This commentary is by Julie Moore, secretary of the Vermont Agency of National Resources.Politicians, advocates and even agency leaders sometimes face a difficult decision when it becomes obvious that the road they have chosen leads into a policy cul-de-sac. They can either acknowledge this and turn around to find other routes, or they can sit parked at an obvious dead end and declare that someone else is responsible for blocking progress.Over the past two sessions, the Legislature directed state agencies to undertake significant — and expensive — work evaluating their primary strategies for meeting the 2030 greenhouse gas emission mandates of the Global Warming Solutions Act. Despite disagreements with aspects of these directives, Gov. Phil Scott and I fully supported the efforts of dedicated state employees to lead thorough evaluations of both the Clean Heat Standard and Cap-and-Invest framework.At the end, both approaches were found to be infeasible because the cost and level of disruption needed to meet the 2030 deadline would not be acceptable to Vermonters — or to many of the legislators who initially promoted these strategies. No one serious about climate action in the Statehouse, or in major environmental interest groups, believes there’s the political will to enact either policy this year.In practical terms, this means the GWSA’s 2030 emissions reduction requirements are unattainable. We are parked at the end of the policy cul-de-sac.We are halfway through the legislative session, and climate issues have received scant attention. Legislative leadership appears content to let the unattainable GWSA requirements stand, while quietly acknowledging the policies needed to fulfill their own mandates are not viable. Rather than turn around and seek other routes to our shared goal of reducing Vermont’s carbon emissions, interest groups are urging legislators to leave the GWSA requirements in place, dismissing the litigation risk as not that disruptive.The idea that the Legislature would knowingly leave a state agency vulnerable to lawsuits by failing to reform a problematic law represents a fundamental breakdown of government accountability.And the litigation has already started.In September the Conservation Law Foundation filed its first lawsuit under the GWSA, believing litigation will accelerate Vermont’s adoption of regulations to reduce fossil fuel use. More recently, CLF was given the opportunity to present to the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee. When asked about the cost to the State of Vermont in time and money of such litigation, CLF downplayed the cost and workload implications; CLF reasoned that the state already sets aside money to deal with lawsuits, so why not spend it?I found this testimony self-serving and disingenuous. It laid bare that CLF would rather spend their time and our time in court battles instead of investing in the tangible work needed to reduce carbon emissions. We’ve seen this strategy’s detrimental effects before. During Lake Champlain cleanup efforts, after several years of building momentum in implementing the innumerable projects needed to reduce pollution, CLF sued the state. This legal battle created uncertainty, cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars, and delayed many meaningful water quality actions for nearly eight years.While CLF has the right to use the broad citizen suit provisions the Legislature established in the GWSA, and though I am confident their ongoing legal challenge will ultimately fail, the resources state government must expend to make our case is a disservice to our environment and Vermont taxpayers. And this is to say nothing of the intangible impact their litigation has on Vermonters’ faith in state government to lead on climate action.Make no mistake, the Agency of Natural Resources, and the rest of state government, are aggressively working to reduce Vermont’s carbon emissions with good will, rigor and dedication. In its most recent annual update to the General Assembly, the Climate Council documented more than $520 million in climate investments that were appropriated in the current state budget. Suggesting that the inability to achieve the 2030 emissions requirements stems from a lack of commitment or inaction ignores these substantial investments.Effective public policy requires policymakers, implementers and advocates to challenge, critique and push for faster results and greater efficiency. Clinging to approaches that have been shown to be impractical, ignoring obvious legal risks or cynically claiming that the administration is not doing anything, may score political points for some but does little to address the challenges of climate change.So I am asking the supporters and critics of this most important environmental work to put more of their effort towards clear-eyed, workable solutions. As with our successful clean water efforts, we need a well-defined, practical plan and budget that outline the steps needed to achieve our goals in a way Vermonters can afford.We’ve done it before, we can do it again. ANR and the Administration stand ready to help get back on the road. After all, good policy and a workable plan — not litigation — will reduce fossil fuel use.Read the story on VTDigger here: Sec. Julie Moore: The road to lasting climate progress. ...read more read less