Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
<br /> <br />voted unanimously to appoint Marcoplos as Chair. The selection of a Vice-chair would be <br />made at the next meeting, and any nominations for this position should be sent to Bouma <br />beforehand or brought to the next meeting. <br /> <br />It was suggested that members choose alternate representatives in order to ensure that the <br />discussions of the Council included the perspectives of all member organizations. The <br />names and emails of alternate representatives should also be sent to Bouma. A question <br />was asked about whether there would be any restrictions around Climate Council members <br />meeting up or attending the same events outside of an official meeting with appropriate <br />public notice. Bouma offered to research that question and notify the Council of any such <br />restrictions. <br /> <br />Marcoplos suggested that the Council meet every month this fall (Sept, Oct, and Nov) to <br />more quickly establish focus areas and then perhaps hold a public information session in <br />early 2020 to report the Council’s steps. The Council’s meeting schedule could then slow <br />down to every other month to provide progress updates as initial projects are <br />implemented. Bouma will create and distribute a poll with potential meeting times both <br />during and after business hours for the week of October 21st. <br /> <br />Marcoplos also clarified that the Climate Council has no dedicated funding source, but that <br />there would likely be opportunities for joint action that would lower the costs for <br />participating organizations. <br /> <br />IV. Discussion of approach and first steps - Council members then discussed the processes <br />and perspectives the Council could use to approach climate issues and actions, and agreed <br />to the first steps that would be taken. <br /> <br />Bouma began this discussion laying out the 2 basic categories of climate action and asking <br />the group where they felt the primary focus should be: 1.) Climate mitigation actions, which <br />reduce our contributions to climate change; and/or 2.) Climate resiliency/adaptation <br />actions, which prepare for the impacts of climate change. Richardson and Rubinoff <br />indicated an interest in a balanced approach to these two categories of climate action. To <br />them, the impacts of climate change were already beginning to be felt and even if the <br />County were carbon-neutral tomorrow we would still expect to be dealing with the impacts <br />of climate change since this is a global issue. Furthermore, the Council’s effort might <br />enhance the ongoing state-funded efforts to update the Eno-Haw Hazard Mitigation Plan <br />which outlines what can be done to prepare for and respond to the most likely hazards <br />Orange County could experience. Slade acknowledged the need to prepare, but responded <br />with the contrasting opinion that there are other groups focused on resilience actions and <br />emergency response, whereas mitigation actions would benefit from the Council’s focus <br />and recently-released climate science indicated that the next few years will be a critical <br />time to dramatically lower climate impacts. McCullough added that a mix of mitigation <br />actions and resiliency actions might be good to consider given the important role local <br />governments play both of these areas. Marcoplos summarized the discussion saying that <br />there is merit to the Council pursuing both mitigation and resilience actions and that <br />mitigation actions might be most urgent for this group to focus on. <br /> <br />Weaver and McCullough emphasized the importance of building connections and laying out <br />a positive vision for Orange County’s future regardless of the focus on mitigation or <br />resilience, with the idea that people respond better to positive messaging about the