Laserfiche WebLink
Sustainability Advisory Board <br />Minutes <br />March 15, 2023 <br />Page 7 of 10 <br />John stated that the ordinance would send a message that Louisville is <br />committed to fighting climate change. He inquired about the possibilities of the <br />City conducting air quality checks at gasoline stations or requiring further vapor <br />control on gasoline pumps. He noted that the ordinance would not eliminate <br />greenhouse gas emissions by itself. <br />Josh responded to a few previous comments. He stated that the State of <br />Colorado is responsible for controlling and testing gasoline stations, and he <br />noted that regulating the number of pumps is closer to the regulations in the <br />citizens' initiative. <br />Lev expressed concern about the discussion focusing on Louisville's air quality <br />while not explicitly considering the air quality of other communities in our region. <br />He also expressed concern about the impacts of pollution on other communities <br />specifically resulting from the electricity generation needed for charging electric <br />vehicles. He emphasized that the ramifications for other communities should not <br />be neglected. <br />Megan stated that she is supportive of the draft ordinance and the letter of <br />support in general. She stated that she does not share Lev's concerns because <br />the electricity grid is mandated to be supplied by 80% renewable energy by 2030. <br />She expressed her support for the first and third recommended amendments but <br />not for the second recommended amendment. <br />Tiffany emphasized that the ordinance does not eliminate existing gasoline <br />stations and that currently there is no evidence for excess demand for gasoline in <br />Louisville. She also expressed her support for the first and third <br />recommendations and a more nuanced version of the second recommended <br />amendment. <br />Todd emphasized that the ordinance would not have a notable impact on <br />greenhouse gas emissions. He expressed his frustration with the time devoted to <br />this ordinance in light of its limited impact on decarbonization. He also expressed <br />his desire for the Board not to be viewed as being antibusiness. He suggested <br />another course of action for the Board: to state that the Board is indifferent <br />