The Fort Collins Sustainability Group (FCSG) offers the following comments on the “Our Climate Future Strategic Funding Plan” agenda item that council will consider at its work session on Tuesday, April 28th:
Fort Collins’ climate pollution reduction goals are 50% by 2026, 80% by 2030, and 100% by 2050 compared to 2005 levels. On page 88, staff shows the community missing those goals in each of those years by increasingly wide margins. Assuming that this City Council is serious about meeting those goals, the first request councilmembers should make of staff is to develop additional strategies that would allow our community to meet its goals.
The climate portion of the sales tax increase approved by voters in 2023 is for “advancing greenhouse gas and air pollution reduction, the City’s 2030 goal of 100% renewable electricity, and the City’s 2050 goal of community-wide carbon neutrality.” However, only three of the five proposed investment areas (excluding administrative expenses and reserves) include climate pollution reduction estimates. City council and Fort Collins residents need to know that the proposed investments will actually result in climate pollution reduction. For instance, while providing “Healthy Natural Spaces” is a laudable objective, if there are no significant climate pollution reductions associated with the proposed investments, another source of funding should be found for that objective.
The FCSG and other community members have repeatedly called for proposed investments to be scored on the basis of dollars per equivalent tons of carbon dioxide reductions per year, or in cumulative tons of carbon dioxide reductions by goal year (2026, 2030, and 2050). Staff has not provided this information in the work session item. This information is essential if Council is to make wise decisions on competing budget offers and to demonstrate to residents that the City is spending their money in ways that align with the results of the 2023 vote to increase sales taxes.
The first investment area listed is “Building Performance and Electrification.” The proposed investments address incentives only. However, staff notes that “there is a potential for more impact if a regulatory or combined approach were to be used.” Adding a regulatory component to the incentive approach, as has been done by Denver and Boulder, is essential to drive commercial and industrial building energy and climate pollution reductions. Fort Collins has been offered a $2.3 million grant from the Colorado Energy Office to develop Building Performance Standards, which the City stands to lose if it opts for an incentive-only program. It’s time for Fort Collins to move forward on Building Performance Standards, both to obtain the grant money and to make serious progress toward its climate pollution reduction goals.
The work session item lists $2.5 million as an annual expenditure for 100% renewable electricity for 2027 through 2039 on page 39, but does not explain how this money is to be used. Councilmembers should be sure they understand this line item. Additionally, councilmembers should be sure they understand why Fort Collins Utilities claims that the community energy supply will be 100% renewable if we continue to rely on PRPA’s new fracked gas plant and will continue to be subject to the air pollution produced by that new plant well beyond 2030. A good use for part of the $2.5 million annual expenditure might be to fund local renewable energy and storage projects so that Fort Collins residents will truly enjoy 100% electricity every day and every hour of the year by 2030.
Clearly, there is more work to be done in order to meet our climate pollution reductions goals in 2026, 2030, and 2050 than is currently outlined by City staff. We ask that councilmembers represent the interests of their constituents to ensure that no stone is left unturned in pursuit of those goals.
