TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I'm told that: TCI is a multi-state plan to cap emissions from the transportation sector, auction off permits to distribute fossil fuels in the participating states and use the auction revenues to invest in low-carbon transportation solutions.

This approach, if understood by me, seems to lead to scarcity followed by higher prices (an indirect fuel tax/fee). Where's the equity in this?

I'm also told that: Despite RGGI’s success regionally, carbon pollution is rising in Vermont (as I suspect is so in other states). The increase is driven primarily by an increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, our cars and trucks.

As I look around the parking lots, I see larger and larger automobiles and pickup trucks every year with the concomitant worse mileage in most cases. Manufacturers' pursuit of greater profits push for larger vehicles for safety and indirectly for status. Since we wouldn't want to/can't limit vehicle choice, maybe we should have a CO2 mileage levy on each vehicle that is dependent on annual mileage driven, and EPA mileage rating. This levy could be established at the annual inspection from odometer readings and be progressive with the EPA mileage rating, so that unnecessarily large vehicles in effect pay more for the mostly unnecessarily greater CO2 emission. Mileages could be reported to the DMV and car registration renewal would be dependent on the payment of the levy.

To TCI Planners- Thank you for taking the time to listen to my input.

Vermont is bound by law to significantly reduce carbon and increase renewable energy sources. Many critics of carbon reduction proposals have argued that the small state of Vermont cannot do it alone. TCI provides a prime opportunity to take a regional approach to carbon pollution reduction. And it has the data of a similar and very successful RGGI program to back it up. Of course, Vermont needs to do this and much more. We need a suite of complementary policies to help us meet our legal obligation, but TCI is an opportunity that we cannot pass up. In planning the TCI program I hope that you consider these 3 priorities in your design:
1. Prioritize equity so that low income Vermonters without access to public transportation are the primary beneficiaries of low carbon transportation options.
2.Polluters, including fossil fuel companies should pay the real costs for the environmental and health consequences of their product.
3. Start the cap low and drop it rapidly. Vermont is way behind in our obligation to meet the reduced carbon goals, and we need an aggressive approach to get back on track.

Thanks for listening!

Steve Gagliardone
Sharon, VT

Thank you for doing this work!

As someone who is deeply worried about the environmental costs of fossil fuel based transportation, I was excited to hear about this initiative. I hope TCI will pursue ambitious solutions that both reduce the impacts of human transportation, and make wise long-term investments in local economies.

Good luck with the project.

Yes, please do develop low carbon emission transportation systems for the state of Maine. Not only does our transportation system contribute to climate degradation in our state, but it is also set up to exclude the most vulnerable citizens: the poor, the elderly, the disabled and the sick. Elders are isolated and access to healthcare is limited for anyone without a car or truck. Depending on outside contractors, such as Uber and Lyft, will exacerbate the carbon emissions problem and do little to address the needs of more remote citizens. Even in a little city like Waterville, where I live, the population is hardly big enough to make cabbing a viable occupation. Everybody loses in the current system. I wholeheartedly endorse accessible, low carbon, affordable transportation systems in Maine. It will serve businesses and individuals alike, and it's the right thing to do. The future is moving away from fossil fuels. Let's not get any more behind the curve than we already are.

This is nothing but a tax on the poorest amongst us. This is not the way to fix climate change. Free market solutions are a day better long term solution that will not harm the population.

No taxation without representation. You do not decide for everyone. This is not a dictatorship.

I oppose this initiative. More pencil pushers will need to be hired to manage this program. The plans on how to spend this tax is vague. There are many programs in this state to reduce energy consumption. Taxing without representation is un-American.