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

State-level regulatory decisions and policies (e.g., CPUC rulemakings) often fail to consistently support distributed generation, creating uncertainty and discouraging investment.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Stakeholders noted that battery storage costs remain high and that even installed systems are often not sized for full home backup, limiting resilience. This undermines confidence in distributed storage as a community solution.

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Leverage trusted local organizations – Work with CBOs and tribal entities to ensure investment decisions reflect community priorities, rather than being top-down utility-driven

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Technical assistance for small agencies – Offer ongoing technical and financial support so under-resourced jurisdictions can participate in and benefit from distributed energy investments

Barrier 3: Siting and Permitting

Siting, planning, and deciding on utility-scale energy infrastructure projects lacks transparency and alignment with societal needs, and faces community resistance in some areas, often those most remote

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Siting decisions are often perceived as top-down and opaque, with limited authentic engagement of local and tribal communities in the process

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Small agencies lack staff capacity to review projects promptly, leading to further delays in siting approvals

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Review processes under CEQA and other regulatory structures can be duplicative across jurisdictions, adding costs and slowing down projects

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Utility and developer investment priorities often emphasize profitable transmission-scale projects over distributed solutions that communities want, creating misalignment between infrastructure siting and local climate/resilience goals

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Communities reported that engagement around permitting sometimes amounts to a “check-box” exercise, fueling distrust

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Battery storage projects in tribal and rural areas have faced strong opposition due to fears of fire risk, ecological harm, and impacts on sacred lands

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Broader community pushback arises around energy siting due to traffic, aesthetics, and perceived inequities, with both conservative and liberal groups opposing projects when they feel excluded from decision-making, particularly in unincorporated areas.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Utility-scale energy projects are often pushed into rural and tribal lands, concentrating risks in the most remote areas while urban centers receive the benefits. This fuels opposition and exacerbates inequities

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Locals should conduct thoughtful and intentional efforts to streamline regulations in order to not harm the communities they are trying to help.

Local or State

Solution

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Construction/Installation/Procurement )

Localized infrastructure investment – Upgrade local water and energy systems to relieve pressure on remote lands where large-scale projects are often sited

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Hold utilities accountable – Shift utility incentives so investment priorities include distributed solutions, not just profitable transmission-scale projects

Barrier 4: Supply Chain

Global dependencies and geopolitical risks slows progress towards clean energy goals

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Communities and local governments noted that the cost of clean energy technologies fluctuates with international trade policies and commodity markets, making local deployment unpredictable

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Clean energy deployment (e.g., solar, batteries, EVs) is slowed by reliance on global supply chains for critical components. This creates vulnerability to delays and cost escalations

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Regional collaboration on procurement – Establish regional purchasing consortia so smaller jurisdictions can pool demand and secure better access to scarce clean energy equipment

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Expand in-state manufacturing and assembly – State programs should incentivize local production of batteries, solar panels, and electrification equipment to reduce exposure to global disruptions

Barrier 5: Assistance Coordination

Making home decarbonization retrofits affordable necessitates a more coordinated effort to use all capital and programmatic options

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Inland Deserts, San Diego

Households and small businesses face confusion and barriers due to siloed and overlapping incentive programs for energy efficiency, electrification, water conservation, and resilience. With each program operating separately and offering different eligibility rules, timelines, and application processes, participants struggle to access the full stack of available benefits. Without dedicated guidance or technical assistance, many eligible residents and businesses miss out on incentives or abandon upgrades due to program complexity.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, San Diego

Past bad actors in solar and retrofit markets have created deep community mistrust, discouraging participation in new decarbonization programs. Stakeholders noted that early solar scams and misleading contractors left a lasting “trust deficit” in communities such as Pacoima, where residents continue to receive deceptive flyers, robocalls, and door-to-door pitches that blur the line between legitimate and fraudulent programs. This widespread skepticism undermines adoption and frustrates reputable installers and advocates working to rebuild credibility in the clean energy sector.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Local governments noted that state agencies and utilities rarely coordinate program delivery with city departments, leaving households to navigate a patchwork system

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Program information is often not available in multiple languages, and outreach doesn’t always reach underrepresented communities, reducing equitable access

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Residents have low understanding of retrofit benefits and available incentives, limiting uptake even when programs exist

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Integrate and simplify access to water, energy, and resilience incentives through user-friendly tools and “concierge” technical assistance (TA) services. Agencies and local governments should coordinate and stack funding sources behind the scenes so residents and small businesses can access a single, streamlined rebate or direct-install service. Expanding local incentive integration efforts—such as bundled programs or AI-driven platforms that match applicants with the full range of benefits—can reduce complexity, lower administrative barriers, and make multi-benefit upgrades more accessible and equitable.

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District is focusing on reducing ozone emissions and particulate matter by controlling NOx emissions, working on regulations to require zero emission space and water heating technologies, and will launch a Go Zero program in early 2025 to help bridge the cost barrier for zero emission transitions. The program will target overburdened communities with rebates, stack incentives, and assistance on finding funding. 2. Basset Avocado Advanced Energy Community Pilot – Provides comprehensive homeowner navigation for retrofit incentives and code compliance; participants recommended replication across the region.3. Silicon Valley Clean Energy has a one-on-one “concierge service” model to navigate incentives and retrofits.

Local or State

Solution

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Technical and outreach support – State agencies could develop guidance and resources for local governments and CBOs, including language access and engagement tools, to improve program participation

Barrier 6: Residential Decarbonization and Affordability

Residential energy bills are increasing, making electrification initiatives more difficult, and CA lacks a coordinated strategy to address the root issues of system costs that impact the trajectory of rates while protecting energy efficiency programs that help lower customer costs.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, Inland Deserts, San Diego

Retrofitting California’s older housing stock is a major challenge for electrification and resilience. In regions like San Diego—where most of the 800,000 buildings built before 1978 are ill-equipped for upgrades—homes often require extensive pre-work such as roofing repairs, panel and insulation upgrades, or appliance replacements before heat pumps and other zero-emission technologies can be installed. Each building’s unique conditions make retrofits costly and highly individualized, creating stacked barriers for low- and moderate-income homeowners. Local energy and air-quality agencies in the Inland Empire have emphasized that the transition to zero-emission housing must prioritize affordability and equity to ensure retrofit programs reduce, rather than reinforce, existing economic divides.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, Inland Deserts, San Diego

High and rising electricity costs are discouraging household electrification and slowing residential decarbonization. Despite available incentives, many Californians hesitate to switch from gas to electric systems because electricity rates—driven upward by costly utility infrastructure investments and overspending—are among the highest in the nation, while gas remains comparatively cheap. As a result, about one-third of households that electrify face higher utility bills. Stakeholders also noted that energy efficiency programs, which can reduce overall energy demand and costs, remain undervalued despite their proven cost-effectiveness.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Rising energy costs are creating affordability and health crises that undermine electrification goals. In regions like SDG&E territory, utility rates are increasing faster than inflation—driven in part by wildfire liability and costly infrastructure investments—making electricity among the most expensive in the nation. Families facing high bills are forced to choose between running air conditioning during extreme heat or paying for rent and food, exposing vulnerable residents to heat-related illness, displacement, and deepening energy insecurity.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Customers and even policymakers struggle to understand what is driving utility rate increases (wildfire liability, transmission, efficiency programs, shareholder profits), undermining trust in the system

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Policymakers and stakeholders often pit affordability against clean energy measures, leading to cuts or resistance to programs that support electrification and decarbonization

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Renters and residents often face confusing and inconsistent electric rate designs, with little clarity about whether they are on the best rate, complicating electrification adoption

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Construction/Installation/Procurement )

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

The state should require utility audits and enact penalties for IOUs that overestimate costs that are passed to rate payers

Barrier 7: Data Access

California lacks consistent access to data about consumption, energy supply infrastructure, and other information that can inform CAPs, capital projects, and cost affordability impact analyses.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

CPUC requires utilities to provide energy consumption data for local GHG inventories but prohibits making that data public, limiting transparency and usefulness for planning

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Utilities’ data request processes are legalistic and slow, often requiring attorneys and creating delays for local governments

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Fragmentation: different departments and agencies collect similar but incomplete datasets, requiring duplicative local work (e.g., Air Pollution Control District covers some gases but not others)

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Legal/regulatory hurdles: Local staff struggle to navigate utility data requests, often involving lawyers and CPUC bureaucracy, delaying access

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Technical expertise gaps: Local staff often lack the ability to analyze raw utility/VMT data, requiring costly outsourcing to consultants

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Public mistrust: Lack of transparency in transportation and utility data reporting (e.g., toll revenues, modeling) undermines confidence in CAP monitoring

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Data collection methods often exclude undocumented or digitally invisible populations, creating blind spots in CAPs and resilience planning

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Regional data-sharing frameworks – Create regional governance structures that facilitate sharing of energy and climate data across jurisdictions, utilities, and agencies

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Mandate utility data transparency – Require utilities to provide timely, standardized, and accessible data on consumption, grid capacity, and supply infrastructure for public planning purposes

Barrier 8: Codes and Standards

Adopting reach codes can be highly political and result in legal challenges, and now face legislated moratorium.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, San Diego

Recent legislative efforts—such as AB 130 (previously AB 306)—threaten to restrict or block local building code updates and reach codes, which are among the most effective tools cities and counties use to advance electrification in new construction. Weakening this local authority would “take arrows out of the quiver” for jurisdictions, undermining long-term residential decarbonization and local climate leadership.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Politicization of reach codes: Local adoption of reach codes is often highly political, facing pushback from developers, utilities, or community members who frame them as costly or anti-choice

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Streamline review and compliance processes – Local governments called for clearer guidance and support to reduce duplicative or inconsistent requirements across jurisdictions when adopting or implementing codes

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Provide templates and model codes – State agencies could issue pre-approved reach code templates that align with state goals and reduce local legal vulnerability

Barrier 9: Community Microgrid Development

Community-scale microgrids remain financially and technically difficult to deploy due to restrictive utility rules, undervaluation of battery reserves, and high coordination needs for EV fleets and other DERs. These challenges, compounded by PSPS outages and slow permitting, prevent microgrids from delivering reliable and cost-effective community resilience.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Despite high potential in San Diego, community solar remains rare and difficult to implement due to state policy and utility resistance. Battery storage deployment is also slowed by utility interconnection delays

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Slow interconnection and permitting: Lengthy utility review and interconnection processes delay the approval of microgrids and distributed storage projects. Permitting challenges and overlapping regulatory requirements add additional costs and delays for local governments

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Communities vulnerable to Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS) see microgrids as a solution, but deployment lags far behind need, leaving communities exposed to outages

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Stakeholders emphasized that utilities face no penalties or accountability mechanisms for slow interconnection reviews. Applications can stall indefinitely unless regulations establish clear deadlines. This creates backlogs for community-scale solar, batteries, and microgrids, leaving resilience projects stranded.

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Prioritize vulnerable communities – Local resilience planning recommended siting microgrids in tribal, rural, and unincorporated communities that are most exposed to outages

Tribal-led pilots – Some tribal governments have initiated microgrid and storage projects as part of their resilience planning, though still constrained by high costs and slow approvals

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Long-term monitoring and evaluation – Fund multi-year demonstration projects to assess the effectiveness of microgrids and DER coordination over time

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Streamline building electrification and transportation electrification on locally produced (community) electricity and locally distributed energy projects.

Barrier 10: Utility Structure

Investor-owned utilities’ control over energy infrastructure limits public power and community solutions, creating legal and procedural hurdles for municipalization and keeping many projects under utility purview.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Efforts to create public power utilities or municipalize existing systems face extensive legal battles, long timelines, and high costs, discouraging communities from pursuing alternatives

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Utility resistance and misaligned incentives: Investor-owned utilities (IOUs) prioritize shareholder profits and large-scale transmission projects that generate returns, while resisting or delaying distributed solutions such as rooftop solar, community solar, microgrids, and battery storage. They have little incentive to value or compensate distributed energy resources, undervalue battery reserves, and often oppose regulatory changes that would enable local or community-driven resilience. As a result, local governments, tribes, and communities face persistent legal, procedural, and financial hurdles in advancing decentralized clean energy solutions.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Local governments and tribes often learn of CPUC decisions affecting utility operations only after they are made, leaving them without meaningful input on structural decisions that shape energy access and costs

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Stakeholders voiced mistrust that utilities and energy markets are manipulating rates and slowing reforms to protect profits, increasing skepticism about decarbonization policies

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Align CAPs with community power goals – Local climate plans should include explicit pathways for public or community-led energy solutions, helping frame municipalization as part of climate action

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Support CCA expansion – State should provide technical and financial assistance to CCAs, recognizing them as key actors in democratizing energy

San Diego Community Power, a Community Choice Aggregator (CCA) focused on providing more renewable energy at lower costs. It manages procurement of locally-sourced energy and energy efficiency programs, including SD Regional Energy Network, and implements programs like Solar Battery Savings, which placed batteries in 1,600 homes.

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Reduce legal hurdles for municipalization – Streamline statutes and procedures so cities and regions can more easily establish public power entities

Discussed in sessions on Capacity Building and Regional Governance, this priority emphasized that cutting vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is essential to meeting climate goals and improving equity.

Key challenges. Sprawling land use, limited clean transit in tribal and unincorporated areas, and fragmented governance leave many residents without safe, low-carbon mobility options. Binational Kumeyaay communities face added barriers accessing transportation programs across borders.

Proposed solutions. Local actions include expanding bike lanes, shaded walkways, and infill housing near transit, and co-designing mobility projects with residents. Regional collaboration can align VMT goals across housing and transportation planning. State actions should boost funding for rural and tribal mobility, electrified transit fleets, and ensure smaller jurisdictions can access transportation and climate funds.

Best practices. Community-led mobility planning, regional mode-shift coordination, and electric bus pilots demonstrate how integrated, people-centered systems reduce emissions while improving safety and access.

Barrier 1: Vehicle Miles Traveled

Emission reductions in many communities requires reducing vehicle miles traveled through active transportation etc

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Regional stakeholders noted a persistent disconnect between transportation planning and land use decisions, leading to sprawling development that undermines clean transit adoption

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

For San Diego, binational communities face barriers in accessing funding and programs to improve transportation resilience, especially for Indigenous Kumeyaay people whose communities span the U.S.–Mexico border

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Transit deserts persist in unincorporated and tribal areas, where clean and active transportation infrastructure is minimal or nonexistent, leaving residents without low-carbon mobility choices

Local Solution

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Target rural and tribal mobility needs – State should design transportation funding programs tailored to rural and tribal communities, where distances and lack of infrastructure create unique barriers

Discussed throughout the San Diego Catalyst Convening—from panels like Funding the Future to breakout sessions on Capacity Building—this cross-cutting priority underscored one reality: local and community-driven climate action cannot succeed without stable, accessible, and coordinated funding paired with long-term capacity support.

Key challenges. Local governments, tribes, and CBOs face fragmented, competitive funding and unstable cycles that limit staff retention and long-term planning. Complex applications, language barriers, and inconsistent TA drain limited resources, while small jurisdictions without grant writers struggle to compete.

Proposed solutions. Locally, participants urged pooled regional staff, guaranteed mini-grants, and recurring convenings to align projects and reduce duplication. State agencies should coordinate funding streams, adopt block-grant or formula models, provide advanced payments, and fund long-term technical assistance through programs like SGC’s Regional Climate Collaborative and Tribal Capacity Building.

Best practices. Examples include San Diego Community Power’s flexible local grants, the San Diego Foundation’s trust-based philanthropy, and Casa Familiar’s community-led housing and resilience work. These models show that flexible, coordinated funding paired with sustained support empowers local action and equitable outcomes.

Barrier 1: Insufficient Investment

Significant budget and funding constraints at local, state and federal levels prevent adequate investments and capacity in needed energy, climate and land use strategies.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Competitive, fragmented funding — oversubscription (e.g., 189 applications at SGC) and siloed programs waste scarce capacity.

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Align and coordinate funding streams. Establish a climate funders forum with regional subgroups to connect public and private dollars, share unfunded proposals, and expand pooled funding opportunities by aligning state department processes with philanthropic partners to avoid duplication and maximize impact.

San Diego Foundation – Cross-border and trust-based philanthropy – Shared lessons from the Tijuana River pollution project and broader philanthropic programs that pool resources across nonprofits and local jurisdictions. The Foundation is moving toward trust-based philanthropy with fewer barriers and deeper community participation.

Barrier 2: Unstable Assistance

Fluctuations in federal and state politics and budgets result in funding and technical assistance opportunities for local and place-based efforts that are often offered on a one-time basis and do not recur at predictable intervals, and are not reliably available.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, San Diego

Federal funding is unstable and subject to freezes, clawbacks, and shifting political priorities—creating uncertainty and gaps during federal transitions. Some stakeholders described “total uncertainty and chaos,” noting that many state and local grants rely on federal dollars, and philanthropy cannot fully backfill these disruptions.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Unstable funding structures: Local governments and CBOs often rely on one-off project grants without baseline operational funding, leaving them unable to maintain staff or build the systems needed to pursue larger clean energy or resilience funds. Quarterly reimbursement cycles further compound the challenge, forcing nonprofits with limited reserves to shoulder significant financial risk and jeopardizing their ability to sustain participation in long-term projects.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Staff hired with grant funds are often laid off when grants end, preventing local governments and nonprofits from maintaining the capacity needed to manage future programs

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Philanthropic support is limited and rarely directed toward building local government or CBO capacity, creating additional dependency on unstable state and federal grants

Local Solution Opportunities

No results found.

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

State Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Regulation )

Increase flexibility in earmarked funding. Introduce and pass legislation that allows state dollars to be repurposed more flexibly to fill gaps created by federal funding losses.

Barrier 3: Application Burden & Accessibility

Competitive public grant applications are overly complex, confusing, and inflexible pass/failprocesses that are oversubscribed with little standardization, extracting limited organizational capacity that could be used for action while creating prohibitively high costs and low success probabilities that discourage resource-constrained organizations from attempting to apply.

Key Challenges Identified

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, Inland Deserts, San Diego

State funding and technical assistance (TA) programs remain highly fragmented and siloed across multiple agencies, creating inefficiencies, confusion, and inequitable access for local governments and community organizations. Despite expanded opportunities through measures like Proposition 4, funding mechanisms, eligibility rules, timelines, and reporting requirements remain misaligned, leading to duplication of efforts and missed opportunities for community-led innovation. Overlapping TA programs further compound the problem, forcing applicants to navigate inconsistent systems rather than receiving coordinated, streamlined support.

Key challenge discussed in - Inland Deserts, San Diego

State and federal grant application processes remain overly burdensome, competitive, and inflexible—disadvantaging under-resourced communities and small local governments. Time-intensive applications, duplicative reporting, inconsistent program rules, and high local match requirements overwhelm limited staff capacity and make it extremely difficult to stack or braid funding sources. Applicants often invest significant time and money into complex, low-success-rate applications, diverting scarce resources away from implementation and reinforcing inequities between well-staffed agencies and smaller jurisdictions or CBOs.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles, San Diego

Smaller jurisdictions and community-based organizations often lack staff capacity, financial reserves, and grant-writing support, leaving them disadvantaged in securing and managing funding. With limited personnel—sometimes a single staff member handling complex applications—they depend heavily on external consultants, draining scarce resources and sidelining local expertise. Wealthier cities with in-house teams are better positioned to compete, reinforcing inequities and limiting sustained local capacity.

Key challenge discussed in - San Diego

Language and cultural gaps – State funding and program processes do not consistently incorporate multilingual access or culturally grounded practices across California’s bioregions.

(Type of Activity: Program Implementation and Outreach )

Resource community leadership and engagement. Provide stable funding for community liaisons, prioritize community-designed projects, and ensure multilingual, culturally relevant processes. Use accessible formats like dashboards, videos, and storytelling to engage residents meaningfully.

Casa Familiar – San Ysidro green and housing projects – Casa Familiar secured a Community Resiliency award for what is described as “the greenest project the city of San Diego has seen,” alongside an innovative rent-to-own affordable housing model. These demonstrate the potential of community-driven project leadership and advocacy for “extra points” in funding processes. The Strategic Growth Council and CCEC has prioritized streamlining and improvement engagement, technical assistance and funding to communities, including through SGC Priority 3 and the "Better Funding" report, which aims to reform traditional grant processes to make them easier and more accessible.

Barrier 4: Capacity Building

Key Challenges Identified

No results found.

Local Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Lean on regional conveners/collaboratives to run grants and assemble teams.

San Diego Regional Climate Collaborative and foundations acting as “regional convening facilitators” to lead multi-partner funding efforts.

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Local convenings with residents and CBOs – Organize regular convenings that bring together community members, local organizations, and governments to align priorities and strengthen trust.

California Climate & Energy Collaborative (CCEC) & tribal initiatives – Programs like the Tribal Energy and Climate Collaborative, Tribal Capacity Building Program, and Tribal Climate Health Project reduce burdens on local/tribal partners and foster peer knowledge exchange.

State Solution Opportunities

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Community Program Implementation )

Lean on regional conveners/collaboratives to run grants and assemble teams.

San Diego Regional Climate Collaborative and foundations acting as “regional convening facilitators” to lead multi-partner funding efforts.

Local or State

Solution

Existing Examples of Progress

Further Progress Pathways

Local Solution

(Type of Activity: Policy/Planning/Land Use )

Local convenings with residents and CBOs – Organize regular convenings that bring together community members, local organizations, and governments to align priorities and strengthen trust.

Previous Events

Catalyst Convening: San Diego

Tuesday, March 25, 2025

Viejas Casino and Resort

Representatives from local and regional governments, tribal governments, community-based organizations, philanthropic foundations, and institutions of higher education came together – alongside key state agencies – on March 25 at Viejas Casino, to coordinate on the region’s energy, land use, climate barriers, and solutions.

The goals of the Convenings were to:

Understand the bio-region & explore specific regional issues
Facilitate two-way conversations on climate, land use, and energy
Enable regions to have space to inform and co-create policies with actionable recommendations
Create opportunities for state agencies and program teams to share funding, incentives, opportunities to engage, and other resources available to the region

Download the Summary

Images courtesy of Koci Hernandez, UC Berkeley Possibility Lab

The Catalyst Convenings are Presented by:

Catalyst Convenings are planned with UC Berkeley’s Possibility Lab and the California Climate & Energy Collaborative with support from Fruition Multimedia and Farallon Strategies.