Comment Log Display

As a former land use attorney and current environmental law scholar
who studies local governments' role in reducing greenhouse gases, I
support redoubling the land use target from 5 MMT to 11-14 MMT.  I
have been the critical role that local transportation planning can
play in addressing climate change as an environmental law fellow at
UCLA School of Law; however, I write in my capacity as an
individual rather than as a representative of the University or the
Law School.

This higher target is critical to signal that this is a top
priority.  We cannot meet our needed transportation reduction
without reducing VMT.  California has the opportunity to create a
model for the rest of the nation in this area.  These emissions
reductions will create significant co-benefits for each region by
also reducting criteria pollutant emissions, saving money, making
budgets more resilient to increased fuel prices, among other
things.  Recent scientific estimates show that targets must be even
lower than initially proposed to avoid catastrophic climate change
and significant changes must be made within the next decade.  This
achievable higher target is essential.

A higher target must be coupled with a commitment to providing
financial resources, technical assistance and other support to help
regions, local governments, and transportation agencies achieve the
target.  A higher target will also signal to the state of
California that land use should be a high priority for financial
and technical assistance to meet the goals of AB 32.
Conversely, a low target will send the signal that
business-as-usual development should continue, and that land use is
not a high priority for resources and support.

Katherine A Trisolini