We’ve all seen the devastating stories of blackouts during February’s cold storm in Texas, leading to the deaths of more than 200 people. As California considers our own efforts at climate resilience, we should consider early analyses indicating that blackouts were concentrated in low-income communities of color, and that a disproportionate number of the deaths were of people of color.

Experts say many of these deaths could have been prevented by strengthening both physical and social infrastructure to protect vulnerable residents. Resilience measures that could have saved lives include investments in back-up power grids for low-income residents experiencing blackouts, and plans to ensure disabled residents could access ongoing power for essential medical devices.

As the California legislature debates a pair of climate resilience bond proposals, AB 1500 and SB 45, to fund infrastructure that is resilient to climate hazards, California must heed lessons from the failures of Texan leaders.

Frontline Communities Need Climate-Resilient Infrastructure

Although the specific climate conditions and hazards differ between California and other states, similar racial and social disparities persist with the worst disparities for Black residents. The communities on the frontlines of climate change, largely low-income people of color, are hit first and worst by climate crises such as extreme heat and wildfires due to institutional exploitation and neglect. Climate disasters exacerbate existing social disparities and health impacts in communities made vulnerable by systemic oppression, including people of color, especially Black and Indigenous communities, immigrants, people with lower incomes, and those in rural areas. An equitable approach can help ensure that these frontline communities can weather the storm.

Research on government aid shows infrastructure investments after natural disasters that do not center equity actually increase racial disparities including the racial wealth gap. Studies show that in Miami, investments that did not center equity had unintended costs related to displacement of residents such as relocation costs, loss of local business support, and social networks.

Proactively targeting investments for the most vulnerable residents will help build up the physical and social infrastructure of historically disinvested communities. These investments are key for preventing California from suffering severe economic damage and preventable deaths during extreme weather events. Successful examples of equitable infrastructure programs that center vulnerable communities have been transformational in California. For example, we have seen the impacts of existing California programs including the Low-Income Weatherization Program, which is the only state program that exclusively supports low-income households with free energy upgrades such as installation of solar panels.

It’s time to scale up these proven solutions and increase funding for them at the state level by amending AB 1500 and SB 45. These two climate resilience bond bills represent an important opportunity to build climate-resilient infrastructure, but unless they are amended to prioritize the programs in high demand by frontline communities-they will fail in their goal to build climate resilience. AB 1500 has been proposed by Assemblymembers Eduardo Garcia and Kevin Mullin, and SB 45 has been proposed by Senators Anthony Portantino, Ben Allen, Melissa Hurtado, and Henry Stern, Robert Hertzberg, and Susan Rubio. These climate bonds finance infrastructure projects including safe drinking water, wildfire protection, and flood protection. Both of these bills claim to fund programs that improve the infrastructure of California to cope with climate hazards, but the proposed funding amounts for community-driven infrastructure projects do not match these commitments. 

Recommendations for an Equitable Climate Resilience Bond

Therefore, the Just Recovery Network (The Greenlining Institute, the Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN), Strategic Concepts in Organizing and Policy Education (SCOPE) and California ReLeaf)  has developed guiding equity principles and recommendations for AB 1500 and SB 45 that will truly allow for resilient infrastructure projects championed by communities on the frontlines of climate change. To do so requires a larger financial investment from AB 1500 and SB 45, and more explicit and intentional focus on building the resilience of vulnerable communities. Funding should support the development and implementation of robust climate adaptation and resilience plans and projects that are community-driven and respond to community-identified needs.

As climate disasters continue to increase in severity and frequency, California must prioritize investments that meet the collective needs of communities hit hardest by climate disasters in proposals like AB 1500 and SB 45. We recommend increasing funding for existing programs with demonstrated records of success that center the most vulnerable communities, such as the Low-Income Weatherization Program mentioned above, Transformative Climate Communities (which funds multiple emission-reducing services delivered through community-led efforts like affordable solar-powered housing with access to public transit and active transportation), and Urban and Community Forestry (which uses nature‐based solutions like green space and tree canopy to lift up Californian communities disproportionately impacted by extreme heat and air pollution, and to provide job opportunities).  

In addition to these programs, we also recommend new programs such as community resilience hubs. These community resilience hubs would provide emergency response services like clean backup power, drinking water, air purifiers and filters for clean air respite, cooling, food storage and shelter in addition to meeting everyday needs of existing critical community institutions such as schools, libraries, and health clinics. 

Each of these equity-centered programs have environmental, racial, and social co-benefits, and are appropriate for bond investments. In addition to funding these programs, we strongly encourage a climate resilience bond to do the following in order to move the needle on equitable community resilience:

• Target at least 50% of investments to disadvantaged communities.
• Invest in resilient workforce development and training.
• Include procedural equity provisions to ensure robust community engagement from frontline communities.
• Provide funding for capacity building and technical assistance.
• Promote anti-displacement solutions.

We recommend investing in climate projects that make the most vulnerable communities resilient and increase their health, safety, economic security, and ability to cope with climate disasters. Our state’s natural resources, built infrastructure, and our people need to be resilient. It’s time to follow the lead of frontline communities as experts on building resilience to climate change that will benefit all Californians.

We hope you will join our advocacy to institutionalize equity and environmental justice in AB 1500 and SB 45. If you would like to learn more about our recommendations or join our advocacy as a supporter, please add your contact information here.