Browse
Search
Climate Council Meeting Summary - 6-16-21
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Climate Council
>
Minutes
>
2021
>
Climate Council Meeting Summary - 6-16-21
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/23/2024 10:34:39 AM
Creation date
5/23/2024 10:34:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/16/2021
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Bouma also agreed, noting that many of the plan’s elements are complete or <br />underway. <br /> <br />Slade also mentioned that the schools and the County’s businesses would also be <br />important players with whom to coordinate actions and a county-wide Climate <br />Action Plan might be a good mechanism to do this. <br /> <br />McCullough made the point that staff may be able to advocate for climate actions if <br />they are included in their adopted Climate Action Plans. Slade agreed. <br /> <br />Bouma then ran through an example of how it would look to work through the <br />proposal of the Council taking the idea of community solar and scoping it to add <br />detail to show feasibility, and then handing it off to our members to implement <br />individually. <br /> <br />Trueblood then referred back to Monast’s idea of getting further direction and <br />project ideas to scope from the member governments’ climate plans since those <br />ideas have already gotten some level of approval and vetting by staff. <br /> <br />Kaufman mentioned that there are several actions in the Carrboro plan that have <br />not yet happened, and there may be in the Chapel Hill plan as well. Some of these <br />ideas might take more than one jurisdiction to complete and may benefit from the <br />Council’s review and input. <br /> <br />Tiger added that it may not be likely or necessary that all partners are ready to act <br />on the same project at the same time due to funding schedules and other factors, <br />but members can still accelerate their individual action on these kinds of larger <br />projects by leveraging each other’s plans, projects, and guidance on what works <br />best. Some projects from the CARD might be able to be done individually, but could <br />be scaled up through mutual action, and others need mutual action to get started, <br />but both would be useful. <br /> <br />Monast tanked the Council for their thoughts on his previous point about asking the <br />member governments how the Council could best assist, and reiterated that no <br />matter where it comes from, having a central question that the Council was trying <br />to solve would be really helpful before going into our Working Groups. <br /> <br />Bouma asked for a distinction on how this central question might differ from the <br />overall mission statement of the Council and the specific work products to be <br />proposed in the Working Groups. <br /> <br />Monast clarified that for him it would be best if the Working groups were all <br />working on a piece of the same larger issue. Going back to the previous example <br />shared by Tiger on Community Solar, if that is an idea from the climate action plans <br />that we decide would be most beneficial to work on, then each working group looks <br />at that same issue through their lens and coordinates their products towards <br />assembling a package to address that central project or idea. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.