TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I'm not an expert on transportation, but I am an environmental scientist, and I am seriously concerned about the world's sluggishness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. I would like to say that I wholeheartedly support the TCI goal of moving to low-carbon transport! I will preferentially vote for leaders who move forward on this issue

We can cut poverty and pollution at the same time. We urge you to move forward with a regional program that prioritizes the needs of communities overburdened with pollution and underserved in mobility options. Your actions and inactions regarding this and all related concerns have been, are being and will be remembered by all of us who will live in the world that you are shaping with your decisions right now, in addition to being a matter of public record. We are all on it together. Environmental emergencies affect everybody, and will do so for generations to come. All other issues need to be considered as facets of the critical state of the biosphere.

I recommend that Vermont join the Transportation Climate Initiative (TCI) that is being developed for states in this northeast region of our country.

We now know that climate emissions in Vermont have been increasing in the last two or three years despite a clear legislative and policy commitment to reduce these emissions. We also know that climate emissions from transportation account for the largest share of recent climate emission increases. We also know that transportation is an activity that may be addressed most effectively on multi-state, regional basis. And we have seen that the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative has proven to be an effective tool for reducing climate emissions from electricity generation.

I am a member of a church in South Burlington that sees the climate crisis as a moral crisis for all mankind and that we all have a responsibility to do what we can to reduce climate emissions. We have been at work for several years to walk our talk by reducing the climate emissions we contribute. Our church has with its own resources taken steps which, with help from Efficiency Vermont and Vermont Gas, enables us to reduce our carbon emissions associated with natural gas and electricity use by more than 50 percent. We want to address climate emissions from driving our personal vehicles but this requires support, just as Efficiency Vermont and Vermont Gas helped us with improving the energy performance of our church building and our individual home.

The TCI offers Vermont a potential source of revenues to support steps to reduce transportation emissions and to do so in way that will help most the people least able to afford newer, more fuel efficient, lower emission cars and trucks.

I ask that Vermont join in the emerging new TCI and to endorse actions by the TCI program that will help all Vermonters to reduce climate emissions resulting from our transportation activities.

It is now obvious that climate change is happening and causing very big impacts that include significant increases in annual rainfall in Vermont, warmer winters in Vermont which threaten the future of skiing in Vermont, accelerate the incidence of lime disease, and threaten the long term viability of our maple syrup industry. These impacts are the obvious ones that confront us in easy to observe ways. Scientists tell us that the Vermont forests, lakes, and wildlife communities are all being transformed by these changes in very negative ways.

It is also important to recognize that the TCI program can make big positive contributions to the State's economy. This has happened with energy efficiency activity, which is now a big Vermont employer, and the solar industry, which had until recently been a fast growing business in Vermont that provided jobs and produced income for Vermonters across the State. The Vermont Clean Energy Development Fund finances annual economic assessments of the clean energy sector and has with these annual studies has documented the large direct employment and income benefits of these clean energy businesses. The TCI can and should be harnessed to build upon this progress.

I urge that Vermont sign the TCI memorandum of understanding and commit the policy and program leadership needed to build an effective program. Such new programs require hard work to make them work and to avoid pitfalls. I plead for the Governor and the Legislature to do the hard work of negotiating an effective TCI program that will benefit Vermont and serve Vermont's stated commitment to achieving the Paris Climate Goals, which will benefit all mankind.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Sam Swanson

Maine is a rural state. Many of it's citizens travel 20+ miles to work or to obtain basic necessities. There are no taxi's, ubers, bus routes. It's aging population and traditional industries can not afford higher taxes of any kind much less on gas and diesel. Take Maine out of the TCI!

Thank you for your thoughtful initial framework for TCI.

I strongly support the equity and environmental justice aspects of this proposal because of the disproportionate impact that fossil fuel burning has on minority, lower income, and rural communities.

Living in Franklin County, MA, a rural region with a great deal of poverty, I would like to see Massachusetts think broadly and with specifics about how to use the TCI funds to increase access to affordable and viable public transportation to rural and low-income residents. For example, our county needs additional and more affordable public transportation to make it possible for people without cars to get to places of employment throughout the week, for night shifts, and on weekends. People in communities without a commercial district also need the ability to get to food shopping, get to medical facilities, etc. with some sort of public transit. Current public transportation here is extremely limited. Perhaps TCI would expand funds for a pilot program in the county--service on demand in small vehicles rather than buses. As our county's population ages, expanded public transportation will be that much more essential.

Thinking outside the box, TCI funds could be used to increase accessibility and expand equity to underserved rural populations by funding the full buildout of broadband. Reliable and up-to-date Internet service could help residents with applying for jobs, professional development, telecommuniting, accessing educational resources and online classes, and accessing support systems and medical professionals, without the need for transportation. Some of our communities and portions of them do not have broadband Internet access; rather they have only satellite or antiquated dial-up connections. This puts these residents at a significant disadvantage.

Lastly, these funds should be used primarily to reverse our greenhouse gases, not for adaptations to the impacts of climate change. We are in a race against time to reverse the devasting affects of climate change, and we must reach beyond the modest climate goals manadated by the Global Warming Solutions Act to avoid the disasterous predictions in the latest IPCC report.

Thank you for considering these comments as you look at finalizing the TCI design.

Missi Sadler Enterprises, LLC which helps employ numerous people is strongly opposed to the "framework for a draft regional policy proposal" which seeks to expropriate the petroleum marketing industry. Over time this plan proposes to move Virginia from simple rationing and new taxes to the ultimate prohibition of fossil fuels.
This plan does not assess the collateral damage it will inflict on state revenue, local tax collections, Virginia's Transportation Trust fund, and consumers.
Many of the advocates of these policies support regulation to electrify transportation. Those advocates somehow forget to mention that a major component of batteries powering these vehicles is cobalt, 90 percent of which is mined in third world countries under unfavorable working conditions.
As the number of electric vehicles grows, petroleum marketers will likely have to battle for a share of the electric vehicle charging market with utility companies that see EV charging as a new business opportunity without cost. When utility companies install charging stations, they may seek the ability to include that cost as part of their capital investment. When these costs are approved by governmental regulatory agencies, they can then be passed on to all ratepayers as part of their monthly electric bills.
Missi Sadler Enterprises, LLC believes this would provide regulated utilities an unfair competitive advantage that Virginia based small businesses simply cannot compete with. I must economically justify and self-fund at risk investments in new equipment like EV charging stations and so should my competition.
Another likely competitor under this scheme is the state government itself. This is not a concept, as just this past session the General Assembly passed legislation to allow the Departments of Conservation and Recreation, General Services, and Transportation to install electric chargers. Fortunately our association was able to narrow this initiative considerably by limiting the number of state agencies involved and mitigating the threat of unfair competition by requiring the state to sell the power at prevailing market rates including taxes.
All Virginians, particularly the petroleum marketing and convenience industries, support a clean environment. There are many ways to achieve this without rationing. Incentivizing the sale of electric vehicles does nothing to meet your stated goals of "equity, environmental justice, and non-discrimination." As one example, the stated goals could be achieved far faster and cheaper via efforts to assist low-income Virginians to purchase more fuel efficient vehicles that meet current and future CAFÉ standards.
History has proven that rationing followed by prohibition - the ultimate goal of TCI - has led to black markets, unregulated and untaxed sales, and undue burdens on law enforcement.
The impact of these proposals will not be solely on fuel sellers and convenience stores - what about the auto repair industry, muffler shops, service facilities at new car dealers, quick lubes etc.? What about agriculture, construction, Loggers and watermen who will be forced to scrap present equipment or pay artificially high prices due to rationing? What about the consumer who will experience not only higher prices to operate their personal vehicles, but higher prices for consumer goods and services?
The impact of these proposals will completely devastate Virginia’s economics. Recent information predicts an alternative fuel source for Commercial Trucks are 15 to 20 years out, Trucking companies have utilized Virginia interstates I95, I85 and I81 as a major travel corridor for years which allowed the state and individual companies to benefit from them stopping and doing business on these popular travel routes. The proposals will cause the majority of companies to route their trucks around the state devastating businesses.
Missi Sadler Enterprises, LLC opposes the TCI plan to ration, tax and ultimately eliminate fossil fuels.

Kathleen Theoharides states the difference between TCI and a gas tax is the point of regulation. This is irrelevant to consumers who will soon be paying more at the pump for this backsliding tax scheme. While taxpayers are the most obvious victims of this situation, individual legislators are greatly affected as well. They are being stripped of their rights and denied the opportunity to carry out the duty they were elected to perform. Taxpayers and constituents deserve better than having such a tax being implemented without explicit legislative approval process. I agree with others that it is a very slippery slope for Massachusetts. Lawmakers from other states in the TCI agreement are seeking legislative approval. Governor Baker’s administration, whether legally required or not, should also act in good faith and seek legislative approval. There must be an open and transparent legislative process on the details of the agreement.