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

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (10)

Don McQuilliams

Alix Lee-Tigner

Nancy Davidson

Prajakta Ghatpande

Dixie Bair

Tom Anderson

Jamie Finch

Kiran Pan

Anne Newcomb

Jonathan Smith

Staff (2)

Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager

David Reedy, Sustainability Coordinator

Excused

Mina (Alexandra) Jun*

Keith Gonzalez

Audience commenters (1)

CONNIE MARSH

Recommendations & actions (1)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

The minutes were approved as presented by unanimous consent.