7. Public Comments — Costa Mesa City Council, September 15, 2026

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 1 August 4, 2026
Comments submitted via email to: [email protected] City of Co
sta Mesa
Economic and Development Services Department
77 Fair Drive 2nd Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
RE: Comm
ents on City’s Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Dear Econ
omic and Development Services Department,
Coastal C
orridor Alliance (CCA) respectfully submits these comments on the City of Costa Mesa’s draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). We request to be notified of any and all future comment opportunities on the CAAP or its elements. Please add: [email protected] to the distribution list.

We received notice from the City staff today that some of our comments will be incorporated into the Planning Commission staff report due out on Friday, August 7th.

Since the comment deadline for the Draft CAAP precedes that date and we are not privy to what those edits will be, and the current document does not reflect our previous suggestions, we would be reiterating many of our points here.

Some comments in this letter are new after reading the Draft CAAP, some comments reiterate previous points, but our original comment letter should be considered our main contributions, as they remain relevant (Attachment A).

We also respectfully request a meeting with staff to go through our areas of concern, see how our comments have been addressed and discuss elements of the plan.

ATTACHMENT 7
-1-
P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 2 Comments
CCA’s comments on the 2026 Draft CAAP below are grouped by Plan Sector, with Sectors ordered by priority related to our comments. Each comment is referenced by Plan Sector, Location (PDF page), Plan Objective, Plan Action, and CCA’s comment.

Chapter 1: Introduction
Location: Pg. 18
Text: “Urban Forestry, Open Space, and Nature-Based Resilience. The City continues to invest in urban greening and ecosystem health.”
Comment: We do not see examples or plans in this document of ecosystem investments. We recommend examples be incorporated to strengthen the document.

Chapter 1: Introduction
Location: Pg. 19
Text: Co-benefit definition: “Enhances the Natural Environment. Efforts that positively impact the ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural resources within Costa Mesa.” Comment: We cannot find examples in the Draft Plan where a solution accomplishes this goal. It is listed as a co-benefit of some of the CAAP efforts, but is not shown how actions accomplish this specific co-benefit. Only natural resources (water and atmosphere) seem to be considered here, for human benefits. There is no mention of biodiversity elsewhere in the plan, and mentions of ecosystem benefits are not explained in the few places it appears (using less toxic chemicals, etc.). What do ecosystems here need, and how will the City provide that? Chapter 5: Climate Action And Adaptation Strategy
Location: Natural and Urban Lands, Pg. 73
General Comment: As stated in our last comment letter (Attachment A), we feel Natural Lands should be treated fully and separately from Urban Lands. The following comments would apply to an individual Urban Lands Sector:

Chapter 5: Climate Action And Adaptation Strategy
Location: Natural and Urban Lands, Pg. 73
Text: “The natural and urban lands sector focuses on enhancing carbon sequestration across parks, open spaces, and urban landscapes. This sector advances strategies that capture and store CO
2 in vegetation while expanding nature-based solutions to strengthen climate resilience.”
Comment: Focusing solely on carbon sequestration to mitigate human impacts by further -2-
P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 3 human engineering (even planting ‘drought tolerant’ gardens) is not ultimately effective.

The focus should be on restoring natural carbon cycles or natural carbon distribution systems provided by naturally evolving ecosystems. More carbon should be stored in terrestrial biology (plants) and geology (soil) because humans have extracted and burned so much of it, but only when carbon is returned to native biological and geological systems will the naturally moderated carbon cycle exchanges be restored and balanced for a stable atmosphere. In short, we suggest the City consider ways to restore and improve the natural carbon cycle and distribution systems.

Chapter 5: Climate Action And Adaptation Strategy
Location: Table 5-1. Sectors, Objectives, and Actions Pg. 81-82 Actions: NU1.a.-e.; g.-h.: Build upon and implement the City’s Urban Canopy and Land Assessment to encourage equitable tree canopy expansions.

Comment: Please include strong guidance and City commitments or ordinances to plant only native or edible plants and trees. Planting non-native trees works to further destroy native pollinators, plants, fungi, and other animals that create a stable environment. Planting non- natives should not a long term solution. It creates more of the problem it tries to solve with only short term human relief. Native plants are naturally drought tolerant and provide the needed shade to help with urban heat island effect. Utilitarian plants help with greening, community wellbeing, and food security. We support community garden and urban farming initiatives alongside native plant landscaping.

We also suggest:
● Adding incentives for participation in Homegrown National Park (https://homegrownnationalpark.org/ ).
● Working with the Orange County Chapter of the California Native Plant Society. ● Finding solutions to organize and consciously scale urban regenerative food production. ● Establishing restrictions against the propagation, sale, and planting of non-native invasive plants. To see a list of non-native invasive plants go to the California Invasive Plant Council website (https://www.cal-ipc.org/).

General Comments
Goals of the Plans
Text:
“The CAAP reflects an integrated approach to align multiple priorities while moving forward with -3-
P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 4 local climate action and adaptation. It provides clear opportunities to reduce emissions, prepare for climate impacts, and support a resilient, thriving community into the future.” (pg. 15)

and,

“…forward-looking community, one where environmental responsibility and quality of life go hand in hand well beyond 2045.” (pg. 65)
Comment: We agree with the goals, but what it would take to truly accomplish this needs further definition. If this plan were carried out fully, is the promise that true environmental responsibility and sustainability would be achieved? If not, what else is needed? Terms & Topics
Term/Topic: “Growth”
Text:
“The City of Costa Mesa CAAP is a roadmap for the community to thrive, supporting continued growth and quality of life while preparing for and addressing climate change.” (pg. 15)

and,

“The CAAP is designed to work with, not against, continued growth and development by supporting smart, sustainable land use, transportation, and infrastructure decisions. The City recognizes that the goal is not to slow progress but to ensure it happens responsibly and equitably.” (pg. 15)

Comment: Please facilitate building a City-wide framework for how “growth” can be measured and discussed. Break down all categories of growth, quantify goals, and prove with research how competing goals are possible to be addressed concurrently.

What are the City’s categories, definitions, and goals for “growth” and how they relate to each other.” Define each growth category’s trajectory and its impacts on true local regenerative ecological sustainability. Define goals, or what numbers / increase is acceptable, for how long. Is there a cap, threshold, or benchmark for each category? ○ Natural World (re-growth)
■ biodiversity
■ natural lands
■ habitat
○ Human World
-4-
P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 5 ■ economic
■ population
■ “Costa Mesa’s strong economy and relatively low exposure to climate hazards as compared to the region may make it an attractive destination for climate- displaced populations from other parts of Southern California. While this may bring economic opportunities, it could also exacerbate existing housing affordability pressures.” (pg. 47)
■ human land use expansion
■ building expansion (out or up?)
■ other?
We did a keyword search with the following results
Native landscaping (three uses, one page, one sector: Water and Wastewater. Not found in Natural and Urban Lands)
Native plants (0 mentions)
Wildlife (0 mentions)
Habitat (0 mentions)
Natural lands: No definition or discussion is in the plan Ecosystem (some nominal mentions, with no specific actions attached) Glossary (Pg. 101 -110): Please include comprehensive and specific definitions for the following:
● Natural environment: This is purported to be enhanced, but is never defined (pg. 19) ● Natural lands: What does this mean to the City?
● Nature -based solutions: how does this include or not include naturally evolving systems? ● Urban greening:
○ drought tolerant landscaping
○ shade trees (native?)
○ native plant / pollinator landscaping
○ edible or usable plants landscaping for food security and carbon cycles ● Environmental Responsibility:
○ to humans?
○ to pets?
○ to native plants and animals?
● Growth / Smart Growth
-5-
P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 6 Conclusion
We would like to see the City’s CAAP plans include more specificity for steering the community toward harmony with the natural world as the only long term effective solution to anthropogenic climate change. We wish for a base level of intention in Costa Mesa’s CAAP that matches other cities’ CAAPs, like San Diego, Santa Cruz, and others. Notably missing is a plan and framework for the necessity of recovering local native species and habitats as our only long-term nature-based solution for climate change.

We hope that any efforts made in the name of ‘urban greening’, ‘green industry workforce opportunities,’ ‘nature-based solutions,’ ‘green business programs,’ put native plants and
ecosystems in its primary position of priority. Without this, these programs will only make nominal temporary living improvements for humans while continuing to contribute to the underlying problem of imminent ecosystem collapse.

We ask that all communications and outreach to the public be honest, realistic, and carefully researched. Please avoid greenwashing or presenting false positivity or a false narrative of the reality of our environmental impacts and the real world consequences in City communications and outreach.

We appreciate the work of City staff to increase sustainability in Costa Mesa. Should you have questions, please reach out to Paul Waggoner at: (949) 820-9094.

Sincerely,

Terry M. Welsh, MD
Board President

Attachments: 1 - CCA Letter to Costa Mesa on CAAP dated May 26, 2026 -6-

May 25, 2026
Comments submitted via email to: [email protected]

City of Costa Mesa
Economic and Development Services Department
77 Fair Drive 2nd Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

RE: Comments on City’s Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Policies

Dear Economic and Development Services Department,

Coastal Corridor Alliance (CCA) respectfully submits these comments on the City of Costa Mesa’s draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). We request to be noti ﬁed of any and all future comment
opportunities on the CAAP or its elements. Please add: [email protected] to the distribution list.

Background
CCA, formerly the Banning Ranch Conservancy, led the decades-long eﬀort to protect and create a permanent public open space of the 400-acre Banning Ranch property located between the borders of Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, and Huntington Beach, along the tidal in ﬂux zone of the Santa Ana River.

Escrow closed in December 2022, permanently protecting 387 acres of Banning Ranch. The title was transferred to the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority (MRCA), a local joint powers authority that manages over 85,000 acres of parkland in Southern California. The property is now known as the Frank and Joan Randall Preserve/Genga (or simply Randall Preserve/Genga).

Our vision of conservation extends beyond the Randall Preserve/Genga to encompass the entire Coastal Corridor from the Paci
ﬁc Ocean up the Santa Ana River to Adams Street in Costa Mesa. We seek to restore our natural lands, ensure functional habitat for wildlife, and promote the critical need for native biodiversity survival through education and built-environment reform in today’s context of late-stage ecological destruction.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 1 Attachment 1
-7-

Comments
General Comments
We would like to see climate and sustainability planning in Costa Mesa, or any location, ﬁrst inventory and prioritize the needs of the preexisting and preeminent local native ecosystems. Local, regional, and global ecosystems serve as Earth's irreplaceable, self-regulating life-support systems.

Climate change, environmental injustice, and resource collapses are not just emissions, pollution, and human resource e
ﬃciency problems—they are symptoms of a deeper root cause: the destruction of native biodiversity by the expanding built human environment. Climate science points to the biodiversity crisis at the center, and prioritizes restoration over innovation (Attachment 1).

While decarbonizing Costa Mesa should be a goal the City strives for in this CAAP, our primary and most e
ﬀective focus would be to shift our relationship with nature and cede land and resources back to local, regional, and global native living systems. Engineering, technology, and green planning cannot eﬀectively reduce human impacts to accommodate all of what modern human populations want and need, and eﬀectively replicate or replace the natural systems that regulate our air, water, and carbon cycles.

Global, Regional, Local: To make our local air, water, and soil cleaner is crucial. But for as long as our populations require remote resources for support, we simply push our air, water, and soil impacts elsewhere. This is just another form of (out of sight and out of mind) environmental injustice for humans, and reinforces the ecological destruction that drives the global climate crisis that local CAAPs try to address. Those global impacts come back around at larger scales to a ﬀect all local places too, even if local
areas end up with cleaner resources. Climate action in this frame looks like taking responsibility for all of our local and remote impacts, reducing or ending our reliance on remote water, air, mineral, and food resources, and reorienting our local in
ﬁll spaces for food, sustainable goods production, and native biodiversity recovery.

Climate action based on ecology prioritizes the restoration of all of our suitable natural areas to native habitats, and creating/ceding massive amounts of local, regional, and global space back for wildlife and habitat connectivity.

We hope our comments encourage Costa Mesa’s CAAP toward actions that help recover biodiversity as a ﬁrst and most eﬀective priority.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 2 -8-

Prioritized Comments
Our comments on the 2026 Draft CAAP below are grouped by Plan Sector, with Sectors ordered by priority related to our comments. Each comment is referenced by Plan Sector, Location (PDF page), Plan Objective, Plan Action, and CCA’s comment.

Sector: Natural and Urban Lands
Location: Pg. 9
Comments: We respectfully request that this Sector gets careful and robust reframing. Natural and Urban lands are very di
ﬀerent, which should warrant separate Sectors. The existing action items apply almost exclusively to Urban Lands and their orientation for human beneﬁts rather than prioritizing Natural Lands and (local, native) nature-based solutions. - We request Natural Lands become a new, banner ‘Sector’ of the CAAP plan focusing on clearly de
ﬁned, legally bound native biodiversity goals. Actions should support ecosystem recovery on Natural Lands, as this is our best and most eﬀective action to take to mitigate anthropogenic climate change.
- We request, Costa Mesa add speciﬁc restoration and rewilding goals, actions, and ordinances as the European Union does, that remove invasive plants, restore already-available open spaces to functioning locally native habitats, and remove human infrastructure that blocks otherwise available native habitats. - Please include consideration of Costa Mesa’s position within our bioregion and within the California Floristic Province, acknowledging our City’s impact on the fragmentation of native habitats, and its e
ﬀects on the climate and livability of our built world, as Santa Barbara does in its CAAP.
- Other documents for reference:
- CAAPS from San Diego, Santa Cruz
- Costa Mesa General Plan, Conservation Element
- Fairview Park Master Plan’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendices B-1 and C-3.

- Urban Lands (Existing Sector):
- Native or edible plants: We request all rules, references, outreach, educational or community programs related to the use of plants (Plan-wide) including tree canopies, tree planting, tree replacements, urban greening, shade plants, drought tolerant plants, or landscaping, make a clear prioritization for either locally native plants or edible cultivars for local food production. Please clearly deprioritize or ban planting non-native or non-edible plants in CAAP actions and policies, as they contribute to biodiversity loss. Instead, please share the bene
ﬁts of locally native plant species and local food production as solutions.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 3 -9-

Native plants provide drought tolerance, shade / canopy, sequestration, and more, while also supporting native pollinators, wildlife, natural soil composition, natural water treatment for the watershed (except for Action d., see Water and Wastewater comment). - Consider adding an action to include public promotion and incentives for residents and developments to participate either in ‘homegrown national park’ native landscapes (https://homegrownnationalpark.org/) (CCA would be glad to help strategize), or micro-farmed food production for locals.
- We support all initiatives that incentivize and expand local food production within inﬁll spaces. Please specify that no additional natural lands encroachments should occur for the sake of food production. We have some other incentivized ideas that support job creation that we can share upon request.
- All civic tree installations or replacements must be to native trees or food production. See Pasadena’s urban forestry information:
https://www.cityofpasadena.net/public-works/urban-forestry/ - Consider policies to block the sale of known invasive plant species from nurseries, garden centers, and more. Look to California Native Plant Society (CNPS), California Invasive Plant Council (CAL-IPC), and Ron Vanderho
ﬀ at Roger’s Gardens for consultation
(rvanderhoﬀ@sbcglobal.net).
- Please deﬁne ‘Urban Greening’ to include recovery for locally native species, Dark Sky, bird safe windows, invasive honeybee and other invasive pollinator management, and more.

Sector: Water and Wastewater
Location: Pg. 6
Comment: We hope this Sector gets a more robust nature-ﬁrst framework. Local watersheds and dependent native ecosystems must be primary considerations, as they comprise the foundation of all human and nonhuman life of a place.
- We request that all references, examples, and methods related to the use of plants for shade, drought tolerance, or any other bene
ﬁts be focused exclusively on diverse locally native plant palettes, or cultivars that provide local human food production. We ask the City to commit to working with consultants from groups such as the CNPS, CAL-IPC, and others to create native wildlife friendly landscapes. Ornamental plant palettes support invasive pollinators and other non-native species, whose presence displaces and competes with native biodiversity. - Local watersheds are engineered to cut oﬀ dependent ecosystems through hardened walls and barriers, which would need to be prioritized for removal to recover biodiversity. Please consider forming a framework for long term watershed infrastructure removal. - Add an action item focused on low-impact development (LID) that mimics natural hydrology.

Ensure stormwater capture basins, bioswales, and daylighted drainage systems are designed as P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 4 -10-

living wetlands rather than concrete or synthetic retention cells. This ﬁlters urban runoﬀ naturally before it reaches the ocean while providing immediate avian and amphibian habitats.

Sector: People and Community
Location: Pg. 10 - 11
Comment: We generally support the action items, with a few critiques listed below. We urge the City:
- To prioritize implementing long term solutions like native habitat and watershed restoration that decrease the needs for short term solutions.
- Not to promote ‘Green’ jobs or businesses that might trade local immediate improvements for global or long term impacts.
- Prioritize sustainably sourced natural materials in eﬀorts to provide relief, and avoid plastics which harm native ecosystems’ ability to thrive and regulate the planetary temperatures.

Sector: People and Community
Location: Pg. 11
Objective: PC3: Build City and Regional Capacity for CAAP Implementation Action: “d. Coordinate with the following agencies on dam operational planning and related ﬂood risks:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District
• Irvine Ranch Water District
• County of Orange”
Comment: Our watersheds are highly engineered, which cuts oﬀ their natural functions to support the ecosystems’ environmental regulatory systems. Watershed infrastructure might protect human homes from
ﬂoods, but they accelerate the trajectory toward a warming environment. Watershed infrastructure must be removed, not added for short term climate relief. City policies should reﬂect this priority, and City involvement in regional planning should promote this practice. Instead of cutting oﬀ river and tide functions to protect infrastructure, infrastructure should move out of the way of rivers and tides (Attachment 2).

Sector: People and Community
Location: Pg. 11
Objective: PC4. Foster Local Sustainable Practices
Action: “e. Engage local Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and compile a list relative to their interests and capabilities on a variety of topics related to climate action and adaptation, such as distributing related news or grant opportunities, or participating in or facilitating volunteer events such as clean ups or tree plantings.”
Comment: CCA is available and willing to engage with the City on these topics and activities.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 5 -11-

Sector: On-Road Transportation
Location: Pg. 2
Objective: T1. Transition to Electric Vehicles
Comment: We generally support the listed action items. Please add actions to incentivize and plan electriﬁcation deployment within a closed-loop second-life framework to reduce rare earth mining impacts. Local improvements should not come with additional global impacts (Attachment 3).

Sector: On-Road Transportation
Location: Pg. 2
Objective: T2. Promote Walking and Biking
T3. Reduce Single-Occupancy Vehicle Trips
T4. Increase Public Transportation Use
Comment: We generally support the action items, though not at the expense of more use of plastics or other environmentally harmful materials or activities. We request the City limit materials to sustainably sourced natural materials and focus on design e
ﬃciency, biodegradation, and simpliﬁcation.

Sector: On-Road Transportation
Location: Pg. 2
Objective: T5. Support Smart Growth
Comment: We urge the City to consider how biodiversity is already too constrained, and how continued growth works against climate adaptation.

Sector: Energy and Buildings
Location: Pg. 4
Objective: E1. Reduce Energy Demand in Buildings
Action: “c. Seek grants to oﬀer incentives for cool roofs and walls during roof replacements or renovations.”
Comment: Please consider policies / building requirements which include other passive cooling and heating systems of various types (air towers, trombe walls, etc.) for all new construction. Consider hybrid local-earth building materials to reduce resource needs, plastic use, promote in-ground in ﬁll building, and
more.

Sector: Energy and Buildings
Location: Pg. 4
Objective: E2. Decarbonize Building Energy Use
Comment: We support actions a. - c. However, for d., we recognize that Green Building standards still have major tradeo
ﬀs, particularly in the proliﬁc use of plastic and other harmful materials. Consider celebrating those that go beyond Green Building by sustainably sourcing natural building materials.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 6 -12-

Sector: Energy and Buildings
Location: Pg. 4
Objective: E3. Increase Carbon-Free Energy Supply
Comment: We provide our general support. Find incentives / ways to keep electriﬁcation circular, engage in second-life platforms (See comment above).

Sector: Solid Waste
Location: Pg. 7
Objective: SW1. Reduce Waste Generation
Comment:
- We provide our support for all, with special support for Action b. - Consider adding actions for easy City-supported e-waste drop-oﬀ / recycling, and facilities for handling fats, oils, and grease waste.
- Please consider having City Departments join the OC Trash and Debris Task Force quarterly meetings CCA participates in. Email [email protected] to participate.

Sector: Oﬀ-Road Equipment
Location: Pg. 8
Objective: OR1. Accelerate Zero-Emission Oﬀ-Road Equipment Adoption Comment: We provide our general support. However, see the above comments on circular electriﬁcation and second-life programs to reduce mining impacts.

Sector: Municipal
Location: Pg. 12 - 13
Comment: We can provide our general support for action items, with relevant above comments for other Sectors applied: native-
ﬁrst plantings, second-life electriﬁcation, embargo on plastic infrastructure, etc.

Conclusion
We appreciate the City’s work on the draft CAAP. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this plan. We understand that ecosystem centrality with its needs and limits have not made its way into widespread public discourse or planning solutions. It's a change in paradigm compared to what most of P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 7 -13-

us were raised to think and believe about what we humans can or can’t sustainably do. We respectfully submit our comments with this in mind.

Should you have questions, please reach out to Paul Waggoner at: (949) 820-9094.

Sincerely,

Terry M. Welsh, MD
Board President

Attachments: 1 - UN: Biodiversity - our strongest natural defense against climate change 2 - Restoring Free-ﬂowing Rivers in Europe
3 - Project Closed Circuit: Helping Cities Lead on EV Battery Circularity P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 8 -14-
Attachment 1
Source: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate- issues/biodiversity
Attachment 1
Source: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate- issues/biodiversity
-15-
-16-
-17-
-18-
-19-
-20-
-21-
-22-
-23-
-24-
-25-
-26-
-27-
-28-
-29-
-30-
-31-
-32-
-33-
-34-
-35-
-36-
-37-
-38-
-39-
-40-
-41-
-42-
-43-
-44-
-45-
-46-
-47-
-48-
-49-
-50-
-51-
-52-
-53-
-54-
-55-
-56-
-57-
-58-
-59-
-60-
-61-
-62-
-63-
-64-
-65-
-66-
-67-
-68-
Apr 10
The New York Climate Exchange recently launched , a new project to put cities at the center of electric vehicle (EV) battery circularity.

Batteries are at the heart of the effort to
electrify the economy and move away from
fossil fuels. From powering EVs to storing
electricity generated by wind and solar,
global battery demand has surged by around
33% per year over the past 30 years. Nearly
95% of recent growth is driven by EVs. In
2013, there were only 100,000 electric
vehicles on the road worldwide; just 10 years
later that number reached 40 million!
Figure: Global EV Stock vs. forecasted
demand (2018-2023 forecasts, 2024 actual)
Get Involved Our Work About Us Press
joins The Exchange as Chief Executive Officer! ×
-69-
All batteries require rare earth materials—
85% of the world’s lithium, 70% of its cobalt,
and 10% of its nickel go to battery production
—and we’ll need hundreds of new mines to
meet growing demand. Many of these mines come with environmental and human rights concerns and increase the world’s dependence on unstable supply zones.

Still, EVs are much less harmful to the environment than gas-powered vehicles, however high upfront costs and ques
tions about battery life contributes to slow adoption. Like cell phones, EV batteries degrade over time. Around 7-12 years into an EV battery’s life, it loses about 25% of its original strength. At this stage, the battery may struggle to maintain peak performance, despite having 70-80% of its charging capacity.

Disposing these batteries in landfills risks contamination from toxic materials and re cycling
them prematurely wastes their remaining value.

Without a better way recycle and repurpose batteries, the growing EV market could turn a climate solution into an environmental crisis.

A circular strategy maximizes a vehicle’s
lifecycle using intelligent battery
management. This first stage involves using
data to optimize battery performance so it
can be used longer before being discarded.

Once a battery’s charging capacity degrades
to 70-80%, it can be reused or repurposed.

These second–life batteries can be used in
building energy systems or electrical grid
storage. This approach transforms a battery,
once considered garbage, into a valuable
asset, and allows EV owners to earn money
from their used batteries. These circular
[International Energy Agency, Annual Energy
Outlooks 2018-2024]
-70-
economy principles make EV ownership more
affordable and environmentally responsible.

Finally, at the end of its life, the battery can
be recycled. Recycling processes extract and purify raw materials and send them back to manufacturers for new batteries. This closed-loop approach dramatically reduces the need to mine new materials, creating a sustainable cycle that minimizes waste and environmental impact.

Current estimates value the battery circularity market to be $7 billion by 2033. According to The International Energy Agency, battery cir
cularity could decrease the need for critical mineral
mining by up to 40% and decrease greenhouse gas emissions by up to 80%. EV batteries that are suitable for second-life applications could create more than 200 GWh of power—enough energy to power around
18,500 American homes for a year—by 2030 Plus, local circular economies for batteries reduce dependence on foreign sources of raw materials Cities are already at the forefront of the battery revolution: they are home to the majority of EV fleets and owners, charging infrastructure, and the bulk of the growth in energy storage systems – making them ideal innovation grounds for battery circularity. This deployment ecosystem means the potential for demonstrating battery circularity is at our fingertips. It just
needs some support and coordination.
leverages The New York Climate Exchange’s partner network of battery experts and resources, business and public–sector engagement, convening, and thought leadership to deliver:
• Framing and analytical content
• Key industry events that facilitate learning and collaboration • Technology and regulation across and beyond our partners to advance a circular economy for batteries
Figure: A Circular Economy for EV Batteries.

Credit: Wyatt Williams
-71-
Sign up to receive news and periodic updates from The Exchange. • : Expanding the network of individuals who are advancing battery circularity by sharing its importance with new audiences — from city officials to fleet operators, waste management professionals to insurers and financiers, and national security and supply chain logisticians to sustainability advocates.
• : Developing communities of practice across and beyond the Exchange’s partner network to ensure that local lessons from the battery ecosystem extend across geographies. These convenings will focus on researchers, city officials, regulators, startups and private sector businesses, fleets, and energy system developers. • : Project Closed Circuit will initially focus on The Exchange’s home — New York City. With a regulatory and economic framework that informs cities worldwide, NYC is poised to become a leading hub and global model for resource–efficient battery innovation, investment, and safe deployment. This will be achieved through policy, local access to battery data and end-of-life battery assets, and the development of a replicable roadmap for battery circularity in urban environments.

Email us at [email protected] with the subject line “Project Closed Circuit”. -72-
Search
10 South Street, Slip 7
New York, NY 10004
Questions? Visit our or email us at [email protected] -73-

May 25, 2026
Comments submitted via email to: [email protected]

City of Costa Mesa
Economic and Development Services Department
77 Fair Drive 2nd Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

RE: Comments on City’s Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan Policies

Dear Economic and Development Services Department,

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 1 -74-

We hope our comments encourage Costa Mesa’s CAAP toward actions that help recover biodiversity as a ﬁrst and most eﬀective priority.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 2 -75-

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 3 -76-

Ensure stormwater capture basins, bioswales, and daylighted drainage systems are designed as P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 4 -77-

living wetlands rather than concrete or synthetic retention cells. This ﬁlters urban runoﬀ naturally before it reaches the ocean while providing immediate avian and amphibian habitats.

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 5 -78-

P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 6 -79-

us were raised to think and believe about what we humans can or can’t sustainably do. We respectfully submit our comments with this in mind.

Should you have questions, please reach out to Paul Waggoner at: (949) 820-9094.

Sincerely,

Terry M. Welsh, MD
Board President

Attachments: 1 - UN: Biodiversity - our strongest natural defense against climate change 2 - Restoring Free-ﬂowing Rivers in Europe
3 - Project Closed Circuit: Helping Cities Lead on EV Battery Circularity P.O. Box 15333 Newport Beach, CA 92659 (949) 216-0880 CoastalCorridor.org 8 -81-
Attachment 1
Source: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate- issues/biodiversity
Attachment 1
Source: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/climate- issues/biodiversity
-82-
-83-
-84-
-85-
-86-
-87-
-88-
-89-
-90-
-91-
-92-
-93-
-94-
-95-
-96-
-97-
-98-
-99-
-100-
-101-
-102-
-103-
-104-
-105-
-106-
-107-
-108-
-109-
-110-
-111-
-112-
-113-
-114-
-115-
-116-
-117-
-118-
-119-
-120-
-121-
-122-
-123-
-124-
-125-
-126-
-127-
-128-
-129-
-130-
-131-
-132-
-133-
-134-
-135-
Apr 10
The New York Climate Exchange recently launched , a new project to put cities at the center of electric vehicle (EV) battery circularity.

Batteries are at the heart of the effort to
electrify the economy and move away from
fossil fuels. From powering EVs to storing
electricity generated by wind and solar,
global battery demand has surged by around
33% per year over the past 30 years. Nearly
95% of recent growth is driven by EVs. In
2013, there were only 100,000 electric
vehicles on the road worldwide; just 10 years
later that number reached 40 million!
Figure: Global EV Stock vs. forecasted
demand (2018-2023 forecasts, 2024 actual)
Get Involved Our Work About Us Press
joins The Exchange as Chief Executive Officer! ×
-136-
All batteries require rare earth materials—
85% of the world’s lithium, 70% of its cobalt,
and 10% of its nickel go to battery production
—and we’ll need hundreds of new mines to
meet growing demand. Many of these mines come with environmental and human rights concerns and increase the world’s dependence on unstable supply zones.

Still, EVs are much less harmful to the environment than gas-powered vehicles, however high upfr
ont costs and questions about battery life contributes to slow adoption. Like cell phones, EV batteries degrade over time. Around 7-12 years into an EV battery’s life, it loses about 25% of its original strength. At this stage, the battery may struggle to maintain peak performance, despite having 70-80% of its charging capacity.

Disposing these batteries in landfills risks contamination from toxic materials and r ecycling
them prematurely wastes their remaining value.

Without a better way recycle and repurpose batteries, the growing EV market could turn a climate solution into an environmental crisis.

Once a battery’s charging capacity degrades
to 70-80%, it can be reused or repurposed.

These second–life batteries can be used in
building energy systems or electrical grid
storage. This approach transforms a battery,
once considered garbage, into a valuable
asset, and allows EV owners to earn money
from their used batteries. These circular
[International Energy Agency, Annual Energy
Outlooks 2018-202
4]
-137-
economy principles make EV ownership more
affordable and environmentally responsible.

Current estimates value the battery circularity market to be $7 billion by 2033. According to The International Energy Agency,
battery circularity could decrease the need for critical mineral mining by up to 40% and decrease greenhouse gas emissions by up to 80%. EV batteries that are suitable for second-life applications could create more than 200 GWh of power—enough energy to power around
18,500 American homes for a year—by 2030 Plus, local circular economies for batteries reduce dependence on foreign sources of raw materials Cities are already at the forefront of the battery revolution: they are home to the majority of EV fleets and owners, charging infrastructure, and the bulk of the growth in energy storage systems – making them ideal innovation grounds for battery circularity. This deployment ecosystem means the potential for demonstrating battery circularity is at our fingertips. It just
needs some support and coordination.
leverages The New York Climate Exchange’s partner network of battery experts and resources, business and public–sector engagement, convening, and thought leadership to deliver:
• Framing and analytical content
• Key industry events that facilitate learning and collaboration • Technology and regulation across and beyond our partners to advance a circular economy for batteries
Figure: A Circular Economy for EV Batteries.

Credit: Wyatt Williams
-138-
Sign up to receive news and periodic updates from The Exchange. • : Expanding the network of individuals who are advancing battery circularity by sharing its importance with new audiences — from city officials to fleet operators, waste management professionals to insurers and financiers, and national security and supply chain logisticians to sustainability advocates.
• : Developing communities of practice across and beyond the Exchange’s partner network to ensure that local lessons from the battery ecosystem extend across geographies. These convenings will focus on researchers, city officials, regulators, startups and private sector businesses, fleets, and energy system developers. • : Project Closed Circuit will initially focus on The Exchange’s home — New York City. With a regulatory and economic framework that informs cities worldwide, NYC is poised to become a leading hub and global model for resource–efficient battery innovation, investment, and safe deployment. This will be achieved through policy, local access to battery data and end-of-life battery assets, and the development of a replicable roadmap for battery circularity in urban environments.

Email us at [email protected] with the subject line “Project Closed Circuit”. -139-
Search
10 South Street, Slip 7
New York, NY 10004
Questions? Visit our or email us at [email protected] -140-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Chris Ganiere <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 10:08 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: CAAP
Government is not equipped to deal with "Climate Change". Not Costa Mesa Government, not State of California Government. Not Federal Government hundreds of billions have been spent and yet the climate is exactly as destructive as before the money was spent.

The City of Costa Mesa is not required to help the Federal Government in any way because of the anti commandeering doctrine. We don;t have to spend a single City resource for FEDERAL goals.

Just take this document and file it away and say it is for the citizens & residents of Costa Mesa to decide to voluntarily do something. No enforcement. No record keeping. Just let the people do what they think is right.

Less Government = More Liberty = More Cash in the hands of the People.

Electrons from the mind of Christopher Ganiere
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-141-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: cheri messerli <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 12:51 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: Feedback on CAAP
Categories: CAAP
The City’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan also ensures the health of Costa Mesa’s ecosystems.

Adopted in 2019, the IPM Plan prioritizes organic and least-toxic treatments, reduces fertilizer use, and focuses on prevention first. This balanced, eco-friendly approach protects community health, supports local ecosystems, and goes beyond the regulatory requirements of Federal, State, and Orange County agencies.

Then why was it ok for glyphosate to be sprayed in a park that is designated a nature preserve, within 500 ft or less of two schools currently in session, with guys spraying in full hazmat suits? For some sort of wildflower project, or at least so I was told.

Get rid of grass, regulate how often grass only yards can be watered, get rid of grass in parks, kids don't need grass, they need nature to play in and explore. Other than sports fields, it is not needed, and drastically guzzles up too much of our water, which we are already going to have to use less of, Colorado river water rights are being renegotiated because it is does not have the water it once did, and too many people/states need it.

page 56, great! Please implement it. Trees need to be big to create shade, this take years, it needed to start years ago, but now it better than never.

You talk about fire hazards and risks of wildfires, but fireworks are STILL legal here, which is ridiculous.

People are CONSTANTLY setting them off throughout the year, and on the 4th of July it is horrific how much pollution, and fire risk is going on. My street alone was nuts. The air quality index the day after is terrible.

p68 is suggestions to people, not noting any actions by the city, what is the city doing besides making these suggestions in this document?

p. 69 Unless the city is changing the codes so that new buildings need to implent these things, these are just suggestions, and not actions in any way. Update building codes, offer rebates for homes and businesses who upgrade to a grey water system. Promote Grey water systems... these are the only ways to get people to change, along with education on Why it Matters, Why it is DIRE.

A huge way to mitigate urban fires is to underground the old electrical lines, especially in Costa Mesa where they are old, and not properly maintained and often buzzing very loudly. Look at what happened with the Eaton fire. Put pressure on the companies who are not maintaining their lines. The consequences can be deadly and devastating.

-142-
2 p. 71 Host mending events, events teaching about composting in different ways, events teaching about reusing, and wasting less, buying less etc..

p.72 Information about how much gas leaf blowers pollute such as 1 hour of lawn mowing is the equivalent of a car driving 3,000 miles in emissions. Public education is key. Have this kind of information as visuals during city events, even if not related to the event, just as public service announcements, or as bus stop billboards, etc..

p. 73 Planting more trees is great, but please stop planting non native plants and trees that are highly flameable. Native plants use less water, survive the heat more easily, and are more fire resistant. We need oaks to be planted, maybe not along sidewalks as they get so large, but they are needed for survival of so many species. There is the Fairview nature preserve, please get some native oaks planted there.

They are essential to our ecosystems.

Please host events where people can learn about natural pest control with things like neem oil. Where people can learn about amending their soil naturally, not with horrible chemical based products. Worm bins are a very easy low maintenance way people can amend their soil, and compost at the same time.

Events where native plant landscapers can educate people on ways to make their gardens more water wise, save money, and be beautiful, as well as supporting local wildlife.

We need to be a sponge city, to mitigate flood risks, it would be great to work towards making it more of a 15 minute city as well, difficult in a suburban area, but still can have things implemented to help. Look up both terms if not familiar.

Look at what Paris did in a very short amount of time. The city's outgoing Mayor regreened the city by digging up paved areas and planting tons of trees, closed off streets to traffic to make them kids, families, walkers, bicyclists, put in more protected bike lanes, and drastically reduced air pollution.

Another idea is to have maps of all the great bike paths in the area for people to access online to encourage biking vs driving. Make Costa Mesa more bike safe and friendly.

One last note, please do a better job of adding signage that is CLEAR to educate the public in Fairview park, that they are in a delicate ecosystem. 90% of California's vernal pools have been destroyed, these ones in Fairview park are extremely important to protect. That information right there should be on signs in the park by each one. People and dogs are running through them, damaging those essential habitats.

This has been captured on camera by the staff who maintain these grounds, which is where I lea rned this
when I was volunteering with them. There needs to be a sign with some ordinance which would mean people would be fined for trespassing in these protected zones within the park. Otherwise, no one takes it seriously. The educational sign for it also matters, because many people probably have no idea what a vernal pool is or that is is an eco system in danger of being lost in California.

Happy to see the objectives on pages 81-83.

Please also prioritize the banning of all use of glyphosate, on both public lands and waterways, as well as on private property. It should be the number one priority. Be a leader in this respect. It only significantly increases fire risk, as well as cancer rates. The group of advocates known as OC Creek Team have brought to light the intense use of this horrific chemical in Orange County. Going against wildlife -143-
3 protections, not to mention causing immense irreparable damage to soil, air, water, and human health.

This should be priority number one for Costa Mesa, to eliminate its use entirely.

Also, stop spraying pesticides in the gutters on the streets of Costa Mesa. I was horrified to see a truck with a guy spraying out the window into the gutters all along the street. This is a backwards practice. No more spraying. It's lazy, it's toxic, it causes cancer, and is completely irresponsible. It goes against anything you're doing as a city to build a better safer, cleaner, sustainable environment. What goes into the soil, goes into the air, the water, and the people.

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-144-
From: Dominic Bendinelli
To: sustainability
Subject: Draft CAAP Comments
Date: Sunday, August 2, 2026 6:16:50 PM
The Costa Mesa draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan is an excellent document. The team who crafted this has done amazing work and I look forward to the city adopting it. Below I have some suggestions on how (in my opinion) it could be improved even more.

A General Comment: The draft CAAP appears to be missing major milestone dates and metrics to measure against next to each Objective/Action. For example M1.B "Transition the City’s non-emergency light-duty gasoline- and diesel-powered fleet to EV". The state of California is aiming for a fully electric state-owned fleet by 2030 , are you planning to meet or
beat that goal? Each of the Actions listed needs to have a complete by date projected. If you take a look at the Los Angeles or San Diego Climate Action Plans they have five year increments with targets set along each milestone. A closer to home and smaller city, Buena Park's CAAP has 2030 and 2045 targets set for each action. To be clear this plan has great goals, but it means nothing if in 15 years a resident stands up at council and asks why you haven't "Install solar PV systems as shade structures at City owned parking lots and facilities" (M2.E) and the council of this future says there is no obligation to do so since the timeline was undefined.

Comments by Objective:

TR1 - Consider incentives to auto dealers for selling electric vehicles over internal combustion engine vehicles. Potentially a local tax break on the purchase of EVs.

TR1 - The city should be exploring and favoring V2G capabilities especially when looking at medium and heavy-duty charging facilities which will tie into Objective E3.

TR1 - It could be considered parts of T1.C/T1.D/T1.E, but its vital that the city prioritizes access to EV chargers at multifamily residences where renters are often not able to have a choice in the right to charge their EV. If rules can be changed to require a minimum number of chargers via landlords or programs rolled out to use state funds to provide those, either way its a bottleneck that should be addressed sooner than later.

TR.1 - There should be explicit language for partnership with school districts for ZE school buses and infrastructure. (This is a very well known program, but this comment and my previous comment are inspired by this
.)
TR2.A/B - Please stress the need for protected bike and pedestrian infastructure.

TR4 - Support efforts to revive the OC Centerline rail project or similar proposals that could connect Costa Mesa to the county and the LOSSAN corridor via heavy or light rail. Similarly consider studying a streetcar route like the OC Streetcar especially on existing ROW.

E3 - Consider adoption of policy that requires businesses with an excess of X number of
parking spaces to develop solar canopy parking. For example, if a business has over 100 parking spots, 30% must be covered by solar canopy. Not only does it support the E3 measure, but also reduces dangerous heat island effects.

-145-
OR1 - Consider offering financial incentives (when funding available) to switch to ZE equipment and follow that up with non-voluntary restrictions on gas-powered lawn equipment such as neighboring Irvine.

NU1 - Include an action to maintain existing green space in the city and incorporate new green space if the opportunity presents itself.

NU1.C - Adopt a policy where a tree is planted in each parkway, unless explicitly rejected by homeowner. Public Works can go door to door with flyers/knocking in a neighborhood to notify residents they will be planting trees and give opportunity, with amply time, for rejection.

NU1.H - " Amend the municipal code to limit the removal of mature trees" add 'unless causing unavoidable property damage'
Great plan! Props to the whole team who worked on developing this and the Commissioners and Councilmembers supporting it!
Thank you,
Dominic Bendinelli
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. -146-
From: Eric Engle
To: sustainability
Subject: comment on the CM draft
Date: Saturday, August 1, 2026 11:55:44 PM
Hello, would it be better if more people took alternative transportation option besides just using electric cars because it wouldn't solve the over-reliance on the cars (gas or electric) throughout the city. The best way to reduce emissions is to provide viable alternative like the cool bike lines going around town. its a start. I feel The city needs a dedicated bus route that loops around within the city limits on a 10-15 minute frequency to the cities biggest destination hotspots. The Goat service is nice until the wait times are over an hour. wouldn't it be nice to have some kind of high capacity vehicle performing the service. Thanks CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. -147-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Jeff Gibbs <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 6:21 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: Smart Traffic???
I reviewed the document and noticed not a single comment about smart traffic. Lot's of info about pedestrian paths, bicycle paths, electric vehicles, though not a mention about keeping traffic moving. Idling cars are terrible for the air, and as long as we keep putting in stop lights, taking away lanes, traffic is going to idle more and more. And reducing speed for potholes and speed bumps, cannot be good either, as most of the time, cars accelerate away from them. My suggestion is to hire a traffic engineering department, to keep the major streets moving, such as Fairview, Harbor, Placentia, Adams, Victoria, 17th, 19th and other major thoroughfares. Keeping traffic moving alone would help the air, not to mention city workers would become more efficient. If the city has a traffic engineering department, tasked to help residents move safely, then I am not aware of that, and perhaps should replace them with participants from the Early Childhood Program. My guess is the results would be identical, traffic stopped throughout the city.

The other item that must be looked at to keep traffic moving, is the 55. How does that highway end at 19th street?
Figure out how to get it to Newport, and make it our neighbors problem, or, get revenue from Newport for all of the idling vehicles.

We also have a lot of asphalt in Costa Mesa. Time to plant more trees. The OC Fair parking Lot, OCC parking lot as well as City Hall, should have many more trees, and those are public facilities which you control. .

My greater question is how is this going to be paid for? This endeavor will cost a lot, so what is going to get cut in order for this plan to be put in place. The new bike lanes look amazing, too bad they are unused and still look brand new. As for busing, unless you start building high rises up and down the thoroughfares, it is not in our culture to walk 2 blocks to a bus stop, pay $2 and ride a bus for 2 miles to the grocery store and then back on the bus, another $2 to get back home. Southern Californians are too independent, and love their cars, you know that, the study just does not want to call that out.

Good luck with your expensive plan. I would prefer you would fix the potholes, clean up the trash on the streets/sidewalks/parking lots, plant more trees and fields, and make it a better community rather than dream of one,
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-148-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Le Wentz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 7:16 AM
To: sustainability
Subject: Sustainable life
I have been to mulƟple planning commiƩee meeƟngs and each Ɵme I have come away disappointed that climate change is not addressed in building plans! Not once was requiring solar panels on new construcƟon even addressed! This is unacceptable!
Sent from my iPad
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organizaƟon. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious acƟviƟes to the InformaƟon Technology Department.
-149-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Mike Draganza <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 4:44 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: Comments on the CAAP
How much CM taxpayer dollars went into creating this plan and what is the overall cost of implementation? Is that anywhere in the document?

What is the point of all this? if it's reducing CO2 in the atmosphere, that will make no difference at all in the total amount in the atmosphere, since China will continue to spew out massive amounts that swamp any savings from CM, California or the U.S.

This plan references a climate model. The problem is that these models have been wildly inaccurate.

Since they have been wrong in every prediction up to this point, what makes you think they will correctly forecast 50-100 years out? We can't even tell what the weather will be 2 weeks out!

No taxpayer dollars should ge to funding EV infrastructure. If EVs were popular, private dollars would fund it. Sales of EVs have plummeted since the $7500 rebate was cancelled. For good reason. They're expensive, have limited range and have a tendency to catch on fire. Creating expensive infrastructure at taxpayer expense will not make people change their minds.

I strongly disagree with the city spending our dollars on this. The city should concentrate on basic services and get out of the green new deal scam.

Mike Draganza
Costa Mesa resident

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-150-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 5:40 PM
To: sustainability
Cc: 'Paul Waggoner'
Subject: Comments on the Costa Mesa Draft CAAP
Attachments: CCA Letter to Costa Mesa on Draft CAAP 080426 FINAL.pdf Greetings,

Please ﬁnd Coastal Corridor Alliance’s comments on the Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. We understand some edits have been made and request a brief meeting to walk through those edits and outline our concerns on the document. We look forward to hearing from you!

Please conﬁrm receipt.

Thank you,

Melanie Schlotterbeck
Stewardship Consultant
Cell: (714) 501-3133
Available: Mon - Fri
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Follow: Website, Subscribe, Facebook, Instagram, BlueSky, LinkedIn

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-151-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: R M <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 6:51 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: Re: Costa Mesa CAAP Constituent Comment - Permeable Paving I forgot to include who I am --

Rob Miller - Costa Mesa District 5 Resident
1076 Townhouse Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92627

On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 6:44 PM R M <[email protected]> wrote:

As your constituent in District 5, I'd like to see policy implemented that encourages the use of permeable paving in construction, as shown in the inserted photo below.

Permeable paving stones allowing grass to grow up while allowing water to drain down and through are already in use all over the world.

They have a lovely aesthetic, are supremely functional, and are somehow simultaneously classic, innovative, ancient and forward-thinking.

It seems that encouraging permeable tiling would be pursuant to "Policy CON-3.A.5: Work with public and private property owners to reduce stormwater runoff in urban areas to protect water quality in storm drainage channels, the Santa Ana River, and other local water courses that lead to the Pacific Ocean."

Thank you for the consideration.

-152-
2 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-153-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Steve Klein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 12:13 AM
To: sustainability
Subject: Feedback on CAAP
CAAP Feedback:

1. These documents and policies are developed with very little real community engagement. They claim to be based on “bringing together a range of perspectives” but when your own documents state they’ve “engaged 340+ participants” and collected “158 survey responses”, that’s a trivial number compared to the 100,000+ residents. This tries to give the appearance of soliciting broad input but in practice no one takes the time. If you really wanted input, then put it to a vote.

2. The CAAP document says “While state policies are expected to reduce emissions over time, these actions alone are not suƯicient to meet the City’s long-term climate goals” – however, it does not appear to describe how the city’s goals were chosen and why o
ur goals are apparently greater than that mandated by
state policies.

3. I oppose state-mandated reductions in GHG

4. It is my preference that the City actively work against state control, as Huntington Beach does

5. To the degree which the state compels the city to act, we should be doing the absolute minimum and obstructing the state as much as possible.

6. I object to the amount of money, time, and leadership focus spent on these proposals.

7. I will actively vote against, and campaign against, councilmembers who are promoting increased wasted money and eƯort on these topics

Steven Klein
1936 Flamingo Dr
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
-154-
1 SPRINGER, CHARLES
From: Sarita Plata <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 7:29 PM
To: sustainability
Subject: Climate Action & Adaptation Plan
Hello,

It makes me super excited to see that Costa Mesa is developing a Climate Action & Adaptation Plan. I was born and raised in Costa Mesa, so it’s beautiful to see how the City can implement strategies.

After reading the plan, I wanted to share my thoughts. Overall, my greatest recommendation is to be more explicit with environmental justice. Several sections failed to showcase how these climate actions interconnect with racial & economic inequalities. The Environmental Justice Policies that the City developed in 2026 should speak directly to the Climate Action Plan. They cannot be seen as separate, but rather as a joint effort; this includes more explicit mentions of EJ in the Climate Action Plan.

Chapter 3: Local Hazards
I found the explanations of climate hazards easy to understand and engaging. The use of map visualizations also helped me visualize where these local hazards occur. However, I was disappointed to see the lack of representation for environmental justice. The impacts of climate change are deeply interconnected with racial and economic inequalities. Latino and low-income communities face the brunt of climate change impacts. I would recommend more explicit mention of which populations are vulnerable. Showcasing this relationship with maps, including an overlay of racial and income status, is crucial!

Chapter 4: Community Engagement
I’d be interested to know how many Disadvantaged Communities/EJ communities participated. How many of the pop-ups were in these neighborhoods? Underserved and minority communities should be a major stakeholder group!

Chapter 5:

The objectives listed for transportation are strong, especially in decarbonization. Yet, the transition to electrification raises barriers such as affordability and reliability. These barriers are more pronounced in environmental justice neighborhoods that already face barriers to paying electricity bills. Renewable energy is not cheap. Not all households, especially low-income households, have the budget to adopt EVs. Yet many of these communities rely on personal vehicles for work. I would like to see a m ore explicit
strategy and outline about how the City expects to address these barriers. Furthermore, historically marginalized communities often have a lot of skepticism towards EVs. How is the City hoping to address that?
-155-
2 Thank you

Costa Mesa City CouncilSeptember 15, 2026

Costa Mesa City Council
September 15, 2026