TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

Please set up a strong plan to reduce pollution from transportation. I support Massachusetts joining this plan. The time is passing. We need to make drastic changes now. I am ready.

I care about reducing pollution from transportation because it is our largest source of global warming emissions (regionally and nationally.
Maryland should formally join the plan to reduce emissions, and should make sure that the policy has a strong component of equity by prioritizing clean investments in areas overburdened by pollution and/or for those who don't have access. Thank you for the bipartisan nature of this project, moving us forward while the federal government takes us backward.

As a Montgomery Country resident and one who until my recent retirement worked in the Tysons Corner, Virginia area, I think that there are several significant measures to improve not only our air quality, but our quality of life.

First, instead of talking about adding lanes to existing and already over crowded roads and bridges, why not build light rail lines that run parallel to these roads and bridges? Why not a circular light rail line that parallels the Beltway and intersects with the existing Metro lines and the soon to be opened Purple Line? Yes, the initial expenditure would be costly, but the improvements in our air quality and the reduction in commuting time and stress would be well worth the expenditure.

Also, if we are going to create livable, safe, clean communities - we need to improve safety for pedestrians. Instead of roads without sidewalks or with intersections that are downright deadly, we need to create roads and intersections where pedestrians (including children and seniors) can cross safely. There are a number of ways to do this - expanding the use of the Barnes Dance (a type of traffic signal movement that temporarily stops all vehicular traffic, thereby allowing pedestrians to cross an intersection in every direction, including diagonally, at the same time), building either pedestrian over or underpasses across major roads, or do what Barcelona does in the area around the Placa Catalunya (putting the traffic lights midblock, so pedestrians are not competing with cars that are turning.)

Improving our environment and quality of life and alleviating our transportation problems does require investment, but more importantly it requires imagination and a willingness to get rid of the not invented here mindset.

The time for action on climate change was yesterday. Despite the scientists sounding the alarms on rising temperatures, elected officials have routinely failed to act. Greenhouse gas emissions must be tackled systemically for substantial reductions in output to occur. With consistent climate denialism emanating from the Trump administration, the onus is on state elected officials to enact bold prescriptions to this growing crisis. The onus is also on fellow citizens to pressure our representatives to make the correct decisions for us. I chose to attend Middlebury College because I believed Vermont is a national leader As an environmental policy major at Middlebury College, I have learned a great deal about the unprecedented attention this crisis requires; the Transportation Climate Initiative fits the mold for bold and sweeping action that the world desperately needs. The Global Warmings Solutions Act’s passing demonstrates the ability for this state to lead in the fight against climate change. Now, it is up to us on whether we continue moving forward on this issue.
The Transportation Climate Initiative’s declining emissions cap is a key step in reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the region, but the opponents of the bill routinely focus on the economic hindrances of the bill on low income Vermonters. In specific, they argue that increasing fuel prices would disproportionately impact their constituents. It appears the two sides are speaking past each other at times. On the third page of the Draft Memorandum of Understanding of the Transportation and Climate Initiative (MOU), the bill states that the benefits of a “cap-and-invest program flow equitably to communities that are undeserved by clean transportation alternatives… .” The bill sets the record straight; the goals outlined by the Transportation Climate Initiative ensures that lower income Vermonters will receive economic benefits through investments funded by the rise in fuel prices. It is designed to protect the most vulnerable citizens in the state. Moreover, if we fail to act with the looming threat of climate change, these same people will experience economic and environmental hardships. More extreme weather events, increased costs of food prices, and the degradation of the environment will impact underprivileged communities the hardest. Through a cap and invest system, revenue garnered from the program will supply the necessary mitigation reforms and economic subsidies for these vulnerable populations.
Opponents of the Transportation Climate Initiative must come to terms with the looming truth; if we don’t act now to protect poor and working-class Vermonters from the climate crisis, they will suffer in the long term. During this legislative cycle, elected officials will be choosing between two radical futures. In the radical future with the passage of the Transportation Climate Initiative, more Vermonters will economically benefit through subsidies, improved transportation services, and home weatherization. In the other radical future, in which the Transportation Climate Initiative is struck down by Phil Scott and the “economic pragmatists,” the most vulnerable in this state will have fewer amenities and tools to effectively combat the climate crisis. We are at a juncture in Vermont legislative history. The Global Warmings Solutions Act was a necessary step, and the Transportation Climate Initiative will build on the climate legislation that has preceded it. The passage of this bill balances on the eventual answer to these two questions: Will those who haven’t taken a side on this issue choose to fight the climate crisis with earnest? Will Governor Phil Scott side with the fossil fuel lobbyists or the most climate-vulnerable citizens of Vermont?

No more taxes!!!! Take it from the newly legalized pot industry. The working and retired people of MA do not want another frivolous tax!!!

This TCI proposal is nothing more than tax increases disguised as "doing good". Raising the gas tax for a supposed carbon reduction is a hoax, pure and simple. No evidence has been shown that this gas tax increase will reduce carbon emissions, just speculation. How will this money be used? I think we all know the answer to that: WASTED!! Also, the legislature should be involved in this, as the people's representatives, not some executive order at the request of some unknown organization. Is the legislature being cut out because TCI knows it will fail? I believe that is the case. Masschusetts' taxpayers and residents should not be forced to pay for something that is not proven and not substantiated.