San Francisco Chronicle - (Sunday)

Newsom must prepare state as natural disasters intensify

- By Michael Mantell

Like every California governor, Gov.elect Gavin Newsom risks natural disaster on his watch. But Newsom’s risk is worse because his term overlaps with the highest atmospheri­c carbon dioxide levels of the past 800,000 years — and that level is increasing.

A warmer Earth compounds the intensity and unpredicta­bility of wildfire, drought, flooding and heat wave in California.

Whatever his other priorities, Newsom must reckon with the potential for climate change to amplify natural disasters. The brutally fast wildfire that killed at least 86 in Butte County last month — by far the deadliest California wildfire — resets our assumption­s about how bad things can get.

After his inaugurati­on on Jan. 7, California’s new governor can immediatel­y build on the work of previous administra­tions to prepare us for the worst. A road map awaits. That road map would improve environmen­tal policies — and our quality of life — more broadly.

This fall, Resources Legacy Fund and the UC Berkeley School of Law Center for Law, Energy and the Environmen­t mined the experience and creativity of dozens of leaders and thinkers to distill three separate sets of actions the Newsom administra­tion could take to address wildfire and forest management; flood, drought, and the provision of safe, affordable water supplies; and climate mitigation, transporta­tion, and housing.

Though not all are natural disasters, all are urgent issues. For too long, hundreds of thousands of California­ns have lacked affordable, safe drinking water. Transporta­tion accounts for 41 percent of California’s greenhouse gas emissions, more than any other source, and we must reduce the number of miles we drive to meet our carbon-reduction goals.

Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, former leader of the California Senate, helped moderate the discussion­s. Some recommenda­tions were simple, cheap and discreet:

Forge into a council the top leaders of agencies that deal with water issues. Have it meet regularly and synchroniz­e work across state government.

Use the bully pulpit to connect wildfires to urban water supplies, air quality and the economy while emphasizin­g that solutions will take years but must begin now.

Others are expensive:

Ramp up fuels treatment and restoratio­n on wildlands to reach a level of half a million acres a year within four years. Find an additional source of funding to support operation and maintenanc­e of affordable, safe drinking-water projects for communitie­s in need. For example, existing greenhouse gas capand-trade program revenues, opt-out fees on water consumptio­n, or fertilizer fees.

Many recommenda­tions are politicall­y fraught, including these:

Limit new developmen­t in areas of high wildfire risk by implementi­ng state incentives for local government­s. Expedite permitting of affordable housing near transit by considerin­g a range of options.

Dedicate a volume of water to the environmen­t, to be managed for ecosystem recovery.

And some demand technical or bureaucrat­ic wherewitha­l:

Create a comprehens­ive, statewide mapping program to identify highpriori­ty wildfire areas for vegetation treatment and emergency-response investment­s.

Realign state transporta­tion, housing and other infrastruc­ture funding and policies to support the state’s goals for reducing vehicle miles traveled and producing affordable housing.

All three half-day discussion­s we organized encountere­d the tension inherent when cities and counties hold the authority to mitigate problems that affect the entire state.

Local government­s could refuse to approve new subdivisio­ns in far-flung, flammable places with precarious water supplies. Should the state use incentives or regulation to spur local actions that align with statewide goals?

Often our panelists suggested incentives. But on guaranteei­ng safe, affordable drinking water, they urged tighter state regulation.

Shot through all three discussion­s was a keen awareness of the climate wild card.

So we cannot move quickly enough to cut emissions from our millions of tailpipes in California, and Gov. Newsom will need to improve state governance, funding and planning as necessary — no matter how difficult — to get ready for the worst.

This commentary was written for CALmatters, a

public interest journalism venture.

Michael Mantell is president of Resources Legacy Fund, a nonprofit that works to create significan­t outcomes for the environmen­t and people. Email: mmantell@resourcesl­egacyfund.org To comment, submit your letter to the editor at SFChronicl­e.com/letters.

 ?? Jim Wilson / New York Times ?? More makeshift evacuation camps like this one set up after Butte County’s Camp Fire could be in California’s future.
Jim Wilson / New York Times More makeshift evacuation camps like this one set up after Butte County’s Camp Fire could be in California’s future.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States