HomeMy WebLinkAboutClimate Council Meeting Summary - 9-17-2020
Orange County Climate Council
Meeting Summary
September 17, 2020
3:00pm - 4:30pm
Online Meeting
Attendees: Mark Marcoplos (Chair), Brennan Bouma (staff), Ray DuBose, Robb English, Tyrone
Fisher, Laura Janway, Kathy Kaufman, Adam Long, Melissa McCullough, Jonas
Monast (joined late), John Richardson, Donna Rubinoff, Owen Ryerson, Sammy
Slade, Mary Tiger, Stephanie Trueblood
Presenters: Norma Safaransky, Sharon Bagatell
Public comments received by advertised deadline: None
I. Call to Order, Land Acknowledgement - Marcoplos called the meeting to order at
3:06pm.
Bouma gave a native lands acknowledgement for Orange County, recognizing that Orange
County sits on the historic lands of the Occoneechi, Saponi, and Tutelo people, and
historically the land where Orange County now sits was also home to the Tuscarora,
Sissipahaw, Eno, Shakori, Saura, and Catawba.
II. Additions or Changes to the Agenda
No additions or changes were suggested.
III. Approval of Meeting Minutes from August 20, 2020
Bypassed due to the lack of quorum at that the time in the agenda.
IV. Presentation from Citizen’s Climate Lobby on Carbon Fee and Dividend Policy
Safransky from the Citizen’s Climate Lobby gave an introduction to their
organization and efforts. They support the Climate Caucus in the House of
Representatives which is structured to be bi-partisan.
Bagtell then gave the main presentation on the Energy Innovation and Carbon
Dividend Act which is currently a Bill under consideration in Congress. This Act
would place fee on carbon emissions at the source or point of entry for all fossil
fuels. The rate would be $15 per ton of estimated carbon emissions to start, going
up $10 each year. The money collected would then be distributed equally among
households as a monthly dividend. So while fuel prices would be expected to rise,
this dividend would offset those higher costs while encouraging a low carbon
lifecycle.
There are currently 82 sponsors in House of Representatives including David Price,
the City of Durham, Durham County, and Chapel Hill.
They then asked the Council to express support of the Act through a resolution or a
letter.
Bouma asked Bagtell to help explain the difference between this proposal and a
carbon tax.
Bagtell responded saying that a carbon tax would leave the money for the
government to use. This proposal sends all the money back to households. This will
help to protect lower wealth consumers.
Kaufman then asked whether this was the time to make comments or discuss
potential objections.
Marcoplos said that there may not be time for a full consideration of this at this
meeting, and we don’t have quorum, so maybe we can review documents for now
and then be prepared to discuss it at the next meeting.
Slade encouraged members to review Kaufman’s written comments and objections,
particularly on the need for comprehensive climate policy and the danger of passing
a pause on further climate regulations.
Rubinoff said that this is one of 7 different bills presented to Congress each with
pro’s and con’s, and we need to be able to respond to this in comparison to the
other policies which may require a longer time.
Bagatell said that she knows that the 10 year regulatory pause is a sticking point and
that this is a first step. This will ultimately be part of a package, and it doesn’t
preclude a green new deal. It does include a regulatory pause that they feel is
narrow so that it only applies to GHG emissions so that there is not both a fee AND
regulation on the same emissions. It doesn’t take away from the Clean Air Act. It
effects 3 mechanisms: 1.) The Clean Power Plan that never was adopted. 2.) New
source performance standard for new industrial plants that emit GHGs, 3.)Permit
modifications for new plants. It would have no impact on CAFÉ standards and other
legislation. They feel that this solution can achieve the emissions targets.
Kaufman made the point that similar prices on carbon in the Northeast is not
getting the results. This proposal would preclude a national clean energy standard.
Safransky added that that should the federal government shift party power in
November, this bill may undergo some changes.
Marcoplos suggested that a small subcommittee be formed to take this up and
bring back a recommendation at the next meeting.
Marcoplos asked if McCullough could lead this subcommittee and she agreed.
Other volunteers for this committee were Kaufman, Rubinoff, and Ryerson.
Tiger asked for whole council to be invited to join the review committee and Bouma
agreed to email the whole council and see if additional volunteers are interested.
Trueblood renewed the conversation about how we manage these types of
requests for advocacy or support from external groups. It will be important to
decide how we manage these types of actions so that we feel comfortable that we
are not getting ahead of the local governments.
Marcoplos agreed, and said that we are learning as we go.
Trueblood said that she would be interested in hearing options on how we
approach these actions because this is especially important for governmental staff.
Bouma called back to a previous Climate Council conversation that offered one
example which was to have the Council make recommendations to the member
governments instead of acting as the entity that is advocating or making the policy
recommendation.
Janway agreed.
V. Update from Climate Action Reporting Committee
Bouma reported that the committee had carried forward the changes that were discussed
at the last meeting, summarizing results quantitatively and qualitatively, and preparing for
the Community Update Event. Bouma expressed the committee’s openness to further
analysis suggestions or key takeaways that the Council had from the CARD that they wanted
to present at the event.
Bouma mentioned that the committee had not yet met with the Policy committee
to consider alignment of the two lists and would reach out to invite them.
Tiger and Janway said that we were also working on a written summary with visuals
to provide at the event.
Long reiterated that the committee was open to other ways of summarizing the
CARD data.
Slade thanked the committee for the work and said that it would be important to
align with the Policy committee, especially given the urgency of the needs we are
facing to take further action and the potential to take advantage of a potentially
changing political landscape.
Rubinoff agreed and asked if the actions could include further links to details or
websites, similar to what Carrboro has done.
Tiger agreed that it would be a good idea.
Trueblood offered that if there are multiple actions in one cell it can be complicated
to figure out which website to send people to. They may be able to add more links
and it may also be helpful to add contact information for who might provide more
details.
Richardson agreed.
Bouma agreed and called back to a previous conversation saying that contact info
would be helpful for journalists as well.
Long offered that links could also be included as footnotes.
VI. Update from Policy Committee
Trueblood reported that for her group, which was focused on low hanging fruit, that they
were still looking for feedback from the larger Council before moving forward. This may
make more sense to continue after the Community Update Event.
Richardson said that the other group, focused on larger actions, had not yet met.
Trueblood said that the committee could get together with the CARD committee and align
before investing further effort into policy research. Some areas from the policy list are not
areas that anyone is working on right now and might be important to include in some way.
VII. Update from Communications Committee
Marcoplos summarized that the committee had met and fleshed out the format for
the event. Marcoplos provided that overview and highlighted Tiger’s idea to
produce a video introduction with 15 seconds from each member.
Bouma and Tiger confirmed that the deadline for video submissions was going to be
Monday the 28th of September.
Marcoplos said that Kaufman would be the moderator for the panel.
Bouma said that the main panel would represent each of the committees with pairs of
presenters. These presentations would deliver information on what we had completed in
our first year. Moving from CARD, to Policy, and to Communications.
Bouma confirmed that there would be a 15 minute live Q and A as well as an opportunity to
have people submit questions at registration and a follow-up survey after the event.
Marcoplos said that at registration we should give people the opportunity to sign up for the
interest Council list as well.
Trueblood said that there needs to be promotion for the event. It would also be important
to get questions ahead of time and that the moderator should create questions as well for a
backup. People might not know the Climate Council yet and what authority we have, and
may not know what questions to ask.
Trueblood then asked if there was a list of invitees that had been created to assist Council
members in reaching out, specifically to elected officials.
Slade agreed.
Bouma said that the Communications Committee will prepare an announcement that
elected officials can deliver at their meetings. He also charged each of the committees to
identify their speakers and let him know, showcasing the diversity of our membership if
possible.
Ian Chrisafis a reporter with the Daily Tar Heel, then asked to speak and Marcoplos granted
that. He offered to help get the word out for the event. He asked if there was anything that
the council would appreciate being included in this or other stories about the Council.
Bouma confirmed the date and time for the Community Update event and offered to work
with Chrisafis separately. He would create a registration link for Chrisafis to include.
Trueblood then asked about what technology platform would be used for the event. When
you have over 60 people, some platforms work better because you can shift to a webinar
style format. Zoom can work well.
McCullough said that Chapel Hill likely had access to good platforms as well.
Kaufman said that it would also be important to build in security for the event and we will
need a technical person for the event.
Richardson agreed and offered to provide a backup if needed. The Zoom webinar platform
has worked well.
Trueblood agreed, especially since the on-the-fly surveys are good for engagement.
Bouma said that he would reach out to colleagues in the County who have access to several
platforms. If we do not have access to the Zoom webinar platform or a technical person,
then he would reach out to Richardson.
Kaufman said that we might consider having a Facebook Live as a backstop as well if
needed.
The Communications Committee closed saying that they would meet again soon and get
promotional materials together including a press release about the event.
McCullough asked when the next meeting would be and Bouma confirmed that there would
be the need for a normal meeting on October 15th the week before the event.
VIII. Discussion of Public Event
This discussion is merged with the update from the Communications committee above.
IX. Adjournment
Marcoplos asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting and this was provided by Slade and
seconded by McCullough. The Council voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at
4:31pm.