Tom Pearson, a representative of the grassroots group Flagstaff First, told the Flagstaff City Council on March 5 that the city's Carbon Neutrality Plan (CNP) should be amended to list wildfire, flooding and drought as top priorities.
Pearson said the 2018 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan explicitly named those threats and that, in his view, the CNP’s coverage of adaptation is limited: “The CNP’s 162 pages only devotes 9 pages to a single climate adaptation topic,” he said during public comment. He described local experience with large wildfires and damaging floods since 2018 and said the city needs a comprehensive, integrated adaptation program rather than piecemeal projects.
Why it matters: Pearson argued that treating adaptation as a lower priority leaves the city vulnerable to continuing damage and to missed funding opportunities. He cited a recent county briefing and a hydrology study projecting combined damage and lost revenue of about $2.8 billion from catastrophic wildfire and post-fire flooding in the Upper Rio de Flag watershed.
Pearson criticized a March letter from the Sustainability Commission that advised against the Flagstaff First petition, calling the commission’s four stated objections — that the CNP already prioritizes adaptation, that existing projects address the risks, that federal attention (including a U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works hearing hosted by Sen. Mark Kelly) was already focused on Flagstaff, and that Flagstaff First stems from climate skepticism — either misplaced or incorrect according to his reading of the plan and local risk assessments.
Pearson said Flagstaff First does not call for cuts to carbon-neutrality funding but seeks a better balance between mitigation (carbon neutrality) and adaptation (wildfire, flooding, drought). He also told the council he believes a new Army Corps funding program (the ‘‘595’’ program as described to the Senate hearing) would suit Flagstaff applications if adaptation were elevated as a priority in the CNP.
What the council did: This topic was raised during the public participation portion of the meeting; the transcript records the public comment but no formal council action on the petition during the March 5 session.
Context and caveats: The remarks were delivered as public comment by a citizen representing Flagstaff First. The Sustainability Commission had submitted written opposition to the petition, and Pearson referenced that letter in his remarks. The council did not vote on revisions to the Carbon Neutrality Plan at this meeting.