California’s EV transition is now local

OPINION – The first months of the Trump Administration have clean transportation advocates scrambling. After four years of landmark programs that promised to transform the ways we travel and clean the air we breathe, America is now facing a government intent on promoting fossil fuels and directly attacking California’s ability to lead on climate change.

With California’s programs now at risk of elimination and federal leadership on the wane—not to mention tariffs threatening to raise prices and disrupt supply chains across the board—what will happen to the much-anticipated electric vehicle (EV) transition?

The answer is not in Washington. It’s not even in Sacramento–it is in the hands of local governments.

Even with the Biden Administration’s billions of dollars of investments fully underway, the EV transition has been bumpy. Alameda County has one of the highest EV adoption rates in the entire country–but East Oakland, one of California’s most underserved urban neighborhoods, is home to only three community EV charging sites. West Oakland is home to one.

With the federal government now pulling back from its commitments to both EVs and climate justice, communities around the country will miss out on crucial investments unless there is deliberate focus on areas in need. And it is local governments that now have the power to either make or break the EV transition.

City departments, county boards, electric utilities: these are the bodies that will determine if the shift to EVs is haphazard and market-driven–or equitable and accessible for all.

Planning departments issue the permits that put EV charging in the ground. Building departments can enable owners to upgrade their electrical systems and allow renters to charge at home. City councils set zoning rules and transit plans to determine which transportation investments go where. Utilities determine who can connect to the grid and when.

Every step–from a delayed grid interconnection request to a failed design review–can determine which communities get access to EVs and charging in ways that meet their needs, and which are left behind.

These roles seem small compared to the tens of millions of EVs and chargers that will hit the US in the coming decade. Why should a municipal permit put the brakes on a crucial mobility investment funded by taxpayers and supported by public policy?

The answer is not just that local approval hurdles abound in American infrastructure projects, though that is certainly true. It is that local review, engagement, and input are crucial to smart transportation investments that actually promote community mobility and quality of life.

If local governments fail to act, they risk stranding the communities that most need investments in mobility. Wealthier Americans who can afford an EV and dedicated charging at home will have no trouble enjoying the convenience and long-term savings of making the switch–but lower-income drivers, apartment dwellers, and underserved communities will need support and action from decisionmakers to get it right.

Crucially, without federal leadership, local governments must step to the fore in identifying where those communities are and what investments they need most. The Biden Administration introduced a suite of tools to direct climate investments to environmental justice communities. The Trump Administration is eliminating these vital programs–meaning local governments need to carry the work of locating the highest-priority areas.

Fortunately, local governments have begun to accept the challenge. We all know California is home to the most EV chargers in the country, but examples of leadership are rapidly cropping up around the country. Cities from New York to Englewood, Colorado (population 34,000) have developed EV plans. Innovative public EV charging pilots are cropping up from Portland, Oregon to Bloomington, Illinois (population 78,000). And cities like Oakland are now embracing simple solutions bring low-cost charging to residents, such as allowing them to run a properly covered charging cable across the sidewalk to a parked vehicle. As we enter a new world for EV policy, California’s local governments need to build on these examples and take the helm of EV leadership.

The arrival of an administration hostile to environmental protection and public health will not stop the EV transition. But it can make it slower and less beneficial for the communities that have suffered most from a century of inequitable transportation investments.

Local governments have the ability–and responsibility–to make sure this does not happen. Now is the time for local leaders to step up with smart plans that will deliver on the climate and public health promise of an equitable EV transition.

Ted Lamm is the Associate Director and leads the EV Equity Initiative at UC Berkeley’s Center for Law, Energy and the Environment.