vermont’s roadmap to resilience - wordpress.com...overview over the course of the past 18 months,...

Institute for Sustainable Communities, 535 Stonecutters Way, Montpelier, VT 05602

Draft Recommendations

Vermont’s Roadmap to Resilience

Preparing for Natural Disasters and the Effects of Climate Change in the Green Mountain State

Resilient Vermont: Draft Recommendations, page 2

Contents

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................4

Introduction and Overview.........................................................................................................................5

Resilience: A Definition for Vermont ..........................................................................................................6

Priority Recommendations: At a Glance.....................................................................................................8

Recommendations in Detail .....................................................................................................................10

Elevate and Integrate Emergency Management ..................................................................................10

Know Our Risks.....................................................................................................................................16

Work Together, Learn Together ...........................................................................................................23

Align Rules and Investment for Stronger Communities .......................................................................27

Next Steps.................................................................................................................................................36

We want your feedback! Comments on the draft recommendations are being accepted through September 30, 2013.

Please submit comments via our website: resilientvt.org

By email: [email protected]

Or call Deb Perry at: 802-‐229-‐2900

www.resilientvt.org

www.iscvt.org


About this Project: The Resilient Vermont Project is a collaborative effort between the Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC) and the State of Vermont. Through a stakeholder-‐driven process, we are working to create a shared vision of resilience and a set of practical, prioritized steps to reduce our vulnerabilities and minimize the risks to our citizens, our communities, our economy and our environment. Over the last 18 months, the process has included several statewide stakeholder meetings and has engaged hundreds of people including key leaders from state and local government, the business community, and nonprofit sector through numerous interviews, working group sessions and community focus group events.

The Resilient Vermont Project seeks to build on lessons learned from Tropical Storm Irene and all of the great work already underway. These efforts will be more impactful and lasting if we better align our efforts and work together in a collaborative way toward shared goals for a resilient future.

The Institute for Sustainable Communities is a Montpelier-‐based nonprofit organization. Founded in 1991 by Governor Madeleine Kunin, ISC’s mission is to help communities address environmental, economic, and social challenges to build a better future shaped and shared by all.


Acknowledgements

Our work on this project has benefited from the help of numerous organizations and individuals who have shared generously of their time, their knowledge, and their perspectives.

We would like to thank those who have funded this project, including The High Meadows Fund, Jane’s Trust, The Lintilhac Foundation, The WaterWheel Foundation, Gisela Gamper, and ISC’s Climate Innovation Fund. We appreciate the support provided by Sugarbush Resort, which has hosted our three stakeholder convenings.

This project has been immeasurably enhanced by our partnership with the Vermont Natural Resources Council, our collaboration with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, and the assistance of the Consensus Building Institute. We appreciate the insights and resources shared by Gavin Smith of the University of North Carolina Center for the Study of Natural Hazards and Disasters, who has been working with Governor Shumlin’s Cabinet since 2011. Many state agencies have provided staff time and resources to this project, including (but not limited to) the Agency of Administration, the Agency of Agriculture, the Agency of Transportation, the Agency of Commerce and Community Development, the Agency of Natural Resources, the Public Service Department and the Department of Emergency Management and Homeland Security. The active participation of many agency heads, commissioners, and deputy directors has given us excellent insights into the challenges and opportunities faced by state government. A number of Vermont’s legislators have made time to meet with us and participate in Resilient Vermont events, and we are grateful for their time and experience.

Regional and municipal officials have played a key role, sharing their experiences with Tropical Storm Irene as well as their knowledge of the daily challenges that face boards and commissions as they seek to make and implement good policy. Their insights have been invaluable. We have also benefited from the perspectives of environmental leaders and groups working to preserve Vermont’s landscape and natural assets.

Many of Vermont’s social service organizations, particularly those engaged in Irene recovery, have provided a wealth of information and perspective about the challenges faced by our most vulnerable Vermonters and the strength of our community fabric. We deeply appreciate their participation, knowing how very hard it can be to take time from meeting urgent needs to work on long-‐term planning activities.

Business leaders have informed and shaped this conversation as well. From the early and ongoing participation of major business leaders like Mary Powell of Green Mountain Power, Win Smith and Adam Greshin of Sugarbush, and Susan Zucker of Agri-‐Mark, to the critical insights provided by the Vermont Business Roundtable, the Vermont and Lake Champlain Regional Chambers of Commerce, and a number of other economic development leaders. This has truly been a public-‐private process with many voices, and far stronger for that.


Introduction and Overview Over the course of the past 18 months, the Resilient Vermont Project has engaged hundreds of Vermonters in a discussion about what we, as a state, must do to build our resilience and help to ensure the continued safety, security, and high quality of life of Vermonters for generations to come.

This effort was motivated largely by the impacts of weather events in 2011 – the unprecedented spring flooding and Tropical Storm Irene on August 28, 2011. For Vermont, these experiences were shocking, inspirational and sobering. Shocking, because of the devastation to life and property and the broad scope of the damage, affecting every aspect of day-‐to-‐day life and work for tens of thousands of Vermonters; inspirational, demonstrating the depth and strength of Vermont’s human resources, community spirit, and willingness to work long and hard; and sobering, because we now have some sense of what lies ahead, and how prepared we are to meet the future.

Vermont has many of the key qualities that are essential to resilience: we have strong social networks, committed leaders, and our well-‐known “can-‐do spirit” – a balance of self-‐reliance and community engagement that aptly reflects the “freedom and unity” of our state motto. Much of what we already do in our communities makes us more resilient. But there are actions we can take and changes we can make that will enhance our ability to address the risks we face.

As we create a strategy for resilience, we must remember that while our greatest risk is flooding, it will not be the only climate impact for our state. Vermont must strengthen our capacity to better respond and recover from a variety of potential challenges, including: wildfires, drought, severe winter storms, widespread power outages and a rapid increase in fuel costs.

Through the Resilient Vermont project, we have identified four key areas in which we can collectively take action to build our long-‐term resilience to these myriad challenges:

• Vermont needs to elevate and integrate emergency management. The work to plan, prepare, respond and recover from disasters cannot be episodic – these functions should be elevated as critically important and deeply integrated into our daily work to build and support strong, prepared and sustainable communities.

• At all levels, from homeowners to business owners, municipal leaders to state government officials, we need to know our risks. We need access to information and data that can be used to guide our decisions and investments.

• Through strong collaboration and good governance, we need to work together and learn together. We need to pool our collective resources to take action in a way that maximizes our impact, efficiently utilizes our resources, and ensures that we are broadly sharing best practices and lessons learned.

• Vermont needs to align rules and investment for stronger communities. To build resilience will require us to update, revise and rethink our rules and investments to reflect our shared goals of building resilience and managing risk to ensure the health, safety, and prosperity of future Vermonters.

This document contains recommendations for priority actions that can be taken to advance these four objectives. These recommendations reflect the voices of those who have participated in our process,


our review of the many reports issued following Tropical Storm Irene, and the expertise and perspective that ISC has acquired through our work in the US and internationally.

From the outset, we’ve sought to develop a variety of possible actions, ranging from those that are inexpensive and quick to implement, to those that will require greater investment and long-‐term commitment, and in some cases significant changes to Vermont’s traditional way of doing things. We present these recommendations with the understanding that implementation will require action on behalf of many stakeholders, in many different areas.

The challenges that we face are numerous and the need to act is urgent. While we do not know precisely what lies ahead, we cannot let this uncertainty be a barrier to action. We need to move forward and adapt strategically as we go.

The recommendations in this document are a work in progress. We are sharing this draft in order to get your feedback, insights and questions – so please, share them! The final version of these recommendations will be produced after the September 13th workshop.

Resilience: A Definition for Vermont A resilient Vermont is focused on identifying and managing risks, proactively reducing our vulnerabilities and improving our response and recovery to ensure that we are continually building resilience to climate change and natural disasters. We understand that resilience is not a final destination, but a continuous process. We are strategic and use the best available data and information to guide our decisions and inform our priorities.

We recognize that actions we take to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions and our dependence on fossil fuels not only reduce Vermont’s contributions to climate disruption, but also make us stronger in the long run, poised to succeed in a low-‐carbon future.

To make progress, Vermont pursues resilience at every level – from individuals and households to the community and state level. There is a shared awareness and sense of responsibility for resilience among individual people, households, families, and enterprises, the public and private sectors, and local/regional and state government. Together, we advance this common definition for resilience, we collaborate to effectively use and deploy resources, and build our collective capacity to take action and become better adapted to the ever-‐changing conditions that we face.

In our recommendations, we highlight priority areas of action for Vermont’s resilience: changing the way we plan and prepare, deepening our understanding of risk, committing to collaboration and ongoing learning, and investing to build strong communities. This is not a one-‐shot solution, but a portfolio of essential actions which, taken together, give our small state the opportunity to bounce forward from the shocks we know will come.


Who We Heard From

Stakeholder Interviews & Meetings

Over the course of this project, ISC talked to and met with dozens of Vermonters to receive their perspective on the opportunities and challenges that come with building resilience in Vermont. Prior to kicking off the project, we conducted more than 30 interviews and used this input to shape our approach and establish our goals and deliverables. Since the kick-‐off, we’ve met with a wide range of stakeholders listening, learning, sharing, and connecting. These stakeholders include many people in state and local government, nonprofit leaders from the environmental, economic development and human services sectors, local emergency volunteers and business owners.

Kick-‐off Meeting – October 11, 2012

This initial event, entitled “Building a Foundation for Success,” brought together more than 60 diverse stakeholders to develop a shared definition of resilience and to take stock of the work already underway to build Vermont’s resilience.

Working Groups – January-‐May, 2013

ISC convened three working groups to focus on key aspects of the challenge: Capacity for Emergency Management, Resilient Landscapes and Communities, and Infrastructure and the Built Environment. Each working group consisted of 10-‐12 participants drawing from expertise among state agencies, regional and local planning commissions and a variety of nonprofit organizations. Each working group produced recommendations for consideration at the Solutions Summit in May.

Solutions Summit – May 20-‐21, 2013

Our second workshop, “The Solutions Summit,” brought together over 60 diverse stakeholders to review, refine and prioritize recommendations brought forth by the three working groups. In preparation for the Summit, ISC prepared a stocktaking report, summarizing the key challenges and opportunities facing Vermont. The Summit provided an opportunity for participants to work on specific recommendations and begin to shape the action agenda.

Local Focus Groups – July-‐August, 2013

Over the summer, six local focus group meetings were held in three regions across the state. A total of 50 people attended representing 31 municipalities and a variety of nonprofits and small businesses. The input received in these meetings has been infused into the draft roadmap recommendations.

The stocktaking report, as well as a report on the local focus groups can be found at http://resilientvt.org/project-‐documents/.


Priority Recommendations: At a Glance

Elevate and Integrate Emergency Management

● The State of Vermont should become an innovator and national leader in instituting resilience in emergency management.

● Elevate the position of the Emergency Management Division within State Government to increase their authority and ability to effectively integrate preparedness and risk management into all State Government functions.

● Regionalize key emergency management functions to provide more efficient and effective support to communities, improve communications, and create strong regional coordination.

● Increase emergency management capacity at the local/municipal level to ensure that those who are responsible for emergency management functions before, during and after disasters, have the skills, training and equipment they need.

Know Our Risks

● Develop and disseminate best available climate risk and vulnerability information in user-‐friendly formats that can be incorporated into local, regional, and statewide plans and used to inform priorities and investments.

● Institute a sustained statewide river corridor mapping program that provides information about flood and erosion risk to inform local, regional and state plans and the identification and prioritization of hazard mitigation projects.

● Conduct a statewide Transportation Vulnerability Assessment that produces a statewide data set and map that shows areas of highest relative vulnerability and is used to guide prioritization of investment.

● Incorporate vulnerable population data and analysis into municipal, regional, and state hazard mitigation plans with the help of social service providers so that the needs of Vermont’s vulnerable populations are clearly identified and represented at all levels of hazard mitigation planning.

● Take advantage of a strategic opportunity to forge a public-‐private partnership between the State of Vermont, Green Mountain Power and IBM to utilize a state-‐of-‐the art weather model, in combination with State data, to improve the accuracy of storm predictions, enable early warnings, and efficiently mobilize emergency equipment and personnel.


Work Together and Learn Together

● Within state government, assign a champion responsible for resilience and risk management that is authorized to coordinate the work across state agencies to achieve a consistent approach, identify and advance state priorities, and ensure accountability.

● Create the Vermont Strong Network -‐ a cross-‐sector collaboration that includes both public and private organizations involved in resiliency work to align efforts, share best practices, and leverage resources to advance resilience efforts statewide.

● Strengthen regional networks to support watershed-‐scale planning and enable municipalities to collaborate across jurisdictions to set priorities and make cost-‐effective investments that reduce hazards for downstream communities and development.

● Support local resiliency networks that bring together planning boards, conservation commissions, emergency managers and human service providers to develop a shared vision for resilience within a community.

● Engage private landowners as key partners in implementing land management practices that reduce hazards and support healthy ecosystems.

Align Rules and Investment for Strong Communities

● Create a regulatory framework/approach to land use that does not create any new or additional vulnerabilities (aka a “no adverse impact” approach).

● Develop model flood resiliency bylaws for compact communities located in river corridors.

● Designate pilot adaptation areas and direct investments into those areas.

● Leverage existing investment in conservation and stormwater management to maximize resiliency benefits.

● Provide guidance and incentives to adapt transportation infrastructure.

● Prioritize investment in resilient water and wastewater infrastructure.

● Invest in education and outreach to increase public literacy regarding river science and

floodplain management practices.

● Invest in training and technical assistance programs targeted to state and municipal infrastructure system owners and managers to promote cost-‐effective action and preparedness and reduce future disruptions.

● Establish a dedicated fund to support the purchase of hazard-‐prone properties that are at high risk but are not eligible for funding through FEMA or other programs.


Recommendations in Detail The following sections provide additional detail regarding the recommendations that have been developed through the course of our process. Each section includes priority recommendations that emerged as recommendations from our working groups and were further refined through discussions at the Solutions Summit and the local focus groups.

For each of the priority recommendations, we have begun to propose potential time horizons (i.e., when the task could be initiated), an estimated level of investment that would be required to implement the task, and a starter list of key partners. In many cases, this information cannot be accurately filled in without additional stakeholder input. There are many choices that first need to be made about the level of priority, the appropriate timing, and the scale of implementation. Through our third stakeholder convening and additional work with the appropriate partners, we will work to fill in all of the information for the final draft.

In several sections, we have also identified some specific “additional recommended actions.” These are specific ideas put forth by stakeholders that did grow directly from our working groups or convenings, but which we believe can be implemented with relative ease and merit consideration.

Within these recommendations, we have also highlighted projects and programs going on within and outside of Vermont. These examples are provided as examples of ways that communities and states are tackling similar challenges.

Elevate and Integrate Emergency Management Create more robust, integrated systems in all aspects of emergency management.

A strong and integrated emergency management system is foundational to bolstering Vermont’s resilience to natural disasters and other disruptions. Emergency management, broadly defined, encompasses many of the key components of resilience: anticipating hazards, reducing risks, preparing for disasters, and effectively responding and recovering in a way that makes us less vulnerable in the future. Our emergency managers, and the skills and tools they offer, are a great asset in the work to build resilience.

Throughout this 18-‐month process, we heard from stakeholders of all perspectives that there exists a need for a more robust system to support all four phases of emergency management: planning, response, recovery and mitigation. For many, Tropical Storm Irene revealed a lack of understanding and awareness of emergency management functions, unclear roles and responsibilities, and a need to invest in the people, tools and systems that enable the system to work effectively. To create a culture of preparedness, the presence of these systems must be made more visible and they must be practiced.

A number of specific challenges were identified, including:

• Isolation of Emergency Management Functions: Emergency management is most effective when deeply integrated into other plans and processes. Too often in the absence of a disaster, emergency management functions can be forgotten or sidelined. In Vermont, emergency management is too often considered to be the responsibility solely of emergency managers and is


considered to be a separate task from other plans, priorities, and processes rather than a priority that is integrated throughout.

• Lack of Trust and Transparency: Vermont’s emergency management program is not perceived to be collaborative, inclusive or transparent. These are big challenges given the importance of their role. Many stakeholders felt that our emergency management functions were driven to meet the requirements of FEMA grants and programs rather than the needs of Vermonters.

• Local Capacity: Local governments in Vermont are charged with a great deal of responsibility in all phases of emergency management. Local focus groups confirm that this task overwhelms the capacities of many Vermont communities, both small and large. Challenges include insufficient training or experience at the local level and the overwhelming demand that is placed on volunteers.

• Lack of Practice: Emergency management systems cannot be episodic. For many Vermont communities, drills are not occurring on regular and consistent basis. While state and regional organizations lead practice exercises, it can be a challenge for volunteer emergency responders to find the time and resources to participate in these activities.

• Span of Control: In the context of emergency management, span of control is defined as the number of jurisdictions reporting to and receiving information from an emergency operations center (EOC). Currently Vermont’s 251 municipalities all report into one state EOC located in Waterbury. This is the highest ratio in the country and is considered too high to be effective.1

• Communication: Related to the span of control, we heard from many that communications systems are not effectively distributing or collecting information. Local government officials, as well as members of the public, are not sure where to get reliable information during and after emergencies. This is a challenge of physical infrastructure (issues of interoperability between systems, lack of cell phone service in rural areas and when power is out, etc.), as well as a lack of a strong communications systems and protocols.

Vermont needs an emergency management system that works for Vermonters. We need to recognize where national models are not applicable to our small, rural state and need to innovate to design a system that considers our unique assets, as well as our particular needs and challenges. The reality is that we are likely to be exercising these systems more frequently in the future than we have in the past, and we cannot afford to be complacent.

What is Underway:

Following Tropical Storm Irene, steps have been taken at all levels of government to improve our emergency management systems. The State of Vermont has revised and updated the State Emergency Operations Plan and Hazard Mitigation Plan. The State has created a new Section of Recovery and Hazard Mitigation, located within Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (DEMHS), and secured several new staff positions supported by state funds. State Agencies have taken many other steps to institutionalize what they learned from Irene. These steps are summarized in the Irene Recovery Reports produced by the Irene Recovery Office.

Many local governments have also updated their plans for emergency response and hazard mitigation. Municipalities such as Hartford and Tunbridge have worked to better integrate these plans into their

1 For a thorough analysis of this challenge, see this report by Ludwig Schumaker.


municipal plan. Municipalities and Regional Planning Commissions are also beginning to develop flood resilience elements in their municipal plans, as required by Act 16 (passed by the Vermont Legislature in 2013). However, our project identified several essential actions that are critical to enhancing Vermont’s resilience.

Priority Recommendations

➤ THE STATE OF VERMONT SHOULD BECOME AN INNOVATOR AND NATIONAL LEADER IN INSTITUTING RESILIENCE IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

The field of emergency management is undergoing a significant change, shifting from a disaster-‐focused discipline into a forward-‐looking risk management function that cuts across all areas of government. To be effective in the face of multiple risks, emergency management must become better integrated into community development and governance. As Robert Schneider describes in his overview of the “new” emergency management: “The linkage of hazard mitigation… to the broader task of developing sustainable communities potentially places emergency management at the very heart of community planning.”2 Specific opportunities for Vermont to innovate and to better integrate emergency management into local and state functions include:

o Set a national example for incorporating land use as a key hazard mitigation strategy, creating strong links between our plans for smart growth development and our investments to reduce vulnerabilities and manage risk (see related recommendations in Align Rules and Investment for Strong Communities);

o Incorporate climate science into our hazard mitigation planning. Through the leadership of the Climate Cabinet, develop a prioritization tool that gives weight to future conditions and risk, and focus mitigation efforts on those areas of highest risk; and,

o Institute emergency management performance metrics to create transparency and elevate the visibility of preparedness and hazard mitigation efforts in Vermont. These metrics could be reported on the governor’s dashboard to increase public awareness and accountability.

As a small state with deep roots in citizen participation and planning, Vermont is uniquely positioned to develop new models for the integration of emergency management into sustainable community development. The key to innovating in Vermont will be successful collaboration across many partner organizations. Stakeholders from every perspective recognized that the responsibility for creating an emergency management system that reflected Vermont’s assets and values was going to require work far beyond any one agency. See Work Together for recommendations on effective collaboration.

◊ Time Horizon: Ongoing

◊ Investment: Existing resources supplemented by grant support (level of investment is scalable)

◊ Key Partners: DEMHS, ANR, RPCs, Philanthropy

2 A Strategic Overview of the "New" Emergency Management -‐ Robert O. Schneider, Ph.D., Chair-‐Dept. Political Science and Public Administration, University of North Carolina at Pembroke MS Word 51KB


➤ ELEVATE THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION WITHIN STATE GOVERNMENT TO INCREASE THEIR AUTHORITY AND ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATE PREPAREDNESS AND RISK MANAGEMENT INTO ALL STATE GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS.

We heard a growing consensus among stakeholders that to effectively integrate emergency management, Vermont should locate the responsibilities of emergency management under the Secretary of Administration. This would reflect the importance of these functions within state government, increase the visibility of the work, improve integration of emergency management into other state agencies and functions, and provide a more direct line of communication to the governor’s office.

◊ Time Horizon: TBD

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: DEMHS, Agency of Administration, Department of Public Safety

➤ REGIONALIZE KEY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS TO PROVIDE MORE EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE SUPPORT TO COMMUNITIES, IMPROVE COMMUNICATIONS, AND STRENGTHEN REGIONAL CAPACITIES.

From both the State and local perspectives, we have heard frustration over the significant gap that exists between emergency management functions provided at the state level and work on the ground in municipalities. To address this gap, Vermont should create a system that places more capacity and responsibility for emergency management at the regional level. Specifically, Vermont should:

o Create four regional emergency operations centers aligned with the existing public safety districts, rather than having a single Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for the entire state. Vermont currently has the highest ratio of municipalities (251) coordinated through a single EOC in the country. Of the five states in the country that do not have county government, only Vermont and New Hampshire have not created a regional structure for emergency management. (Vermont currently has the option of activating Regional Coordination Centers; however, they are ad hoc and do not help to address challenges of communication and coordination during the disaster). Regional Emergency Operations Centers would be staffed with full-‐time personnel who are responsible for preparedness, response and recovery functions, and could be activated during state or regional emergencies utilizing the Incident Command Structure.3 The Regional Emergency Operations Centers would be the main liaison between DEMHS and the municipalities.

o Provide additional support for planning, hazard mitigation and recovery within each of the eleven

Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs). The RPCs played a very active role in helping municipalities with disaster management post-‐Irene, and already have established relationships with the municipalities that enable them to effectively integrate the work of emergency management into other municipal functions, such as land use planning. Currently each RPC receives support for approximately 0.5FTE through FEMA’s Emergency Management Planning Grant (EMPG) Program, which enables them to provide a basic level of assistance to prepare municipal hazard mitigation

3 The concept of Regional Emergency Operations Centers in Vermont was first put forward by Ludwig Schumaker in his thesis for the Naval Postgraduate School, online at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-‐bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA493908. He envisioned that each regional office would be staffed by 2-‐3 FTEs, including a Public Safety District coordinator, and an emergency management planner and trainer.


plans and provide some support to Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs). To provide additional technical support and capacity to municipalities in planning, recovery and hazard mitigation, each RPC should have at least 1 FTE dedicated to emergency management. The RPCs would participate in the Regional Emergency Operations Centers described above.

◊ Time Horizon: These recommendations could be instituted by FY15 if funding is secured.

◊ Investment: Approximately $357,000 to support 1 FTE in each Regional Planning Commission; Cost of regional EOCs TBD

◊ Key Partners: DEMHS, Vermont Department of Public Safety, RPCs

➤ INCREASE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT CAPACITY AT THE LOCAL/MUNICIPAL LEVEL While additional emergency management capacity at the regional scale is critical, because authority rests at the municipal scale in Vermont and because the impacts of disasters are inherently local, we must also build the capacity of local governments and organizations to execute the functions of emergency management. Vermont municipalities, with few exceptions, report that they lack the expertise, resources, and staff to execute the responsibilities of emergency management effectively and efficiently. Concern about local capacity was also cited by support organizations that work with municipalities during disasters and is considered to be among the greatest threats to effectively responding to a widespread disaster like Irene. Through State programs and capacity-‐building organizations, Vermont should continue to increase the opportunities for high-‐quality education and training available to local decision-‐makers. Specific examples identified include: o Create a training curriculum for emergency management directors and encourage selectboards to

require their EMDs to complete this training. This could be a series of online courses or webinars that would allow participants to take courses at their convenience. (A webinar series has already been created on the topic of agricultural emergency preparedness: http://blog.uvm.edu/jmsmith/community-‐preparedness-‐webinars/).

o Modeled after VLCT’s Selectboard Retreat training, an emergency management director training for those newly appointed to the position should be offered each year.

o Develop a series of peer-‐exchange meetings, providing an opportunity for those involved in emergency management to exchange best practices (focus specifically on creating learning opportunities between those who experienced Irene and those who did not).

o Increase promotion of Vermont’s annual preparedness conference and make resilience a key theme in 2014.

◊ Time Horizon: Begin implementation in 2014

◊ Investment: $20,000-‐$100,000/year

◊ Key Partners: DEMHS, Vermont League of Cities and Towns, Regional Planning Commissions, Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs)


Additional Recommended Actions:

● To further elevate the importance of preparedness and ensure that each agency is ready to fulfill its response functions, the Governor should host an annual preparedness meeting of the Cabinet.

● The State government, led by the Department of Buildings and General Services, should lead by example and take visible steps to reduce the vulnerability of state buildings and properties. Potential projects would include retrofitting buildings and implementing river restoration projects.

● The responsibility for oversight of State Agency Continuity of Operations Plans should be moved from BGS to DEMHS. This will help ensure consistency between COOP plans and the State Emergency Operations Plans.

● State Agencies should develop emergency personnel plans and strategies to ensure there is adequate capacity and trained personnel on hand during emergencies.4

● DEMHS should initiate the process of revising and updating the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, beginning with a feedback session to discuss the planning process as it occurred in 2012/2013. Stakeholders have expressed a desire for a more inclusive planning process and have requested to be involved in designing that process to ensure broad inclusivity and a timeline that will enable meaningful participation and data analysis.

4 A similar recommendation with additional detail has been put forward by Gavin Smith in his report to the Agency of Commerce and Community Development.

Building Local Capacity for Adaptation in New Hampshire

Since2010, the State of New Hampshire has been working to bolster the capacity of local communities to implement climate adaptation. The effort started with a focus on shoreline communities that were facing impacts associated with sea level rise. The New Hampshire Coastal Adaptation Workgroup (NHCAW) was created to guide the capacity-‐building work and has evolved into a collaboration of 19 organizations working to help communities in New Hampshire’s Seacoast area prepare for the effects of extreme weather events and other effects of long term climate change. The Adaptation Working Group helps to identify key areas where local leaders need more information, tools and training, including understanding climate science and conducting vulnerability assessments. The NHCAW was so successful and well-‐received by local communities, that the model is now being expanded. In 2012, the Upper Valley Adaptation Working Group was formed. This effort is supported by the NH Department of Environmental Services and a collection of organizations and agencies interested in taking climate action. Interested stakeholders volunteer their time to participate in the working groups which continue to meet regularly to plan training events for local leaders. For more information: http://nhblog.stormsmart.org/


Know Our Risks Ensure availability, access, and use of data to understand risk and guide decision-‐making.

At all levels, from homeowners, business owners and members of the public to state decision makers, there is demand for better information about risk and vulnerabilities. Similar to the private sector, Vermont should adopt a risk management approach, whereby the state proactively identifies and prioritizes risks according to their potential impact and likelihood. Access to good information is fundamental to making good decisions about mitigation (i.e., actions to reduce risk), prioritizing action, and making wise investments.

Vermont has a significant amount of data already available through the work of state agencies, nonprofit organizations, and academic institutions. However, through our process, we identified several outstanding needs, including:

o Climate Projections: We heard from all perspectives that there is a need for information about the anticipated impacts of climate change in Vermont. This includes information about changes in temperature and precipitation, as well as more analysis of how these changes will impact public health, different sectors of the economy (including agriculture and tourism), and Vermont’s ecosystems. Local leaders are requesting data that is as localized as possible so they can understand the specific impacts likely to be experienced by their community.

o River Science: Given that flooding is and will continue to be our greatest climate risk, there is significant demand for better information and understanding of river science, flood vulnerability, floodplain management practices (including bank stabilization and debris removal) and best practices for reducing flood risk. 5

o Infrastructure Vulnerabilities: Tropical Storm Irene and other recent flood events have raised awareness about the level of risk to our infrastructure and the high cost of incurring damage. There is widespread interest in having better information about the level of risk that climate poses to our systems, such as transportation, drinking water, wastewater, energy and telecommunications.

o Prioritization Tools: Decision makers in Vermont need tools and assistance to translate data into a prioritized list of actions. This includes cost-benefit analysis tools that enable decision makers to choose between different potential actions and investments.

Vermont has a great deal of data and information already gathered through its state agencies, non-‐profits and academic partners (see list in the following section). However, much of this data requires technical expertise to access or use it. To help local and state leaders to use this information it must be put into user-‐friendly formats and made widely accessible.

5 A similar recommendation with additional detail has been put forward by Gavin Smith in his report to the Agency of Commerce and Community Development.

“Before Irene we were very unaware of what the risks were, we were fairly complacent of what the

risks were. Now, we need to start knowing what our risks actually are.”

- Focus Group Participant

“We don’t have the information to prioritize where replacements or work needs to happen.”

- Focus Group Participant


What is Underway:

There are a number of efforts underway that provide data and information about climate impacts and risk:

o ANR Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Strategy: This report, scheduled for release in September 2013, will compile the best available information on climate change impacts on forests, fisheries, wildlife, and water resources.

o Vermont Economic Resiliency Initiative: This 18-‐month project, managed by ACCD, will produce a state-‐wide map to identify areas where river instability, infrastructure vulnerabilities and other hazards intersect areas of critical economic activity. Five communities will receive assistance to develop implementation plans to address the identified risks. These plans are intended to serve as models to help all Vermont communities better assess, understand and manage their risks.

o Statewide Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS): ACCD is currently working to develop Vermont’s first statewide CEDS. The strategy will include an analysis of economic clusters and will integrate climate impacts and resilience.

o Department of Health Climate Change Adaptation Program: Over the next four years, this program, funded by the Center for Disease Control, will identify the most pressing health threats posed by climate change and to develop strategies for lessening their impacts.

o Research on Adaptation to Climate Change (RACC) Project: This research program at the University of Vermont is developing downscaled climate models and exploring the link between climate change, land use and impacts on water quality in Lake Champlain.

In regard to river science and floodplain management, there is also a significant amount of work underway to develop and disseminate better data. ANR’s River Corridor Mapping process (a method for mapping fluvial erosion hazard zones) is considered a national model. To date, ANR has completed 173 stream geomorphic assessments involving 165 communities and over 1,500 miles of river corridors throughout the state detailing river dynamics, presenting a picture of where instability and erosion hazards exist. As required by Act 138, ANR will produce a statewide map of river corridors in 2014. VANR is also working to make this information more accessible through the development of the “Focus on Floods” website. The site is scheduled to be launched in early 2014 and is being designed as a comprehensive tool for municipalities across Vermont to find all information related to flood hazard planning.

There is also an effort underway to improve the information Vermont has about impending weather. This initiative is being led by IBM, Green Mountain Power, and Vermont Electric Power Company (VELCO). The “Deep Thunder” model, developed by IBM, would enable Vermont to anticipate weather events several days before they occur and would help identify specific locations that are at greatest risk. This effort is expected to be headquartered in Rutland. There is a strategic opportunity for the State of Vermont to join this partnership and gain access to data that could further enhance the model and provide valuable information to inform state and local government.


Priority Actions:

➤ DEVELOP AND DISSEMINATE BEST AVAILABLE CLIMATE AND RISK INFORMATION IN USER-‐FRIENDLY FORMATS THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATEWIDE PLANS AND USED TO INFORM PRIORITIES AND INVESTMENTS.

Under the leadership of the Climate Cabinet, convene partner organizations to create a coordinate response to the demand for climate information. Specific opportunities include:

o Create a data clearinghouse or “guide to best available climate information” for the state of Vermont;

○ Work with RPCs to develop and disseminate templates for the inclusion of climate data into municipal plans;

○ Partner with the UVM RACC Project to disseminate data from the downscaled climate models in user-‐friendly format; and

○ Partner with organizations that have existing networks, such as VLCT, VECAN, the Association of Conservation Commissions, watershed organizations, business associations and other to disseminate information to municipal officials, business leaders, public works departments and other target audiences.


◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: Climate Cabinet, Regional Planning Commissions, Vermont League of Cities and Towns, Vermont Natural Resources Council

Colorado Climate Preparedness Project

The Colorado Climate Preparedness Project provides an example of an online database being used to share information and disseminate best practices within a state. The project, initiated in 2010, set out to create a platform for sharing climate adaptation work to inform future government leaders and support long-‐term preparedness in Colorado. The project has developed a searchable online database of adaptation efforts in Colorado. The database is organized by four sections; organizations, people, projects and products. Registered users can edit existing content and add new content, allowing organizations to share their work and learn from others. The Colorado Climate Preparedness Project was developed by the Western Water Assessment, a Regional Integrated Science and Assessment (RISA) programs funded by NOAA.

For access to the online database, follow this link.


➤ INSTITUTE A SUSTAINED RIVER CORRIDOR MAPPING PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES INFORMATION ABOUT FLOOD AND EROSION RISK TO INFORM LOCAL, REGIONAL AND STATE PLANS AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARD MITIGATION PROJECTS.

The State of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) should support a sustained river mapping program responsible for developing and updating accurate river corridor maps for the entire state that clearly indicate high hazard areas, integrate consideration of uplands into river corridor mapping, identify opportunities to reduce flood impacts, and provide guidance to prioritize investment in flood mitigation. These maps should be designed to help identify highest risk locations for detailed river corridor planning that will result in specific recommendations for buyouts, land conservation, floodplain restoration, green infrastructure and other mitigation actions and should be easily accessible and usable by local planners and decision-‐makers. Specifically, the State of Vermont should:

○ Broaden the engagement process associated with the development of river corridor maps and plans. Use the corridor planning process to foster a watershed scale dialogue about

upstream-‐downstream coordination between jurisdictions;

○ Maps should be made more user-‐friendly and accessible and should support the identification of hazards and hazard mitigation projects within a watershed; and

○ Work with RPCs to provide targeted technical assistance to pursue implementation projects based on these maps.


◊ Investment: 2FTE (note: to achieve some savings, there may be potential to co-‐locate this mapping program with the VTrans mapping office. This office already houses trained GIS staff, software and IT support.)

◊ Key Partners: VANR, VTrans, municipalities

➤ CONDUCT A STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT THAT PRODUCES A STATEWIDE DATA SET AND MAP THAT SHOWS AREAS OF HIGHEST RELATIVE VULNERABILITY AND IS USED TO GUIDE PRIORITIZATION OF INVESTMENT.

Vermont’s transportation infrastructure continues to be the most expensive source of damage in the State. While local and state officials are incredibly concerned about the vulnerabilities of the roads, bridges, and culverts under their jurisdiction, they report that they do not have access to adequate information about their vulnerabilities that could help inform priorities. Under the leadership of VTrans, Vermont should conduct a statewide transportation vulnerability assessment similar to that conducted by the Washington DOT. While this process would be focused on state-‐owned infrastructure, it could provide a model process of analysis that could be scaled down and used to analyze municipal transportation infrastructure in the future.

◊ Time Horizon: TBD

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: VTrans, ANR, DEMHS, RPCs, UVM Transportation Center


Washington State Transportation Vulnerability Assessment

Similar to Vermont, the State of Washington is expecting to experience more frequent and intensive rain that will seriously threaten their transportation infrastructure. In anticipation of these climate impacts, in 2011 the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) conducted a statewide risk-‐based vulnerability assessment to identify and prioritize vulnerabilities in state’s transportation infrastructure system. The project received a grant for $189,500 funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and WSDOT provided matching funds (totaling a project coast of $379,000).

Through fourteen statewide workshops, local participants helped to identify potential vulnerabilities for all modes of travel. Participants included local experts in geology, hydrology and transportation, including maintenance superintendents and field staff with firsthand knowledge of the impacts of past storm events. Climate change scenarios were provided by University of Washington Climate Scientists and WSDOT. The project resulted in a map that indicates the levels of vulnerability for routes of auto, air, rail and ferry travel. This information is being used to guide prioritization of projects and investment decisions.

In the 2 years since WSDOT completed this process the benefits, are already being seen. WSDOT has implemented a ‘no regrets’ asset management program based on the vulnerability assessment. This program supports practices including seismic retrofits of bridges, improved fish passages, culvert replacements and drilled bridge shafts on new structures. Furthermore, areas that are currently experiencing problems in response to climate impacts are on a watch list including scour critical bridges and low-‐lying areas subject to sea-‐level rise flooding. This summer, WSDOT entered into phase two of the study, supported by an additional $267,600 in federal grant funding, to address corridor flooding and other hazards in the Skagit River Basin. This area was identified in the vulnerability assessment as highly vulnerable to extreme flooding.

More information on WSDOT’s Climate Impacts Vulnerability Assessment can be found online.


➤ INCORPORATE VULNERABLE POPULATION DATA AND ANALYSIS INTO MUNICIPAL, REGIONAL,

AND STATE HAZARD MITIGATION PLANS WITH THE HELP OF SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS SO THAT THE NEEDS OF VERMONT’S VULNERABLE POPULATIONS ARE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AND REPRESENTED AT ALL LEVELS OF HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING.

There is widespread consensus that actions that support the safety and security of vulnerable populations should be prioritized in the work to build more resilient communities. However, there is little understanding about the needs, location, or priorities of these communities. Tropical Storm Irene revealed some examples of vulnerable populations in Vermont, including those who live in substandard housing located in flood-‐prone areas, people without access to transportation, people without personal savings, those with medical needs (such as a reliance on oxygen or prescription medications). In winter storms, vulnerable populations include those who cannot heat their homes. Social service providers, including the Department of Health, Community Action Councils, housing organizations, fuel assistance, and weatherization providers, can provide valuable data and experience to incorporate the needs of vulnerable populations into pre-‐disaster planning, including the needs of low income elderly, and the disabled individuals and households. Engaging these organizations in the planning process will help to strengthen relationships that are needed in the response and recovery phases.

◊ Time Horizon: Initiate these partnerships immediately

◊ Investment: Low (much could be achieved with existing resources)

◊ Key Partners: Central Vermont Community Action Council and other Community Action agencies, LTRCs, University of Vermont, Department of Health, Agency of Human Services


➤➤ TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY TO FORGE A PUBLIC-‐PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE STATE OF VERMONT, GREEN MOUNTAIN POWER AND IBM TO UTILIZE A STATE-‐OF-‐THE ART WEATHER MODEL, IN COMBINATION WITH STATE DATA, TO IMPROVE THE ACCURACY OF STORM PREDICTIONS, ENABLE EARLY WARNINGS, AND EFFICIENTLY MOBILIZE EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL.

Vermont has a unique opportunity to pursue a public-‐private partnership that will provide access to state-‐of-‐the-‐art weather modeling. The Deep Thunder computer model developed by IBM is capable of producing more accurate predictions about the potential impacts of storms that can be used to guide where and how response teams are mobilized and equipment is deployed in a way that will reduce damages and cost. The State of Vermont should take advantage of this strategic opportunity work with IBM, Green Mountain Power and VELCO to develop the model and gain access to its capabilities. ◊ Time Horizon: Ongoing

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: State of Vermont, Green Mountain Power, IBM, VELCO

Additional Recommended Actions:

o VTrans should continue to support and improve the Vermont Online Bridge and Culvert Inventory Tool (VOBCIT) as a valuable tool for local decision-‐makers.

o DEMHS and the RPC should pilot new tools for communities to track data regarding infrastructure maintenance, especially damage caused by disasters (data required to be eligible for funding from FEMA). This would include compiling current best practices in VT communities, piloting the use of smart phone apps, and supporting peer exchange forums on this topic between municipal public works departments.

o Utilize the Statewide Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) to identify Vermont’s economic risk and vulnerabilities. Ensure that this strategy and the information therein is broadly disseminated and is used to guide federal, state and local investment.


Work Together and Learn Together Foster stronger collaboration and alignment across organizations, sectors and jurisdictions to leverage resources and maximize results.

There is significant interest from a wide spectrum of government, community and business leaders in strengthening collaboration and finding ways to bring partners from the public, private and nonprofit sectors together to work toward a shared definition of resilience.

During the response and recovery phase of Tropical Storm Irene, many new collaborative efforts were born and proved invaluable to those who were involved. In support of resilience, Vermont stakeholders have the opportunity and expressed desire to build on post-‐Irene success and continue to break down silos. Through collaboration, we seek to work more efficiently, aligning our efforts for maximum impact. To do this effectively, we will need to overcome many challenges, including:

o Working across jurisdictional boundaries: While Vermont communities are connected in many ways, there is often very little coordination between adjacent municipalities in regard to land use, economic development, and infrastructure planning. In order to tackle problems like localized flooding within a watershed or staff capacity during emergencies, Vermont communities need to find ways to work together effectively, to share equipment and resources, and to take actions that will provide regional benefits.

o Working across levels of government: Coordinating across levels of government is often difficult as different agencies and government entities have different goals and objectives, jurisdictions, levels of authority, and capacities.

o Addressing inconsistencies: Resiliency is one of many goals within the State of Vermont. In some cases, this goal may be competing or even in conflict with other statewide goals, such as historic preservation, economic development, or smart growth development. While there are many opportunities to find common ground (for example, developing floodproofing techniques appropriate for historic structures), we need to clearly identify where our efforts are inconsistent or working against one another and work to find shared solutions.

o Bringing new partners to the table: Through the Resilient Vermont project, we’ve identified many groups that need to be brought to the table as part of the resilience conversation, including: businesses, farmers, insurance industry, land conservation and housing organizations. While many individuals and organizations in these areas are interested in resilience, they are often facing their own capacity constraints and are hesitant to add to their commitments.

What is Underway:

Vermont has a long history of successful partnerships and collaboration. Organizations such as the Vermont Council on Rural Development, the Vermont Farm-‐to-‐Plate Initiative and the Vermont Climate Action Network all demonstrate the power of bringing together organizations to advance common goals. Since Tropical Storm Irene, we have seen several new collaborative efforts emerge. Within state government, the Irene Recovery Coordination Team was an interagency effort to ensure a coordinated


approach to recovery and resilience that spanned state agencies, including ACCD, VTrans, DEMHS, VANR, DHS, Agency of Agriculture, as well as other agencies and organizations, including the RPCs. Irene also spurred other collaborative efforts between agencies, including new efforts to coordinate VANR and VTrans in regard to bridge and culvert standards and other overlapping areas of work. At the regional scale, we are also seeing new partnerships emerge to address common challenges. For example, the communities of the Mad River Valley are working together on a long-‐term flood resilience project with support from the US EPA. Recommended Actions:

➤ WITHIN STATE GOVERNMENT, ASSIGN A CHAMPION RESPONSIBLE FOR RESILIENCE AND RISK MANAGEMENT THAT IS AUTHORIZED TO COORDINATE THE WORK ACROSS STATE AGENCIES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE A CONSISTENT APPROACH, IDENTIFY AND ADVANCE STATE PRIORITIES, AND ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY.

Vermont needs a coordinated approach to advancing resiliency across state government and all of its functions. To be successful, this coordinating function must be assigned to an entity that has adequate authority, credibility and scope. This entity would be responsible for establishing state goals for resilience, coordinating projects and programs that cut across agencies, ensuring that data and information are shared, and would provide accountability – ensuring that recommended actions are advanced. This coordinating role could be filled by either: o The Climate Cabinet: To fulfill this role, the Climate Cabinet would need to be expanded to include

DEMHS and the Agency of Human Services. It would need dedicated technical staff and would need to have shared ownership across agencies (for example, be co-‐chaired); or

o Emergency Management: If elevated and reconfigured as recommended earlier in this document. ◊ Time Horizon:

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: Climate Cabinet, DEMHS

The Oregon Climate Adaptation Framework In October 2009, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski sought to create a unified approach to climate adaptation across state agencies. With support from the Oregon Climate Change Research Institute (OCCRI), an interagency working group identified key risks facing the Pacific Northwest, took stock of existing capacities, and identified gaps that needed to be filled by state agencies. The resulting Climate Adaptation Framework identified 11 climate risks facing the state and their likelihood of occurring within the next 30-‐40 years. The Framework proposed 20 top-‐priority, short-‐term, low-‐cost actions for implementation and a set of cross-‐cutting recommendations. The framework has increased the commitment of Oregon’s State agencies to take action, and has helped many of them to see how their existing projects and capacities can be leveraged to support climate adaptation work. More information and full framework report can be found online.


➤ CREATE THE VERMONT STRONG NETWORK – A CROSS-‐SECTOR COLLABORATION THAT INCLUDES NONPROFIT, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED IN RESILIENCY WORK TO ALIGN EFFORTS, SHARE BEST PRACTICES, AND LEVERAGE RESOURCES TO ADVANCE RESILIENCE EFFORTS STATEWIDE.

We have myriad organizations working to promote resilience work across the state of Vermont. Currently many of these efforts are not connected to one other, there is duplication of effort and a missed opportunity to share lessons learned across different parts of the state. A Vermont Strong Network, structured to achieve collective impact and work toward a shared vision, presents an opportunity to coordinate across different partner organizations for deeper and more lasting impact. Learning from the Farm-‐to-‐Plate Network, another model of collective impact, the Vermont Strong Network would need: shared goals, shared metrics, means of communicating and coordinating activities across partner organizations, and a backbone support organization or network coordinator. ◊ Time Horizon: Immediate action to identify a network coordinator

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: State of Vermont, VNRC, UVM, Philanthropy

Vermont’s Farm to Plate Network: A Model of Collective Action The Vermont Farm to Plate Network provides a local example of a collective impact model -‐ a network of organizations aligned behind a set of common goals. Supported by the Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund (VSJF), the network now has participation from over 200 organizations including food systems businesses, nonprofits, government agencies, educational institutions, capital providers and community groups. F2P was modeled on the collective impact model developed by Re-‐AMP (www.reamp.org). “Successful collective impact initiatives typically have five conditions that together produce true alignment and lead to powerful results: a common agenda, shared measurement systems, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support organizations. (Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 2011).”For F2P, VSJF serves as Network Coordinator, providing support in areas such as communication, funding, administrative and assessment. A steering committee helps to govern the network and oversee the work of steering committees.. In support of the network, VSJF created the Vermont Food System Atlas, an online resource to support communication and collaboration, and is responsible for monitoring and evaluating the network and providing feedback that can support continuous improvement. More information available online.


➤➤ SUPPORT LOCAL RESILIENCY NETWORKS THAT BRING TOGETHER PLANNING BOARDS, CONSERVATION COMMISSION, EMERGENCY MANAGERS, SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS AND OTHER LEADERS TO DEVELOP A SHARED VISION FOR RESILIENCE WITHIN A COMMUNITY.

Within Vermont municipalities, there are a variety of organizations doing work related to community resilience. These include selectboards, planning commissions, conservation commissions, emergency management directors, housing organizations, food shelves, energy committees and others. Just as it is important to create alignment across state agencies, so too is it important to align the efforts of these local organizations. Forming local resiliency networks would be an easy and low-‐cost way to build social capital at the local level and create a shared vision of resilience within a community. A similar concept has been developed by Peg Elmer who is working to create pilot projects in 2014. If the pilot phase is successful, this concept could be perpetuated in other Vermont communities with minimal assistance.

◊ Time Horizon: Pilot projects in 2014

◊ Investment: Low

◊ Key Partners: Municipalities, RPCs, VNRC, VLCT, and Philanthropy

➤➤ ENGAGE PRIVATE LANDOWNERS AS KEY PARTNERS TO IMPLEMENT LAND MANAGEMENT

PRACTICES THAT REDUCE HAZARDS AND SUPPORT HEALTHY ECOSYSTEMS.

Building resilience will require a change in our land management practices. 82% of Vermont forests are privately owned, as is the majority of unforested and developed land. Implementing changes will require participation, cooperation, and innovation on the part of private landowners. Because state regulations do not mandate the use of resilient practices, and because landowners are often resistant to being told by local and state government what they can and cannot do on their land, we must find other ways of engaging with landowners to improve the resilience of our landscape. This can be achieved by encouraging and fostering the voluntary adoption of best land management practices by partnering with landowners to encourage practices such as: installation of riparian buffers; preservation and restoration of floodplains, wetlands, and forested areas; improving infiltration of rainwater. All of these actions require investment in time, energy, and capital by landowners, so it is important that some of the barriers to implementation are addressed. A variety of organizations are already engaging local landowners through voluntary efforts to adopt new land management practices, but many private landholders still don’t know where to look for information and technical assistance in making land use choices. To engage more private landowners will require additional education (including case studies), technical assistance, financial incentives such as rebates, and recognition for Vermonters who voluntarily act as “good neighbors” and adopt practices that make their communities safer. ◊ Time Horizon: Long-‐term

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: Watershed Associations, VANR, Agency of Agriculture,


Align Rules and Investment for Stronger Communities Ensure that investments, rules, and regulations help us to effectively prepare and respond to climate disruption.

The recommendations contained in this section are largely focused on implementation and the changes we need to make in our rules and investments in order to achieve real change on the ground. Tropical Storm Irene provided stark evidence of the high toll that natural disasters take on people and communities. It demonstrated many of our greatest vulnerabilities, elevated the need for new investments and updated rules to ensure that we are ready to meet future challenges.

Decision makers at all levels, from homeowners to business owners, selectboard members to agency secretaries, have voiced the need to align our rules and investments behind the goals of resiliency and in support of communities that are safer, economically vibrant, and continue to support a high quality of life for Vermonters.

There are many complex challenges that these recommendations seek to address:

o Historic and Economic Centers in Vulnerable Locations: Among Vermont’s greatest challenges is the fact that many of our compact downtowns and villages and our economic centers, including many industrial parks, are located along waterways. While our smart growth goals adopted by the state and many communities support continued development in these areas, those goals may not be consistent with our goals of resilience and reducing vulnerabilities.

o Protecting Undeveloped River Corridors: While we seek to resolve the challenge of existing development in floodprone locations, data shows that new development continues in these areas. Development in these areas creates a new hazard and can increase the vulnerability of downstream residents and communities.

o Vulnerable Infrastructure: Our infrastructure systems – including transportation, energy, water and telecommunications –are critical to our economy, public health and safety, and quality of life. Vermont is faced with the reality of aging infrastructure and systems that are unlikely to withstand the challenges of climate change. These systems are expensive to maintain and even more expensive to replace – and there is a lack of funding to do either.

o Valuing our Natural Assets: Vermont’s natural resources, including forests, wetlands, floodplains and open lands are incredible assets in many ways. These resources provided valuable services (sometimes called “ecosystem services”) by helping to absorb stormwater, slow floodwaters, and improve water quality. Oftentimes, when opportunities arise to develop these areas, these important functions are not given any value. Protecting these services where they are most critical can be far more cost-‐effective than trying to deal with the consequences or engineer a solution.

o Funding and Financing: Put simply, Vermont does not have access to the level of funds necessary to address even our highest priority vulnerabilities. Homeowners, business owners, municipalities and the state are all struggling to find funding. While we have seen significant investment in resilience since Tropical Storm Irene, these funds will not continue


to be available and unless we institutionalize resilience as an investment priority in Vermont, its importance is likely to lessen over time.

What is Underway:

Vermont has been making good progress toward aligning rules and investment in support of more resilient communities. Specific examples include:

o Updates to the rules of Vermont’s Emergency Relief and Assistance Fund (ERAF) to create additional incentives for municipalities that adopt higher standards for hazard mitigation;

o The revision of Vermont’s bridge and culvert construction standards incorporating river science and creating consistency between VTrans and VANR; and,

o New requirements for regional and municipal plans to include a flood resilience element which creates a stronger link between hazard mitigation plans and land use plans (as required by Act 16).

But these efforts must be augmented by comprehensive shifts in how we think about and manage land use, both in our undeveloped and developed areas. We can advance resiliency by aligning our plans, policies and regulations with our investments.

Priority Actions:

➤ CREATE A REGULATORY FRAMEWORK/APPROACH TO LAND USE THAT DOES NOT CREATE ANY NEW OR ADDITIONAL VULNERABILITIES WITHIN RIVER CORRIDORS (AKA A “NO ADVERSE IMPACT APPROACH).

We found widespread support for reducing the impact of development on our waterways and for ensuring that additional development is not located in hazardous areas. Downstream communities, in particular, voiced very strong support for consistent river corridor protections that would help to reduce the potential flood damage in their communities. The key to achieving this is an approach known as “No Adverse Impact”

– an emerging concept based on the principle that one property owner should not adversely impact the flood risk of other properties or communities.6

Currently, floodplain regulations in Vermont are adopted and enforced by municipalities.7 The result is an inconsistent regulation of floodplains throughout a watershed. Currently, 70% of Vermont municipalities have adopted the FEMA minimum floodplain protections (which do not protect against erosion hazards), 17% have adopted additional protections within river corridors, and 13% have no floodplain regulations at all.

6 For more information, including case studies on No Adverse Impact programs, see http://www.floods.org/index.asp?menuID=460. 7 The State of Vermont does have jurisdiction on development that triggers Act 250 review and development that is exempted from local zoning in Vermont Chapter 117.

“People hate to see restrictions but it’s foolish to allow development that’s going to cost us fiscally and possibly result in the loss of life. If we let people build, then we are saying ‘we are going to help them when there is a problem.’ Are we then going to invest public money if there is a loss?” – Focus Group Participant


VANR should work closely with the RPCs and municipalities to implement a No Adverse Impact approach to development in river corridors. Specifically, this would include:

o VANR, in partnership with the RPCS, should produce a set of model flood hazard bylaws that can be implemented by municipalities. The models would include a minimum standard as well as options for additional protections.

o VANR should seek funding to support a flood resiliency position within each RPC. This staffperson would be responsible for working closely with the municipalities in their region to support efforts to incorporate river corridor mapping into town plans and policies, to adopt flood hazard bylaws, and would provide education, training, and technical assistance within their region. RPCs would be responsible for reporting on performance metrics to VANR.

o VANR should continue to develop incentives for municipalities to adopt flood hazard bylaws; one example would be to award additional points on state grant applications.

o VANR should monitor and publicly report performance metrics to determine the progress being made toward reducing our flood vulnerabilities.

◊ Time Horizon: Model bylaws in 2014

◊ Investment: Approximately $715,000 to support 1 FTE in each RPC

◊ Key Partners: Philanthropy

➤ DEVELOP MODEL FLOOD RESILIENCY BYLAWS FOR COMPACT COMMUNITIES LOCATED IN RIVER CORRIDORS.

Vermont’s villages and downtowns are unique historic, cultural and economic assets. Many of these communities are located along river and lakes and are therefore prone to flooding and erosion damage. There is widespread recognition that Vermont needs different regulations for these existing compact communities, as compared with less developed portions of the watershed. To date, the model floodplain bylaws that have been created have not addressed the unique challenges of Vermont’s village and downtowns. In these areas, bylaws should prohibit development that will further encroach into the river corridor, incentivize reducing the footprint of existing development in the corridor, and include standards for retrofitting structures to withstand flooding. Community leaders have requested a set of model bylaws focused on compact communities that illustrate a range of options they can choose from to increase the protection of their communities. These model bylaws should take into account the diversity of local conditions and constraints faced by Vermont’s communities, including size of community, geography, financial and capacity base, and ease of enforcement.

◊ Time Horizon: 2014

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: VANR, ACCD, VLCT, RPCs


➤ DESIGNATE PILOT ADAPTATION AREAS AND DIRECT INVESTMENTS INTO THOSE AREAS.

Vermonters are anxious to get started and implement adaptation and resiliency improvements in vulnerable communities. While work needs to continue in communities across the state, there is strong support for selecting a discrete number of pilot communities and implementing a suite of adaptation practices to test potential approaches, demonstrate what is possible, provide valuable data (including return on investment), and an educational opportunity for decisions makers and the public. A similar concept is currently being used in Rutland to demonstrate the potential for a Vermont community to become “zero-‐energy” through an intensive energy efficiency retrofit program and the installation of renewable energy. Adaptation pilot areas would likely feature investments in river corridor protection and restoration, stormwater management, drinking and wastewater infrastructure, building retrofits for flood resilience, and community education and engagement. ◊ Time Horizon: 1-‐2 years to develop and initiate concept

◊ Investment: Scalable depending on the number of communities selected, the level of investment and the implementation timeline.

◊ Key Partners: Municipalities, ACCD, VANR, VTrans, Philanthropy

Adaptation Action Areas in Broward County, Florida The Florida 2011 Community Planning Act created the option for Florida’s county government to designate priority Adaptation Action Areas, which would receive prioritized funding for infrastructure and adaptation efforts. In 2013, Broward County became the first regions in the state to adopt the concept in its regional plan. Located in southeast Florida with 23 miles of coastline, Broward County is highly vulnerable to sea level rise. The region includes 31 municipalities and a total population of over 1.8 million people. Over the next four years, the County will be working with local municipalities to designate the areas that are most vulnerable to sea level rise as Adaptation Action Areas. These areas will benefit from advanced planning and funding for infrastructure investment. More information available online.


➤ LEVERAGE EXISTING INVESTMENT IN CONSERVATION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TO MAXIMIZE RESILIENCY BENEFITS.

Vermont is already investing deeply in conservation of farm and forest land, river corridor restoration and stormwater management. Investments are made by federal agencies (including NRCS, Fish & Wildlife Service), the State of Vermont (through state agencies as well as the current use program), municipalities, and nonprofit organizations (including land trusts). These investments have been largely motivated by the desire to maintain Vermont’s rural working landscape and protect the water quality in rivers, streams and lakes. Each of these investments has the potential to provide co-‐benefits in regard to climate adaptation and flood resilience. To realize these co-‐benefits, partner organizations should incorporate resilience into their prioritization processes. Priority should be given to those projects that provide climate adaptation co-‐benefits, including flood retention and storage, groundwater recharge, stream channel protection or restoration, wetland protection/restoration. The process of identifying and prioritizing projects should be linked to, and informed by statewide river corridor maps. ◊ Time Horizon: Ongoing

◊ Investment: Leverage existing resources

◊ Key Partners: VANR, VHCB Local, Regional and Statewide Land Trusts

Otter Creek Floodplain Reduces Vulnerability in Middlebury, Vermont

In Vermont, the Otter Creek serves as an example of the important role that our natural systems play to help protect our built environment from flood impacts. The Otter Creek runs from the Green Mountains to Lake Champlain, connecting Rutland and Middlebury. During Tropical Storm Irene, the Otter Creek River caused significant flooding in the Town of Rutland. However, 30 miles downstream, Middlebury stayed dry. This difference is attributed to the floodplains and wetlands that have been protected in the watershed. These areas were able to store so much water that measurements of the amount of water flowing through the river were actually lower in Middlebury as compared to Rutland. In fact, the wetlands along the Otter Creek surrounding Middlebury stored so much water that on August 29, water flow was measured at 13,500 cfs (cubic feet per second) in Rutland but at the same time, the river was only at 3,700 cfs in Middlebury. The Otter Creek continued rising in Middlebury until September 2 when it hit its peak level, 3 days after the storm, proving the amount of storage capacity in the upstream wetland areas and their ability to slowly release increased water levels at a slower, safer rate through the riverways. River scientists have modeled data where they applied the same rate of flow that actually occurred in Rutland to Middlebury with a hypothetical scenario that ignores the surrounding wetlands. The result shows a potential increase in water flow 7 times that of what was actually measured during Irene in Middlebury. Using this lesson, we see firsthand how wetlands can act as a natural defense against floods and how we might be better served to understand and protect the ecosystem services provided to us by protecting our floodplains.

Watch a video recounting the story in detail here.


➤ PROVIDE GUIDANCE AND INCENTIVES FOR PROACTIVE INVESTMENT IN TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE.

At both the state and local level, there is strong interest in developing construction guidelines and climate adaptation best practices that will better equip Vermont’s transportation infrastructure to sustain future weather and the increased likelihood of flooding and erosion. Developing new guidelines is particularly challenging, as we can no longer depend on historic trends and rather need to utilize predictive models to inform our design standards. To support the construction of more resilient transportation infrastructure, VTrans should: o Develop a set of construction guidelines or adaptation best practices that can be used by the

Agency as well as by municipalities; o Provide a cost-‐benefit analysis tool that allows decision-‐makers to see the benefits of building

more resilient infrastructure (Local leaders acknowledge that building more robust infrastructure will be more expensive and would like tools that help them make informed decisions.);

o Encourage municipalities to take action to address vulnerabilities before a disaster. Currently, municipalities receive more assistance to rebuild infrastructure that has been damaged in a disaster, then they do if proactively address transportation vulnerabilities. At minimum, the State of Vermont should reverse these incentives.

◊ Time Horizon:

◊ Investment:

◊ Key Partners: Philanthropy

➤ PRIORITIZE INVESTMENT IN RESILIENT WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

Water infrastructure, including drinking water, wastewater and stormwater systems are likely to be heavily impacted by increased precipitation and changes to Vermont’s climate. In many Vermont communities, these systems are already suffering from deferred maintenance. Much of Vermont’s water infrastructure is managed by municipal boards and volunteer commissions. These organizations need significant support to assess the vulnerabilities of their infrastructure and anticipate future impacts. Specific actions include:

o Provide training in asset management; o Create a set of case studies demonstrating how infrastructure improvements can be financed and

can achieve positive return on investment; o Incentivize resilience for projects applying for state grant or revolving loan funds through

prioritization of infrastructure projects that increase system resilience. Conversely, disincentivize projects that do not demonstrate resilience to future hazards.

◊ Time Horizon:

◊ Investment:

◊ Key Partners: Vermont Rural Water, VLCT, VANR, Philanthropy


➤ INVEST IN EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO INCREASE PUBLIC LITERACY REGARDING RIVER SCIENCE AND FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PRACTICES.

Climate change and the increasing intensity and frequency of precipitation, is expected to significantly impact Vermont’s waterways. In particular, our rivers and streams will be experiencing more frequent flooding and causing more erosion as a result. Over the past decade, VANR has dramatically increased our understanding of river science and how Vermont’s unique topography and geology affect the behaviors. Working with landowners across the state, as well as other state and federal agencies, they have supported dozens of pilot projects to identify land management practices that can help to reduce the impacts of flooding, including floodplain protection and restoration, low-‐impact streambank stabilization, and improved stormwater management to reduce the amount of water reaching the river during a storm. This information needs to be widely disseminated and supported by strong education and training programs to effectively reach key target audiences, including municipal officials, landowners (including homeowners, farmers, and other business owners), local business and environmental organizations, and next-‐generation Vermonters. Specific education and outreach efforts should include: o Develop a network of organizations delivering river science workshops and trainings to ensure

consistency of message and coordinated delivery to different audiences and regions of the state.8 This network should include the flood resiliency coordinators situated within each RPC (as per previous recommendation);

o Develop a Floodplain Management Best Practices manual that can be widely distributed to Vermont landowners. This manual should clearly articulate the costs and benefits of different approaches to floodplain management;

o Incorporate river science and land management into school curriculum, building on existing programs focused on water quality, to ensure that future Vermonters have a strong understanding of river dynamics;

o Create a computer simulation program or game that enables Vermonters to see how upstream mitigation projects can reduce downstream vulnerabilities;

o Utilize the Focus on Floods Website, currently under development by ANR, as a portal to all of the information and resources developed by the network; and,

o Develop performance metrics for state-‐funded river science education programs to ensure that

successful programs are replicated and scaled up and to ensure that the budgets for these programs are defensible.

8 Similar recommendation made by Gavin Smith.


◊ Time Horizon: Immediately

◊ Investment: Base funding is already in place to support “Focus on Floods website”-‐ partner organizations should seek additional grants to supplement this funding.

◊ Key Partners: VANR, ACCD, DEMHS, VTrans, VNRC, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)

➤ INVEST IN TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS TARGETED TO STATE AND MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEM OWNERS AND MANAGERS TO PROMOTE COST-‐EFFECTIVE ACTION AND PREPAREDNESS AND REDUCE FUTURE DISRUPTIONS.

Vermont’s infrastructure systems, including our transportation, water, energy and telecommunications systems are the backbone of our communities and our economy. These systems enable the high quality of life that we enjoy. However, these systems – in particular our transportation, drinking water, wastewater and stormwater systems – are going to be under increasing stress due to Vermont’s changing weather patterns. Vermont infrastructure system owners and managers need education and training that will enable them to take proactive steps to managing, maintaining and investing in these systems in order to increase their resilience and minimize future disruptions or catastrophic failures. Specific training and technical assistance needs include:

o Asset Management: Asset Management is an approach to operating, managing and planning physical infrastructure in a way that is sustainable and recognizes life cycle costs. 9 Vermont Rural Water has already begun offering training in asset management to water system owners and operators. This effort should be scaled up with a goal of having every selectboard/city council, as well as water/fire district boards, familiar with the concept.

o Climate Data: Decisions about these systems are often based on past experiences and projections that do not factor in projected climate impacts. Infrastructure managers need access to best available climate projections and how to incorporate them into investment decisions (see previous recommendation about compiling best available climate data).

o Case Examples: Develop case examples that show how climate data was utilized to inform decisions and result in a different approach that produced a positive return on investment and increased.

o Rate Setting: In many Vermont communities with public water systems, rates have not changed significantly in decades. This is a reality in communities across the country and a variety of new rate structures are being developed to ensure that systems generate enough revenue to keep up with operations, maintenance and environmental requirements.

o Transportation Construction Practices: Training and technical assistance in support of the

transportation adaptation guidelines (see previous recommendation).

9 For more information, see the Institute for Asset Management at http://theiam.org/what-‐asset-‐management


◊ Time Horizon: Immediately

◊ Investment: Scalable

◊ Key Partners: VLCT, RPCs, ACCD, VANR, VTrans, VT Rural Water, VT Better Backroads

➤➤ ESTABLISH A DEDICATED FUND TO SUPPORT THE PURCHASE OF HAZARD-‐PRONE PROPERTIES

THAT ARE AT HIGH RISK BUT ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING THROUGH FEMA OR OTHER PROGRAMS.

The FEMA hazard mitigation buyout program, while an important source of funding to purchase damaged properties in high-‐risk locations, is not sufficient in meeting statewide needs to relocate structures located in high-‐risk areas. FEMA buyouts are only available after a disaster, and many vulnerable properties don’t qualify for this pool of funds. We know we have an incredible number of homes and structures located in hazardous areas. We should work to proactively move people to safer locations by choice, rather than after disaster strikes. Relocating residents and removing high-‐risk properties is more cost-‐effective than repeatedly repairing damage and rebuilding after disaster situations. Leveraging our ability to transforming disaster prone areas into open lands through relocation that help with flood attenuation can fulfill a variety of hazards mitigation, environmental, water quality and flood management functions. Attempting to achieve relocation along with these other environmental goals maximizes co-‐benefits and can increase potential to capture grant funding. Structuring and capitalizing a hazard prone property fund will be challenging, and to do so requires dedicated partners thinking creatively. ◊ Time Horizon: ACCD or VANR should convene a working group to advance this concept in fall 2013

◊ Investment: TBD

◊ Key Partners: ACCD, VANR, Philanthropy, Vermont Housing and Conservation Board


Next Steps In the coming month, ISC will be soliciting additional feedback on these draft recommendations through a third and final stakeholder convening, additional meetings and continued public outreach. We will utilize that feedback to inform the final draft roadmap, which is anticipated for completion by the end of October. Please submit comments via our website: resilientvt.org

By email: [email protected]

Or, call Deb Perry at: 802-‐229-‐2900

Acronyms List ACCD – Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development AHS – Vermont Agency of Human Services BGS – Vermont Department of Buildings and General Services CEDS – Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy COOP – Continuity of Operations Plan DEMHS – Vermont Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security DOT – United States Department of Transportation EMD – Emergency Management Director EMPG -‐ FEMA’s Emergency Management Planning Grant EOC – Emergency Operations Center ERAF -‐ Vermont’s Emergency Relief and Assistance Fund F2P – Vermont Farm to Plate Network FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA – Federal Highway Administration FTE – Full time equivalent ISC – Institute for Sustainable Communities LEPC – Local Emergency Planning Committee LTRC – Long Term Recovery Committee NAI – No adverse impact NFIP – National Flood Insurance Program NRCS -‐ Natural Resources Conservation Service RACC – Research of Adaptation to Climate Change RPC – Regional Planning Commission UVM – University of Vermont VANR – Vermont Agency of Natural Resources VECAN – Vermont Energy and Climate Action Network VELCO – Vermont Electric Power Company VHCB – Vermont Housing and Conservation Board VLCT – Vermont League of Cities and Towns VNRC – Vermont Natural Resources Council VSJF – Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund VTrans – Vermont Department of Transportation

vermont’s roadmap to resilience - wordpress.com...overview over the course of the past 18 months,...

Documents