Insufficient Investment - California Climate and Energy Collaborative

Barrier 1: Insufficient Investment

Barrier Statement

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

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 Francisco Bay Area

Inadequate operational funding (e.g., staff, overhead) limits organizational ability to manage and report on grants effectively.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

Insufficient funding for full project lifecycle (planning → shovel-ready → implementation), resulting in stalled implementation and inequitable outcomes.

Key challenge discussed in - San Francisco Bay Area

Lack of reliable revenue streams for climate resilience, adaptation, and capacity-building; funding is only available in surplus years and not treated as a core state budget priority.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Local hyper self-governance (e.g., LA County’s 88 cities, 55 water utilities) creates competition and uneven resource distribution.

Key challenge discussed in - Los Angeles

Arbitrary funding caps (e.g., 15% state limits) disadvantage large states like California.

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

Creative Local/Regional Revenue Generation. Local and regional entities can pursue creative revenue-generation strategies—such as bonds, JPAs, climate resilience districts, and region-wide funds—to fill gaps left by insufficient state or federal investment. These mechanisms allow communities to raise capital for both planning and implementation where local tax capacity is otherwise limited.

Existing Examples of Progress:

1. Regional wildfire bond discussions in the North Bay (though not adopted). 2. Regional housing bonds (LA’s passed; Bay Area’s failed but used as lessons learned). 3. City of Concord construction recycling fund.

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

Local Solution

Philanthropy Filling Local Gaps. Local governments and CBOs can collaborate with philanthropy to secure capacity-building support when public funding is insufficient or unavailable. These partnerships can supplement planning, staffing, and operational needs to sustain implementation.

Existing Examples of Progress:

1. Philanthropy CA’s Resourcing Resilience report, which outlines philanthropic–government alignment strategies. 2. Liberty Hill Foundation model in LA that builds CBO capacity when public funding does not yet exist for a needed program

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

Local Solution

Use guaranteed mini-grants to unlock local implementation.

Existing Examples of Progress:

San Diego Community Power – Member Agency Grants. Flexible $50k per member city, usable for local climate/energy priorities—shows how small, guaranteed allocations can overcome capacity bottlenecks.

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

Position Climate Resilience as a Core State Budget Priority. The state can stabilize funding by treating climate resilience and adaptation as an essential public service rather than a discretionary “surplus-years-only” line item. This reduces volatility and supports multi-year programs.

Existing Examples of Progress:

SB 1 regional shoreline adaptation model funding both planning and implementation phases

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

State Solution

Grant Programs that Fund Both Planning and Implementation. The state can structure grant programs so that a single grantee receives funding for planning, shovel-ready preparation, and implementation, reducing gaps created by multi-step competitive cycles. This supports continuity and reduces cost burdens on small jurisdictions.

Existing Examples of Progress:

SB 1 regional shoreline adaptation model funding both planning and implementation phases

Further Progress Pathways

Region(s): San Francisco Bay Area

State Solution

Funding should flow to the region broadly and be redistributed by trusted local intermediaries who understand community needs, avoiding competition between organizations.

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

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