Why education and communication are essential to creating workable legislation.

In part one of our interview with Michael Taylor, Senior Advisor, for HillStaffer (https://autosphere.ca/fleet/2024/06/26/charting-a-cleaner-future/), we looked at the Advanced Clean Fleets regulations currently in play in jurisdictions like California and other states, as well as British Columbia and Quebec here in Canada. These strict emissions reduction targets that push for widespread adoption of zero emissions vehicles are complicated and in current form, have some very significant ramifications for fleets, OEMs, the entire transportation ecosystem and the wider economy.

In part 2, we look at ways in which these regulations could impact fleets here in Canada and how fleet managers/professionals, and their representatives can take steps to ensure their voices are heard at both the state/provincial and federal level, when it comes to creating regulations that are fair, practical and can be effectively adopted in a real-world operating environment.

Autosphere: It has been encouraging to see several states taking a more pragmatic approach to emissions reduction targets and also that progress is being made in others like California. With that in mind, how do you think fleets and their representatives at organizations such as NAFA-Fleet Management Association get involved to ensure their interests are properly and fairly represented at both the state/provincial and federal level?

Michael Taylor: When you’ve been involved with public affairs and the government regulatory environment as long as I have, you become aware of how difficult it can be to get people who are completely focused on their day job out of necessity, to realize that if you do put some time into representing the interests of their business and industry at the government level, it can be very beneficial. As time has gone by and we’ve seen more and more regulations introduced, the need to get involved has becoming increasingly important. One thing I will say that while it still remains a challenge, we have gotten better at trying to educate people and to mobilize and encourage them to represent their interests and work with government to introduce regulations that are fair and practical. Nevertheless, you can never do too much education or spread too much awareness and the more you can do, the more effective your efforts are likely to be.

Secondly, from a fleet manager perspective, it’s really important to have both private and public fleets involved. Private fleet managers tend to be able to engage more quickly, often due to the approval process that’s required by public fleets when it comes to implementing procedures. Nevertheless, once you’ve been able to spread that awareness and get them involved, they will be there. Often, when you are dealing with legislative boards at the state and federal level, because these people tend to be elected to office there will be politics involved and that means that often they will say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ when it comes to proposals that you put forward or bills you try and introduce. Nevertheless, what I feel is important for our industry to understand is that the part the fleet manager needs to play in this has nothing to do with lobbying or asking the parliamentarian to vote in favor of this bill or that bill. Instead, it’s really about what’s best for your municipality and what is the optimal situation that allows you as a fleet to continue delivering the services you provide, and in the most effective way possible.

AS: If applicable, can you share some examples of how this can play out and the results it can deliver—such as bringing politicians to facilities and talking with fleet operators to spread awareness?

MT: One example that I feel illustrates this fairly well was when I spoke at Government Fleet Expo (GFX), which is one of the biggest public fleet management events on the calendar in North America. This was of particular significance because one of our objectives was to make more inroads when it came to public fleets. The fact is we need more fleet managers to be involved, period, from every state and every province, but particularly on the public side. A good example of that is the legislative efforts we’re putting forward in New Jersey. I’ve already been told that in this case, the state legislature has so far, heard nothing from public fleet managers. When you have involvement from both private and public fleets it makes for a more compelling argument, though in reality we also need to consider that for public fleets there tend to be more challenges and more time required for their fleet managers to participate. Getting back to GFX, what we did there, was unlike almost every other talk I’d previously done. We said that effective advocacy comes down to two things, education and communication. If you do these two things optimally, then you have the opportunity to inform or influence policymaking in support of whom you are representing. Ultimately, decision makers need to be better educated and informed, which leads to better decisions related to policy and regulations. A good example of this was when we did a facility visit with one of NAFA’s members in California. We conducted this visit with a California state senator who sits on the Senate Transportation Committee. This particular fleet was focused on obtaining electric buses and was having major challenges in acquiring them. This senator who sits on the committee said this was complete news to him and he was unaware that this initiative was even taking place. And this is just one example. The second aspect for effective advocacy is being a good communicator. Being an effective communicator requires you to be a good storyteller and my role depends on me presenting the best narrative when it comes to representing the interests of fleet managers. I do think that fleet managers, particularly public fleet managers, have a powerful narrative to share. And so that’s why our approach has been focused on improving the regulations so that they are based in reality, and fleets can meet compliance requirements. And the more fleets and managers that work with us in trying to improve our opportunities, the more impactful we will be, and in a positive way.

AS: For our Canadian readers, can you tell us about some specific regulations the fleet industry needs to be aware of?

MT: As you might recall from NAFA I&E we talked about the Government of Canada federal regulations for ZEVs including both light and commercial vehicles, since there aren’t many of these in place at the national level. And then we dove into what’s been happening at the provincial level, particularly in the case of Quebec and British Columbia which have adopted a similar approach to California and the 17 states (including the District of Columbia) that chose to implement the Advanced Clean Fleets regulations. Specific to Canada, there is a zero-emission vehicle requirement under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. In 2023, the Government of Canada announced that their new ZEV regulations would require a specified percentage of vehicles manufactured to be ZEVs by a certain date, with 20% of light vehicles by 2026 to be ZEV, 60% by 2030 and 100% by 2035. This is the same for California and the 17 states, including the District of Columbia that adopted ACF, but we have two states, Washington and Vermont that are looking to implement the 100% ruling by 2030, which is even more challenging. The ZEV regulations in Canada amend an already existing regulation but what’s interesting about the Canadian model is the idea of using credits. Incentivizing change like this is a far more realistic approach than simply trying to introduce mandates, which are horribly blunt instruments and rarely prove effective. It goes back to what the Governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, talked about in being realistic with these kinds of regulations and adopting a carrot versus a stick approach. When it comes down to it, you can’t really mandate things like this, but you can incentivize. Which is why I like what the Canadian government is doing by using compliance credits, allowing fleets and OEMs to essentially “bank” these credits both for the manufacturing of vehicles and also for charging infrastructure, which is a much better approach than simply trying to force everyone to comply via mandates.

AS: Is there anything else you’d like to mention related to Canada?

MT: I think it’s important to understand that while the bulk of regulations in the U.S. and Canada are similar, there are also differences. Political culture and processes are different between the two countries and that’s important from an advocacy perspective. When we look at ACF for example, what is planned for California isn’t going to necessarily work in British Columbia or Quebec. You need to be aware of the particulars, related to operating requirements within specific regions and municipalities, including the population, demographics and economic factors. That being said—at its core—advocacy is still the same and doing it effectively means educating, communicating and creating a compelling narrative around storytelling, as well as identifying your targets and coming with appropriate strategies and credible resources to put your point across.

AS Any final thoughts?

MT: Specifically relate to Canada I will say that NAFA has some very active and notable fleet members in Canada and as far as advocacy goes, there is a real window of opportunity at this particular juncture. We are very much looking toward more engagement with the government in Ottawa, and to organize facility visits, but for both private and public NAFA fleet members in Canada. Our goal is to not only to monitor and inform, but also have boots on the ground and I encourage anyone that is reading this and wants to get involved to reach out and contact us.