Energy And Climate Action Committee Presents Town Climate Action Plan
R.W. Kern Center, a net zero building at Hampshire College. Photo: hampshire.edu
Report On The Meeting Of The Amherst Town Council, June 21, 2021 (Part 2)
The report on Part 1 and Part 3 of the meeting here and here.
The meeting was called to order at 6:38 p.m. and adjourned at 12:52 a.m.
This was the first hybrid meeting of the Town Council since the expiration of Governor Charlie Baker’s special orders on remote meetings.
Present:
Lynn Griesemer (President, District 2), Mandi Jo Hanneke and Andy Steinberg (at large), Cathy Schoen (District 1), Pat DeAngelis (District 2), Dorothy Pam and George Ryan (District 3), Evan Ross and Steve Schreiber (District 4).
Remote participation: Alisa Brewer (at large), Sarah Swartz (District 1), Shalini Bahl-Milne and Darcy DuMont (District 5)
Nine councilors were present in the Town Room of Town Hall, as were Town Manager Paul Bockelman and Clerk of the Council Athena O’Keeffe. Councilors Alisa Brewer (at large), Sarah Swartz (District 1), Darcy DuMont, and Shalini Bahl-Milne (District 5) participated remotely. Masks were required for all who attended in person. At the beginning of the meeting, there were an estimated 25 people in the room, which has a capacity of 40. The full meeting can be viewed here.
The Energy and Climate Action Committee (ECAC) presented its Climate Action, Adaptation and Resiliency Plan (CAARP) to the Council. Sustainability Coordinator Stephanie Ciccarello and ECAC Chair Laura Draucker presented the 170-page plan, which was developed over the past two years with input from extensive public outreach and consultation with, Linnean Solutions, a firm that guides local governments, organizations, property owners, and communities in reaching ambitious resilience and sustainability goals.
The goal of the CAARP is a 25 percent reduction in carbon emissions from 2016 levels by 2025, 50 percent by 2030, and carbon neutrality by 2050.
The plan also stresses the need to take equity into account when developing plans by employing multilingual outreach and collaboration with the community. Ciccarello noted that climate change impacts everyone, but has more effect on less advantaged members of the community. She stressed the need for the whole community to work together to meet the goals established, as well as working with other towns, the state, and the region.
The ECAC divided its roadmap to achieving the goals into five sections: buildings, renewable energy, land use and natural systems, transportation and infrastructure, and governance and communication. They encouraged the Council to opt into the PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) program which would give the Town access to financing to facilitate renewable energy and energy efficiency improvements in commercial and industrial buildings.
The Implementation Matrix (page 162) gives a snapshot of the proposed actions, their cost, readiness, and effect on carbon mitigation. Draucker pointed out that there is “a ton of work to be done in all aspects of operations. We especially need to address the rental community. […] Bold decision-making has to happen.”
Bahl-Milne pointed out the need to coordinate with the institutions of higher learning in Amherst and also with certain committees of the Council, such as the Community Resources Committee (CRC) to move efforts forward. DeAngelis appreciated the inclusion of equity across the board in the proposal.
Griessemer moved to direct the Town Manager to formulate an implementation plan for the CAARP by November 15, 2021. DuMont wanted to add that the Town Manager is expected to solicit input from the ECAC in formulating the implementation plan. Brewer objected to accepting a plan presented by a committee in its entirety. She said this was not done with the Community Safety Working Group (CSWG)’s plan or, for that matter, with the Master Plan. DeAngelis noted that the Town Manager denied extending the work of the CSWG so that the group could have a voice in the plans to implement their proposals, but Griessemer said that conflating the two situations was out of order.
Hanneke and Griessemer both expressed reservations about accepting this detailed report as a whole on such short notice. (The Councilors saw the report for the first time on the Thursday before the meeting). Schoen said that there are aspects of the plan, such as the PACE program, that she wanted to know more about. The motion to direct the Manager to develop an implementation plan for the CAARP was withdrawn.
Ciccarello said it is important to move forward with some speed and to determine the role of the Council and the Town in enacting the plan. She didn’t think that acceptance of the Implementation Matrix meant accepting every aspect of the report. Pam pointed out that there is currently no requirement for the large mixed-use buildings being constructed in Town to meet energy efficiency standards, and that none are included in the report.
The CAARP will be brought back before the Council in July or August, after the Council has had a chance to study it.
It’s good to see this basic principle made into the CAARP (what an acronym, however ;-):
Members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Task Group introduced and advocated for the principle of transportation as a fundamental human right. As a public good, our public transportation system should be funded and regarded in the same way we fund and think about our schools, libraries, and parks, with free and universal access as the guiding principle. The benefits of expanded service and fare-free transit extend beyond affordability and convenience for riders, increasing equity across the transportation sector and improving public health as more people switch to riding the bus and vehicle emissions (and resulting air pollution) go down….
And later (page 158):
The City of Lawrence, MA implemented fare-free service on three bus lines in the city starting in 2019, and a 2020 survey found a 24% jump in ridership as a result. Ninety percent of those riders were commuting to work…. In Amherst’s service area, the PVTA regularly surveys its customers to understand travel needs, customer satisfaction, and priorities for improvements, especially when it comes to assuring equity and accessibility.
Their 2015 survey of riders in Hampshire County found that 52% of customers said they had no other way (than the PVTA) to make their trip…. By making public transportation 100% [fare] free…, the PVTA and its member communities will be supporting economic and environmental justice and improved quality of life for residents already disproportionately impacted by climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Pam pointed out that there is currently no requirement for the large mixed-use buildings being constructed in Town to meet energy efficiency standards, and that none are included in the report.”
But — why not? Why exempt Archipelago and any other developers from having, and having to meet, the same energy efficiency standards as everyone else? If we are all in this climate crisis together, aren’t they in it with the rest of us? And why should Town Council, since it has the ultimate authority here, let developers profit from making it harder on and for the rest of us?