Joint Long Range Planning report: greenhouse gases rising, growth nearing 7% comp-plan trigger

Ryan Hostetter, a Joint Long Range Planning staffer, presented the 2025 indicator report to the Teton County commission and the Town of Jackson council on April 7, summarizing 2024 data and the new web dashboard used to track comprehensive‑plan metrics.

Hostetter said the dashboard compiles metrics going back to 2002 and is intended to support an adaptive‑management cycle that will feed the joint work plan. He told officials the county is “just about” at the comprehensive‑plan growth trigger of 7%, reporting a 6.7% growth rate since the last plan and that staff will return in May with items on the work plan related to that trigger.

Why it matters: the comprehensive plan calls for revisiting policy once a 7% growth trigger is reached. Council and commissioners asked whether the joint bodies have enough staff and funding to develop and track the additional indicators the plan lists, particularly for ecosystem stewardship and quality‑of‑life measures that staff described as still “under construction.”

Key takeaways presented by staff included rising greenhouse gas emissions; increases in vehicle miles traveled and energy use; recent additions to conserved acreage tied to a large conservation action; growth occurring in complete neighborhoods; a slowing housing pipeline; and transit ridership returning to pre‑pandemic levels.

Public comment and questions: Margie Lynch of the Jacksonville Climate Action Collective praised the indicator work but urged elected bodies to link the dashboard data more tightly to operational priorities. Lynch said the comp plan calls for reducing community greenhouse gases below 2012 levels and told officials, “As of 2024, greenhouse gases are 45% over 2012 levels,” and that surface transportation accounted for the largest share of emissions. She urged short‑, medium‑ and long‑term goals and annual review tied to departmental work plans.

Council and commission discussion focused on resource constraints and measurement choices. Hostetter and other staff said some strategies in the comprehensive plan have not been implemented because resources were not allocated; joint staff lost a position in the prior year. Commissioners asked whether staff could bring clearer scoping and prioritized tasks when they return with the work plan in May.

Several elected officials raised questions about which changes the indicator report emphasizes. Commissioner Brooks asked why the dashboard highlighted a large conservation acreage transfer (the Kelly parcels) that he said was led by federal and philanthropic partners while other locally funded conservation actions (for example the county’s two‑and‑a‑half‑million‑dollar long‑term conservation lease on Munger) were not emphasized; staff replied that the dashboard reflects transactions recorded as permanent conservation within the reporting year and that large acreage changes will appear as large year‑to‑year jumps.

Housing data: several council members questioned discrepancies between local indicator counts and federal census figures. Hostetter said the joint program’s unit counts come from local building permit and assessor data and track units at parcel level; he offered to provide screenshots or direct guidance on using the dashboard to compare town versus county counts. Elected officials also pressed staff about the “unit pool” that tracks remaining bonus or rezoning units used to allocate growth; staff said the pool measures potential build‑out under policy and zoning rather than units allowed under current base zoning, and that depletion of the pool would trigger policy discussions about bonus tools tied to the pool.

Next steps: staff said the online dashboard is available for deeper review, that a joint work plan item for comp‑plan scoping will appear next month, and that staff will return with more detailed scoping and prioritization recommendations. There was no formal action or vote on the item at the meeting.

Closing note: the presentation and questions showed sustained interest from both elected bodies in improving how the county and town translate indicator metrics into funded actions and clearer implementation assignments.