TOWN OF MANCHESTER, VERMONT
CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES
Commissioners Present: Alan Benoit (Chair), Carl Bucholt, Leslie Burg, Michael Cooperman, Dee Myrvang.
Staff Present: Planning & Zoning Director Janet Hurley.
Others Present: None.
Benoit called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
Minutes from December 16, 2019, meeting were approved by unanimous consent.
Gyphosate Ban Actions. Editorial (Op-Ed) was published in the Manchester Journal. Burg distributed a list of some ideas for follow up actions including suggested topics for letters to the editor. Letters to the editor are limited to 300 to 400 words. Burg expressed interest in writing a letter about Monsanto and its relationship to the EPA. Bucholt expressed interest in writing about the effects of glyphosate use on soil. He passed out a NOFA publication on glyphosate. Regarding effects on watersheds, Cooperman questioned whether there is room in a letter to be responsible and accurate on this very complex issue. Benoit agreed that an unbiased and informative approach would be more beneficial than further short opinion pieces. Cooperman said he is not comfortable with pursuing an opinion piece as the Conservation Commission. Bucholt offered that he is comfortable with saying that glyphosate is an ecocide, a systemic insecticide, killing not just the plant but soil microbes and fungi, and does not wash away as inert. Cooperman said the commission has to be able to discuss viable alternatives to be fair and intelligent about it. Bucholt said he thinks we need to move toward regenerative agriculture as state policy. Myrvang indicated that commissioners would have to move on from this discussion to get to the other business on the agenda. She said she does not view the commission as a political body. Benoit said he would appreciate a reasoned piece by Cooperman. Berg reminded that she initiated the glyphosate ban efforts because she thought it appropriate for the commission to support the house bill. Bucholt agreed asserting that banning glyphosate is about protecting the environment. Cooperman offered that the credibility of the commission takes a hit if its efforts are not balanced and well informed. He said we need to understand all the consequences of the advocated position. Hurley suggested that commissioners could proceed with individual letters and if one of the commissioners wants to write a more educational and balanced piece, it could be brought to the commission for consideration as another Op-Ed. Bucholt advocated urging the selectboard to consider a local ban. Commissioners suggested the selectboard would respond that it should be considered at the state level. Bucholt noted that this was good strategy with the bag ban. Benoit suggested moving on and taking up this discussion again at the next meeting.
Draft Preferred Site Scorecard. The draft scorecard was extensively discussed. Hurley explained the town's only jurisdiction is to identify a site as preferred or not. Cooperman asked about including consideration of incidences of species of local concern or value as an item six in the “additional Considerations” section. Energy Committee members agreed that this would be a good addition to the scorecard. Bucholt offered that the bigger picture is that climate change is destroying ecosystems on a broad scale and he would not like to see too many obstacles in the way of solar development. There was discussion about the housing viability scoring and whether it should be changed to reflect what the zoning allows for density and whether the numbers should be negative. Members agreed that it should be changed to reflect what the zoning allows for housing density. Whether and how housing should be differently weighted was extensively discussed. In the end, Cooperman suggested an introductory paragraph explaining that the score is simply to get to a threshold, which would allow consideration for preferred site status. That is, a higher score does not mean that a site should be considered a better candidate for preferred site status. Members understood that the form will not result in an endorsement of a site; therefore, the scorecard should not indicate a recommendation by the Energy Committee. However, they noted that the committee should be invited to participate in the preferred site process.
Other Business. No other business was presented. The next meeting of the commission/committee will be February 24, 2020. Burg motioned to adjourn. Bucholt seconded the motion. The Motion carried at 8:54 p.m. 4-0-0. Myrvang departed the meeting earlier.
________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
For the Conservation Commission/Energy Committee Date