Clark County’s Environmental Justice Coalition met Jan. 6 to review draft climate-equity goals and a consolidated set of greenhouse-gas reduction and resilience policies Staff and consultants asked coalition members to provide written feedback by Sunday, Jan. 12, to inform final recommendations that will go next to the Climate Advisory Group, the Planning Commission and the County Council.

Jenna, a Clark County staff member leading the project team, said the group had reached a decision point: "today we're starting the process of confirming your recommended changes," she told members as the meeting began.

The meeting centered on two overarching goals staff drafted: one focused on equitable transitions to net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions and community/ecosystem resilience; the other to advance environmental justice across the Clark County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan. County staff described how they compiled public and previous EJC feedback into a revised policy package that consolidates greenhouse-gas and resilience work into a single list of 33 goals and 124 policies.

Why the review matters: the county is embedding an explicit environmental-justice lens into planning policy for the first time and must balance that work with state laws and funding requirements. Staff noted the project is funded by the Climate Commitment Act and that the county must report to the Washington State Department of Commerce on progress, which creates periodic accountability. At the same time, staff said, a recent statewide ballot measure (referred to in the meeting as Initiative 2056) and related lawsuits create uncertainty about building- and energy-related policy language; staff said they are awaiting state guidance on how to reconcile that measure with the state law implementing the climate planning mandate (House Bill 1181).

Substantive items discussed

- Overarching principles. Staff read a proposed policy that would require county project evaluations to identify who is most affected, use qualitative and quantitative data, prioritize engagement with vulnerable people, and remove participation barriers such as language, childcare and transportation. Members recommended strengthening the language to require collaboration (rather than "as much as possible"), to explicitly name undocumented residents and indigenous communities, and to add nonvisible disabilities and mental-health conditions to accessibility language.

- Resilience hubs and implementation questions. The draft policy list includes a new policy on resilience hubs — community spaces that can serve as regular gathering places and emergency centers — and guidance on issues to address during implementation (urban vs. rural needs, languages and culturally appropriate services, and connection to mutual aid). Members asked whether the county would fund hub upgrades or resilience retrofits; staff said implementation, including whether and how to seek funds or private grants, would be determined only if the policy is adopted.

- Food systems and agriculture. Coalition members pushed for stronger language supporting local food security, distributed food distribution models (farmers markets, food hubs and neighborhood pantries), and reduced reliance on harmful pesticides. Staff said the team added new food- and agriculture-related policies tied to climate objectives but cautioned the climate element cannot be used to solve all agriculture issues; policies were drafted to focus on climate resilience and emissions reductions.

- Process and accountability. Members asked how county recommendations would be tracked through Planning Commission and County Council review and into implementation. Staff described the standard planning process—recommendations move from the EJC to the Climate Advisory Group, then to the Planning Commission, and finally to the County Council, which makes the final decision. Staff also noted the law requires periodic reporting to the state (every five years), but acknowledged that funding, staff capacity and political priorities will affect implementation speed and scope.

Public comment and member input

Two public commenters spoke: a Battleground resident urged alternatives to a proposed interstate bridge replacement and suggested rail improvements as a lower-emissions option; a community member expressed appreciation for the coalition's work. Multiple coalition members offered detailed edits and additions to policy language, with recurring asks to explicitly name affected groups (for example, undocumented residents, renters, people with disabilities and outdoor workers) and to add language referencing tribal consultation and indigenous knowledge.

Next steps and group decisions

The county asked coalition members to submit written feedback on the draft goals and policy list by Sunday, Jan. 12. Staff will revise the draft based on the EJC’s input and pass it as a recommendation to the Climate Advisory Group. The EJC will reconvene on Monday, Feb. 3, for a final debrief and to consider whether the group will submit a joint letter to the Planning Commission and County Council. Anna Karen Betancourt Mesias (representing Latino Leadership Northwest) volunteered to lead a small subcommittee to draft that letter; Monica Zazueta (vice president, Vancouver Metro LULAC Council No. 47026) offered assistance.

No formal ordinance or code changes were adopted at the meeting. Staff repeatedly cautioned that several building- and energy-related policies may change pending state guidance on Initiative 2056 and related litigation.

Why this matters locally

County planning staff are attempting to incorporate environmental justice obligations into long-range planning for the first time; the decisions and language adopted through this process will guide how Clark County evaluates future comprehensive-plan amendments and long-range projects for climate impacts and distributional equity. Members of the EJC emphasized that specificity—naming groups, languages and access barriers—matters because broad language can leave vulnerable populations without targeted protections or resources.

Looking ahead

Staff will post the revised draft policies and a worksheet for submitting comments; members were reminded to invoice for any contracted meeting hours remaining. The policy package will continue through the Climate Advisory Group, the Planning Commission and then the County Council if the coalition’s recommendations are finalized. Staff emphasized uncertainty around building- and energy-related policies until the state issues guidance on how to reconcile Initiative 2056 with HB 1181. The EJC’s next meeting is scheduled for Feb. 3, 2025.