Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-07-2020-min 2020 Vision Committee May 7, 2010 7:45 a.m.-9:00 a.m. Selectmen’s Meeting Room In attendance: Fernando Quezada, Janice Frascatore, Jane Warren, Alan Wrigley, Chuck Benson, Bhumip Khasnabish, Peter Lee, Barry Orenstein, Dan Krupka, Peter Enrich, Marian A.O. Cohen, Ann Redmon, Richard Canale, George Burnell, Candy McLaughlin, Brianna Olson, Carl Valente Meeting Began: 7:45 a.m. The minutes from last month’s meeting were approved. Climate Change: Fernando updated the 2020 Committee on the current status of the Climate Action Plan Ad Hoc Committee. The Ad Hoc Committee was recently dissolved. George has asked the former Ad Hoc Committee Chair to give him an unofficial report, and has talked to several people about forming a 2020 work group being developed to consider the recommendations in the report and develop a path forward.. The general construct for the working group would be similar to that of the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC); that the working group would consider the commercial sector (as well as the residential sector), and identify specific tasks and whom to delegate them to. As the originator of the initial Climate Action Plan committee, the 2020 Committee has an opportunity to shepherd the next steps of the process. Peter E. stated that he liked the model whereby the 2020 Committee identified and scoped issues and then forwarded these ideas to elected boards. He wondered if bringing the next phase of the climate change issue back to the 2020 Committee was necessary, and if it was a political issue as well. George commented that the issues are of general interest to the community, but that it is difficult to decide upon a scope and the 2020 Committee could help to do that. Peter E. also noted that the current focus of the issue was addressing energy conservation in buildings, and wondered what other facets of climate change should be addressed. George noted that for whatever issues are addressed, the conversation needs to move beyond conceptual to concrete action items. Marian commented that the 2020 Committee is a think tank and setup mechanism for action. She wondered what the working group’s responsibilities would be. George noted that Town Meeting recently passed the Stretch Energy Code, and wondered what other items the committee could suggest be implemented. Marian commented that she would like to see the report from the chair of the Ad Hoc Committee, when it is available; George stated it would be available in 2-3 weeks. Peter E. noted that this is a particularly relevant discussion because a citizen’s article at Town Meeting would set up a broad committee to discuss climate change; he commented that he felt this committee, with its charge as written, would not have a constructive approach to the issue. He wondered if it would be possible to set up a task force to address climate change. Marian commented that she believed it is not good practice to establish a committee at Town Meeting, and wondered if the 2020 Committee should attempt to take any action before Monday. She wondered if a statement by the 2020 Committee to Town Meeting would be a good step. Fernando noted that these issues will continue to be relevant, and are definitely worth addressing. He wondered if, and how, the 2020 Committee should address the upcoming citizen’s article on Monday, May 10. Richard commented that the citizen’s article, having been pared down significantly from its first presentation, was likely to pass. He wondered if a 2020 initiative could be taken up irrespective of what happened at Town Meeting. However, he expressed concern that a 2020 initiative taken up in addition to the passage of the article may seem like 2020 is contravening Town Meeting; he suggested that any action taken by the 2020 Committee be couched carefully. Barry noted that reconsideration of the article requires a 2/3 vote. He asked why the proposed committee would be under the Moderator; it was stated that the proponent did not want the committee under the charge of the Board of Selectmen. Barry commented that the undefined scope of the committee was troublesome, and he was also concerned about the committee’s jurisdiction. Barry wondered who would own the committee, noting that he felt that 2020 should. He commented that statements from the BOS and 2020 may obviate the need to reopen the article. Fernando noted that having multiple groups address the issue of climate change may be beneficial; Peter E. agreed, adding that different groups could tackle different aspects of the issue. Fernando asked if there was enough consensus on the issue to say anything on Monday 5/10; Peter E. suggested that 2020 authorize someone to speak at Town Meeting. He noted that such a statement would be informational, and would not provide reasons to vote any particular way. The statement should include that the Committee is in discussion with other boards to form a committee, as the original climate change committee was a charge of 2020. Peter E. will draft a statement, which Anne could issue at Town Meeting. George said that he would send a message out to the TMMA listserve on the issue. MAPC MetroFuture: Richard Canale reviewed the MAPC MetroFuture plan from his slide show at the previous meeting. The MetroFuture plan is a long-range plan for the metropolitan Boston area, including suggested action items for how to implement this plan. The plan focuses on three specific areas: smart growth, transportation investment, and clean energy. For example, the Boston MPO will be deciding which of Lexington’s intersection improvements along Mass Ave will be eligible for funding through the state. Lexington’s designation as a Green Community will rank these transportation projects higher on the funding list. MetroFuture used outreach, models, and explored alternatives to project what the Metro Boston area will look like in 2030 assuming no intervention. Then, they examined the potential avenues of intervention, and identified prosperity, equity, sustainability, and community as areas to address. The plan identifies 65 goals with many objectives and implementation strategies for communities to peruse and pursue. If a community has a specific issue, the MAPC can help address the issue by providing technical assistance and helping municipalities find efficiencies. The MAPC has a website that provides many useful tools to communities:  MetroBoston Data Common, which uses census and other data to create community snapshots and provide data for analysis and mapping,  Mapping tools, and mapping workshops for citizens and staff,  Data sources,  Itemized sections with specific goals, and  Legislative involvement- e.g. lobbying support. Meeting Adjourned: 9:00 a.m.