CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive by building on our foundation and success as a world class community.”
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL/FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
June 20, 2024 – 4:30 PM
Council Chambers
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott and Stickler
A. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council on any item listed on the agenda.
State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to three (3) minutes per individual. For City Council Rules of Decorum refer to Resolution No. 2023-086.
B. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
B1. Discussion and Consideration of Proposed Budgets for Fiscal Year 2024/25. (Verbal Report) (Document is available for review at City Hall and https://www.cityofrc.us/your-government/budget) (CITY/FIRE)
C. ADJOURNMENT
CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the City's website.
LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC
CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk Services Department at (909) 774-2023. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive by building on our foundation and success as a world class community.”
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
1 ACSC
Date: June 19, 2024
To: Mayor L. Dennis Michael, Councilpersons: Lynne B. Kennedy, Ryan A. Hutchison, Kristine D. Scott, Ashley N. Stickler
C/O: [email protected], City Clerks Office
From: Dan Titus, American Coalition for Sustainable Communities (ACSC), Alta Loma, California
Email: [email protected]
Subject: Item B1. Discussion and Consideration of Proposed Budgets for Fiscal Year 2023/24. (Verbal Report) Comments
The Rancho Cucamonga, California, Fiscal Year 2024/25 - Preliminary Budget, continues carryover programs that leave the city open to potential lawsuits and litigation. The city’s RC Drive program constrains city employees’ first amendment rights and civil rights.
Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) program opens the city up to litigation because administrative ordinances constrain property rights and are unconstitutional. Further, the UFMP, funded by special district money, indicates a potential hidden fee, which would possible put the UFMP under the purview of Proposition 218 process for voter approval.
The Rancho Cucamonga Climate Action Plan (CAP) ordinances will increase costs for new housing and increase possibility of litigation because of constraints on private property.
The Electric Vehicle (EV) market is failing. The city states that it will conform to “the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirement that 50% of municipal purchases of new medium duty vehicles be zero emission began in 2024.” We recommend that the city challenge CARB’s mandate and save tax payers money.
CARB is not a central economic planning agency.
6/20/2024 - Special Meeting - ITEM B1 - CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
2 The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, Fiscal Year 2024/25 - Preliminary Budget continues to embrace questionable racist DEI narratives, which could lead to lawsuits under the Civil Rights Act.
Page 272 of City Manager Goals states to: Cultivate an inclusive organization dedicated to equitable practices through RC DRIVE Cultivate meaningful and equitable communications and community engagement by providing resources and support that encourages transparent communication, builds trust, and supports Team RC in meeting the community where they are at.
On Page 96, RC DRIVE is referenced: The HR Team will also continue to support and participate in the leadership of RC DRIVE, the City’s race, equity, and inclusion initiative, to ensure a diverse, respectful, inclusive, valued, and engaged workforce.
Identity Politics, Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI): RC DRIVE Rancho Cucamonga, California, Subjects City Employees to Racist DEI Indoctrination.
The city has politicized public policy with their numerous woke, Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs. One that is of deep concern is the RC DRIVE program.
continue to implement the Team RC initiative, RC DRIVE. This journey into race, equity and inclusion aims to cultivate an organizational culture that is diverse, respectful, inclusionary, valued, and engaged.”
The city paid a $1000 membership fee to the left-leaning Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) and paid them $33,000 to indoctrinate city employees with their program: Advancing Racial Equity and Leading for Racial Equity.
In a letter to GARE members fomenting a social contract, solidarity leader Gordon Goodwin said: “The pandemic has brought decades of racial inequity in healthcare, housing, education and employment into plain sight, as Black, Indigenous, and other people of color bore the brunt of the crisis in rates and severity of infection, hospitalizations, and deaths. These combined crises plainly demonstrate the existence of institutional and structural racism and government’s role in maintaining systems that
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
3 harm communities of color. Government’s legitimacy can only be secured if it ensures the safety and well-being of all of us.
Goodwin makes a broad statement insinuating minorities have somehow endured “decades of racial inequity” and “bore the brunt” of the pandemic disproportionately than white people. He claims that “crisis” demonstrates the existence of institutional and structural racism. Not so.
According to David Wert, Public Information Officer for San Bernardino County California, “There is no empirical evidence that institutional and structural racism exists in San Bernardino County.” Therefore, since Rancho Cucamonga is in San Bernardino County, there is no evidence that it exists there either.
Goodwin invites potential discrimination lawsuits with his rhetoric: “Decisions on issues like policing, transportation, the status of frontline workers, and many other important aspects of our lives, requires careful, informed racial equity analysis to prevent further harm to people of color in the communities we are called to serve… it is imperative to center race in our work and decision-making… we will be present with you to share how our movement of people working in government to advance racial equity is developing innovative approaches to eliminate the racial inequity within our government practices, civic spaces and economy.
Furthermore, GARE is inviting even more lawsuits by facilitating the California State Library funded California Libraries Cultivating Race, Equity and Inclusion program which supports 19 cohorts from public libraries across the state in deepening their engagement in race and equity strategies to better serve California residents.
The city hired Tiana Sanchez and paid her $76,559 to create a customized curriculum to:
create safe space for psychological safety,
courageous conversations by developing and
cultivating inclusive workplace norms where employees are invited to show up as their authentic selves in a workplace free of all forms of prejudice, inequity and exclusion;
cultivating a workplace where employees become more comfortable having uncomfortable conversations;
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
4 holding safe and healthy spaces for employees to speak out if they experience and/or witness injustice;
supporting employees to alert managers if they feel unsafe or how others are interacting with the or others in the workplace.
According to Sanchez’s website, her company is a “Woman-Owned Small Business on a mission to turbocharge leaders toward next-level success in talent and leadership development. Right now, her company is steering the ship for a diverse portfolio of clients, rocking a combined net worth that surpasses the $100 million mark. Sanchez got her career start at age 16 with 90 percent female-led national franchise organization Hot Dog on a Stick, became a manager at 17, was promoted to regional manager, and welcomed the company as her first consulting client.”
DEI has turned in to a lucrative industry for consultants and university professors who push identity politics to further gains. For example, Councilwoman Lynne Kennedy was hired for the position of Interim Director for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in May 2021, by Chaffey College and paid a monthly sum of $11,500.
RC Drive Opens Rancho Cucamonga to Potential Lawsuits
Numerous articles have be published about the discriminatory nature of DEI programs and cite litigation.
In an article by labor attorneys Pechman Law Group called, “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Programs May Invite Reverse Discrimination Lawsuits,” claims are made that hiring practices based on racial and gender invite “reverse discrimination” lawsuits because programs may conflict with federal or state EEO (equal employment opportunity) laws.
1. A federal jury in North Carolina awarded $10 million to a white male executive of Novant Health who claimed he lost his job due to efforts to diversify top leadership positions. In a similar vein, an in-house lawyer with Electrolux sued, claiming he was denied a promotion to General Counsel due to a diversity initiative with an expressed preference for sex/gender as a “distinguishing and beneficial characteristic.”
2. In the USA Today article titled, “Affirmative action decision will increase scrutiny of diversity programs”, Jessica Guynn reported that conservative groups are pushing back
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
5 on diversity programs and consumers vent frustrations over corporations becoming more vocal on progressive issues like LGBTQ rights, abortion and racial equity,
The debate swirling around diversity programs has increased the possibility that corporations [and government jurisdictions] will be hit with discrimination lawsuits.
According to Andrew Turnbull, a labor and employment partner at law firm Morrison & Foerster: “We may see an increase in challenges to affirmative action programs.”
In the article, “Woke extremism is costing the struggling taxpayers of New York City in more ways than one,” Alex Newman, reports that the city is on the hook for millions of dollars after three European-descent educators sued over anti-white discrimination schemes. The lawsuit was a response to an obsession by far-left city leaders with “diversity” and ending what officials view as “toxic whiteness” in education.
According to the lawsuit, the three educators — Lois Herrera, Jaye Murray, and Laura Feijoo — were demoted under the reign of then-Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza.
Each was replaced by an unqualified “person of color” as top officials overseeing the “education” of close to a million children pursued “diversity” as a goal.
Each of the affected educators will receive $700,000 from taxpayers under the terms of the settlement. The decision came in response to a judge’s ruling that the plaintiffs had indeed offered evidence of what was described as “race-based discrimination” within the Department of Education run by Carranza.
3. In an ABC News report titled, “Anti-DEI teacher sues California union over BIPOC board position: Discrimination, Jackson Walker says, “ A California teacher is suing his teachers union after it allegedly denied his candidacy for a position on its executive board due to him being White.
History teacher Isaac Newman attempted to run for a board position for the Elk Grove Education Association (EGEA) after becoming “fed up” with his school district’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, his attorney told Crisis in the Classroom (CITC). Newman, a decade-long member of the union, allegedly could not advance his candidacy past the nomination form due to his race.
After nearly 10 years of membership, my union has barred me from running for a leadership position simply because of the color of my skin,” Newman said. “You don’t have to be a history teacher to recognize that this is a textbook example of discrimination
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
6 and a blatant violation of the Civil Rights Act. I hope my lawsuit will force the union to see reason and remove all racial barriers to running for elected office. Newman told CITC Thursday the requirement is blatant discrimination and must be stopped.” On page 86 of the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Preliminary Budget the obtuse statement is made:
“Public Works is embracing the current economic slowdown by strategically evaluating future needs to pave the way for a more efficient, sustainable future.”
The UFMP is a roadmap for the City’s urban forest for the next 50 years, incorporating urban forest management best practices and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals to help Rancho Cucamonga mitigate:
• the impacts of climate change,
• abide by State mandates,
• reduce the urban heat island effect, and
• lessen the risk of wildfires.
In Q3 and Q4 of 2024, Public Works will undertake several new or expanded initiatives for renewed growth. Central to these efforts are the continued development of the electrification of the municipal fleet and charging infrastructure, implementation of the Urban Forest Management Plan, LED sports lighting and site lighting upgrades, and drought tolerant landscape projects.
In addition, the Department will continue to work on several major capital projects that began in prior years but had slow progress due to the economy and staffing challenges.
In FY 2024/25, Public Works will begin implementation efforts on the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP), Rooted in RC. The UFMP, which included a tree inventory, canopy coverage assessment, and wildfire risk assessment, was prepared in alignment with the General Plan and [Climate Action Plan] CAP, and provides staff with a long- term strategic plan for tree management.
CO2 Coalition Challenges CARB Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP)
The CO2 Coalition challenged the PCAP program the State filed with the EPA. The United Nations influenced program embraced by the Biden administration.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
7 The C02 Coalition, a group of 1600+ scientists that disagree with the dominant narrative on climate change recently sent this letter to CARB. The summary letter contains a link to the September 2023 “NO Climate Emergency” declaration signed by the 1,600 scientists, including long-time scientist and epidemiologist Dr. James Enstrom.
“An open letter to the California Air Resources Board”
Dear Sir or Madam:
Good news: There is NO climate crisis in California. This claim was verified by the scientific data that were compiled by the CO2 Coalition, a nonprofit organization with the goal of determining and propagating the facts regarding carbon dioxide (CO2) and the climate (CO2 Coalition, 2024). The key findings provided below stand in contrast to the climate crisis claims made in the March 1, 2024, California Priority Climate Action Plan (Priority Climate Action Plan, 2024) and the California Climate Disclosure Rules (Senate Bills No. 253 and No. 261) (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, 2024).
Modest warming of California is beneficial and not a cause for concern:
Globally, more people have died from the cold than from the heat since 2000.
Increase in agricultural production: The combination of lengthened growing seasons (from warming) and increased CO2 concentrations has contributed to this increase.
CO2 is essential: Plants need CO2, sunlight, water, and nutrients from the soil to produce food and oxygen, both of which are essential for human and animal lives.
CO2 is beneficial: Exposing plants to higher concentrations of CO2 increases their growth, food production, and drought-resistance; and greens the Earth.
California is in no danger of unusual drought: The annual precipitation in California has fluctuated greatly over the last 150 years, with only a slight decrease.
Ski resorts are experiencing more snow: Most (21 of 22) ski resorts in California had increasing snowfall from 2012 to 2023.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
8 California is in no danger of drowning: North Spit, CA, has the highest rate of sea level rise of 0.005 meter/year, or 1.64 feet in 100 years, which is easily mitigated.
Less natural disasters over the years: Significantly reduced number of wildfires and acres burned were reported in the United States and globally; California has infrequent tornadoes, no land-falling hurricane from 1851 to 2023, and no tropical depression from 1950 to 2023; and tropical storms are rare in California, with the last two reported in 2023 and 1997. Air quality in California keeps getting better:
The concentrations of major pollutants have decreased over the years.
In conclusion, there is NO climate crisis in California and CO2 is essential for all life on Earth. If you need additional details, the CO2 Coalition will be happy to respond to any inquiries you may have, and the members of the CO2 Coalition will be happy to meet with you for further discussions. Several members of the CO2 Coalition have signed the No Climate Emergency Declaration (CO2 Coalition, 2023).”
Dr. Enstrom says one of the most prominent signers is 2022 Nobel Laureate John Clauser, who described the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as “one of the worst sources of dangerous misinformation,” and was disinvited to speak before the U.N.’s International Monetary Fund (IMF) on July 25, 2023. “The physicist believes that objective science on climate has been sacrificed to politics. The preeminence of politics is all the worse, he said, because so much money has already gone to climate,” the CO2 Coalition said.
Rancho Cucamonga Climate Action Plan (CAP)
In a November 2023 article titled, Climate Change: Rancho Cucamonga Proposing Questionable “Mandatory” Tax & Fees on Residential and Commercial Property, Dan Titus critiques Rancho Cucamonga’s CAP.
Joel Kotkin, a fellow in urban studies at Chapman University, warns in his new book, The Coming of Neo-Feudalism: A Warning to the Global Middle Class, about climate fanaticism. It’s safe to say that the city manager, city planners, and the Rancho Cucamonga city council, are climate fanatics.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
9 A transformative agenda is under way in the city of Rancho Cucamonga. It’s called a Climate Action Plan or CAP. It is nothing more than a backdoor way to charge people for the privilege of existing in a new, highly regulated, “climate”. Designed by bureaucratic city planners, promoted by unethical city managers, and voted for by amoral city council people, Rancho Cucamonga’s CAP will further erode trust in government and destroy its essential fabric: a suburban city.
In 2015 the city council received a $150,000 grant to develop a voluntary climate plan.
Let’s say that again: voluntary. Residents were told by Mayor. L. Dennis Michael, it was simply policy and not for enforcement. Local citizens objected to the plan because of concerns that it could be used against property owners in the future. In 2021, this plan was added to the General Plan Update as a “companion”. In 2023, the city council budgeted money to develop ordinances that are essentially laws over residential and businesses. The plan promotes getting people out of their cars.
The updated General Plan focuses on creating great places, more things to do, and more ways to get there that don’t always require a car – Rancho Cucamonga City Manager, John Gillison, The Grapevine Magazine
Southern California is a commuter region, always has been and always will be. People want and like their cars. It is not the responsibility of local city bureaucrats to socially engineer Rancho Cucamonga to fit an urban profile to meet arbitrary climate goals. The council advertises the city as, “A city of Route 66”, embracing the regions rich, historical, car culture; then, turns right around and denounces cars.
Rancho Cucamonga, a Route 66 City, no more
Further, the city wants to reduce the number of miles residents drive through ordinances, by instituting fees for “congestion pricing”. This is to change driving behavior by punishing driving habits. New York is in doing this now by installing computerized surveillance cameras that monitor different pricing zones and automatically cites and sends a billing.
The CAP ordinance requires the implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies that reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by 5 percent in new development by 2030 and 10 percent by 2030 or later.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
10 How hypocritical it is to sign on to socially engineering with concepts like “place making” that accommodate “urban spaces” where city the council, city manager and city planners insert progressive dense, mixed-use housing, mass-transit like buses, bicycles and walking over traditional suburban design. Think of San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, and New York City with increased congestion, crime and poverty. That is what the city will become in the future because, city manager, John Gillison has stated that the city is entering a new era of “in-fill” development for urbanization, thereby, leaving behind the suburban tradition that has made Rancho Cucamonga what it is today.
Gillison has stated that Rancho Cucamonga is the jewel of the Inland Empire and that the city has a mandate, through the General Plan Update, to be the blueprint for all cities in the county. This as he promotes the destruction of the very fabric that his made the city to and county great: suburban.
Mr. Gillison and the city council think that Rancho Cucamonga is exceptional. How can that be if over time all cities in the county follow the lead of becoming just another homogenized urban landscape?
Officials complain about the cost of housing; however, they really want to use the CAP as an excuse to increase the cost of housing in Rancho Cucamonga for more revenue.
The development fees the city charges developers are already some of the highest in the county. Now they want to add fees, increasing the price for new housing and soak property owners and businesses, too. Consider this statement from the CAP:
Rancho Cucamonga city planners want to, “go beyond requirements in the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code requiring new construction and major alterations to existing structures…”
The City Council wants to adopt several ordinances:
That is consistent with and to provide “EV Ready” and “EV Installed” parking spaces according to land use type. Ordinances assume the electric vehicles (EVs) are a standard in the marketplace, they are not. The market for EVs is in its infancy and there is no evidence to predict that the technology will prevail over competing technologies in the future. Promoting charging stations and infrastructure for EVs could backfire. There are competing standards. Mandating
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
11 this technology is picking winners and losers. It skirts the free market. The market decides what consumers want, not bureaucrats. Major auto manufacturers are saying climate mandates are unrealistic and that electric vehicles are not ready for prime time. Car companies backing off from climate commitments. Companies like, BMW, Ford, Honda and Toyota are saying they can’t sell EVs because people can’t afford them.
”Banning combustion engines will destroy the middle class! EVs are NOT the future, and 100% electrification should be STOPPED at all costs! – BMW CEO, Oliver Zipse, October 2013
EVs are not selling because they cost too much and are unreliable for distant travel.
The charging infrastructure is not ready for mass adoption of millions of vehicles; even if built, charging times make EVs impractical. Betting on unproven technology is risky and is negligent to free market consumer demand. However, despite these concerns there is a ordinance proposal in the CAP to:
Require 50 percent of heavy-duty construction equipment and vehicles to be electric or use other zero emissions technology or fuels by 2030, and 75 percent by 2040. Did the city do an impact report denoting the cost to local business? The city council wants to use housing to increase revenues.
1. Existing Housing – Require energy efficiency improvements and upgrades at the point of sale in order that would reduce building energy consumption in existing residential and nonresidential buildings. This means that people will have to do expensive upgrades to their property before you sell it. What happened to grandfather clauses?
2. Requires that new single-and multi-family residential development to meet a standard of zero net energy (i.e., on-site generation of energy is equal to on-site energy consumption) and,
3. Requires new non-residential development to meet a standard of zero net energy. “Experts” claim this is needed to combat climate change; thereby, increasing costs for development and the price tag goods and services to consumers.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
12 To accomplish CAP goals, the city is promoting changing resident’s behavior by recruiting stakeholders (grifters who are groomed by city staff and benefit from social and climate justice) to build artificial, fake, consensus. Mr. Gillison and city planners are overtly promoting CivicSpark, a biased program offered by AmeriCorps for capacity building, which is designed to create a faux buy in for CAP ordinances.
This completely skews local input and local control for residents in the city; however, this is by design. The city council uses stakeholder consensus and outcome-bases surveys to justify their decisions. They see stakeholder groups as their constituency and typically state, “We are doing what the people want…”
If the city council is doing what the people want, tax and fees issues should be put to a vote of people in the city!
Proposed Funding for CAP Goals
New development impact fees – Increased costs for commercial development and housing.
Issue general obligation bonds – Really? Increase debt? PACE/HERO finance programs and Energy Efficient Mortgages (EEM).
These types of programs are corrupt and have been shunned over the years because of fraudulent marketing practices that encumber private property with liens. Note: As of 2017, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) does not endorse these programs because in 2017 residents forced the SBCT board to vote them down. Mayor Michaels was at the meeting. Private equity funding - claims that, “Private equity can be used to finance energy improvements, with returns realized as future cost savings.” There are no guarantees of future cost savings, especially with the current price inflation and mismanagement by the Federal Reserve Bank.
Rent increases for retrofits to commercial buildings. – Seriously? Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) – This is Government buying electricity for consumers. It is a fraudulent idea. These programs were defeated at SBCTA in 2017. Mayor, Dennis Michael was present at the meeting.
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
13 RC Electric Vehicle Fleet Transition
Public Works is transitioning the City’s fleet to more sustainable options to achieve Climate Action Plan (CAP) goals and State mandates. On-road transportation accounts for more than half of the city’s total GHG emissions and a 50% municipal fleet electrification goal by 2030 was identified in the CAP to reduce city emissions. In addition, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirement that 50% of municipal purchases of new medium duty vehicles be zero emission began in 2024. As part of Public Work’s fleet electrification initiative, the City will procure seven (7) EVs to replace internal combustion engine vehicles in FY 2024/25. EVs account for half of the vehicles budgeted and will increase the percentage of EVs in the fleet from 10% to 14%, moving the fleet closer to the 2030 CAP goal. Concurrently, EV charging infrastructure will also be installed at the Public Works Service Center to support the electrified fleet, demonstrating the City’s proactive stance toward reducing its carbon footprint and to intentionally embrace and anticipate the future.
Central economic planning never works. Rancho policy is propping up mundane policy from the State that embraces arbitrary climate goals. The city is reinforcing policy that is destined to fail.
Electric vehicles (EVs) aren’t ready for prime time and even if they were, early adopters have already purchased and now the mass market has turned its back on EVs.
Automakers are scaling back or delaying their electric vehicle plans. Automakers from Ford Motor and General Motors to Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, Jaguar Land Rover and Aston Martin are scaling back or delaying their electric vehicle plans.
General Motors has abandoned its goal of selling 400,000 EVs by June 2024. Yet reality is more easily ignored at the White House. President Joe Biden has proposed rules that would require 60% of new cars sold to be battery-powered electric by 2030 and 66% battery-powered electric by 2032. GM's quarterly gains were led by its popular SUVs and gas-powered car lines, while producing EVs continues to lose the company money.
Tesla’s stock is down 40% and the revered Cyber Truck is a complete flop after having to recall the entire production run of 4,000 unites because the gas pedal can get stuck.
Customers are trying to ditch trucks purchased for six figures to avoid catastrophic losses.
The Electric Vehicle (EV) market is failing. The city states that it will conform to “the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirement that 50% of municipal purchases of
The American Coalition for Sustainable Communities
Sustaining representative government; not unelected governance [email protected]
14 new medium duty vehicles be zero emission began in 2024.” We recommend that the city challenge CARB’s mandate and save tax payers money. CARB is not a central economic planning agency.