Mobilize

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

This phase involves reviewing the draft plan and getting ready to mobilize for climate action. We want to hear what community members think about the draft plan so we can refine the plan further. Additionally, we want to hear how residents, neighborhoods, businesses, and community organizations can help activate the plan and accelerate climate action in Kansas City and beyond.

The Draft Climate Protection and Resiliency Plan public comment period has ended. Thank you for your patience while we review the over 500 comments received!

You can still view the draft plan here

(Note that the online plan is interactive. For the best experience we recommend reviewing the online version.)

Plan appendices and supplemental documentation can be accessed through the "Important Links" section to the right.


Next Steps For Plan Adoption

1) The Office of Environmental Quality, the Climate Protection Steering Committee, and our consultant team will work on reviewing the draft comments received and use them to refine the plan document.

2) The final plan will go to the city Executive Team and City Council for review.

3) The plan will go before a City Council Committee (date and committee to be determined) for discussion. At this point the public can also comment on the plan in front of council. The committee will either recommend edits to the plan or forward to full City Council for adoption. Show your support!

4) City Council will vote on adopting the plan.

5) Once the plan is adopted, we mobilize for climate action!

This phase involves reviewing the draft plan and getting ready to mobilize for climate action. We want to hear what community members think about the draft plan so we can refine the plan further. Additionally, we want to hear how residents, neighborhoods, businesses, and community organizations can help activate the plan and accelerate climate action in Kansas City and beyond.

The Draft Climate Protection and Resiliency Plan public comment period has ended. Thank you for your patience while we review the over 500 comments received!

You can still view the draft plan here

(Note that the online plan is interactive. For the best experience we recommend reviewing the online version.)

Plan appendices and supplemental documentation can be accessed through the "Important Links" section to the right.


Next Steps For Plan Adoption

1) The Office of Environmental Quality, the Climate Protection Steering Committee, and our consultant team will work on reviewing the draft comments received and use them to refine the plan document.

2) The final plan will go to the city Executive Team and City Council for review.

3) The plan will go before a City Council Committee (date and committee to be determined) for discussion. At this point the public can also comment on the plan in front of council. The committee will either recommend edits to the plan or forward to full City Council for adoption. Show your support!

4) City Council will vote on adopting the plan.

5) Once the plan is adopted, we mobilize for climate action!

Plan Comments

Use this tool if you have a few comments you are okay with sharing publicly

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Hi im a constituent of kansas city, mo. Please support the Sunrise Movement's linked demands in regards to the climate action plan. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/scientists-risk-arrest-in-global-climate-protests-2022-4%3famp

Bsymmonds about 2 months ago

This plan needs more specific and actionable targets. I.e. deadlines, measures, not vague and open ended ideas.
1 Close Evergy’s Hawthorn coal plant in Indian Mound neighborhood by 2025 and all remaining coal plants by 2030 and ensure ratepayer money is being spent not on more gas infrastructure but on clean energy and helping modernize households and buildings to help meet demands of the grid.
2 Needs to make sure low income residents can access things like rooftop solar and insulation improvements.
3 Need east-west Max line.
4 Phase natural gas out of all municipal buildings by 2030.
5 City should not support false, expensive solutions like renewable natural gas.
6 We should be aiming for zero carbon by 2040 no net zero.
7 City should adopt the bike plan and put more funding towards making it safer to bike and walk.

ilyssablock about 2 months ago

I have concerns about the affordability of transportation and what that will do to tourism and attracting businesses. Vote no!

biker294 about 2 months ago

As a resident of Kansas City MO, I am extremely concerned about our children's future, and I want to see my city taking effective steps to slow climate change. Other levels of government seem incapable.

I would like to see strong action on energy efficient construction standards (homes last decades!), energy conservation by weatherizing homes, streamlining traffic, smart streets/ alternative means of transportation, discouraging sprawl, closing coal fire power plants, making sure homes with solar power can contribute to the grid, encouraging greater residential density, allowing tiny homes.

Be sure to FUND implementation of initiatives in the climate plan!!! Show us that you are serious and this is not just hot air!

Midtown Resident about 2 months ago

Hello, I am from the 4th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. Specifically, I really support protecting communities from gentrification in housing. You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

eclaire about 2 months ago

Hello, I am a resident of District 3, which contains communities disproportionately harmed by the climate crisis and most overlooked in our city's infrastructure. While I appreciate some of the efforts outlined in the drafted CPRP plan, the draft at this time is severely lacking in specificity needed to hold city leaders, fossil fuel executives, and developers accountable as we build a more sustainable and equitable city. This plan needs to specify which communities will be invested in - namely, it should focus on infrastructure in Black, brown, low-income, and houseless communities while protecting us from gentrification. We want to see measurable goals like policies that outline green building and retrofitting requirements. We want accountability for our utility companies like Spire, requiring them to disclose how much of our money they use to lobby for policy that favors their interests. We want guaranteed job replacement for workers in fossil fuel companies as we transition to clean energy. We want actual green energy, not green-washed messaging to frame fossil fuels as a sustainable option when it is not. We want regular community engagement with everyday Kansas Citians throughout the implementation of the CPRP. Please see the comprehensive list of these demands and more passed at the People's Climate Town Hall this week: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1snOfywhlDoX5ZpmxG_YAFHmigbFmpu0dlw0sNbo_veA/mobilebasic

Respectfully,
Sarah Gray

Sarah Gray about 2 months ago

From the perspective of a Kansas City Northland resident, this plan fails in so many ways I don’t have time to list them all. I’ll focus on just the first two sections.

Mobility
The plan calls for providing alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle miles traveled without specifying what those modes of transportation are. If planners intend to add more light rail similar to the KC Street Car, it’s an incredibly expensive proposition for what will prove to be an inconvenient option at best for most within the KC city limits. Kansas City encompasses a huge geographical area relative to population. When planning rail routes, or bus routes for that matter, there’s no cost-effective way to move the city’s population around, especially when taking into consideration the significant number of commuters within outlying KC neighborhoods and commuters from surrounding communities. And the fact is, most people don’t want to use public transportation because it’s inconvenient, slow and often unpleasant. We can’t fill up the buses running currently during peak commuting hours, but we’re going to add more? The only reason the Streetcar has been as “successful” as it has been so far, is because it’s limited to a relatively dense area with significant attractions at either end and, perhaps most importantly, because it’s free. Are we going to subsidize all public transportation in KC? Either our taxes would have to go up or other city services would have to be reduced, or both. In fact, it’s clear this plan overall significantly underestimates the costs and overestimates the so-called benefits of its recommendations.

What about increasing the use of bicycles for transportation? Again, I would suggest it’s not practical or desired by most residents. I currently have a 40-mile round trip commute to work each day, almost entirely within KCMO city limits. Some might say I should move closer to where I work, but I love where I live and there’s no guarantee I’m going to be working at the same place for the rest of my career. In an area of the country where we experience weather extremes throughout the year, there’s no way I and others like me are going to make that kind of commute by bike or even a combination of bike and public transport. Too hot, too cold, too rainy, too windy, too icy, too far, too long.

The plan also mentions avoiding sprawl. Too late. Kansas City is already a sprawling city due to the areas that were annexed years ago, including the Northland. How do the plan’s proponents suggest that be addressed? The reality is that the bulk of current development and new employment opportunities are largely in these very areas. As businesses locate here, they are looking to areas where they can build facilities that suit their specific needs and provide room to expand in the future. As these employers take root, neighborhoods grow around them to provide homes and services for those who are employed in those areas and, ultimately, increase the area’s tax base. It’s impractical to think that this is going to change without discouraging businesses from locating or remaining here and taking their jobs and tax dollars with them. This plan would result in more businesses choosing to locate in Kansas or other more business-friendly MO communities.

Energy
I care about the environment just like every commenter on here. I have children and want them to grow up being able to experience nature and all that the outdoors provides. But the notion that Kansas City has to be powered by renewable-only electric in order to preserve the environment is foolish. The US has already seen a tremendous drop in greenhouse gas emissions in the last quarter century, due primarily to the switch in this country from coal to natural gas for the majority of electric generation. If you refer to the trend chart in the plan (p. 22), you see a similar trend for Kansas City, even before the impacts of the pandemic. Yet we’re expected to believe that trend is suddenly about to reverse? Based on what? Electric generation continues to improve on the reduction of GHG emissions and higher efficiency gas appliances are reducing energy usage and emissions. We’re already on a path to reduced emissions in Kansas City and across the US.

And where exactly is all this new renewable electricity going to come from? Solar and wind still make up a small percentage of current electric generation and are nowhere close to being able to supply all of Kansas City’s needs. Scaling up to the point that Evergy could meet all of Kansas City’s energy needs with renewables will require huge investments, investments that will have to be recouped at some point by passing those costs on to customers by way of increased electric bills. There’s just no way around it. Electricity is already more expensive than natural gas for heat and cooking. Going to all renewables will only increase that price even more. And increased energy bills are going to have the greatest impact on the individuals and communities that can least afford them.

In addition to the increased investment and costs associated with building all this additional solar and wind energy generation, there’s the environmental impact to consider. Seems to me we’re just trading one environmental issue for another. Just think of how many square miles will need to be covered by solar panels, blocking the sunlight from reaching the ground beneath them, choking out plant life and displacing the animal life that depends on it for food, nesting habitat, etc. And there are plenty of studies that document the negative impacts wind turbines have on bird populations. Imagine multiplying that impact a hundred-fold, just to meet Kansas City’s current energy needs.

And all that investment, all that development, if it succeeds, still won’t be enough to meet Kansas City’s future energy needs if we eliminate natural gas as an option for homes and businesses. We just experienced last year what the weather extremes in this part of the country can be like. In February of 2021, winter storm Uri nearly took down the electric grid across our region. Now imagine all gas furnaces and water heaters are forced to convert to electric, and the additional strain on the system that would create in a similar future weather event (not to mention all the electric cars charging away in our garages since the plan also pushes for more electric vehicles). Remember, wind turbines froze up and couldn't generate any electricity in those conditions. That’s not creating a more resilient energy system, it’s creating one more likely to collapse when it’s needed most.

One more thing to consider - the same city government that can't effectively manage a budget, refuses to adequately fund our police, doesn't maintain our roads and can't keep our parks and open spaces free of the ever-increasing trash presence would be responsible for administering this plan and the BILLIONS of dollars attached to it. Based on what I've seen in my time here, I have zero faith this plan could be successfully completed on time, on budget or to expectations.

I could go on, but I should hope by now that it’s clear this plan is flawed in so many ways it should be voted down unanimously. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I only wish more Kansas Citians were aware that this is being considered. I have no doubt the vast majority would be opposed if only they knew.

John M about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is Kamran and I am from the 5th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. Specifically, I really support adding in more green technology investment and divestment from dirty technology. You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

Kamran about 2 months ago

My name is Duong Hoang and I am from the 4th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must represent people, not fossil fuel executives from Spire and Evergy.

First, the plan fails to address racial injustice and green gentrification. We’ve all seen how the development of the streetcar has raised rent for those living along the path, who’s to say that new green developments won’t do the same? We shouldn’t have to choose between affordable housing and reliable transit. I call for a fully funded transit system that doesn’t raise rates, and is accessible and affordable to poor/working-class folks.

Second, the plan doesn’t mention tenants or tenant unions, renters, and protections against abusive landlords and developers. Instead it gives handouts to developers and landlords, and allows Spire to minimize building decarbonization efforts. Instead of leaving tenants to fend for themselves, the plan needs to explicitly endorse social housing and KC Tenant’s People’s Housing Trust fund. KC deserves rent control and stabilization, and no tax incentives for developers that aren’t building affordable housing.

Third, this version of the plan is not aggressively implementing clean energy and lets polluters off the hook. We demand a complete end to the Hawthorn coal plant and a just transition to renewable energy by 2030. 2040 is too late, and “net-zero” is not zero.

sriracha_d about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is Ellen and I am from the 3rd District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. Specifically, I really support tax polluters, implement plans to combat gentrification and have a strong focus on racial justice. You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

Ellen about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is Rohan and I am from the city’s 4th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. Specifically, I really support moving to a zero fossil fuels policy instead of a net-zero fossil fuels policy. The climate has degraded to such an extent that we can’t afford to continue using dirty, non-renewable sources of energy. Our city deserves a sustainable, equitable future, and it starts with a commitment to stopping the use of dirty fossil fuels. Closing the Hawthorn coal plant would be a great start.

rohanpidaparti about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is James Gilson, and I am from the 4th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. Specifically, I really support the expansion of transit, bike lanes, and sidewalks; higher pay for bus workers; guaranteed housing for all; and the taxation of polluting industries to fund the development of public green infrastructure. You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

jhg17 about 2 months ago

KC metro born and raised here, current resident of the 3rd district. Please consider the proposals put forward by the recent People's Climate Town Hall, available here -- https://bit.ly/pcthdemands .

Please consider the real needs being expressed by real citizens over the agendas of corporations, politicians, developers and utility companies. You have the power to create real change that will impact our city, land and descendants for generations to come. Please consider the legacy you want to leave with the opportunity to serve the public good with this plan.

abpenney about 2 months ago

Hi I’m a resident I think the 4th district. We need public money funding public projects for renewable energy, we need to stop caring about the profits of fossil fuel companies, and we need housing for all. https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

The current plan is unacceptable and is clearly intended solely to satisfy appearances and the consciences of city council. We need specifics and we need public backing for projects and initiatives that will create good paying jobs and make our communities healthier.

Jakob B about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is Tim Hawks and I am from the 6th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. I support all parts of this plan, including the initiatives surrounding racial justice, housing, workers, transit, and energy. You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

TimJHawks about 2 months ago

Natural gas as a bridge fuel is a false solution. We need 100% renewable energy ASAP!

Kailee w/ Sunrise about 2 months ago

Hi, my name is Kailee, and as a young person, and a leader with Sunrise Movement KC, I have a lot of concerns about this plan.
First, there is not much about equity, justice, workers’ rights, tenants’ rights, or fighting racial injustice in this plan. The climate crisis affects every aspect of our lives, and impacts people differently. Black and brown folks are disproportionately affected by this crisis, so they must be at the forefront of it.
I won’t talk about what is in the plan, since it is vague and inadequate. Instead, I’ll talk about what needs to be in the plan, specifically what community members suggested in the Peoples’ Climate Town Hall last night.
Firstly, a just climate plan should include racial justice. Be specific about which communities will be benefited by the plan; include houseless people and black and brown folks. The plan must also work to protect houseless folks, black, and brown folks from gentrification in housing, and guarantee housing for all. Pricing people out of a home is an act of racial injustice.
The CPRP should also work to address police violence by adding local control of the KCPD to maximize city control over the budget, and work to defund KCPD.
Second, a just climate plan should include justice for tenants and renters, and not give power to abusive landlords and greedy developers. The city should fund retrofits of buildings and homes in frontline communities, and make Spire and Evergy pay for them. Rooftop solar projects should also work to benefit frontline communities first, and work to make sure poor, black and brown communities are not left behind again.
Third, a just climate plan must center around workers and workers’ rights. There must be expansion to public transit, specifically in low-income and black and brown neighborhoods. People need reliable ways to get to work, and electric transit, bikes, and scooters should be safe, accessible, and free. Buses should also come more frequently, every 5-10 minutes and not every 30 minutes to an hour. For workers, every worker should have access to paid sick leave, parental leave, should get a liveable wage, and have access to a union and union bargaining without interference from employers. Wages should have always been involved in the process of this plan, and its disappointing to see that they weren’t. Now that we are getting closer to passage and implementation, workers must be involved.
Lastly, (even though there is so much more to comment on), energy was a big topic at last night’s town hall. The CPSC and City Council must work harder to counter Spire’s false claims that renewables are more expensive than natural gas, and we must work to ensure that natural gas and other fossil fuels are not included. We want no false solutions like “net-zero” which isn’t really zero, and 2040 is too far away. I can’t wait that long for radical change to be made. KC can’t wait that long. The Hawthorn plant must be closed NOW. Not in 2025, not later, NOW. There must also be no further coal, oil, gas plants or leases made. We also demand community controlled electricity, meaning that we have a community controlled energy provider through publicly owned renewable energy.
There is so much more that must be included in this plan. It was a powerful moment seeing the community come together to decide what’s best for the community. We had to take matters into our own hands to be included and properly give input on this plan, and what came out of that, was a plan more radical, equitable, and just than the one presented by the Brendle group, the CPSC, and the influences of Spire and Evergy. There cannot be climate justice without racial justice, without workers’ justice, without tenants’ justice, without economic justice.

Kailee w/ Sunrise about 2 months ago

Hello, my name is Bailey and I am from the 6th District. I’m a supporter of the Green New Deal, and that’s why I believe this plan must adopt the demands from the People’s Climate Town Hall. My first wish for the plan is to add specific language like in the PCTH demands. This plan's current superficial language is not enough. I really support the plan being specific with which communities will be benefited by the plan, including houseless people, and Black and brown people . I would also like to see
1. Expansion of transit, bike lanes, sidewalks
2. Fix streets and sidewalks regardless of whether there is development there or not
3. All city electric scooters and bikes should be free (Make electric transit safe and accessible)

You can view the rest of the demands at: https://bit.ly/pcthdemands

greenbeen about 2 months ago

Prioritize low-income communities of color to be the first to benefit from CPRP strategies, such as sustainable transportation infrastructure, increase renewable energy, and affordable infill housing.
Include a green jobs section that provides data quantifying both job quality and demographic and geographic distribution of workers.
Commit to leveraging existing skilled training and apprenticeship infrastructure to create and sustain middle-class career ladders.
Recognize and support existing community-led organizations, businesses, and programs that can help achieve the goals in Kansas City’s Plan while building a green and just economy and culture.
Create green jobs and entrepreneurship opportunities that advance the goals of this plan, expand economic opportunity and inclusion, and build agency and decision-making power in low-income communities and communities of color.
Work with partners to secure educational and funding support for local workforce development, job-training, and economic opportunity for residents.

KCgreen about 2 months ago

My name is Michael and I live in the 4th District. I support the Green New Deal, and that's why I support the demands from People's Climate Town Hall hosted by Sunrise Movement KC.

This climate plan needs to be as aggressive, holistic, and just as possible, and right now it's failing on all counts.

We must be pursuing our goals as quickly as possible. Not only is the "net-zero" emissions by 2040 in this plan reliant on false solutions like carbon offsets, but 2040 is far too late for the Global South and poorer communities who will need extra help transitioning. We must transition off fossil fuels by 2030, we must not grant any new oil or fracking leases, and we must not assume that carbon offsets are at all a reliable solution when wind & solar are already proven. We also need to close the Hawthorn coal plant as soon as we can and ensure that the elementary school kids and Northeast families have access to adequate healthcare due to the air pollution they have breathed in.

I'm also struck by how little this plan seems acknowledge the lead in many KC resident's water. These pipes can be replaced as we replace everything else, and this plan should name exerting more power over the Water Department.

Our climate plan must also be as just and holistic as possible. There is barely a mention of tenants and renters in this plan even though KC is a majority-tenant city with a housing crisis. The climate plan must embrace municipal social housing and KC Tenant's proposed People's Housing Trust initiative. The city must help renters ensure their landlords make their buildings green, safe from temperature changes, weatherized, weatherized, and accessible without raising their rent. Tenants also deserve disclosures on utility costs (including what amount of utility dollars is being used for lobbying) and protection from rate increases. The city must use whatever power it has to make sure rent and utility bills do not go up, and that our unhoused comrades are able to immediately transition into public housing. This city has an Office of Tenant Advocate, it must be named and further funded in this plan as well.

Speaking of funding, this plan must be funded by public dollars and a climate tax on Evergy, Spire, and any other polluting business. Additionally, we need not waste money greening electric vehicles or hiring more police officers because we don't need them; we need more workers planting trees, growing food locally, retrofitting buildings, educating the public, and building and staffing new green infrastructure, including our understaffed bus system that is currently underpaying its workers and subjecting them to horrible working conditions. This plan should name that 50% of any jobs created must go to Black, Brown, and working communities, and this plan should name the importance of those jobs being good-paying, wage adjusted-for inflation, union jobs. If the city is going to negotiate with private businesses for public contracts, it must leverage its power to ensure the above, and named in this plan.

This plan must also define convenient transit and make sure it is convenient for all. The plan should name beefing up KC's micro-transit program with extremely prompt service. The same should go for our buses, which should run East to West, better include Southeast KC, and come within 5-10 minutes, not 30 minutes to 1 hour. And again, this plan should be aware of and take steps to prevent gentrification that happens in all of these communities as they become improved. Additionally, we should be improving infrastructure everywhere, regardless of whether or not there is development there. And finally, people are more likely to use bike lanes and walk if they have access to public restrooms. This plan should name the importance of more public restrooms that are ADA accessible and have bidets in them to ensure we are not as reliant on toilet paper, which has a huge impact on the environment.

Additionally, I'm struck by zero mention of climate refugees within this plan. This plan could at least name funding more organizations for refugee resettlement and ensuring that refugees will have full access to city benefits as residents who are US citizens.

Finally, when it comes to food and trees, I find many aspects of this plan to be very progressive. However, this plan does not name how the planting of male pollinating trees worsens allergies (which are worsening every year as the temperature worsens.) The city should plant more female trees that bear fruit, which can also be a new source for more local food.

I also support the full list of demands here: http://bit.ly/pcthdemands

mgwolfe95 about 2 months ago
Page last updated: 13 Apr 2022, 12:47 PM