The new infrastructure law signed by President Biden includes almost $50 billion to protect communities against climate change, the largest such investment in United States history, and a recognition that the effects of warming are out pacing America's ability to cope.
The benefits of federal climate spending should reach at least 40 percent of underserved places, which tend to be low income, rural, and communities of color.
White communities with high property values and resources to apply to competitive programs receive the bulk of federal grants. Policy experts don't know if federal bureaucracy can level the playing field quickly.
The tensions have to be faced squarely, according to a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who volunteered on the transition team. He said that the White House was trying to transform some of the deep structures of government that needed attention.
Some local governments have tried to distribute money in a more equitable way. The political backlash can be very strong.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, voters approved a bond to fund 500 flood-control projects. The percentage of residents who are minorities was used as a factor in the decision to prioritize the projects.
The policy would push the wealthier neighborhoods to the back of the line.
Billions of dollars are injected into competitive grant programs by the new climate provisions in the infrastructure bill. These pots of money are only available to towns, cities and counties, which must submit applications to get funds.
Funding goes to the most worthwhile projects according to the system.
The ability of local officials to use sophisticated tools and resources to write successful applications is something that is outside the control of the federal government. The result has widened the gap between rich and poor communities.
The image is.
President Joe Biden signed the $1 trillion infrastructure bill into law at the White House.
The disparity starts before the application process begins. Local governments have to be aware of grant programs in the first place and have dedicated staff to track them. They need to design proposals that will score highly and complete the required paperwork.
Many struggling towns and counties are not able to afford a 25 percent share of the project if they are awarded a grant.
Demonstrating that the value of the property that would be protected is greater than the cost of the project is a final hurdle that governments have to clear. The rule excludes communities of color and rural areas where property values are lower than in white communities.
The federal government has created a list of programs for hazard mitigation and climate adaptation, but counties and municipalities don't have the institutional capacity to participate in them.
In October, advocates challenged senior White House officials to explain how they would fulfill their promises of racial equity, given the history of federal grant programs.
Beverly Wright is the founder and executive director of the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice. What good is it if the people who need it the most can't afford it?
Yoca Arditi-Rocha is the executive director of the CLEO Institute, a nonprofit group in Florida that promotes climate change education, advocacy and resilience.
She said the price tag to adapt to the climate risk is enormous. The federal government can't leave behind communities like my own.
Officials conceded the challenge and said they were looking for ways to address it. The associate director for climate at the White House Office of Management and Budget said that they are aware that the issue needs work.
The image is.
The homes in Lake Charles, La., were destroyed by Hurricane Laura.
The consequences of the current approach were on display this summer when the Federal Emergency Management Agency named the first round of likely winners under a new climate resilience grant program.
The BRIC program is a model that should be expanded by the Biden administration. Billions more is provided to the program by the infrastructure bill.
Most of the first round winners were wealthy areas in a few coastal states, according to federal data.
California, New Jersey and Washington State received most of the money. The largest single recipient was a $68 million flood-control project in Menlo Park, Calif., where the median household income is more than $160,000, the typical home costs more than $2 million and only one in five residents are Black or Hispanic. The project is close to getting $50 million from FEMA.
Smithland, Ky., is a town of just over 200 people and is halfway between St. Louis and Nashville. The town wanted to build a levee along the riverbank, which has been prone to flooding three times in the past 10 years.
The top elected official in Livingston County, which includes Smithland, said that it was a lot of money.
He said that the barrier would be less expensive than a temporary barrier every time the river crests because it would be large compared to the houses it would protect.
I am not sure what would happen if the grant doesn't qualify. It is almost as if you would prefer me to leave the city.
The first round of BRIC awards were governed by the rules set by the Trump administration. The rules for the next round of awards have been changed to give more points for applications that cite benefits for disadvantaged communities, according to a senior official in the Biden administration.
The Biden administration wants to give 40 percent of climate dollars to disadvantaged communities, as defined by each federal agency. The initiative doesn't require a specific amount of climate funding to be spent in underserved communities.
The FEMA program's new rules define disadvantaged communities broadly, to reflect one or more of 15 suggested criteria. They include persistent poverty, racial segregation, high costs for housing, transportation, energy or water, and job losses related to the transition away from fossil fuels.
The same criteria that makes it hard for climate resilience projects in low-income communities to get approved is what makes it hard for communities to demonstrate that their infrastructure projects would save more money than they would cost.
The image is.
The Blue Ridge Fire was 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217 800-273-3217
Ellory Monks runs a website called The Atlas that allows local officials to share information about their community.
Ms. Monks wants the federal government to recreate circuit riding, in which judges traveled between small towns during the 1800s. Federal agencies would assign staff to live in towns and counties to help local leaders with their resilience projects.
Ms. Monks said that it was not possible to do that from D.C.
If the government really wants to help disadvantaged communities become more resilient to climate change, it should move away from competitive grant programs altogether and instead decide which communities need help, according to Carlos Martn, a fellow at Brookings.
The places that we know have high exposure to climate-related effects have low wealth. These are easy criteria to set up.
Ms. Arditi-Rocha of the CLEO Institute said that the Biden administration should rethink who gets climate resilience money. She asked what was most important. Is protecting the lives of people more important than protecting property values?
