TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

This seems like a plan that has some potential to make change in Vermont. I hope that it moves forward.

Copied and gave presentation to Essex Economic Development Committee. They loved my idea of making Saxon Hill Road a Greenway Linear Park as this already pristine, well maintained gravel public road, is an effective means of connecting people with their jobs in Saxon Hill Business District, school, and the land the Town now owns. The Greenway concept is a response to a Town severely fragmented. It would serve as an access by foot, bike, electric bike or ski not only to get to businesses in Saxon Hill Business District, but connects one another with the 90 acre school property, the new 225 acres gifted to Essex for passive recreation and connects all portions of Saxon Hill Road with one another. Our Town outside the Village community has fragmented neighborhoods, Saxon Hill Business District to Jericho line becoming very populated but, our parks, wet lands, playgrounds, trails, public gravel roads, and other open spaces, are scattered; to many people, accessible only bar car. This Greenway concept which has maybe 6 houses at most with long driveways, focuses on reconnecting our recreational carbon free lifestyle that most millennials want, in order to decide if they want to live here. The question is: how convenient will you make it for them? I gave presentation on why millennials are leaving Vermont, and how a simple concept of putting up Greenway signs to connect Saxon to Thompson Dr., Allen Martin all within the Saxon Hill Business District would be a millennial magnet. Most of living here no matter what age or background are demanding quality of life worth living and
Demand Carbon Free Lifestyle. Thank You, Patty Davis

My husband and I left Maine 6 years ago. We were making plans to return next spring but have had second thoughts since Mills was elected. She is not for helping the citizens of Maine.

I am strongly supportive of what the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI) states are developing as a regional policy for low-carbon transportation. With accelerating climate change/warming of the earth, we urgently need to cap and reduce carbon emissions from the combustion of transportation fuels. This might be done through a cap-and-invest program as the TCI has suggest, or through other pricing mechanism. This needs to be be done in the context of an aggressive, health and conservation focused policy approach that is developed, adopted and implemented as soon as can be managed. Our future depends on this. This should be a top priority of our local, state and federal government.

Get serious. The climate Crisis and our infrastructure crisis are not going to fix themselves. It is time to do something that will provide a means to a proactive, positive change for my grandchildren's future.

This is an excellent proposal. I urge Vermont’s Governor Scott to support an aggressive program to fight the Climate Crisis

The Transportation Climate Initiative sets out a framework that imposes an unfair burden on all vehicle owners and thousands of businesses.

I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined: Capping sales of gasoline and diesel, requiring suppliers to purchase allowances in order to sell motor fuel, and having consumers pay higher prices at the pump in order to subsidize electric vehicles.

This proposal negatively impacts low income Vermonters, particularly those that live in rural areas of the state. It would only help those who are considering purchasing a new electric vehicle and/or those that live in urban areas with access to public transportation.

Furthermore, while some consumers may be able to choose public transportation or an electric car to avoid the increased cost in gasoline, there is no viable option for businesses that need diesel trucks. In Vermont, 25% of the motor fuel sold is diesel— and we need diesel trucks to haul milk, logs and other products that benefit our agricultural economy. Diesel is also sold with increasing blends of renewable biodiesel, which is critical for Vermont and the Northeast to meet our energy goals.

We ask you to slow down this process and consider taking diesel fuel out of TCI.

While AGC/VT is interested in working towards solutions regarding our climate and environment we believe that more thought be put into this program. Specifically we oppose adding the tax to diesel fuels. We have been told that dyed diesel and diesel used in heavy equipment like excavators are not intended to fall into the TCI tax, but its not clear how it would be avoided. The diesel used by the construction industry is typically delivered in bulk and is "dyed diesel". Currently there are requirements from ANR in some cases to identify total uses of those fuels and the reason is for potential future carbon taxation according the ANRs clean air division. It is important for agencies and TCI advocates to understand that these fees/taxes will be passed on to individuals and government agencies employing services from the private sector. This will either increase costs of roads, bridges and buildings, or provide an opportunity for organizations outside of TCI districts to step in and under bid for services which could kill local economies. At the very least adding a 30 tax to diesel would result in an additional cost of approx $16.20 for a truck to run from White River to just Montpelier or $7000-10000+ per construction vehicles annual usage. These costs multiplied by the sheer volume of commercial and government work would have a major effect the state and private consumers in the multi millions. This new expense would be a heavy lift for the already challenged appropriations of our state.

If/When TCI comes to be, Vermont is expected to benefit from $30-60 million per year depending on the source I have spoken with. It is imperative that any monies gained by this transportation program have a nexus to transportation. The majority of the fuel taxes we pay already go to general fund projects while our road and bridge infrastructure continue to age and have been level funded at approximately 1/3 of VTRANS budget requests. This is an emerging crisis as the state depends of federal funds which are based on "grades" of our road maintenance. TCI funds should not go in the general fund, clean water fund or go to unfunded pension liabilities. It should stay in transportation whether it would be used to modernize our roads, or improve public transportation so more people use it.

We face a climate emergency and cannot win unless we start immediately. The Cap and Trade can be a valuable tool but it must be done soon and aggressively. If gasoline stays cheap and plentiful, we will fail to save the climate. So thanks for implementing this legislation.