Environmental Board · Wednesday, July 10, 2024 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of June 6, 2024

packet pp.3–5

▶ Watch from 4:47 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 06-06-24 Environmental Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Environmental Board 6:00 PM Tibbetts Manor, 750 17th Ave. June 6, 2024 MINUTES NW, Issaquah

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Proposed Increase to Administrative Fee to Support Sustainability Fund (D)

30 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager · packet pp.7–29

Topics: ClimateBudget

▶ Watch from 5:19 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

Office of Sustainability 130 E Sunset Way | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 issaquahwa.gov

Process for Providing Input on Park Plan (D)

10 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry

Topics: Parks

▶ Watch from 54:31

5. REPORTS

Youth Report

ICAP Presentation to Council - Report Out

packet pp.31–34

Topics: Climate

Previously discussed: Park Board · Jun 24, 2024

Open packet at p.31 ↗

Staff report:

Parks & Community Services 130 E Sunset Way | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 issaquahwa.gov

Urban Forest Management Plan Update n/a

packet pp.35

Topics: Trees

Open packet at p.35 ↗

Staff report:

Office of Sustainability 130 E Sunset Way | P.O. Box 1307 Issaquah, WA 98027 issaquahwa.gov

City Facility Decarbonization Assessment n/a Update

packet pp.37–44

Topics: Climate

Open packet at p.37 ↗

Staff report:

Prepared by: Audrey Turpin Date: 6/6/24

Student Research on Employee Travel Offset n/a Programs

packet pp.45–49

Open packet at p.45 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVED: 3/13/2024 REVISED: 6/27/2024

Environmental Board Workplan n/a

1615 segments .txt ↗

0:03 ↗ okay

0:05 ↗ good all right welcome uh welcome to the

0:09 ↗ July 10th meeting of the esqua

0:10 ↗ environmental board I'm Don mcams I'll

0:12 ↗ be chairing the board meeting tonight du

0:14 ↗ to our hybrid format of the meeting I'd

0:17 ↗ like to provide some guidelines um we'll

0:19 ↗ have participants in the room as well as

0:21 ↗ online please speak clearly and pause

0:24 ↗ frequently state your name each time

0:26 ↗ before speaking for those in the room

0:29 ↗ raise your name card to indicate

0:30 ↗ indicate an interest to speak and for

0:33 ↗ those attending virtually please mute

0:35 ↗ your mic when not speaking and uh when

0:37 ↗ you would like to speak raise your hand

0:43 ↗ please we have anybody tonight for

0:46 ↗ public

0:46 ↗ speaking um we do have one member of the

0:50 ↗ public um and she has indicated an

0:53 ↗ interest to speak but we could do roll

0:55 ↗ call okay

0:58 ↗ okay uh great uh Tommy

1:01 ↗ Anderson here Nancy

1:07 ↗ Davidson

1:08 ↗ here Jamie

1:10 ↗ Finch

1:12 ↗ here Raj kapandi

1:15 ↗ here uh Kiran pan here uh Mina June has

1:20 ↗ an excuse to absence Don McWilliams here

1:24 ↗ Dixie

1:25 ↗ bear

1:27 ↗ here Alex Lee tigner

1:30 ↗ here an

1:32 ↗ newom

1:34 ↗ here Keith Gonzalez has an excused

1:37 ↗ absence and John Smith here great we

1:41 ↗ have

1:42 ↗ cor all right we do have one person

1:44 ↗ online yep all right public comments are

1:47 ↗ important to the part of the process we

1:49 ↗ take them seriously and Factor them

1:50 ↗ under decision making for members of the

1:52 ↗ public joining us welcome um when

1:55 ↗ recognized please unmute your microphone

1:57 ↗ state your name address relationship to

1:59 ↗ the city and speak clearly and pause

2:01 ↗ frequently and please limit your

2:03 ↗ comments to five

2:05 ↗ minutes great Connie you can go ahead

2:08 ↗ and

2:16 ↗ unmute all right go ahead

2:18 ↗ Connie I was trying to do camera did you

2:21 ↗ know how camera is ah there we go okay

2:24 ↗ uh my name's Connie Marsh I live on

2:26 ↗ squawk mountain and um I was

2:30 ↗ going I don't want Stacy to fall over in

2:33 ↗ a dead faint so I hope she's sitting

2:34 ↗ down so I was going to say I appreciate

2:38 ↗ her taking so much comment on her

2:41 ↗ presentation about the uh

2:44 ↗ midterm update on the climate action

2:47 ↗ plan I thought that the council took the

2:50 ↗ clear clue that you need more funding

2:54 ↗ and they've also been hearing from the

2:57 ↗ uh people doing the Strategic plan that

2:59 ↗ climate action is a priority which I

3:02 ↗ thought was sort of an interesting

3:04 ↗ tidbit so at the meeting last night

3:07 ↗ there was an awful lot of conversation

3:09 ↗ in support of more funding of the

3:11 ↗ climate

3:12 ↗ action stuff and also concern about what

3:16 ↗ if the law gets overturned so um I

3:19 ↗ thought that was went as best it could

3:22 ↗ on Monday night so I appreciated all of

3:24 ↗ her work now I have been uh pestering

3:28 ↗ you all with emails today because

3:33 ↗ there I feel like the environmental

3:36 ↗ board should have review of conservation

3:39 ↗ easements because it directly impacts

3:42 ↗ how well we get to preserve our

3:44 ↗ protected lands and we have these two

3:47 ↗ conf conservation easement coming up one

3:49 ↗ for Burma and one for

3:52 ↗ Kora and

3:54 ↗ um and they aren't very protective

3:58 ↗ there's a lot of flexib ability in them

4:01 ↗ and it has me concerned uh it is just

4:04 ↗ going to go back to council for review

4:08 ↗ so if any of you can stand to read a

4:10 ↗ conservation easement and put your legal

4:13 ↗ brains to it to see where you think the

4:16 ↗ flaws are and if you could uh provide

4:19 ↗ public comment that would be awesome I'm

4:22 ↗ not sure that we can get it actually to

4:24 ↗ your committee uh but I'm doing my best

4:28 ↗ so I sent you some of the information if

4:31 ↗ you have time in your air conditioning

4:33 ↗ have at it thank you very

4:35 ↗ much thank you

4:39 ↗ Connie anybody

4:42 ↗ else that is the only member of the

4:45 ↗ public tonight okay sorry I skipped over

4:47 ↗ approval of minutes do anybody have any

4:50 ↗ changes to the

4:53 ↗ minutes hearing none no Count's still

4:57 ↗ hearing none they're approved

5:01 ↗ Connie did you have another comment or

5:04 ↗ can I lower your

5:11 ↗ hand you can you can lower it because I

5:14 ↗ can't lower it it won't let me great

5:16 ↗ okay thank

5:19 ↗ Youk all right our first agenda item

5:21 ↗ tonight is proposed increase to

5:23 ↗ administrative fees to support the

5:25 ↗ sustainability fund

5:32 ↗ bear with me for just a

5:41 ↗ moment sorry little blustered here as we

5:45 ↗ were dealing with the IT issues one

5:47 ↗ moment

6:09 ↗ all right sorry one second let me just

6:11 ↗ show you that

6:12 ↗ version

6:17 ↗ okay all right um so apologies this is

6:20 ↗ just the online version but it should

6:24 ↗ transition smoothly hopefully um so

6:27 ↗ tonight we wanted to share of

6:30 ↗ presentation that we actually gave to a

6:31 ↗ council committee last night um ideally

6:35 ↗ we would have brought this to the

6:37 ↗ environmental board first um but it was

6:39 ↗ just determined in late June um that we

6:41 ↗ would be moving forward with this

6:43 ↗ proposal and um the only time we could

6:45 ↗ get on the committee agenda was for last

6:48 ↗ night um what is beneficial is the board

6:51 ↗ is hearing this presentation before this

6:53 ↗ goes to the full Council um so you have

6:56 ↗ an opportunity to provide staff feedback

6:58 ↗ um and wait in as

7:01 ↗ appropriate um so this presentation that

7:03 ↗ we provided to one of the council

7:05 ↗ committees last night is on a proposal

7:08 ↗ to um change the solid waste

7:10 ↗ administrative

7:17 ↗ fee um so uh what we are proposing to

7:22 ↗ council is that we increase the solid

7:24 ↗ waste contract administrative fee this

7:28 ↗ fee provides Revenue to our City's

7:30 ↗ sustainability fund which is the main

7:32 ↗ source of funding for climate action

7:35 ↗ implementation as well as waste

7:37 ↗ diversion programming and

7:41 ↗ projects what we were seeking from the

7:43 ↗ council uh committee last night was

7:46 ↗ whether or not they supported that

7:48 ↗ increase from a 6% to a 9% fee um to

7:52 ↗ support those projects as

7:54 ↗ shared sorry for the scrolling down here

7:59 ↗ um so to provide you all with a bit of

8:01 ↗ background um we did share a little bit

8:03 ↗ about the sustainability fund back in

8:05 ↗ June but um this will provide a little

8:07 ↗ bit more depth in terms of how that

8:09 ↗ relates to our waste holler contract um

8:12 ↗ the sustainability fund as mentioned uh

8:14 ↗ does support our climate action planning

8:18 ↗ uh projects policy work um as well as

8:21 ↗ Solid Waste programming and projects

8:23 ↗ revenue from the waste holler

8:26 ↗ administrative fee is what supports that

8:28 ↗ fund it is the only source of Revenue

8:30 ↗ into that

8:31 ↗ fund currently the uh administrative fee

8:35 ↗ is set at 6% this rate went into effect

8:38 ↗ with the new waste huler contract uh

8:40 ↗ last year it is lower than what the city

8:43 ↗ had set the administrative fee uh

8:46 ↗ previously because the new workology

8:49 ↗ contract was going to have increased

8:51 ↗ weights and we wanted to make sure we

8:53 ↗ are having the least impact on our

8:55 ↗ residents with those new

8:57 ↗ fees currently the revenue gener

8:59 ↗ generates approximately $660,000 per

9:03 ↗ year um and that's approximate because

9:06 ↗ it depends on the number of residential

9:09 ↗ and Commercial customers uh that rology

9:12 ↗ has as well as the size of their account

9:14 ↗ so depending on what size bins or

9:16 ↗ dumpsters they

9:22 ↗ have for the first year of our climate

9:26 ↗ action plan implementation we relied on

9:29 ↗ a small allocation of City funds uh

9:32 ↗ funds requested through Council for

9:34 ↗ special programming and some grants that

9:36 ↗ we were able to secure in 2023 we're

9:39 ↗ able to accelerate our implementation of

9:42 ↗ IAP through uh access to the

9:45 ↗ sustainability fund as well as some

9:46 ↗ additional grants that we

9:48 ↗ secured in addition to supporting

9:51 ↗ actions around climate mitigation and

9:54 ↗ resilience um as you all know the IAP

9:57 ↗ includes a number of actions related to

10:00 ↗ waste

10:01 ↗ diversion um because of our limited

10:04 ↗ Staffing capacity we had not Advanced

10:07 ↗ many projects or programs related to

10:09 ↗ waste Diversion the last couple of years

10:12 ↗ besides what we could do uh through some

10:14 ↗ limited consultant

10:16 ↗ support another piece of this puzzle is

10:19 ↗ last uh summer we completed our lead

10:23 ↗ certification leadership and Energy

10:25 ↗ Efficiency and design um I think many

10:28 ↗ members of uh for for the new members of

10:30 ↗ the board uh isaa was the first city

10:32 ↗ certified gold in Washington state um

10:36 ↗ and through that process we identified a

10:39 ↗ number of limitations in our Solid Waste

10:41 ↗ work uh which really highlighted the

10:43 ↗ need to bring back dedicated Staffing to

10:46 ↗ work on Solid Waste um and that position

10:48 ↗ was hired in

10:50 ↗ 2024 uh in conversations with all of you

10:53 ↗ with council with the community through

10:55 ↗ our community surveys we really know

10:57 ↗ that both climate action and solid waste

11:00 ↗ programming projects are high priorities

11:02 ↗ here um and we have developed our plan

11:06 ↗ for how to implement um a number of

11:10 ↗ activities and make progress towards our

11:11 ↗ targets over the next couple of

11:14 ↗ years so based on what we have drafted

11:17 ↗ as a proposed budget for 25 through 26

11:21 ↗ we know that we can't currently support

11:24 ↗ that work um with the existing Revenue

11:28 ↗ that we're in I at to generate through

11:30 ↗ the the administrative fee um as you've

11:34 ↗ heard in previous presentations David

11:36 ↗ and I are pursuing pretty much every

11:37 ↗ Grant possible um but uh as you all know

11:41 ↗ that takes a lot of resources to do the

11:44 ↗ applications manage grants report on

11:46 ↗ them um our plan is to continue pursuing

11:49 ↗ those grants but having an additional

11:52 ↗ dedicated Revenue Source through the

11:55 ↗ sustainability fund will really help us

11:57 ↗ um in implementing a poal climate and

12:00 ↗ waste

12:06 ↗ work so that has led to this uh

12:09 ↗ recommendation for us to increase the

12:12 ↗ administrative fee by 3% which would

12:15 ↗ jump uh from 6% to

12:18 ↗ 9% so what what does that get us um a

12:21 ↗ fee increase really supports a variety

12:24 ↗ of climate and solid waste projects and

12:26 ↗ programming um we had in the meeting

12:29 ↗ packet the memo that was provided to

12:31 ↗ council and a a fairly developed list of

12:35 ↗ what those programs and projects look

12:37 ↗ like um and I'll touch on a few of them

12:39 ↗ here without the fee increase we'll be

12:42 ↗ able to maintain our ongoing costs um

12:45 ↗ but we will need to cut back on some of

12:47 ↗ the proposed projects and

12:49 ↗ programming um and also we will likely

12:52 ↗ need to spend a lot more of our staff

12:54 ↗ capacity on pursuing

12:56 ↗ grants on Monday night um as as Connie

12:59 ↗ mentions uh Council heard about the

13:01 ↗ progress on our actions and targets uh

13:03 ↗ within the climate action plan and we

13:06 ↗ really identified the need to accelerate

13:08 ↗ our work and in some cases expand on

13:10 ↗ projects and

13:12 ↗ programming uh David and I feel that our

13:14 ↗ proposed budget for the next B really

13:16 ↗ does that um so some of what our budget

13:21 ↗ requests for next year look like um

13:23 ↗ include capital projects so solar energy

13:26 ↗ on several City facilities EV charge ing

13:29 ↗ for our Fleet as well as a few

13:31 ↗ additional public sites um converting

13:34 ↗ street lights uh to

13:37 ↗ LEDs um and then we're also looking at

13:39 ↗ continuing or expanding upon a number of

13:41 ↗ our programs this includes our

13:43 ↗ residential heat pump program looking at

13:46 ↗ additional electrification incentives

13:48 ↗ for other

13:50 ↗ appliances um continuing our work with

13:52 ↗ commercial and nonprofit buildings to

13:54 ↗ reduce energy Electrify and increase

13:57 ↗ Renewables um and really uh expanding

14:00 ↗ our efforts around building Community

14:03 ↗ resilience in partnership with our

14:05 ↗ emergency management team and and

14:07 ↗ Community Partners um we have a whole

14:10 ↗ Suite of other smaller projects and

14:13 ↗ programs we're looking to advance in the

14:14 ↗ next two years but those are some of the

14:16 ↗ more big ticket items um one thing we've

14:21 ↗ also started to do with our budget

14:22 ↗ request this year is

14:24 ↗ identify um the linkages between

14:26 ↗ projects and programs and Emissions

14:28 ↗ reduction

14:29 ↗ or Energy savings and we'll continue to

14:32 ↗ build that out as that um budget request

14:34 ↗ gets finalized for

14:38 ↗ Council um so uh last night Evan

14:41 ↗ Brumfield from our Public Works team

14:43 ↗ also shared a bit about some of the

14:45 ↗ plans for the solid waste projects and

14:47 ↗ programming over the next biennium um as

14:50 ↗ mentioned a real benefit is that we've

14:52 ↗ brought Sam Tarvin onto the Public Works

14:55 ↗ team and she is our Solid Waste um

14:58 ↗ analyst in really focused on these

15:01 ↗ topics um some of the items that she's

15:04 ↗ looking to launch in the next year

15:06 ↗ include standardizing solid waste

15:08 ↗ resources across City facilities making

15:11 ↗ sure we have consistent signage

15:13 ↗ containers to really help educate um the

15:16 ↗ community but also make sure that um we

15:19 ↗ are diverting waste in the appropriate

15:21 ↗ ways um advancing zero waste events um

15:25 ↗ and other programming for the

15:27 ↗ communities um looking at expanding the

15:30 ↗ city's construction and demolition

15:32 ↗ ordinance to uh have some requirements

15:35 ↗ for tracking

15:37 ↗ diversion um and then also uh looking at

15:40 ↗ ways to expand opportunities for reuse

15:42 ↗ and repair um programs for the community

15:46 ↗ those are just a couple of the solid

15:48 ↗ waste

15:48 ↗ highlights from the next

15:52 ↗ budget um so we presented three options

15:55 ↗ to the council committee last night and

15:58 ↗ um

15:59 ↗ they did end up supporting the

16:01 ↗ recommendation of the increase fee to 9%

16:04 ↗ but I do think it's important for you

16:05 ↗ all to understand those other options um

16:08 ↗ because these are fees that are passed

16:10 ↗ down to the residents and the commercial

16:12 ↗ customers um of

16:14 ↗ rology so our proposed recommendation is

16:18 ↗ moving the fee back to 9% which is

16:21 ↗ actually where it was uh with the

16:23 ↗ previous workology contract um this is

16:26 ↗ about

16:27 ↗ a11 monthly increase um in the uh per

16:32 ↗ subscribed service the most common

16:34 ↗ subscribed service level um and that's

16:36 ↗ the 32 gallon uh garbage wastebin that

16:39 ↗ would be about a11 14 monthly increase

16:43 ↗ um this 9% rate would generate $660,000

16:47 ↗ in additional Revenue over the BM um

16:51 ↗ compared to our six% administrative fee

16:54 ↗ so that's additional 660,000 um

16:59 ↗ compared to other jurisdictions 9% puts

17:02 ↗ us about in the middle in terms of admin

17:04 ↗ fee uh there is a uh appendix in the

17:08 ↗ packet that shows where that would put

17:10 ↗ us compared to um a number of

17:12 ↗ jurisdictions around

17:15 ↗ Washington um and again we do feel that

17:19 ↗ um or we we do know that the 9% what we

17:22 ↗ are estimating for revenue from that

17:23 ↗ would really cover a lot of these large

17:26 ↗ projects and expanded programming that

17:28 ↗ were um planning to pursue next year um

17:31 ↗ the other option we put forward was more

17:34 ↗ of a step increase uh this would be

17:37 ↗ where we' move um up

17:40 ↗ 1.5% uh to a 7.5% admin fee in

17:44 ↗ 2025 and then step up again in 2026 to

17:47 ↗ that 9% this would be to to buffer that

17:51 ↗ um impact a bit um this would be about a

17:55 ↗ 57 Cent monthly increase for that

17:58 ↗ average

17:59 ↗ or most subscribed 32 gallon service

18:03 ↗ level um what this um the impact that

18:07 ↗ this would have to our programming is we

18:09 ↗ would be able

18:10 ↗ to pursue a lot of the plan programming

18:13 ↗ next year but we would really need to

18:15 ↗ cut back um on some programming in 26

18:18 ↗ because we'd have some less carryover um

18:21 ↗ so this could have impact or a scaled

18:23 ↗ back approach to a lot of our

18:24 ↗ electrification campaigns commercial

18:27 ↗ campaigns um as well as some of the

18:29 ↗ larger Solid Waste

18:32 ↗ programming and then the last option we

18:34 ↗ put forward to council was no change uh

18:37 ↗ stay at the 6% fee no impact to um our

18:42 ↗ subscri our rology

18:43 ↗ subscribers um if this is the case we

18:46 ↗ actually um we can cover our ongoing

18:49 ↗ costs next year we're unable to do that

18:51 ↗ in 26 and those ongoing costs Beyond

18:55 ↗ Staffing include things like a small

18:57 ↗ budget for marketing and translation and

18:59 ↗ some of our communication needs so we

19:02 ↗ would need to really scale those back um

19:04 ↗ and primarily use those funds to cover

19:07 ↗ Staffing and some real basic needs and

19:09 ↗ probably turn a lot of our work to to

19:12 ↗ grant

19:16 ↗ writing um so I won't don't necessarily

19:19 ↗ need to be too repetitive here but

19:22 ↗ um just to wrap this up essentially the

19:26 ↗ um committee last night did

19:30 ↗ um support the 9% recommendation and so

19:33 ↗ that will move to Council on July 22nd

19:37 ↗ uh we'll be presenting under regular

19:39 ↗ business uh we want to make sure the

19:42 ↗ community has the chance to weigh in

19:44 ↗ since this is a fee that is passed down

19:46 ↗ um to all of those with a a rology

19:50 ↗ account um if that does move forward we

19:53 ↗ will alert rology by September 1st and

19:57 ↗ then the new fee would go to effect uh

19:59 ↗ January 1st we have the option to change

20:03 ↗ this annually um the committee also did

20:05 ↗ recommend that next summer we review the

20:08 ↗ fee again I think um in some cases they

20:12 ↗ were concerned that this increase wasn't

20:14 ↗ high enough um and that we wouldn't be

20:16 ↗ able to cover all the programming that's

20:18 ↗ needed um but that's something that

20:20 ↗ we'll re-evaluate next year especially

20:22 ↗ with um seeing if the climate commitment

20:25 ↗ Act is repealed or some of our major

20:27 ↗ Grant sources are pulled

20:32 ↗ back is it so want to make sure you are

20:36 ↗ all aware of that and provide

20:37 ↗ opportunity for the environmental board

20:39 ↗ to um provide feedback um again we will

20:42 ↗ be moving forward with this

20:44 ↗ recommendation July 22nd but would love

20:47 ↗ to um share with the council any

20:50 ↗ feedback concerns uh additional

20:53 ↗ recommendations that the board

20:56 ↗ has I can take

20:59 ↗ questions comments feedback

21:03 ↗ JN I was just wondering how this feed

21:07 ↗ would be um how the public would get

21:11 ↗ visibility of this increase does it come

21:13 ↗ from City or it come from Recology yeah

21:17 ↗ that's a great question when the

21:19 ↗ Recology um the new contract went in

21:22 ↗ place last year both the city and rology

21:25 ↗ did quite a bit of

21:26 ↗ communication um that is something that

21:28 ↗ Council committee asked us to do if it

21:30 ↗ is approved to make sure the the

21:33 ↗ community knows what they're buying um

21:35 ↗ so that uh would likely happen in the

21:38 ↗ past we've used inserts with the rology

21:41 ↗ bill in advance of that change and then

21:43 ↗ the city would be putting out um a lot

21:45 ↗ of

21:46 ↗ communication um one thing we can do to

21:50 ↗ offset that increase is we will also um

21:54 ↗ educate the community on how they can

21:55 ↗ reduce their bin size we did a lot of

21:58 ↗ that with the the change in the Recology

22:01 ↗ contract to offset that increase so lots

22:03 ↗ of communication will provide uh all

22:05 ↗ those OP options for how folks can

22:08 ↗ reduce their bill

22:10 ↗ communication do you have other any

22:12 ↗ suggestions too on how any

22:16 ↗ that Solid Waste

22:19 ↗ program this is idea

22:22 ↗ how I walk through tiis uh the day

22:27 ↗ aftera and I was Flor at how much singly

22:32 ↗ these plastic containers were everywhere

22:35 ↗ there were tons of and um as far as

22:40 ↗ reaching out and

22:41 ↗ educating there's a great opportunity at

22:45 ↗ these sporting events to maybe set up a

22:47 ↗ table and have a

22:50 ↗ little person having person discuss U

22:54 ↗ you know um

22:59 ↗ provide information

23:01 ↗ about using you

23:06 ↗ alter water yeah seems pretty obvious

23:10 ↗ but they all the BS were

23:17 ↗ completely but you could you could

23:19 ↗ educate in that way you would educate

23:21 ↗ both adults parents as well as

23:25 ↗ kids and young adults

23:31 ↗ softballers soer and I would be happy to

23:34 ↗ volunteer by

23:38 ↗ time provide

23:42 ↗ information folks uh just uh folks

23:44 ↗ joining virtually can you hear uh Nancy

23:47 ↗ I see you can you give a thumbs up if

23:49 ↗ you can hear us okay in the

23:52 ↗ room hear but it's a little quiet okay

23:55 ↗ okay speak up to speak up um

23:58 ↗ what Jonathan had to

24:00 ↗ say um I could just summarize John John

24:04 ↗ was providing some great feedback on

24:06 ↗ other um ways that we can get out in the

24:09 ↗ community and educate about waste

24:10 ↗ reduction specifically mentioning um

24:13 ↗ Tibbits Park and baseball softball other

24:16 ↗ sporting events because there's been a

24:17 ↗ lot of overflowing trash bins of single

24:20 ↗ use Plastics

24:21 ↗ there and I did take the tour with the

24:25 ↗ the group down to the rec colge Center

24:29 ↗ you in thereo right and um it was a

24:32 ↗ little

24:35 ↗ depressing I mean it was I don't know

24:37 ↗ what your position was but it was

24:39 ↗ interesting yet there's a lot of

24:41 ↗ material that doesn't get

24:44 ↗ get even do their

24:50 ↗ best kind of disappointing um just a

24:53 ↗ quick comment before we move on to prage

24:55 ↗ has the city looked at installing like

24:58 ↗ water bottle filling stations or

25:00 ↗ anything like that at some of the major

25:01 ↗ Parks yeah there are there are actually

25:04 ↗ I believe two at tibits um park for

25:07 ↗ example I don't know if they're actually

25:08 ↗ working and I know there's one at

25:10 ↗ Confluence um we have funding through

25:13 ↗ one of our King County grants to do some

25:15 ↗ more bottle filling stations but that's

25:17 ↗ something I can raise with Sam Tarvin

25:19 ↗ that we pursue more and also to work

25:21 ↗ with parks and um see make sure that

25:23 ↗ those are operational or what we can do

25:25 ↗ to support

25:30 ↗ um so St few questions here and some

25:35 ↗ comments um so personally you know I I

25:40 ↗ like the alternate or option two where

25:43 ↗ you know it's a phased app to increase

25:45 ↗ me as a resident I would like to see the

25:47 ↗ increase faced um one other thing to

25:51 ↗ consider is you know the neighboring

25:53 ↗ cities like I looked at the attachment

25:55 ↗ and admin is zero there are reasons for

25:59 ↗ that of course I I read the footnote

26:01 ↗ which says they just have the

26:02 ↗ sustainability coordinator and I know

26:05 ↗ Sam started some of the programs later

26:08 ↗ than S like I think they just started

26:11 ↗ the east side you know Energy Smart

26:13 ↗ program they just join so there are a

26:15 ↗ few things there is a reason why this

26:18 ↗ fee is there so you know if you're going

26:21 ↗ with the 9% increase you definitely want

26:24 ↗ to as Jonathan mentioned you know the

26:26 ↗ education will be a big part of

26:28 ↗ or communication that Community is aware

26:31 ↗ of it why there is a big jump um

26:35 ↗ personally as I said I like to see more

26:37 ↗ phased increase but I wanted to check if

26:40 ↗ you do and I know you had listed some of

26:42 ↗ the reasons what you would cut down on

26:44 ↗ if you go with the phased off approach

26:47 ↗ but are there any critical items which

26:49 ↗ you will miss if you go with the

26:52 ↗ alterate yeah that's a great question I

26:55 ↗ think um some of the items we could

26:58 ↗ could potentially cut back on um our

27:01 ↗ more of the public charging we have to

27:03 ↗ get our Fleet Chargers in so that's not

27:05 ↗ really a question we have vehicles

27:07 ↗ coming but some of the public charging

27:09 ↗ we would likely cut back on our

27:12 ↗ residential and Commercial

27:13 ↗ electrification programs continue those

27:15 ↗ but at a less um

27:18 ↗ contribution um other ones we included

27:22 ↗ were let's see um some of the capacity

27:26 ↗ support so right now planning to fund

27:29 ↗ another Civic spark fellow um Nick will

27:32 ↗ be his term will end in August so we're

27:35 ↗ hoping to bring on another one and then

27:37 ↗ we're also hoping to cover a part of a

27:40 ↗ Communications staff um we only have

27:42 ↗ really two Communications staff that do

27:44 ↗ all our work and I think David and I

27:46 ↗ probably take up about 50% of their time

27:48 ↗ it feels like so we want to contribute

27:50 ↗ to um that additional support um and

27:54 ↗ then other big ticket items that we have

27:56 ↗ we'd probably cut back on are Grant

27:58 ↗ funding match a lot of the grants we

28:00 ↗ apply for want to see at least some

28:02 ↗ amount of match so our concern with that

28:04 ↗ is it might make us a little bit less

28:06 ↗ competitive those are a few of the

28:08 ↗ initial items we would probably scale

28:10 ↗ back maybe not remove completely but at

28:13 ↗ least scale back um so just to give you

28:15 ↗ some input you know these are all great

28:18 ↗ you know so this lot of this work which

28:20 ↗ goes in the background right which the

28:22 ↗ office of sustainability will do to get

28:25 ↗ the visible programs and actually make

28:27 ↗ it happen for community so 80% of that

28:31 ↗ background work which is so important is

28:34 ↗ not visible to the community so really

28:36 ↗ they're not going to care about you know

28:38 ↗ in that sense or value the percent

28:41 ↗ increase for the word which they don't

28:43 ↗ see so some of the things which you said

28:46 ↗ public you know the EV charging stations

28:48 ↗ and stuff that should be you know the

28:51 ↗ highlight of the um education because

28:54 ↗ you know there were some um on electric

28:59 ↗ vehicles owners got some tax benefits a

29:02 ↗ lot of people bought it in 2023 some

29:04 ↗ electric vehicles you know end of 20123

29:06 ↗ or things like that so these things are

29:08 ↗ important to the community so you might

29:10 ↗ want to look at you know which are the

29:13 ↗ most visible items and highlight them uh

29:18 ↗ when you're talking about or about the

29:20 ↗ you know increase in the tax because

29:23 ↗ that will get them going and understand

29:25 ↗ why they're okay great um just to very

29:29 ↗ Briefly summarize a lot of great points

29:30 ↗ from praj for those on the phone uh P

29:33 ↗ was just mentioning the um preference

29:36 ↗ for the phased approach to really reduce

29:38 ↗ we can hear p a lot better you can hear

29:40 ↗ okay great is a lot more that yeah great

29:46 ↗ all right Tom I got you

29:50 ↗ next uh yes thank you uh just building

29:53 ↗ on Jonathan's comment the down Fourth of

29:56 ↗ July was also a big trash generating

29:59 ↗ event um I contributed to the trash flow

30:03 ↗ I I admit but anyway another opportunity

30:06 ↗ be a good Community event to try to

30:09 ↗ increase the com compostable usage uh

30:13 ↗ but my real question is about uh other

30:15 ↗ sources of funding uh that may have been

30:18 ↗ explored and maybe there's a

30:20 ↗ philosophical reason why it was decided

30:23 ↗ to put the sustainability fund entirely

30:26 ↗ on the uh Sol

30:28 ↗ waste um agenda item there but uh maybe

30:33 ↗ you can expand on that Stacy if you know

30:36 ↗ some background on that like I'm I'm

30:37 ↗ wondering well why isn't some of this

30:39 ↗ funding coming from U consumers of power

30:43 ↗ for example do we have a little search

30:46 ↗ charge we can put on psse energy usage

30:51 ↗ uh seems to be also an important uh

30:54 ↗ aspect that ties into sustainability why

30:57 ↗ is it all this one one Revenue stream

31:01 ↗ can you speak to that yeah I can attempt

31:04 ↗ that might be um also for hups in the

31:08 ↗ administration um I know so there are a

31:10 ↗ couple other fees that the city collects

31:14 ↗ um such as storm water and water and

31:17 ↗ those um go to a lot of our Public Works

31:20 ↗ programming so they are allocated um I

31:23 ↗ would say across most of our neighboring

31:25 ↗ jurisdictions they they funding is

31:28 ↗ coming from the general fund so I think

31:31 ↗ we feel very lucky here that we do have

31:33 ↗ some dedicated fund and we're not

31:35 ↗ competing with all the other

31:37 ↗ programming quote unquote competing with

31:39 ↗ all the other programming in the city

31:41 ↗ for the general funds so we're a little

31:43 ↗ bit of a unique situation where I think

31:46 ↗ the city was looking to be proactive

31:48 ↗ where it had this funding source to

31:50 ↗ support um solid waste and environmental

31:53 ↗ programming and decided to allocate it

31:56 ↗ towards the office assisting ability and

31:58 ↗ and solid waste so I can look into more

32:01 ↗ of the history that's um about the

32:04 ↗ extent of my knowledge um on how those

32:08 ↗ funds became part of this

32:10 ↗ program well it it seems to me I mean I

32:14 ↗ so I'm I'm on board with this the the

32:17 ↗ direction we're going and all but I

32:18 ↗ think oh in a longer longer term basis

32:22 ↗ it would be better to broaden the

32:24 ↗ support and and cover the energy

32:26 ↗ consumption as well as the waste

32:28 ↗ generation uh aspect of our Behavior Uh

32:32 ↗ to fund this this campaign of

32:35 ↗ sustainability that's that's I think

32:37 ↗ would be preferable in my my opinion but

32:40 ↗ if doing so means the the administrative

32:43 ↗ cost of adding a new fee to some other

32:46 ↗ Revenue stream there's cost doing that

32:49 ↗ maybe that maybe that's a prohibitive

32:51 ↗ part of it I don't know so that's that's

32:54 ↗ my thought on that I had one little knit

32:56 ↗ on just the wording it you know a 3%

32:59 ↗ increase in in the fee is misleading

33:02 ↗ well I know I know what you're saying

33:04 ↗ and you know the rest of the story

33:07 ↗ explains it well it's an increase from

33:09 ↗ six to 9 that's a 3% increase but it's a

33:12 ↗ 50% increase in terms of what the what

33:15 ↗ the revenue generated from that is uh so

33:20 ↗ I would add more words to clarify what

33:23 ↗ what that means but I know this is just

33:26 ↗ an internal presentation so that's maybe

33:28 ↗ not important if this was a a more of an

33:32 ↗ outward facing uh presentation to the

33:35 ↗ public about oh yeah we're going to

33:38 ↗ increase um our fee by only 3% well make

33:42 ↗ it clear that you're your bill is going

33:45 ↗ to go up 3% uh approximately uh related

33:48 ↗ to this but the increase of the fee is

33:51 ↗ uh as the revenue stream generated by

33:54 ↗ the city will increase by 50% I think

33:56 ↗ that's an important way to disclose it

34:00 ↗ just in the in the interest of full

34:03 ↗ disclosure yeah great

34:07 ↗ thanks that's all I had one quick

34:10 ↗ response um uh I think we can definitely

34:14 ↗ look into other funding sources I don't

34:16 ↗ believe that we're allowed to um apply

34:20 ↗ any fees on the energy utility bills I

34:23 ↗ believe those are set by the state um

34:26 ↗ but David and I were at a conference

34:27 ↗ said couple weeks ago and believe it's

34:30 ↗ up in Vancouver or a neighboring city

34:32 ↗ has um a streetl fee so there are other

34:36 ↗ things that we could look at um and talk

34:39 ↗ with our other programming in the city

34:41 ↗ to see what other sources could be could

34:43 ↗ be a potential so thanks for those

34:46 ↗ thoughts

34:48 ↗ okay thank you Tom Jamie thank you

34:52 ↗ thanks Don um first a couple points that

34:55 ↗ are just related to what Tom was just

34:56 ↗ talking about I actually think that the

34:59 ↗ way that you talk about the increase is

35:02 ↗ confusing in the opposite direction

35:04 ↗ because until you're at the very end of

35:06 ↗ the presentation you don't realize that

35:07 ↗ you're kind of near the end you don't

35:09 ↗ realize that we're just going back to

35:11 ↗ what we had before as a percentage and

35:14 ↗ albeit understand the base rates are

35:16 ↗ different but I feel like we're kind of

35:18 ↗ burying the fact that it's really just

35:21 ↗ we had one year at 6% but otherwise the

35:23 ↗ history has been at 9% so that that

35:26 ↗ seems like something that like as we're

35:28 ↗ thinking about bringing this to a

35:29 ↗ broader audience that should be I I

35:31 ↗ would encourage us to message that I

35:35 ↗ also think quoting the increase in terms

35:37 ↗ of bium is both confusing it like hurt

35:39 ↗ my brain to figure out what you were

35:40 ↗ trying to say but it also but it also

35:44 ↗ makes it seem like it's out like it just

35:47 ↗ is it would seem like it'd be better to

35:49 ↗ put in in terms of the annual amount I

35:51 ↗ think that's just easier to understand

35:53 ↗ um and it it seriously took me like five

35:55 ↗ minutes reading that to be like what is

35:58 ↗ okay what does that mean and what these

36:00 ↗ numbers don't seem to LA to make sense

36:02 ↗ but then I I realize what you were

36:04 ↗ saying and then on Tom Tom's um feedback

36:08 ↗ around funding sources I think what he

36:10 ↗ brought up is a really

36:12 ↗ important um kind of topic because what

36:15 ↗ I hope we're not doing is just shifting

36:18 ↗ what money would have been coming out of

36:20 ↗ the general fund into a fee that's being

36:23 ↗ put to Consumers because I do think and

36:26 ↗ I we don't ever say that but I think we

36:28 ↗ should make sure that we're clear that

36:30 ↗ the city is not going to be like the

36:32 ↗ city is also going to be making

36:33 ↗ increased investment and I think the

36:35 ↗ conversation that you're having with the

36:37 ↗ midpoint checkin around the IAP is

36:39 ↗ really important context to know that

36:42 ↗ hey residents it's not just you that's

36:43 ↗ going to be paying some additional it's

36:45 ↗ it's quite small amount the city is also

36:48 ↗ going to be committing more funds than

36:49 ↗ we have in the past like that's the type

36:51 ↗ of stuff that I want to know that it's

36:52 ↗ not just me as a resident footing the

36:55 ↗ bill that the city is going to be making

36:56 ↗ increased commitments

36:59 ↗ um I also think it's a bit dangerous if

37:02 ↗ we if we if we were to become overly

37:04 ↗ reliant on a single uh Revenue source so

37:07 ↗ I do think that's something that we

37:09 ↗ should just I don't think that the

37:10 ↗ city's proposing doing that but that's

37:12 ↗ just something that I think we should be

37:13 ↗ really clear about and it should be in

37:15 ↗ the messaging for for home for consumers

37:17 ↗ for like when this goes to council that

37:19 ↗ should be clear that this is not

37:20 ↗ intended as a way to shift funding

37:22 ↗ elsewhere um I also think PR's Point

37:26 ↗ around what and it's a little bit

37:29 ↗ different than what she was saying think

37:30 ↗ but like sharing what they're already

37:32 ↗ getting for that fee and being more

37:33 ↗ clear about like what is this already

37:35 ↗ fund and like all the benefits we're

37:38 ↗ getting like again as this goes to

37:40 ↗ council as this goes to a broader group

37:42 ↗ I think that that would be worth some

37:44 ↗ additional context and like clearly

37:46 ↗ showing what you're getting and then

37:48 ↗ what's going to be in addition to that

37:50 ↗ uh again just helps them understand

37:52 ↗ what's the value what how am I valuing

37:54 ↗ this this fee in general and what am I

37:57 ↗ getting um so then in terms of kind of

38:01 ↗ more feedback on this this

38:04 ↗ recommendation overall I I support uh

38:07 ↗ the recommendation from the city I do

38:10 ↗ think um Anything You Can Do I thought

38:12 ↗ the bin size decrease how that messaging

38:15 ↗ can go along with the the increase in

38:17 ↗ the fee is a great opportunity to

38:19 ↗ potentially even decrease someone's bill

38:21 ↗ by getting them to do what we actually

38:23 ↗ want which is to decrease the the amount

38:24 ↗ of waste that they're generating stuff

38:26 ↗ going into the trash so

38:28 ↗ really I think that's great I do think

38:30 ↗ what you're talking about around

38:31 ↗ Community uh communication staff it's

38:33 ↗ not in the current presentation if there

38:35 ↗ is any specific element of this that is

38:37 ↗ going towards communication staff that

38:40 ↗ to me is a big thing that I would I

38:43 ↗ would love to see in here because I

38:44 ↗ think that's a a a really important part

38:47 ↗ and and maybe this won't be understood

38:48 ↗ by by some of the public but that seems

38:50 ↗ like such a important element of what

38:53 ↗ we're trying to do with the climate

38:54 ↗ action plan all of the out engagement

38:56 ↗ with the city so I I think that's like a

38:59 ↗ another thing that would be great to

39:00 ↗ have included um I do think that um one

39:05 ↗ thing that we and this is a general

39:07 ↗ piece of feedback that you'll have heard

39:09 ↗ from me before but I think especially

39:11 ↗ for these funds we need to make sure

39:12 ↗ that we are like doing as much as we can

39:16 ↗ to get at what is the impact especially

39:19 ↗ on the climate focused ones like what

39:21 ↗ are the like and maximizing that kind of

39:24 ↗ tons of carbon to Dollars spent so the

39:28 ↗ one the one that jumps out to me is like

39:29 ↗ I would hope that this doesn't like I I

39:32 ↗ I understand a lot of the grants were

39:33 ↗ tied to kind of equity-based paying for

39:35 ↗ entire heat pump systems but I think we

39:38 ↗ need to make sure that these really are

39:40 ↗ pay like are maximizing bang for buck

39:42 ↗ for climate since that's really the

39:44 ↗ reason that this is getting passed or

39:46 ↗ this is getting passed through so I do I

39:48 ↗ think do think because this isn't grant

39:50 ↗ money and because this is the

39:51 ↗ community's money I think that becomes

39:53 ↗ an even more important element um and

39:56 ↗ then the one final thing that I will

39:58 ↗ mention um I do think one thing that

40:02 ↗ keeps getting kind of lost in the rology

40:04 ↗ conversation and I don't know that it

40:06 ↗ really has uh that this is the right

40:09 ↗ place to inject it but is the wildlife

40:12 ↗ interaction with our waste streams and

40:14 ↗ the fact that we still have a high

40:16 ↗ percentage of people in in basically in

40:20 ↗ habitats where they're garbages

40:21 ↗ regularly being uh having bears go

40:24 ↗ through it and and all like basically

40:26 ↗ impacting negative impacting the

40:28 ↗ ecosystems around us that we aren't

40:30 ↗ addressing so I do wonder if I don't

40:32 ↗ know that it fits in here but that's

40:34 ↗ just something that I think we should at

40:36 ↗ least consider whether there's an

40:37 ↗ opportunity as part of this to to find

40:39 ↗ to try to find a solution or uh improve

40:43 ↗ the situation on on how this is

40:45 ↗ impacting the ecosystems around around

40:48 ↗ isqua so thank you great Jamie thank you

40:53 ↗ Jamie an

40:58 ↗ thanks Don um boy I think you nailed

41:02 ↗ everything uh Jamie so not much to say

41:06 ↗ but I just want to say I support the

41:09 ↗ 9% um increase uh I think for the

41:13 ↗ average person just a11 14 isn't very

41:17 ↗ much and I think it's like praj says

41:21 ↗ it's an a perfect way to educate the

41:23 ↗ public on um the great things that isqua

41:26 ↗ is doing

41:27 ↗ and um you know I think it I think most

41:31 ↗ people would be really happy to pay a11

41:34 ↗ a month to um get what they're

41:38 ↗ getting uh it's a small small fee um but

41:44 ↗ I don't live in isqua so I'm on the

41:47 ↗ outskirts so um I don't know how much of

41:51 ↗ I I should comment on that but um and

41:54 ↗ then also love the idea of letting

41:57 ↗ people know that um it's not all coming

41:59 ↗ from them that um the city is also

42:02 ↗ paying a portion of it

42:05 ↗ uh and let's see there was one more

42:08 ↗ thing I was going to say but I can't

42:10 ↗ remember what it was yeah mainly yeah I

42:13 ↗ don't know what you can get for a11 14

42:15 ↗ not even a cup of coffee these days

42:18 ↗ right thank you thank you Ann um so I'll

42:23 ↗ in the comments there I have one final

42:25 ↗ comment um

42:27 ↗ my concern with this is that it's a

42:29 ↗ creeping tax um Wastewater water storm

42:33 ↗ water garbage they're all fee related

42:35 ↗ right and it's a little bit here a

42:36 ↗ little bit there and every year it goes

42:37 ↗ up and up and up and it it does hit the

42:41 ↗ the homeowners and while it's only a a

42:42 ↗ couple percent increase um might only be

42:45 ↗ a buck 15 for a residential homeowner

42:48 ↗ but what does it cost a big giant

42:49 ↗ business um what are we looking at there

42:51 ↗ I do think we need to look at alternate

42:53 ↗ funding sources going into the future I

42:55 ↗ mean this takes you through 20 26 but

42:58 ↗ this is a growing program and it's going

43:00 ↗ to cost more and more over time um so I

43:03 ↗ do I think you need to consider that and

43:04 ↗ I think you have support um region wide

43:08 ↗ for a sustainability program seems to be

43:11 ↗ a lot of the cities are doing it there's

43:12 ↗ a lot of support out there um I don't

43:15 ↗ have a solution for you just something

43:16 ↗ to consider moving

43:20 ↗ forward Tom do you have another

43:23 ↗ comment uh yeah I

43:26 ↗ guess kind of a combination of response

43:28 ↗ to an and you about sensibilities and

43:32 ↗ well yeah this is a small thing and

43:34 ↗ we're all we're all behind this and all

43:36 ↗ that well it turns out we aren't all

43:38 ↗ behind it um and I was reminded of this

43:41 ↗ here just this last week I engaged in a

43:44 ↗ nice conversation with one of the city

43:46 ↗ of isqua Public Works people who came

43:49 ↗ out to my local fire hydrant to bleed it

43:53 ↗ which is a normal thing to be done and

43:56 ↗ it just was a good reminder that not

43:58 ↗ everybody thinks

44:00 ↗ alike and uh some people see these

44:04 ↗ creeping Trends towards funding of um

44:08 ↗ climate action things and other

44:11 ↗ dimensions of

44:12 ↗ political scenarios that I won't talk

44:15 ↗ about as just part of the uh the liberal

44:18 ↗ agenda being foisted upon others so

44:21 ↗ anyway to each his own there are other

44:24 ↗ points of view and there will be some

44:26 ↗ percent of the popul you consider fees

44:29 ↗ like this to be an outrage but you

44:33 ↗ know I'm I'm with it but uh yeah it's

44:37 ↗ it's it's good to just keep in mind we

44:39 ↗ don't all think alike about this so um

44:42 ↗ kind of being measured in our increases

44:46 ↗ is is a good thing thank you that's all

44:48 ↗ I had on that thank you Tom um any other

44:53 ↗ comments I get C wanted to decision on

44:56 ↗ this are you asking for us to vote on um

44:58 ↗ it was a discussion I think it was

45:00 ↗ labeled as a I believe but um sounds

45:04 ↗ like we're all in agreement that um to

45:06 ↗ get us through 2026 at 3% increase is

45:08 ↗ the right thing to do for now okay and I

45:10 ↗ can all note to um just that there were

45:14 ↗ some that prefer the phased approach we

45:16 ↗ do in the um agenda bill for Council

45:19 ↗ we'll provide a summary of the

45:21 ↗ environmental board feedback so I'll

45:23 ↗ note some of these items

45:25 ↗ there you want your phased approach

45:28 ↗ called out in

45:34 ↗ that it would specifically name to say

45:37 ↗ in general they were supportive there

45:39 ↗ was some um interest in the phas too to

45:43 ↗ reduce the impact of residents Andy I

45:46 ↗ just had one more comment if we had a

45:48 ↗ minute so when we were all talking about

45:51 ↗ you know the education on how much city

45:53 ↗ of dist is actually doing to increase

45:55 ↗ the tax uh one way you can do is I know

45:58 ↗ there was sustainability Ambassador or

46:01 ↗ these programs also are kind of funded

46:03 ↗ by the sustainability fund right and I

46:05 ↗ know um you do have some student interns

46:09 ↗ so maybe through their work also they

46:12 ↗ can do the community outreach on

46:14 ↗ education where they actually and these

46:17 ↗ kids are really good with you know like

46:19 ↗ actually making videos and you know um

46:22 ↗ just the you know kind of a small

46:26 ↗ screenshot and putting it in nice way

46:28 ↗ and just posting it on Instagram which

46:30 ↗ actually gets a lot of traction among

46:33 ↗ young people so that is a good way to

46:36 ↗ educate or do the community outreach and

46:38 ↗ actually be aware of why why city of

46:41 ↗ charg image yeah great idea so's comment

46:45 ↗ gives me another suggestion um maybe

46:47 ↗ talk with your staff and see if there's

46:48 ↗ a way you can develop a return on

46:50 ↗ investment type of graphing um okay

46:54 ↗ something you can put on your website

46:55 ↗ that says here's where the money's going

46:57 ↗ here's what we're getting out of it

46:58 ↗ here's where we plan to go with

47:03 ↗ it when I looked at your list of the

47:06 ↗ things that people were getting um from

47:09 ↗ this additional

47:11 ↗ fee it looked to me that um there wasn't

47:16 ↗ much that the average person get your

47:19 ↗ average show um the street light

47:22 ↗ conversion was one that stood out to me

47:24 ↗ that would affect everybody

47:27 ↗ but but you the chargers chargers things

47:29 ↗ like that that only affects the wealth

47:32 ↗ your citizens so it's it may not be

47:36 ↗ viewed well by lower income people okay

47:43 ↗ that's good and that's something we can

47:44 ↗ emphasize I think especially our

47:46 ↗ electrification programs will be

47:48 ↗ offering incentives to folks um but we

47:51 ↗ can look at highlighting a few of those

47:52 ↗ that would actually go direct back into

47:54 ↗ the pocket great

47:59 ↗ any last

48:01 ↗ comments seeing none thank you

48:06 ↗ everybody we park yep so the next uh

48:09 ↗ item we have is the sty wants to talked

48:12 ↗ about the process for providing input on

48:14 ↗ the park plan great thank you this is a

48:17 ↗ very last minute addition uh we were

48:20 ↗ requested this morning to send along

48:22 ↗ communication to the board for providing

48:24 ↗ feedback on the draft Park plan the

48:27 ↗ update to the park plan um and in

48:30 ↗ consultation with Don and our clerk's

48:33 ↗ office wanted to talk to you all about

48:36 ↗ the process for doing that um there are

48:40 ↗ a couple options I discussed with the

48:42 ↗ clerk's office is and I'll share those

48:45 ↗ but also open to other

48:47 ↗ ideas um one option is that you all

48:52 ↗ individually as community members for

48:54 ↗ those that want to open up the park plan

48:56 ↗ and provide comments they can do so to

48:59 ↗ the staff and that we just approach it

49:01 ↗ from a individual non environmental

49:03 ↗ board rep

49:05 ↗ perspective uh other option is that

49:08 ↗ environmental board members could send

49:10 ↗ me their feedback on the park plan um

49:14 ↗ and then I would compile that into a

49:16 ↗ single memo have Don and Alex review and

49:19 ↗ approve it and then I would send that

49:22 ↗ onto Park plan on behalf of the

49:24 ↗ environmental board and representing all

49:26 ↗ of you your um

49:28 ↗ feedback those are the two options we

49:31 ↗ identified open if there's other

49:33 ↗ thoughts on how the environmental board

49:35 ↗ wants to provide feedback on that Park

49:36 ↗ plan just noting the timeline that the

49:39 ↗ staff were looking for that feedback um

49:42 ↗ by the uh July 23rd so we don't have

49:45 ↗ time for another discussion at a board

49:48 ↗ meeting and is it one or the other

49:50 ↗ option or is there option for the

49:53 ↗ combination of two absolutely yeah

49:55 ↗ absolutely you all are always welcome to

49:57 ↗ provide comments as community members

50:00 ↗ and individuals too so we could do that

50:02 ↗ plus folks send it and I package it

50:05 ↗ together on behalf of the environmental

50:06 ↗ board is that is that the com you're

50:09 ↗ looking for uh Nancy Stacy called me

50:11 ↗ earlier and that this conversation came

50:13 ↗ to be my question earlier was if we have

50:15 ↗ a quorum commenting on the plan should

50:18 ↗ it go through Stacy to be a formal

50:22 ↗ recommendation on the parks plan from

50:23 ↗ the environmental board so just to give

50:25 ↗ you guys some context of our earlier

50:26 ↗ conversation today

50:31 ↗ Nancy you're on muted yeah I just had to

50:34 ↗ turn my mic on sorry about that so I

50:36 ↗ guess I have a couple of thoughts and I

50:39 ↗ may come back again so first off it's

50:42 ↗ troubling that something that's as

50:43 ↗ important as the park plan has a 13-day

50:46 ↗ turnaround for getting comments back so

50:49 ↗ I strongly urge that we get that

50:51 ↗ feedback back to the parks department

50:53 ↗ it's not that's troubling for a board

50:55 ↗ that has a a large agenda in terms of

50:58 ↗ trying to protect the environment and

51:00 ↗ parks are a big part of what is going to

51:02 ↗ do that um secondly it was also sent out

51:06 ↗ to the community at the same time and to

51:09 ↗ ask the community in July to turn it

51:11 ↗ around in 14 days they have one extra

51:13 ↗ day more than we did um is rather

51:16 ↗ troubling as well it feels like Parks is

51:20 ↗ really not interested in feedback either

51:22 ↗ one from boards or two from the

51:24 ↗ community I know that's probably not

51:26 ↗ Fair statement but it is the worst time

51:29 ↗ of year to be asking for this and to

51:31 ↗ give people a very short window and

51:33 ↗ something this important is troubling to

51:35 ↗ me my next point is I had a chance to

51:39 ↗ take a half hour and go through the plan

51:42 ↗ and there are pieces that are missing of

51:44 ↗ it from it in my opinion to actually

51:47 ↗ make this the document that we need that

51:50 ↗ we want to base our funding for in the

51:52 ↗ future on Parks um it's the first time

51:55 ↗ we've actually got to see the whole

51:57 ↗ vision of where the parks department is

52:00 ↗ trying to take this and I'm troubled

52:02 ↗ that you're asking us as individuals to

52:05 ↗ submit comments when the collective we

52:07 ↗ of this board and our knowledge and

52:09 ↗ input has always provided a better voice

52:12 ↗ than each of us as an individual so I

52:16 ↗ don't see how we can make that work so

52:19 ↗ there's a couple options I mean if we're

52:20 ↗ just doing our individual voices um we

52:23 ↗ are much better sending them in as the

52:26 ↗ environmental board because the council

52:28 ↗ actually has an opportunity to hear from

52:30 ↗ a group that has some expertise if we

52:32 ↗ send them in as

52:35 ↗ individuals they're less likely to

52:38 ↗ listen as much as it does from the board

52:40 ↗ because if you read our Charter is the

52:42 ↗ Environmental board it's basically says

52:44 ↗ they're supposed to provide weight to

52:47 ↗ our recommendations and our discussions

52:50 ↗ and therefore if they're supposed to

52:51 ↗ provide that kind of weight in my

52:53 ↗ opinion it's important to us to actually

52:56 ↗ look at it if that's something we choose

52:58 ↗ to do to provide thoughtful

53:00 ↗ conversations and discussions about it

53:02 ↗ and give our best input to the city

53:04 ↗ council about what needs to be done with

53:06 ↗ the parks plan so can we ask for more

53:09 ↗ time is that an option I just think the

53:12 ↗ Board needs to come together and do

53:14 ↗ something and we need to have a

53:15 ↗ conversation about it that's just my

53:17 ↗ thoughts on it that's my comments for

53:20 ↗ now

53:23 ↗ sorry thank you Nancy Jamie

53:27 ↗ thanks Don um question for Stacy what is

53:31 ↗ driving that 23rd timeline what what's

53:35 ↗ what is the timeline based upon yeah

53:38 ↗ from the best of my knowledge it's

53:39 ↗ likely then scheduled to go to the

53:42 ↗ different Council committees and then

53:44 ↗ for Council approval I'm guessing that

53:46 ↗ is the driving

53:48 ↗ force but I can clarify all that and I

53:50 ↗ will also follow up on Nancy's comment

53:53 ↗ and see if we can get a extension and

53:56 ↗ EXP Express their concerns about the

53:57 ↗ timeline yeah it just seems so out of

54:00 ↗ the ordinary for a major city plan to

54:03 ↗ have basically we had like some initial

54:07 ↗ visioning comments but for something

54:10 ↗ that is so Central to our mission and

54:14 ↗ important to community members it just

54:16 ↗ seems like a big issue to have this be

54:19 ↗ such a short turnaround so I that's all

54:22 ↗ to say I agree with with Nancy that we

54:24 ↗ really need to look at how and why this

54:27 ↗ is getting pushed so quickly and um I

54:31 ↗ think in the absence of that timeline

54:33 ↗ changing I would also recommend that we

54:37 ↗ uh move forward with something as a try

54:39 ↗ to get something together as a board

54:40 ↗ because it will have I think more weight

54:43 ↗ so yeah a lot of just reiterating what

54:45 ↗ Nancy stated great thank

54:50 ↗ you I would agree with both Nancy and

54:52 ↗ Jamie I think we need to ask Parks

54:54 ↗ what's the driving force for this can we

54:56 ↗ bump it out a month so we have a little

54:59 ↗ longer to look at it and um I do think

55:02 ↗ that yeah a Bo letter from the board is

55:04 ↗ the most appropriate means so that it

55:06 ↗ gets council's attention

55:08 ↗ Okay any disagreement with that from

55:13 ↗ anybody okay so if you could reply back

55:16 ↗ to us via email and let us know if we

55:18 ↗ can get that timeline extended that

55:19 ↗ would be great if not and I'm going to

55:21 ↗ ask everybody to take a hour or so of

55:24 ↗ their time and read through it and

55:25 ↗ provide comment back to to Stacy and

55:27 ↗ she'll put a letter together for us

55:32 ↗ Nancy sorry I have to turn my mic on I

55:34 ↗ have to remember to do that it's not

55:37 ↗ natural so I guess that's what I was

55:40 ↗ going to ask and you followed up on that

55:42 ↗ is what happens if they don't choose to

55:44 ↗ extend it and so what we're going to do

55:47 ↗ is just provide individual comments

55:49 ↗ we're not going to try and throw

55:50 ↗ together another meeting to have a

55:51 ↗ conversation about it is that the

55:54 ↗ plan what I'm hearing n is we're not

55:56 ↗ going to throw together a meeting for it

55:58 ↗ but we'll all provide comment to Stacy

56:00 ↗ and she'll collate our comments and then

56:03 ↗ Alex and I review that letter and have

56:06 ↗ the Board review it and then sign it and

56:08 ↗ get it over to the parks department and

56:10 ↗ to

56:13 ↗ council thank

56:18 ↗ you yep I will follow up with Park T

56:21 ↗ Park team tonight um get back to you all

56:23 ↗ before the end of the week as well as

56:25 ↗ any next steps

56:32 ↗ process those were our only two topics

56:34 ↗ tonight um

56:37 ↗ reports on the reports Karen do you have

56:40 ↗ a youth report for us I'm okay not

56:43 ↗ tonight okay great Stacy do you have a i

56:46 ↗ CH yeah and just a couple

56:50 ↗ um last reports and then we'll get you

56:53 ↗ all out of here um so as was shared we

56:55 ↗ did did uh present the midpoint check-in

56:58 ↗ to Council on Monday night um we had a

57:01 ↗ really good discussion with Council on

57:02 ↗ the progress so far as well as our needs

57:05 ↗ going forward um there's several

57:07 ↗ follow-up items that David and I will be

57:10 ↗ um getting back to Council in terms of

57:11 ↗ some data a more detailed report on our

57:14 ↗ clean buildings program um there's also

57:16 ↗ some interest in exploring a few

57:19 ↗ additional policies especially uh around

57:21 ↗ waste

57:22 ↗ diversion um so we'll be uh getting some

57:25 ↗ additional information out to in the

57:26 ↗ next couple of weeks around those

57:28 ↗ followup items um we can share the video

57:32 ↗ from Monday's presentation if you all

57:34 ↗ want it it was long uh can watch it on

57:38 ↗ one and a half speed um and we had some

57:41 ↗ really nice comments from Ann Fletcher

57:42 ↗ and Dave Kepler were there um provided

57:44 ↗ some public comment on that presentation

57:47 ↗ so anything David put you on the spot

57:49 ↗ anything you want to add about

57:52 ↗ presentation a set all right um and then

57:57 ↗ uh just wanted to highlight that the

57:59 ↗ packet meeting packet tonight does

58:01 ↗ provide a number of written

58:03 ↗ reports uh Urban Forest management plan

58:05 ↗ just to update on the development of

58:08 ↗ that plan um a facility decarbonization

58:12 ↗ assessment status report um we'll have

58:15 ↗ much more to you all on that in the next

58:17 ↗ month or two um and then a student

58:20 ↗ research paper on carbon offset policies

58:23 ↗ for staff travel this wasn't completed

58:25 ↗ in time time for our June meeting where

58:27 ↗ we had a number of student

58:29 ↗ presentations um but wanted to share

58:31 ↗ with you all the work that Audrey did

58:33 ↗ it's a initial research project around

58:36 ↗ how um the city might consider

58:38 ↗ offsetting employee airline travel um

58:41 ↗ David and I will be uh digging in a

58:43 ↗ little bit deeper um and hopefully

58:44 ↗ putting an internal policy forward uh

58:48 ↗ later this

58:50 ↗ fall um environmental board work plan

58:53 ↗ our August meeting is going to be

58:56 ↗ a bit of a heavy one uh Dan will be here

58:59 ↗ to to present to us on the urban Forest

59:01 ↗ management plan um that'll be a draft

59:04 ↗ review I anticipate we'll want to

59:06 ↗ generate a letter uh coming out of that

59:09 ↗ meeting on behalf of the board and then

59:11 ↗ we also have the comprehensive plan

59:14 ↗ review uh both on the environmental

59:17 ↗ element which um for those that were on

59:20 ↗ the board last year have seen many times

59:23 ↗ um as well as components of other ele

59:26 ↗ elements that relate to our work which

59:28 ↗ folks have also seen um and both both

59:31 ↗ those topics we are hoping uh to get the

59:33 ↗ materials out to the board a little bit

59:35 ↗ early because I know they are um long

59:38 ↗ and uh ones that the board will have a

59:41 ↗ lot of feedback on um our my plan is to

59:45 ↗ potentially and I haven't discussed this

59:46 ↗ with Don yet but uh potentially schedule

59:49 ↗ a longer meeting so we can avoid a

59:51 ↗ special meeting in in August

59:56 ↗ Jamie I think Jamie had a

1:00:01 ↗ comment yeah one just on uh I guess it's

1:00:04 ↗ more of a question um for Stacy do you

1:00:07 ↗ know on the urban Forest man Forest

1:00:10 ↗ management plan whether they're planning

1:00:11 ↗ on coming up in addition to like like

1:00:14 ↗ actions are there is there goal setting

1:00:16 ↗ as part of this like I'm curious if

1:00:18 ↗ beyond the I just think we need to get

1:00:20 ↗ like the 55% canopy to me is one not

1:00:23 ↗ achievable and two not uh not enough

1:00:26 ↗ detail below of like what do we actually

1:00:28 ↗ want with the to improve forest panopy

1:00:31 ↗ and ecosystems in the city so I'm just

1:00:33 ↗ curious if you know whether that's

1:00:35 ↗ planned for the their en Force

1:00:38 ↗ management

1:00:39 ↗ plan yeah my understanding is that is

1:00:43 ↗ part of it um I think also it goes along

1:00:46 ↗ with Title 18 updates on the tree code

1:00:49 ↗ which are also getting at um that as

1:00:51 ↗ well those were delayed from tonight

1:00:53 ↗ until our September meeting um David I

1:00:56 ↗ don't I haven't seen a full copy of the

1:01:00 ↗ draft of the uh Urban Forest plan I

1:01:03 ↗ don't know David if you have any other

1:01:05 ↗ insight into the level of detail and

1:01:07 ↗ actions and

1:01:09 ↗ strategies yeah I think the thing I can

1:01:12 ↗ add is I haven't seen and I have not

1:01:15 ↗ fully seen it either but I I haven't

1:01:17 ↗ seen many more you know specific targets

1:01:19 ↗ like 55% tree canopy but there is

1:01:22 ↗ visioning process and you know vision

1:01:25 ↗ statements and goals and kind of

1:01:26 ↗ additional pieces in there that are

1:01:28 ↗ related to kind of what what um they

1:01:32 ↗ really want the the urban Forest

1:01:33 ↗ management plan to start achieving so I

1:01:35 ↗ know that is that is also going to be in

1:01:37 ↗ there in addition to specific

1:01:39 ↗ actions okay yeah I and I we'll have

1:01:42 ↗ time next month to talk with Dan about

1:01:44 ↗ this but I hope that as part of this

1:01:46 ↗ it's not just vision and kind of like

1:01:48 ↗ overarching go like I think we need to

1:01:51 ↗ be specific and one of the slides

1:01:53 ↗ actually that was related to like tree

1:01:55 ↗ cover or canopy around on along R

1:01:58 ↗ pairing corridors especially along the

1:02:00 ↗ Creeks I think was a great jumping off

1:02:02 ↗ point for where I think there's goals

1:02:04 ↗ and that can get more specific to like

1:02:06 ↗ what are where how are critical areas

1:02:08 ↗ being improved as it relates to canopy

1:02:10 ↗ so just hope that that ends up being a

1:02:12 ↗ part of it because definitely encourage

1:02:14 ↗ that um and then the the other thing

1:02:17 ↗ that I was just going to provide and

1:02:18 ↗ actually Stacy I was going to figured it

1:02:21 ↗ might be a good chance to give people an

1:02:23 ↗ update on the Strat plan task force is

1:02:26 ↗ this an appropriate time or should

1:02:28 ↗ I yeah yep go ahead great okay just uh

1:02:32 ↗ quick update so as I think many of you

1:02:34 ↗ are aware I've been on a task force that

1:02:36 ↗ it's a bunch of different board members

1:02:38 ↗ from all over the city as well as C like

1:02:41 ↗ just kind of other other folks with from

1:02:43 ↗ within the city working on an update to

1:02:46 ↗ the Strategic plan which is in a

1:02:48 ↗ nutshell kind of our fiveyear vision for

1:02:51 ↗ the city what do we want to be working

1:02:53 ↗ on what are really the the focus goals

1:02:55 ↗ for the city City and next Monday there

1:02:59 ↗ will be a presentation to council so

1:03:02 ↗ basically we've come up with a some

1:03:04 ↗ recommended updates to both objectives

1:03:06 ↗ and actions Stacy's been very involved

1:03:08 ↗ and in at several of our

1:03:09 ↗ meetings but in a nutshell the major

1:03:13 ↗ additions from the last strategic plan

1:03:15 ↗ uh or the first well really the first

1:03:17 ↗ strategic plan that we had is that there

1:03:19 ↗ is a lot more focus on climate within

1:03:21 ↗ the objectives so that was not really a

1:03:24 ↗ focus we didn't have a climate action

1:03:25 ↗ plan last time we went through this so

1:03:27 ↗ that is something that is being added

1:03:29 ↗ and then um there is a little more Focus

1:03:33 ↗ within some of the uh objectives on kind

1:03:36 ↗ of commitment to ecosystem enhancement

1:03:38 ↗ and focused on Urban Forest management

1:03:40 ↗ so that's another kind of new thing

1:03:42 ↗ that's coming in so um you'll you'll be

1:03:45 ↗ able to see a lot more detail and either

1:03:47 ↗ out of that Council presentation or um

1:03:49 ↗ I'm not sure exactly how that will get

1:03:51 ↗ shared out but if anyone has any

1:03:53 ↗ questions on that uh feel free

1:03:56 ↗ to to reach out but I think I I I hope

1:03:59 ↗ that everyone would from the board would

1:04:02 ↗ agree that like some of the major themes

1:04:04 ↗ that are kind of different in the last

1:04:05 ↗ five years are are are being echoed by

1:04:08 ↗ some of what's coming out of that uh

1:04:11 ↗ that that task force so um yeah please

1:04:14 ↗ please reach out if have any questions

1:04:16 ↗ or feedback Jamie do you feel the

1:04:20 ↗ Strategic plan is in line with the

1:04:21 ↗ comprehensive plan coming forward

1:04:27 ↗ so that I I mean the short answer is yes

1:04:32 ↗ I I mean I think yeah I think it is um

1:04:36 ↗ that that's a bit of a moving Target

1:04:38 ↗ because I think in some ways like the

1:04:40 ↗ Strategic plan is needing to react more

1:04:43 ↗ quickly than the comprehensive plan will

1:04:44 ↗ so there's going to be things that that

1:04:46 ↗ are just not not contemplated when we

1:04:48 ↗ did the comp plan update um uh but like

1:04:53 ↗ as we're doing the updates as we've gone

1:04:55 ↗ through the last year I think it's

1:04:56 ↗ they're they're getting closer and

1:04:57 ↗ closer so it's nice that they're kind of

1:04:59 ↗ being updated around a similar uh kind

1:05:01 ↗ of similar time but yeah it does does

1:05:03 ↗ seem like generally we're those are

1:05:06 ↗ aligned uh uh

1:05:10 ↗ yeah my understanding too is the

1:05:13 ↗ Strategic plan will be coming to the

1:05:15 ↗ boards and commissions in the fall so I

1:05:19 ↗ don't have any firm timelines from Dale

1:05:21 ↗ yet but it was in the timeline presented

1:05:23 ↗ to the task force we'll keep you all on

1:05:27 ↗ that and one final comment I do think

1:05:29 ↗ that the while the overarching themes of

1:05:31 ↗ that the update that the task force has

1:05:33 ↗ put together are generally good I think

1:05:35 ↗ there's a lot of work still to be done

1:05:37 ↗ on like the underlying actions and

1:05:39 ↗ making sure that we're really focusing

1:05:41 ↗ that like efforts on the right things so

1:05:43 ↗ it'll be great to for it to come back to

1:05:45 ↗ boards because what we're what we're as

1:05:47 ↗ a board or as a task force putting out I

1:05:49 ↗ would not say is like a fully baked

1:05:52 ↗ ready to go document so I think it's

1:05:54 ↗ it's a great starting point but there's

1:05:56 ↗ still a lot of work to do so yeah thanks

1:06:00 ↗ Stacy thank you Jamie couple more quick

1:06:03 ↗ updates um just a couple more updates uh

1:06:07 ↗ since our last meeting updates on the

1:06:09 ↗ climate action plan I don't think we had

1:06:12 ↗ this information during the last meeting

1:06:13 ↗ but um energy smarty side received some

1:06:16 ↗ additional funding for heat pump

1:06:17 ↗ installations in adult family homes this

1:06:20 ↗ was a special allocation of funding

1:06:23 ↗ through Department of Commerce um so

1:06:25 ↗ likely to see installations in three to

1:06:28 ↗ five um adult family homes in isqua um

1:06:31 ↗ we've also begun public Outreach on

1:06:34 ↗ psc's electric vehicle pole charging

1:06:36 ↗ program as a reminder they'll be

1:06:38 ↗ selecting two to four sites in isqua for

1:06:41 ↗ installations next year um we'll be at a

1:06:44 ↗ number of additional community events uh

1:06:46 ↗ this month um so you likely see us at

1:06:49 ↗ the resource fair or concerts on the

1:06:51 ↗ green or psse staff there as well um and

1:06:54 ↗ then later this month we're going to

1:06:56 ↗ begin Outreach on additional

1:06:59 ↗ electrification incentives um that we

1:07:02 ↗ may be offering to the community through

1:07:04 ↗ some grant funding and City funds so

1:07:06 ↗ these would be incentives um for

1:07:08 ↗ appliances Beyond heat pumps so thinking

1:07:10 ↗ of induction stoves or hot water heaters

1:07:14 ↗ Etc so we'll be starting to do some

1:07:16 ↗ Community engagement on

1:07:18 ↗ that um and then the last couple items

1:07:21 ↗ just to mention Council updates um

1:07:24 ↗ Connie touched on this during the the

1:07:25 ↗ public comment but uh last night and and

1:07:28 ↗ also sent some materials uh last night

1:07:30 ↗ there was a very long committee meeting

1:07:32 ↗ on transfer development rights as well

1:07:34 ↗ as some updates to Title 18 um so you

1:07:37 ↗ have uh those materials from Connie

1:07:40 ↗ today um as Jamie mentioned strategic

1:07:42 ↗ plan task force report will go to

1:07:44 ↗ Council next week that is um just a an

1:07:48 ↗ update and then later this month Council

1:07:50 ↗ will also hear about uh update on the

1:07:53 ↗ transit oriented development project is

1:07:55 ↗ the one um at the parking ride uh just

1:07:58 ↗ across the way that has been in the

1:08:00 ↗ works for 10 plus years um and then uh

1:08:04 ↗ we'll be presenting on the solid waste

1:08:05 ↗ administrative fee on the 22nd and then

1:08:08 ↗ Council will also be having some

1:08:09 ↗ discussions on budget priorities um so

1:08:12 ↗ those are all happening over the next

1:08:14 ↗ few

1:08:15 ↗ weeks that's all I had and did you have

1:08:19 ↗ a question

1:08:23 ↗ comment yeah I did thank you um so Stacy

1:08:28 ↗ was generous generous enough to

1:08:31 ↗ share um all of the great grants that

1:08:36 ↗ um have been uh received or um are

1:08:41 ↗ secured and then Al also ones that are

1:08:44 ↗ pending um and a lot of them come from

1:08:48 ↗ the climate commitment act I was just

1:08:50 ↗ thinking that is that something that's

1:08:53 ↗ visible to the whole environmental board

1:08:56 ↗ yeah that what we sent was all um

1:08:59 ↗ information that was contained in the

1:09:03 ↗ IAP uh midpoint report so it was um

1:09:07 ↗ within that report that longer table so

1:09:10 ↗ not just climate commitment act funding

1:09:11 ↗ but other grant funding okay I can send

1:09:16 ↗ so I can find that someplace then yes I

1:09:18 ↗ can send that out I'm happy just to send

1:09:22 ↗ the IAP midpoint report out back out to

1:09:24 ↗ the group to

1:09:26 ↗ yeah I think that would be good okay

1:09:28 ↗ that'd be cool because you might have

1:09:29 ↗ made some updates that we didn't see

1:09:32 ↗ yeah um yeah well it's a lot and I just

1:09:35 ↗ want to say way to go getting all those

1:09:38 ↗ grants and getting all the CCA grants

1:09:40 ↗ and I also thought that it would be

1:09:44 ↗ um it might help all of us see how

1:09:47 ↗ important it is to predict the climate

1:09:49 ↗ commitment

1:09:51 ↗ act I don't know if I'm allowed to say

1:09:53 ↗ vote no on 2117 but

1:09:56 ↗ that's how we can protect it because um

1:09:59 ↗ if we don't keep the climate commitment

1:10:01 ↗ act alive then a lot of our funding

1:10:04 ↗ sources are going to be dried up and um

1:10:07 ↗ it'll be harder to find grants

1:10:11 ↗ right is that right David and

1:10:14 ↗ Stacy

1:10:16 ↗ yeah a lot of funding comes through the

1:10:19 ↗ climate commitment act

1:10:22 ↗ yeah cool so one another thing I can say

1:10:26 ↗ Stacy we can connect on this but um we

1:10:28 ↗ could put the midpoint checkin report in

1:10:31 ↗ the external share drive for board

1:10:33 ↗ members so um it can hopefully be easy

1:10:36 ↗ to find and accessible when you

1:10:40 ↗ want that sounds great yep we'll share

1:10:43 ↗ out a link and the the documents just

1:10:45 ↗ because I know a few folks have had

1:10:46 ↗ trouble with access to that great thanks

1:10:48 ↗ David no it's a good suggestion cool

1:10:51 ↗ thank you thank you an

1:10:55 ↗ great meeting any announcements or uh

1:10:58 ↗ reports from the

1:10:59 ↗ board just one little comment I

1:11:02 ↗ listening to the radio the other day a

1:11:05 ↗ story on NPR this week about Belle new

1:11:08 ↗ Washington's um canopy preservation plan

1:11:11 ↗ I don't know if anybody heard it but you

1:11:13 ↗ could probably if you if you haven't you

1:11:15 ↗ could probably call it up

1:11:19 ↗ on might been presented by okay I'll try

1:11:24 ↗ and find that I can send it out to the

1:11:25 ↗ board I didn't hear it so

1:11:29 ↗ great all right with that uh thank you

1:11:32 ↗ everybody thanks meeting and we'll see

1:11:34 ↗ you next

1:11:36 ↗ month thanks everyone thank you

Approved minutes

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF