To: Mayor Mark Sutcliffe, City of Ottawa Councillors, Committee Chairs
February 20, 2023
Subject: The 2023 City of Ottawa Budget and the Climate Emergency
Dear Mayor Sutcliffe, Committee Chairs, and Councillors,
Citizen Climate Counsel (C3), a group of local citizens concerned about climate action within the City of Ottawa, has reviewed the draft 2023 budget for its climate funding. We applaud the City for its new annual capital commitment of $5 million to implement the Climate Change Master Plan through initiatives to support Energy Evolution projects, building retrofits and zero emission buses.
We also note that the budget has applied a climate lens to all new capital budget requests. This is a step in the right direction.
However, we are concerned that the 2023 budget will do very little to move the City towards realizing its climate goals, most of which risk becoming unachievable unless provision is made for action in 2023. We offer the following general comments intended to suggest certain immediate practical actions that can be accommodated in this year’s budget:
Broader application of the climate lens.
The budget refers to “new” capital requests. Does this mean that the lens has not been applied to capital projects whose planning predates many of the climate-related events of the last couple of years? This includes the indirect and induced GreenHouse Gas (GHG) impacts from road and infrastructure developments. We note that the budget funds planned roads and infrastructure. There appears to have been no re-evaluation of those projects and their climate impacts in light of today’s realities. If only the direct GHG emissions from road construction are calculated (construction activities, materials and vehicles), that misses the far greater and long-term impacts from widening existing roads or from having more roads and car traffic from new car dependent development. With no details available about what criteria the climate lens uses, we question whether there has been any consideration of resilience impacts and costs, especially for road and infrastructure projects that were already planned and presumably were not designed to take into account increased rainfall (need for bigger culverts), more heat, ice and extreme weather (need for resilient materials) and potentially reduced lifespan of roads.
Support and adequately fund community action on energy transition.
City documents acknowledge that the vast majority of the GHG emissions in the City are caused by the community (residents, businesses, universities, other institutions, etc.). The City has been deplorably slow (aside from the Better Homes Loan Project) to inform and support the community in making the shift away from GHGs. Absent are needed changes to by-laws, regulations and policies to encourage the public and businesses to make investments to reduce GHGs. This could include incentive programs (i.e., bulk buying of heat pumps as the city of Portland, Oregon has done for years), partnerships with other levels of government and other delivery groups (i.e., Federation of Canadian Municipalities), information about funding programs and removing barriers. To date, insufficient funding has hampered current efforts. Putting in place these necessary enabling tools now would set the City and its residents up for success in energy transition.
Make communications a priority to support community action on climate resiliency.
While Ottawa residents, businesses and institutions are largely responsible for protecting their lives, assets and properties themselves, they also have a large part to play in working with the City to protect neighborhoods and communities. For informed action, the City needs to provide up to date information about risks and facilitate community members in developing and implementing solutions. The delay of the Climate Resiliency Strategy until 2024 further pushes back action on this crucial aspect. Given the time it will take to mobilize the community – from residents to community associations to civil society groups – it makes sense to start serious communications and engagement actions in 2023. Investment sooner in public communications can result in savings in both City and public insurance fees, create green jobs, avoid costly and life disrupting property damage, protect the city’s economic activity, and result in savings on City emergency service costs. The 2022 “derecho” extreme weather event is only one of recent examples of the high cost of delayed action to ensure a resilient infrastructure.
Be transparent about the City’s climate change agenda and actions.
Council and senior managers must commit to climate change actions as priorities and drive the internal changes needed to integrate these priorities into the workings of the City. All senior manager performance contracts should include targets for climate change action. Similar considerations and targets must be part of the contract for the new city manager. All committees must have climate change targets included in their terms of reference. Tracking and reporting expenditures and results against these targets needs to be made public annually, with specific reference to the financial budget for each target and to the target’s expected impact on the carbon budget. The climate change lens on the budget needs to be made public and the impact on GHG reduction and resilience protection from proposed investments and operations needs to be included in annual budgets and made public well before the final budget decision. Good examples exist in other cities that lead the way in accountability. We note that the City has stated that $52 million (in addition to the new $5 million) is being spent on climate-related action and we agree that money from within departmental allocations needs to be repurposed to address climate needs. However, “climate tagging” or a carbon budget would help the City prioritize and make longer term spending decisions in a manner that is more efficient and transparent to City government, City officials and the public.
Make all key City climate positions permanent.
Most of the staff in the City climate change unit are on term positions. Not only does the City need stable funding for climate change (e.g., $5 million and more), it also needs stability in staffing. Climate change personnel across all departments need to be permanent and have the skills and authority to be immediately effective. Hiring of new personnel for departments should include consideration of their knowledge of and support for climate change priorities.
Reduce wasteful City emissions and energy costs to save costs and apply savings to climate change actions.
There are a number of simple steps that the City could take now to reduce GHG emissions and save money. For example, the current Idling Control bylaw is out of date and contains exemptions that go far beyond what other Canadian cities are using. Curtailing idling of municipal vehicles (public works, OC Transpo, police, etc.) could save hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Other energy saving measures that could be implemented in 2023 – some of which may be already happening – include adjusting the heat/air conditioning temperatures in buildings, using timers to control the lights in all city buildings, replacing lights with LEDs etc.
In closing, we support the steps that Council is making with this budget to better fund climate initiatives. Our recommendations are intended to strengthen and enhance those efforts.
We wish you success in the transformations the City requires in its efforts to address its declared Climate Emergency and hope that steps taken now will better enable the City to tackle current and future climate imperatives.
Citizen Climate Counsel
Kelly Allen, Peter Croal, Joan Freeman, Stephen Hazell, Judith Kennedy, Tim Lash, Charles Nixon, Darlene Pearson, William Young
Leave a Reply