Vermont Agency of Natural Resources

The primary focus of the meeting was to review and approve prior meeting minutes in a consensus format. A significant portion of the discussion centered on the Steering Committee's recommendations for the subcommittee appointment process, moving toward a phased approach to allow for more inclusive and less rushed selection of non-council members. Key discussion points included defining clear criteria for subcommittee membership, establishing a framework for concentric rings of engagement beyond formal subcommittee roles, and planning targeted outreach milestones around draft climate action plan ideas. There was a specific clarification sought regarding whether council members could serve on more than one subcommittee if time permitted, with the initial consensus supporting this flexibility.

The meeting covered foundational discussions for the council, including an overview of climate change in Vermont, a presentation on the greenhouse gas emissions profile from the Department of Environmental Conservation, and an inventory of existing programs impacting greenhouse gas emissions. A key part of the session involved reviewing the Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4), specifically focusing on regional aspects of the Northeast, such as the balance between rural and coastal impacts, and incorporating economic data related to temperature changes and air quality. The session also included a discussion on Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), such as RCP 8.5 (business as usual) and RCP 4.5 (aggressive policy scenario), and the influence of various atmospheric components like greenhouse gases (CO2, methane) and aerosols on climate warming and cooling.

The primary purpose of this special meeting was to review the Vermont Climate Council's report to the legislature, which was due the following day, January 15, 2021. The discussion involved a walk-through and review of the draft report, which summarized the council's activities to date, detailed core elements of the Global Warming Solutions Act, and outlined steps for developing the climate action plan. Council members provided specific edits and suggestions for the report, including adding acknowledgments of public comments, detailing subcommittee structures, and clarifying the status and timeline for hiring three key staff positions (Project Manager, Program Technician, and Legal Counsel). Further organizational updates and planning for future meetings, including discussions about drawing upon member expertise and public outreach efforts, were also addressed.

The meeting covered several substantial agenda items, including an update from the Climate Council Steering Committee, which met earlier in the week. Key discussions focused on finalizing vision and goal setting for presentation to the full Climate Council on Monday, and reviewing compiled strategies and action items. A significant portion of the meeting involved planning for targeted stakeholder engagement events, separate from broader public meetings, to gather technical feedback on pathways and strategies across sectors like forestry and agriculture. A request was made to consider adding a specific working group focused on water and watersheds for stakeholder outreach, though concerns about tight timelines were raised. Discussions also addressed updates on testimony provided to the House Energy and Technology Committee regarding the process timeline and the importance of engaging rural communities.

The primary discussion focused on establishing a clear protocol for decision-making within the Steering Committee and subcommittees as content is compiled for the Climate Action Plan. This included defining practical applications of consensus-based decision-making versus majority voting, as stipulated by statute. Key points involved ensuring clarity on what actions participants are agreeing to (e.g., input vs. final decision), utilizing real-time polling for transparency regarding group sentiment, and outlining pathways for unresolved concerns, including the potential for formal voting as a last resort. A separate discussion also arose regarding the need to define the 'high bar' threshold for including multiple viewpoints in the final report sooner rather than later.