Environmental Board · Wednesday, January 14, 2026 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of December 16, 2025

packet pp.3–5

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 12-16-25 Environmental Board Minutes Page [1] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Environmental Board 6:00 PM Tibbetts Manor, 750 17th Ave. December 16, 2025 MINUTES NW, Issaquah

4. AGENDA ITEMS

2026 Environmental Board Workplan

15 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager & Board Liaison · packet pp.7–9

Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

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

ICAP Update: Buildings & Energy and Transportation & Land Use (D)

90 min · Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager · packet pp.11–36

Topics: Land UseTransportationClimate

Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

Buildings & Energy. The Buildings & Energy focus area currently includes several actions for reducing energy and fossil fuel use in new and existing buildings, including residential and commercial buildings. Staff propose revising this section to include the following actions (note: these are concepts – continuing to wordsmith):

2038 segments .txt ↗

0:00 ↗ All

0:07 ↗ right, welcome to the January 14th

0:10 ↗ environmental board meeting. My name is

0:11 ↗ Don Williams. I'll be your chair

0:13 ↗ tonight. Um, as usual, we have a hybrid

0:16 ↗ meeting tonight. So, some people online,

0:18 ↗ some people in the room. If you're in

0:19 ↗ the room, put your sign up and I'll call

0:21 ↗ in order. I see them come up. If you're

0:23 ↗ online, just put your hand up and I'll

0:25 ↗ keep an eye out for you guys there on

0:27 ↗ the screen.

0:30 ↗ JC post. Great. And Alex B, can you hear

0:34 ↗ the back of the room? Okay. Okay. Great.

0:37 ↗ Uh Tommy Anderson

0:39 ↗ >> here.

0:39 ↗ >> Nancy Davidson

0:41 ↗ >> here. Tommy has an excused absence.

0:44 ↗ Pradi

0:46 ↗ >> here.

0:48 ↗ >> Pan

0:48 ↗ >> here.

0:50 ↗ >> Mina June.

0:52 ↗ Don Mc Williams

0:53 ↗ >> here.

0:54 ↗ >> Alex Lee Ter

0:57 ↗ >> here.

0:58 ↗ Ann Newm,

1:01 ↗ Keith Gonzalez,

1:03 ↗ >> and John Smith here.

1:12 ↗ >> Um, there any comments to the previous

1:14 ↗ minute from the December 16th?

1:21 ↗ Good.

1:23 ↗ Any public comments?

1:25 ↗ >> Yes. and pleasures to make public

1:28 ↗ comment.

1:31 ↗ >> Yeah. Why don't you come up to closer to

1:33 ↗ the mic?

1:42 ↗ Did I try to sort of face them too or

1:45 ↗ fine?

1:45 ↗ >> Yeah, just go ahead and face the room.

1:47 ↗ That's fine. Okay.

1:49 ↗ >> Hi. I think I can see everybody. Good

1:51 ↗ evening.

1:53 ↗ Um I'm an Fletcher. I'm a resident and a

1:56 ↗ member of People for Planet Action. It's

1:59 ↗ good to see you all again.

2:02 ↗ Um, first of all, I'd like to thank the

2:04 ↗ sustainability department for proposing

2:07 ↗ improved and new actions to the building

2:11 ↗ energy and transportation land use

2:13 ↗ sections of the IAP update. uh many of

2:17 ↗ them relate to uh people for climate

2:19 ↗ actions critical uh actions and uh these

2:23 ↗ critical actions will really strengthen

2:25 ↗ our plan and achieve better results

2:28 ↗ toward our greenhouse gas emission

2:30 ↗ reduction targets. Um some examples of

2:33 ↗ these uh that I saw in the memo were um

2:38 ↗ to develop and expand energy efficient

2:40 ↗ outreach and incentive programs. Um I'm

2:43 ↗ thinking that energy smarty site is an

2:46 ↗ example of that. And um with this one I

2:49 ↗ would like uh you uh to consider in the

2:53 ↗ implementation section of the updated

2:56 ↗ plan a timeline for assisting most

3:00 ↗ residences to make this energy

3:02 ↗ transition over the next 25 years.

3:05 ↗ That's about how long it'll probably

3:06 ↗ take if we get on it. and it's needed to

3:10 ↗ meet our 2015 target.

3:13 ↗ Um second uh another item uh is

3:16 ↗ modifying benchmarking program to cover

3:20 ↗ buildings under 20,000 square ft. Uh

3:23 ↗ this one fills a gap in our middlesized

3:26 ↗ commercial buildings to make sure we're

3:28 ↗ including everyone or giving all an

3:30 ↗ opportunity.

3:32 ↗ Um, next uh action uh is remove building

3:36 ↗ code updates because the state energy

3:39 ↗ code has made significant improvements.

3:42 ↗ Uh, and they noted that it's good that

3:44 ↗ advocacy at the state level is still in

3:47 ↗ our actions because I just learned of a

3:50 ↗ proposed state house bill 2147

3:54 ↗ which would dismantle the state building

3:56 ↗ codes for the next 10 years. Uh these

3:59 ↗ are codes that are currently have been

4:00 ↗ working since 2007

4:03 ↗ very well to gradually increase

4:05 ↗ standards uh for being green building

4:07 ↗ and the proposed bill would even prevent

4:09 ↗ cities from requiring the gradual

4:12 ↗ increase. So um this bill should be

4:15 ↗ monitored uh and its first committee

4:18 ↗ hearing I don't think it has been

4:19 ↗ determined yet.

4:22 ↗ Another item action item that I noticed

4:24 ↗ was assess potential for a home energy

4:27 ↗ score or ordinance. This is new action

4:31 ↗ and a priority uh for people for climate

4:34 ↗ action. Um it has been implemented in

4:37 ↗ other cities and states and our state

4:39 ↗ has not passed legislation related to

4:42 ↗ this uh for three years now that it's

4:46 ↗ been introduced at the state level and

4:48 ↗ uh in three years in a row and uh

4:51 ↗ despite improvements being made to the

4:53 ↗ bill to make it more affordable. So it

4:55 ↗ seems like it may be time for um uh

4:58 ↗ Isiqua to explore and act on this on our

5:01 ↗ own. Uh and other cities have already

5:03 ↗ done it.

5:04 ↗ Uh, another item is accelerate market

5:06 ↗ transformations of residential

5:08 ↗ properties away from natural gas. Um,

5:11 ↗ it's good that this is consistent with

5:13 ↗ other cities and would allow for our the

5:16 ↗ expanded programming that we need.

5:20 ↗ One more house house uh building one um

5:23 ↗ incentivize electrification for

5:25 ↗ commercial properties. That's also

5:26 ↗ another important step. Those are all

5:28 ↗ really great I I think um the

5:31 ↗ strengthening kinds of things in the

5:34 ↗ transportation and land use department.

5:36 ↗ There are also a lot of great actions.

5:38 ↗ Um I'm just going to highlight a few

5:41 ↗ that seem high highly critical to people

5:43 ↗ for climate action. One is city code

5:46 ↗ upgrades uh to improve climate and

5:48 ↗ environmental protection across multiple

5:51 ↗ pathways uh and expand sustainable

5:54 ↗ design standards because things are uh

5:58 ↗ technologically changing and there are

6:00 ↗ more um more different things that you

6:03 ↗ can do to be sustainable. We want to

6:04 ↗ make sure that our codes reflect that.

6:08 ↗ Uh the next thing is expand multifamily

6:11 ↗ charging requirements and I appreciated

6:14 ↗ the part that says with technical

6:16 ↗ assistance always needed with multif

6:18 ↗ family to make it work. The next one is

6:22 ↗ advocate and partner regionally to

6:24 ↗ improve transit network. Uh this of

6:27 ↗ course is a really basic one. Uh but

6:30 ↗ it's great to add the demand shuttles

6:32 ↗ and the exploration of free ridership on

6:35 ↗ some routes. I think that's a a a good

6:38 ↗ addition for us. And then another one is

6:42 ↗ remove required transportation

6:44 ↗ management action plans. There was no

6:47 ↗ explanation of why there was the removal

6:49 ↗ on this and so I'm um hoping that at

6:52 ↗ this meeting I'll I'll find out more

6:54 ↗ about that.

6:56 ↗ Uh and then I just also wanted to thank

6:59 ↗ uh you for the information um and the

7:03 ↗ inclusion of ebikes uh and e-

7:06 ↗ motorcycles in I learned a lot from

7:09 ↗ those and I want to thank you for that

7:11 ↗ aspect um getting into that because it's

7:13 ↗ very timely. So I look forward to the

7:16 ↗ environmental board discussion and I

7:18 ↗ hope to learn a lot. Thank you.

7:29 ↗ first agenda tonight is going to walk us

7:32 ↗ through.

7:39 ↗ >> Thanks. Um so this is I believe the

7:42 ↗ third time we've had a look at our work

7:44 ↗ plan. Um, back in December, we looked

7:49 ↗ through the draft work plan and

7:50 ↗ anticipating the needs and the topics

7:53 ↗ that would come before the board in

7:54 ↗ 2026.

7:56 ↗ There were several suggestions from the

7:58 ↗ board on additional topics that they

8:00 ↗ would like discuss this next year. So,

8:03 ↗ we have worked to incorporate them into

8:05 ↗ the draft. And I'll I'll flag some of

8:07 ↗ these items in just a moment. Um,

8:09 ↗ tonight we are looking for any

8:12 ↗ additional topics you all want to make

8:14 ↗ sure are discussed this year or any of

8:16 ↗ these topics that you don't feel like

8:18 ↗ are necessary to come before the board.

8:21 ↗ Um, we'll be asking for approval of the

8:23 ↗ work plan tonight and then I'll be going

8:25 ↗ to the mayor and senior leadership for

8:29 ↗ review and approval.

8:32 ↗ So, I'll walk through a couple of items

8:35 ↗ um or just summarize kind of what's

8:37 ↗ what's on the work plan for this year

8:39 ↗ and there's one or two that we'll have

8:41 ↗ just a bit of additional explanation

8:43 ↗ around. Um so, the climate action plan

8:47 ↗ update is obviously a big lift for staff

8:49 ↗ and the board this year. We anticipate

8:52 ↗ several meetings between

8:55 ↗ tonight and April where we'll really

8:57 ↗ focus in on those sections of the plan

8:59 ↗ and work towards approval and a

9:01 ↗ recommendation towards council.

9:03 ↗ Potentially we may have a couple of

9:05 ↗ special meetings uh just to make sure we

9:07 ↗ get through all the content and have all

9:08 ↗ the input from the

9:11 ↗ um we have a few additional items that

9:15 ↗ will be coming to the board um this

9:18 ↗ spring. the storm water plan. Um and

9:20 ↗ then actually one that was just added

9:22 ↗ yesterday uh that's not in here is the

9:25 ↗ transportation improvement um program.

9:28 ↗ So that is another one scheduled for

9:30 ↗ March. Um

9:34 ↗ one a couple items that were requested

9:36 ↗ by the board was around um emergency

9:39 ↗ response and resilient efforts. Um Dave

9:42 ↗ and I have talked with our emergency

9:44 ↗ manager about bringing that into our

9:46 ↗ February meeting where we'll also be

9:48 ↗ talking about the community resilience

9:50 ↗ and well-being section of the climate

9:52 ↗ action plan. Um so we'll work with Jared

9:55 ↗ to integrate that conversation into the

9:59 ↗ um discussion around the plan update.

10:01 ↗ Um there was interest in a followup on

10:04 ↗ the wildlife and waste concerns. Um Sam

10:07 ↗ provided a memo

10:09 ↗ back in December that summarized the

10:11 ↗ data and next steps. Um we'll have her

10:14 ↗ come and have a conversation with the

10:16 ↗ board and determine if there's any

10:18 ↗ action that the board requests.

10:22 ↗ Um and then moving in later in the

10:24 ↗ spring, um we'll be discussing updates

10:27 ↗ around the urban forest management plan.

10:29 ↗ Um the board just uh requested a little

10:32 ↗ bit of additional conversation around

10:34 ↗ how the city

10:36 ↗ manages forests for wildlife and

10:39 ↗ integrate that into that conversation.

10:42 ↗ Um and then there's been requests to

10:44 ↗ have a conversation around streams and

10:46 ↗ ditches. Nancy, do you want to provide a

10:48 ↗ little more context on this topic?

10:52 ↗ >> Sure. Um, so during the conversation,

10:55 ↗ we've gotten a few emails from Connie

10:57 ↗ Marsh related to streams and ditches and

11:00 ↗ then I've had conversations with Jeff,

11:03 ↗ the head of the parks department. Much

11:05 ↗ of it, Conniey's concerns related to the

11:09 ↗ water body that once parallel to the um

11:12 ↗ reun trail near the new dot park that's

11:16 ↗ being constructed by communities kind of

11:19 ↗ where the temporary under construction

11:21 ↗ and the issue is is that a stream or is

11:23 ↗ that a ditch and how is it handled in

11:25 ↗ the code? Um,

11:28 ↗ apparently there's some confusion and

11:31 ↗ the title 18 code isn't very clear on

11:33 ↗ how you count ditches. Not very clear if

11:36 ↗ that's if you have to go back to an 18

11:39 ↗ something map to kind of define it. Kind

11:42 ↗ of wonder who built that code back to

11:45 ↗ the 1800s to figure out if a water body

11:47 ↗ is a stream or a ditch. So, I think

11:49 ↗ there's some room here for conversation

11:52 ↗ and but I did want to add something. So,

11:54 ↗ I'm hoping that we can move that up. I

11:56 ↗ cannot be here in May.

11:57 ↗ >> Yeah.

11:58 ↗ >> But I'd also request I know that um

12:00 ↗ community planning is taking to the

12:03 ↗ council um topics

12:06 ↗ that are going to be considered in title

12:07 ↗ 18. I don't know when they're but I know

12:10 ↗ that committee has that happen and I

12:12 ↗ would ask that this be included in it. I

12:14 ↗ mean it's probably just a definition and

12:16 ↗ in my conversation with uh Jeff Wling

12:20 ↗ who's the

12:22 ↗ he the director of hearts and he said

12:26 ↗ yes he totally supported the idea of

12:29 ↗ somehow coming up with the definition

12:31 ↗ that works the issue came up. So we're

12:34 ↗ going to get it right the first time.

12:35 ↗ back to see if we can't get a better

12:38 ↗ definition of what I did show them and

12:39 ↗ what a stream is and not have to look at

12:41 ↗ 1890 maps to figure that out.

12:45 ↗ I don't have all the facts, but someone

12:47 ↗ will bring it forward to us in the

12:48 ↗ future. That's why it's hopefully

12:50 ↗ region.

12:53 ↗ >> Do you have a place to bring that

12:55 ↗ forward?

12:56 ↗ >> Um, yeah, I'll follow up.

12:59 ↗ I'll touch base with Jeff and Minnie. um

13:06 ↗ possibly April.

13:08 ↗ >> We also need to include something about

13:10 ↗ drainage

13:13 ↗ pods,

13:15 ↗ storm water ponds,

13:17 ↗ >> a lot of those are integrated

13:20 ↗ and those are

13:22 ↗ those are typically separated from

13:25 ↗ streams. They're not

13:28 ↗ in line with systems. You should address

13:30 ↗ eventually good style ponds.

13:36 ↗ There's a lot of conversation going on

13:37 ↗ about what happens when they turn into

13:40 ↗ wetland.

13:46 ↗ Suggest we have that session later

13:51 ↗ alone is fairly

13:55 ↗ ideal. There's how ecology defines um

13:59 ↗ online

14:03 ↗ how

14:06 ↗ to

14:12 ↗ >> add that.

14:18 ↗ >> Would you like to bring bonds as a

14:19 ↗ topic?

14:22 ↗ >> Well, I'm just Is it something we should

14:24 ↗ consider? It's another waterway.

14:29 ↗ connect

14:31 ↗ to streams.

14:36 ↗ >> There's a lot that are actually

14:37 ↗ developed.

14:41 ↗ >> You have a storm water plan coming in

14:43 ↗ March. Should we ask is it

14:47 ↗ >> um Evan and Mike? Yeah. From public

14:49 ↗ works. I could ask them to talk about

14:52 ↗ how the city manages those. Yes.

14:56 ↗ How many there are, where they are, how

14:58 ↗ the use

15:07 ↗ >> um so a few adjustments we'll be making.

15:09 ↗ One is um adjusting the timing of the

15:11 ↗ streamings of streams and ditches and

15:14 ↗ I'll see when the t 18 docket

15:17 ↗ um if how it'll line it up with that.

15:19 ↗ Um, and then we will also be working

15:22 ↗ with Sam over the next year as she

15:25 ↗ starts to develop a compostable

15:27 ↗ serviceware policy. This is part of a

15:30 ↗ grant that we're doing jointly withish.

15:34 ↗ Um, we'll have our regular kind of

15:36 ↗ administrative procedures with board

15:38 ↗ elections. Um, bringing you budget

15:41 ↗ topics. One thing we're looking at for

15:44 ↗ the board elections that some of the

15:45 ↗ other boards and commissions have done

15:49 ↗ is adjust the timing of electing the

15:52 ↗ chair and vice chair so that if we have

15:54 ↗ new members starting in May, they are

15:56 ↗ not having to elect a chair and vice

15:58 ↗ chair at their very first meeting before

16:00 ↗ they get to know everyone. Um so looking

16:02 ↗ at whether that's June or some um boards

16:05 ↗ they've even pushed out to the fall. So,

16:08 ↗ um, that may require a change to our,

16:10 ↗ uh, rule regulations. So, a thing we're

16:13 ↗ evaluating.

16:15 ↗ >> Kind of on a different topic. So, this

16:17 ↗ is on the budget. You start talking

16:19 ↗ about the budget. In the past, the

16:21 ↗ criteria for the CI was brought to the

16:24 ↗ environmental court. And you talked

16:26 ↗ budget over is that criteria coming back

16:29 ↗ so that we could fire and climate

16:32 ↗ related emphasis into that or is that an

16:35 ↗ option like the CIP update and those

16:38 ↗ criteria would be done in 27. So these

16:41 ↗ will be the acts that David and I are

16:43 ↗ going to be bringing forward. So, we'll

16:46 ↗ provide you all a summary of what we're

16:48 ↗ anticipating moving forward, how we're

16:50 ↗ working with other departments on their

16:52 ↗ budget ask um for any initial input.

16:56 ↗ >> So, is this the big year for a budget or

16:58 ↗ is it next year?

16:59 ↗ >> This is the big year. Um yes. So, we'll

17:02 ↗ be developing the 2728 budget this year.

17:05 ↗ >> So, why is the CIP not be being included

17:08 ↗ as part of that? This is big year. A lot

17:10 ↗ of departments will be making requests

17:12 ↗ for that.

17:13 ↗ >> It is considered. It is part of that but

17:16 ↗ the criteria is worked on in the off

17:19 ↗ year with the budget so they rotate.

17:26 ↗ >> Um and then moving in later to summer

17:29 ↗ and fall um we'll be

17:33 ↗ looking at the sustainable building

17:35 ↗ requirements in title 18. Um, this is

17:38 ↗ something we'll talk about tonight too

17:39 ↗ with the actions, but currently we have

17:41 ↗ a lead certification or green building

17:44 ↗ requirement in the city and we want to

17:46 ↗ allow other pathways for sustainable

17:48 ↗ meeting sustainable building

17:50 ↗ requirements. So, that's something we'll

17:51 ↗ be seeking input

17:53 ↗ um from the board on.

17:56 ↗ Um there was a lot of interest in

17:58 ↗ wildlife. So we added another topic

18:01 ↗ around kind of everything the city does

18:03 ↗ around planning programs and policies

18:05 ↗ associated with wildlife. Um the other

18:07 ↗ topic was around how we manage our

18:10 ↗ forests for wildlife. This was there was

18:12 ↗ interest in looking a little more

18:14 ↗ broadly.

18:16 ↗ Um and then again moving into some more

18:18 ↗ administrative items towards the end of

18:19 ↗ the year with our um reporting

18:23 ↗ >> requirement. Yes. a natural systems

18:25 ↗ checklist. Previously, we had asked to

18:28 ↗ see examples of how that's being

18:30 ↗ implemented.

18:30 ↗ >> Yeah.

18:33 ↗ >> Yes. Yeah.

18:37 ↗ >> Um, great. And then I think the other

18:39 ↗ thing we're hoping to get in um at least

18:42 ↗ one field trip. Um, we're also having

18:44 ↗ conversations about possibly doing a

18:46 ↗ tour up at Timber Ridge with their

18:48 ↗ emergency manager to look at their clean

18:50 ↗ buildings work on how they're becoming

18:52 ↗ more energy efficient um as well as

18:55 ↗ their emergency management procedures.

18:57 ↗ So, we'll try and get a couple field

18:59 ↗ trips scheduled throughout the year.

19:03 ↗ Um, any other requests? Um, we'll be get

19:09 ↗ storm water ponds we'll add in there.

19:11 ↗ Um, we'll add in the the transportation

19:14 ↗ plan and then adjusting the timing of

19:17 ↗ the streams and ditches. Is there

19:19 ↗ anything else folks want to make sure

19:21 ↗ appears on this initial work plan?

19:24 ↗ Recognizing it does update throughout

19:26 ↗ the year as new topics come or more

19:30 ↗ urgent topics.

19:38 ↗ >> We're just looking for kind of a thumbs

19:40 ↗ up. we can move forward. Okay, Alex

19:44 ↗ Praj, any questions, concerns, revisions

19:47 ↗ from either of you?

19:50 ↗ >> Um,

19:53 ↗ >> I had one question, Stacy, if there's an

19:55 ↗ opportunity for us to invite the new

19:57 ↗ mayor or any cedar um city leadership to

20:01 ↗ come and meet us for one of our meetings

20:03 ↗ that are upcoming.

20:06 ↗ >> Yes. Um, I will ask about that.

20:11 ↗ I know in the past they've kind of

20:13 ↗ assigned a council member to come to

20:15 ↗ boards and commissions. I think it fell

20:17 ↗ through with our assigned council member

20:19 ↗ a couple of times. So, I'll see if we

20:22 ↗ can um have someone come.

20:31 ↗ >> Great. Thank you.

20:49 ↗ >> Keep going. Okay.

21:03 ↗ All right. Um, so very similar to last

21:08 ↗ time, um, or December meeting, what

21:11 ↗ we're planning to do tonight is pull out

21:13 ↗ a couple sections of the climate action

21:16 ↗ plan and review the revisions that we're

21:20 ↗ proposing to the actions. Tonight we're

21:22 ↗ going to look at uh buildings and energy

21:25 ↗ and then transportation and land use. Um

21:29 ↗ we'll walk through all the proposed

21:32 ↗ changes that we have for the actions for

21:35 ↗ the buildings and energy first and then

21:38 ↗ take input discussion and then we'll

21:40 ↗ move into transportation.

21:44 ↗ Um

21:46 ↗ let's see. So tonight, really just

21:48 ↗ looking for that feedback on kind of the

21:51 ↗ action concepts. Uh we still have a lot

21:53 ↗ of words smithing to do, but at least

21:55 ↗ want to make sure that we're hitting the

21:57 ↗ right set of actions and that you feel

22:00 ↗ like we're encompassing highest

22:02 ↗ priorities for moving forward in the

22:03 ↗ climate action plan.

22:08 ↗ Um, what I will do really quickly before

22:12 ↗ we move into buildings and energy is

22:14 ↗ have David just talk about the metrics

22:17 ↗ committee because there was a question

22:18 ↗ that came up from Tom today about

22:20 ↗ metrics. So, if you want to just give a

22:22 ↗ quick overview of that group and what

22:24 ↗ they're going to be doing, that'd be

22:25 ↗ great.

22:26 ↗ >> So, um, the third committee that we have

22:28 ↗ for the climate action plan, there was

22:30 ↗ the previous committee on natural

22:31 ↗ systems and one on land use. Third

22:34 ↗ committee is going to be the veterans

22:36 ↗ committee. Um Raj will be a participant

22:40 ↗ in that uh committee. Um there is still

22:43 ↗ space if any other insurance board

22:45 ↗ member would like to join that. Um but

22:48 ↗ we are hoping that um we'll kick that

22:51 ↗ off soon and have about uh two meetings

22:54 ↗ similar to the the other um committees,

22:57 ↗ one in February and one in March. um

23:00 ↗ where we are going to be digging into

23:03 ↗ this question of metrics. Um how we uh

23:08 ↗ assign metrics to actions, how how we

23:10 ↗ handle metrics uh associated with

23:13 ↗ actions, especially those that are uh

23:16 ↗ difficult to um quantitatively uh

23:20 ↗ measure or even qualitatively measure.

23:23 ↗ um think a little bit critically around

23:26 ↗ um some of the targets in the climate

23:29 ↗ action plan. For the most part, the uh

23:32 ↗ metrics committee is going to be focused

23:35 ↗ mostly on process, how we're dealing

23:37 ↗ with metrics in the plan. And then we'll

23:39 ↗ be able to take that uh feedback and

23:42 ↗ incorporate it into the plan itself as

23:44 ↗ we uh fine-tune how the metrics um or

23:48 ↗ how we're measuring uh the impact and

23:50 ↗ implementation of the climate action

23:52 ↗ plan. So uh hope that we can share out

23:57 ↗ the results committee meetings uh in

24:01 ↗ April and that some of this will be uh

24:04 ↗ incorporated as we as we go with action.

24:09 ↗ >> So tonight if as we're going through the

24:11 ↗ actions if you're getting really excited

24:13 ↗ about how we're going to measure all of

24:15 ↗ them and report out on them contact

24:17 ↗ David and you can join the metrics. I

24:20 ↗ think Jamie is also going to be on it.

24:22 ↗ Be great to have Jamie back in

24:26 ↗ the lead.

24:27 ↗ >> That is our next meeting.

24:28 ↗ >> Okay. So, we're going to do there's

24:30 ↗ there's not a special meeting around

24:31 ↗ that.

24:34 ↗ >> We have been talking about the metric

24:36 ↗ for

24:38 ↗ this current

24:40 ↗ one.

24:42 ↗ >> That'll be it. Yeah.

24:43 ↗ >> So, we have ideas.

24:46 ↗ >> Great. Um, so we'll move into buildings

24:48 ↗ and energy actions. This is the first

24:50 ↗ time you all are seeing these updated to

24:53 ↗ the actions. They haven't been through a

24:55 ↗ committee process. These were ones that

24:57 ↗ David and I felt like we could um

25:01 ↗ provide some recommended revisions to,

25:03 ↗ as you heard from our public comment,

25:06 ↗ we've um really tried to integrate some

25:08 ↗ of the priority actions we've heard from

25:10 ↗ people for climate action. Um so this

25:13 ↗ section of the plan is really focused on

25:15 ↗ reducing energy and fossil use in new

25:17 ↗ and existing buildings. Um everything

25:20 ↗ from residential to commercial.

25:24 ↗ Um so like the December meeting, we'll

25:26 ↗ walk through these. I'll walk through

25:28 ↗ all the proposed revisions first just so

25:31 ↗ you have a sense of um the full set and

25:34 ↗ then we will take comments um questions.

25:41 ↗ Um so the first one is developing energy

25:44 ↗ efficiency outreach and incentive

25:46 ↗ programs. That language we are proposing

25:49 ↗ to retain. Um, we'll probably make a few

25:52 ↗ minor modifications to the description

25:55 ↗ language just so it can be a little more

25:58 ↗ um encompassing and uh would include

26:01 ↗ kind of the types of programming that we

26:02 ↗ may do in the future.

26:05 ↗ Assess potential for energy benchmarking

26:08 ↗ program. The current language in the

26:10 ↗ plan is to establish an energy

26:13 ↗ benchmarking program. Um, we've shared

26:17 ↗ with you all about our clean buildings

26:18 ↗ incentive program. There's existing

26:21 ↗ state law that requires energy

26:23 ↗ benchmarking for buildings 20,000 square

26:26 ↗ feet and above. Um we are interested in

26:30 ↗ potentially looking at filling that gap.

26:34 ↗ Um buildings 5,000 to 20,000 square feet

26:37 ↗ where we would explore kind of the

26:40 ↗ feasibility of having a local smart that

26:44 ↗ would require them to report their

26:45 ↗ energy use. Um, this is something a few

26:48 ↗ other east side cities are interested in

26:51 ↗ in doing. Um, it's a pretty big uh

26:55 ↗ capacity hit to run a benchmarking

26:57 ↗ program. So, we want to be really

26:59 ↗ thoughtful and make sure it's something

27:00 ↗ that we'd be able to handle in this, but

27:03 ↗ it help fill that gap um for buildings

27:05 ↗ that aren't currently covered by state

27:07 ↗ real quick.

27:10 ↗ Um, this was spoken to at public

27:12 ↗ comment, but the next one is strengthen

27:14 ↗ energy efficiency building codes. We're

27:16 ↗ actually recommending removing that. Um

27:19 ↗ there's really strong state energy codes

27:22 ↗ in place. Um and we have several other

27:26 ↗ actions throughout the plan that speak

27:27 ↗ to continued advocacy at the um state

27:31 ↗ level. Um I was not aware of the house

27:35 ↗ bill that was mentioned earlier.

27:36 ↗ Obviously, that's something we would

27:38 ↗ track and if that went into place, we

27:41 ↗ consider bringing moving this action

27:45 ↗ that's currently in 2021 into our

27:48 ↗ updated plan.

27:51 ↗ Um, we have a new action where we're

27:53 ↗ proposing to assess the potential for a

27:55 ↗ home energy score ordinance. Um, this is

27:59 ↗ spoken to in the public comment. It is a

28:01 ↗ priority for people for climate action.

28:04 ↗ Um this is essentially when a home is

28:07 ↗ being sold, they report out um their

28:11 ↗ energy score. Um the home is kind of

28:13 ↗ rated for its energy efficiency.

28:16 ↗ Um it is being used in Oregon. It's run

28:20 ↗ at the state level. Uh I think we want

28:22 ↗ to look at

28:26 ↗ implications here and how that could

28:28 ↗ work on a more localized scale or at a

28:30 ↗ regional scale. Um, I think we have some

28:33 ↗ questions about equity and making sure

28:36 ↗ it's a fair program. There's a program

28:38 ↗ down in Berkeley that um has a home

28:42 ↗ energy score requirement and then

28:43 ↗ there's actually some incentive dollars

28:45 ↗ available to help people improve their

28:47 ↗ energy score. Um, so there's just a lot

28:50 ↗ of questions we have and and examine it

28:53 ↗ further before we move it forward.

28:57 ↗ Um, conduct electrification outreach. We

28:59 ↗ want to retain that action.

29:03 ↗ Um

29:05 ↗ the next action was implementing the

29:07 ↗ regional heat pump campaign. We wanted

29:09 ↗ to expand that language um to

29:12 ↗ accelerating market transport

29:14 ↗ transformations of residential

29:15 ↗ properties away from natural gas. Um, we

29:18 ↗ thought this would be more inclusive of

29:20 ↗ where our campaigns and programming are

29:23 ↗ going where we will continue to um

29:28 ↗ implement rebates and incentives for

29:30 ↗ heat pumps, but we're also looking at

29:32 ↗ hot water heaters and improved

29:34 ↗ weatherization,

29:36 ↗ um, battery storage, just a whole wide

29:39 ↗ array of solutions for helping people

29:44 ↗ transition away from natural gas. So, we

29:46 ↗ just wanted to make sure it was a bit

29:48 ↗ more expanded language. Um, this

29:50 ↗ language would also mirror language um

29:53 ↗ used in the Belleview and Redmond plan

29:55 ↗ updates.

30:01 ↗ And then the next one, incentivizing

30:02 ↗ electrification.

30:04 ↗ This we wanted to just differentiate by

30:07 ↗ changing the language to incentivize

30:09 ↗ electrification for commercial

30:11 ↗ properties so that we have specific

30:14 ↗ actions more focused on residential um

30:16 ↗ and those focused on and just really

30:19 ↗ emphasize that importance of working

30:21 ↗ with commercial

30:24 ↗ um advocating for increased electricity

30:26 ↗ grid reliability. We are recommending

30:29 ↗ retaining that.

30:32 ↗ Um enacting an all electric building

30:35 ↗ code. Um that is the current language in

30:38 ↗ the plan. We are recommending changing

30:41 ↗ that to assessing potential policies and

30:43 ↗ partnerships to advance electrification.

30:47 ↗ Um all electric codes have been

30:50 ↗ challenged across the country in court.

30:53 ↗ Um, we don't know if there's a pathway

30:56 ↗ for that here. We're not opposed to it.

31:00 ↗ But I think with this revised language,

31:03 ↗ it would allow us or it would open up

31:05 ↗ the door for other avenues to look at

31:09 ↗ regional initiative, state initiatives,

31:11 ↗ or maybe it does end up being more of a

31:13 ↗ local initiative. Uh but just to allow

31:16 ↗ more flexibility versus focusing our

31:19 ↗ efforts on a code that just may not be

31:22 ↗ feasible um or may be um illegal as

31:26 ↗ challenged in court.

31:29 ↗ Um evaluating community solar projects.

31:32 ↗ We're recommending revising that to

31:35 ↗ allow for flexibility that would be um

31:39 ↗ really looking at community benefiting

31:40 ↗ renewable energy projects. So expanding

31:43 ↗ beyond solar um and really just opening

31:47 ↗ up the door so we can do programs and

31:49 ↗ incentives and rebates for more than

31:51 ↗ just um solar.

31:54 ↗ And next one promoting renewable energy

31:58 ↗ financing incentives. We're just

32:00 ↗ recommending revising that to include

32:03 ↗ storage. Um I think we're seeing uh

32:06 ↗ really that promotion and programming

32:08 ↗ around um battery storage is essential

32:11 ↗ both for supporting um grid resilience

32:15 ↗ um as well as kind of local resilience

32:17 ↗ during power outages.

32:20 ↗ Um and I'll just mention the last one

32:23 ↗ real quick is encourage enrollment in

32:25 ↗ PSC's green power program. We just

32:28 ↗ wanted that's very specific. We wanted

32:30 ↗ to revise that just for um for language

32:35 ↗ similar to encouraging enrollment in

32:37 ↗ offsite renewable energy programs that

32:40 ↗ would just be a little bit more

32:41 ↗ expansive than beyond PSC's green power

32:43 ↗ program.

32:46 ↗ That is it. Sorry, David. Are there

32:50 ↗ other comments or things or just jump in

32:53 ↗ as there's questions? Um, so yeah, we

32:57 ↗ wanted to really just open up questions

32:59 ↗ on any of the proposed revisions. What

33:02 ↗ did we miss? The ones in here you really

33:04 ↗ like, ones you want us to change. Um,

33:06 ↗ really just want feedback on those that

33:08 ↗ the board wishes to comment on tonight.

33:12 ↗ >> Thank you. Have you first

33:23 ↗ muted the

33:23 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah, I

33:25 ↗ couldn't hear clearly. Yeah. So, Stacy,

33:28 ↗ um, you know, I have a question

33:30 ↗ associated with this regarding the

33:33 ↗ electricity grid reliability and

33:36 ↗ stability. I know we had asked the mayor

33:38 ↗ at one time last year, you know, um if

33:42 ↗ there were formal assessments and you

33:45 ↗ know um real evaluations if the

33:48 ↗ electricity grid or PAC PAC seems to be

33:52 ↗ the primary provider and if their grid

33:54 ↗ is stable or reliable enough to

33:58 ↗ continuously provide the increasing

34:01 ↗ electric demand. Right? Um and I don't

34:05 ↗ know if this necessarily falls under the

34:09 ↗ you know the ICAP or the environmental

34:11 ↗ board perview but my worry is you know

34:14 ↗ with all these um electric vehicles and

34:18 ↗ all other uh green energy programs you

34:21 ↗ know actually taking an effect suddenly

34:24 ↗ we might find ourselves in a position

34:27 ↗ where the electric grid is completely

34:30 ↗ unstable or you know I may be

34:32 ↗ exaggerating but my point is this needs

34:34 ↗ to be done and this needs to be a city

34:36 ↗ priority. Um, and I'm wondering if

34:39 ↗ anything is being done uh in that

34:42 ↗ respect and if there is any way we can

34:45 ↗ push for that.

34:47 ↗ >> Yeah, great question. Um, not sure I

34:49 ↗ have a

34:51 ↗ real clear response for you, but just a

34:54 ↗ couple things that are happening. I

34:55 ↗ mean, Bellevio and Redmond are actually

34:57 ↗ funding their own studies to look at can

35:01 ↗ the grid kind of handle electrification

35:04 ↗ over the next 10 or so years. Um, and so

35:08 ↗ we're looking forward to seeing their

35:11 ↗ results and just seeing any kind of

35:13 ↗ recommendations that come out of that

35:14 ↗ study. Um, PSSE is um putting in more

35:18 ↗ capacity in Isiqua. Um and then the

35:22 ↗ other item that we'll be really

35:24 ↗ promoting is a lot of the energy

35:27 ↗ conservation, the demand response um

35:31 ↗ type programs that PSC is running to

35:33 ↗ really cut back on energy use even if

35:36 ↗ there's increased electrification,

35:38 ↗ cutting back on how much um is consumed

35:41 ↗ where possible or making sure that um

35:44 ↗ the timing of that consumption is when

35:46 ↗ there's less of a hit on the grid. Um so

35:49 ↗ we'll um we can probably share any kind

35:54 ↗ of studies that come out from our

35:55 ↗ neighboring partners and um once we have

35:59 ↗ a chance to connect further with the new

36:00 ↗ mayor just kind of see what's on his

36:02 ↗ radar for working with PSSE too and

36:04 ↗ share that back the group

36:07 ↗ >> right I think I think that would be a

36:09 ↗ great idea and you know means in some

36:11 ↗ way I feel like you know we and the city

36:13 ↗ needs to keep tabs on this you know

36:16 ↗ because um Um I I I think that is going

36:20 ↗ to be genuinely a hurdle all across the

36:22 ↗ country not just for our city. Um and

36:26 ↗ then I had one more question and I know

36:28 ↗ it's not associated with this particular

36:31 ↗ slide. Um, and I kind of forgot. I know

36:33 ↗ we had looked at the emergency

36:35 ↗ preparedness

36:37 ↗ plan at some point and I know it was a

36:39 ↗ part of IAP or is it a separate plan? We

36:43 ↗ had looked at Stacy because I I had a

36:45 ↗ question associated with that.

36:48 ↗ >> The emergency Yes, that there is a

36:50 ↗ separate plan. Um Jared, our emergency

36:53 ↗ manager, will join us in February and

36:56 ↗ talk a bit about the emergency

36:57 ↗ management program and how they work on

37:00 ↗ resilience. Um so sorry I just had one

37:06 ↗ suggestion on that Stacy because I know

37:09 ↗ I didn't say it earlier because for the

37:11 ↗ environmental board work plan right I

37:14 ↗ personally think every year we are

37:15 ↗ seeing the weather related emergencies

37:18 ↗ you know increasing this year it was

37:20 ↗ flooding last year it was bomb cyclone

37:22 ↗ you name it and something or the other

37:24 ↗ is there and which is not necessarily

37:26 ↗ expected by the city right it's coming

37:28 ↗ in different forms we don't expect

37:30 ↗ necessarily

37:31 ↗ at that time or that season. Um, and so

37:35 ↗ the emergency preparedness plan for the

37:38 ↗ city needs to be a priority and I think

37:41 ↗ maybe we should add that to the

37:43 ↗ environmental board work plan for this

37:46 ↗ year.

37:49 ↗ >> Yeah, that's a good question. I don't it

37:51 ↗ it is definitely a priority for the

37:54 ↗ city. there is no board or commission

37:58 ↗ that really advises on that plan. Um I

38:01 ↗ can mention that as a that's a interest

38:05 ↗ and definitely where there's the

38:06 ↗ intersection with the resilience piece

38:07 ↗ and the climate work. Um David and I try

38:10 ↗ to bring those topics forward to you

38:12 ↗ all. Um but I can I can plague that and

38:16 ↗ just get some input from our leadership

38:19 ↗ on thoughts. But I think we'll continue

38:20 ↗ to bring those topics. I know Jared's um

38:23 ↗ very interested in in sharing the work

38:26 ↗ he does and emergency management is one

38:28 ↗ of our think is on

38:32 ↗ looking at our uh our 2026 priorities

38:35 ↗ from the mayor but emergency management

38:37 ↗ is one of those very top priorities. So

38:40 ↗ you will see it come out quite a bit at

38:42 ↗ council um over this next year.

38:45 ↗ >> Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Um back

38:54 ↗ on the one you're proposing to remove

38:55 ↗ alto together the stren energy

38:57 ↗ efficiency building codes.

38:59 ↗ >> Um not opposed to that but maybe a

39:02 ↗ reference to supporting the state energy

39:05 ↗ codes monitoring them or something along

39:08 ↗ those lines

39:09 ↗ >> just in case they go sideways on

39:13 ↗ something.

39:19 ↗ Yeah, and there's a number of appendices

39:21 ↗ that are proposed to those codes

39:23 ↗ throughout the years um throughout the

39:26 ↗ year that cities can opt into adopting.

39:29 ↗ So, I think that's a that's a great

39:31 ↗ amendment where we do monitor that um

39:34 ↗ and work with staff to determine whether

39:36 ↗ or not.

39:40 ↗ So I feel like there's two things that

39:42 ↗ I'm missing from this list and so I'm

39:44 ↗ going to talk some concept.

39:49 ↗ First one is it feels very much like

39:51 ↗ we've missed the energy conservation

39:54 ↗ talks about going to getting away from

39:57 ↗ gas getting into the

40:00 ↗ >> but there's no specific thing to

40:02 ↗ continue to push energy conservation.

40:05 ↗ People should turn their lights off when

40:07 ↗ you go out of the room. A lot of those

40:10 ↗ >> Yeah. energy efficiency or energy

40:14 ↗ benchmarking, it's still you have to

40:16 ↗ hear the words. They have to be

40:18 ↗ something monitoring. It's something

40:20 ↗ that you're pushing. I don't see energy

40:22 ↗ conservation.

40:24 ↗ And as you guys all know, I love all the

40:26 ↗ lights at the Costco parking lot, but I

40:28 ↗ love the seat turned off at some points

40:30 ↗ are nearly shut down and even beautiful,

40:32 ↗ but it's just doesn't send the right

40:34 ↗ message as you drive down the freeway

40:36 ↗ that it's lit up like a Christmas tree.

40:38 ↗ I'm sorry. That's how I strongly feel

40:41 ↗ about it. So, energy conservation and

40:44 ↗ working with our community to produce

40:46 ↗ this like I'd love a little more night

40:48 ↗ sky in this community. I think there's

40:50 ↗ an opportunity but I also think it's the

40:53 ↗ right message which is we need to

40:54 ↗ conserve energy even if we are using

40:56 ↗ LEDs it still uses

41:00 ↗ >> yeah that is great that is the intent

41:02 ↗ with this first one but knowing that

41:04 ↗ that wording isn't

41:06 ↗ >> you got it that's great and

41:09 ↗ >> just you have to send that's what we

41:12 ↗ need

41:15 ↗ >> okay yeah that's fantastic

41:19 ↗ Is there another another one?

41:21 ↗ >> No, the other one was you guys know

41:23 ↗ that's my favorite question.

41:25 ↗ >> And we'll be talking about dark sky when

41:28 ↗ we get to community resilience and

41:30 ↗ wellbeing.

41:34 ↗ >> Yeah. So, I'm glad you brought up the um

41:38 ↗ the grade reliability. Are we going to

41:41 ↗ have too much electricity coming from

41:44 ↗ it? Um, so the way I understand it leads

41:47 ↗ into something that I wanted to talk

41:49 ↗ about. So, and that Stacy um touched on

41:53 ↗ a bit. So, the way I understand it is

41:56 ↗ there's um we have enough energy

42:00 ↗ um but there's certain times when we

42:03 ↗ have peak times. So in the um in the

42:07 ↗ winter the peak time is but in the in

42:10 ↗ the spring and summer the peak time is

42:12 ↗ just in the evening from 5 to 8 p.m. And

42:17 ↗ then um now in the fall and winter it's

42:21 ↗ from uh

42:24 ↗ uh it's in the morning and the evening

42:26 ↗ from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and then the PM

42:30 ↗ one. Um and then sometimes we have you

42:33 ↗ know the uh the pe we use a whole bunch

42:37 ↗ of electricity when it's super cold or

42:40 ↗ super hot.

42:41 ↗ Um and those are the times that we need

42:45 ↗ to try to balance out. And there's a lot

42:47 ↗ of great tools to do that these days.

42:50 ↗ Um, and then people are even using like

42:52 ↗ batteries and um, they can fill up their

42:55 ↗ battery like in the evening if you're on

42:58 ↗ a time of use plan through BSC and get

43:01 ↗ really cheap electricity and then um,

43:04 ↗ use your battery to power everything

43:05 ↗ else during the peak times. Um, and then

43:09 ↗ there's like you can seamlessly

43:11 ↗ seamlessly control your heater and a lot

43:15 ↗ of your appliances.

43:17 ↗ So I'm thinking maybe that is something

43:22 ↗ like demand response is a little bit

43:24 ↗ different than efficiency and um

43:27 ↗ conservation. So I'm wondering if demand

43:29 ↗ response should be one of our um columns

43:34 ↗ >> because in my mind

43:39 ↗ it's um it's going to be super

43:41 ↗ important. And then um last year, maybe

43:45 ↗ this last year, I went to I listened to

43:48 ↗ a Northwest Power

43:50 ↗ and Conservation Council meeting because

43:53 ↗ I'm a total geek. And um what they were

43:57 ↗ concerned about wasn't necessarily like

44:01 ↗ more electricity coming on and EVs and

44:03 ↗ stuff because a lot of people charge at

44:04 ↗ night. they're they're really concerned

44:06 ↗ with uh uh the data centers and Bitcoin

44:12 ↗ and stuff like that. So that's

44:15 ↗ what is throwing a wrench in everything

44:17 ↗ all around the country and the world.

44:20 ↗ So,

44:22 ↗ um I'm not sure how we're going to

44:24 ↗ control for that, but luckily at least

44:27 ↗ some of the um some of the tech

44:29 ↗ companies are paying for their own

44:32 ↗ electricity and

44:34 ↗ I'm not even sure if they're going to

44:36 ↗ use the same lines because we don't have

44:38 ↗ enough transmission lines to deal with

44:40 ↗ all of that. So, that that was my first

44:43 ↗ one. And then the second one is um

44:46 ↗ around advocacy.

44:48 ↗ So it everything's in there. Um BE24,

44:54 ↗ you know, talking about um

44:57 ↗ advocate for increased electricity grid

44:59 ↗ liability through state and utility

45:01 ↗ regulatory

45:03 ↗ ruling rule making legislation. So and I

45:06 ↗ know that there's like a legisl

45:08 ↗ legislative person in the city of Isqua.

45:11 ↗ So, um, as a as a citizen that likes to

45:15 ↗ try to help guide the process and get

45:17 ↗ the city to comment things on things

45:19 ↗ that I think would be powerful, um, it

45:22 ↗ would be great for us to know who those

45:25 ↗ point people are, you know, like is it

45:28 ↗ going to be the mayor? Is it going to be

45:29 ↗ sustainability? Is it going to be this

45:31 ↗ legislative person? Um,

45:35 ↗ so maybe that leads to a fight and so

45:38 ↗ they know who they are too. because

45:40 ↗ everybody needs to know what their job

45:42 ↗ is.

45:42 ↗ >> Yeah.

45:43 ↗ >> And maybe maybe they is there already a

45:46 ↗ person that deals with all of that

45:48 ↗ besides legislation.

45:50 ↗ >> Um yeah, just the ledge update at the

45:54 ↗ end of the meeting. Um, so the way it

45:58 ↗ works with the city is we have a

46:01 ↗ contractor that she has the city's

46:05 ↗ legislative priorities and she's

46:07 ↗ tracking bills and place them for staff

46:10 ↗ um where they align with the city's

46:13 ↗ priorities where there may be an impact

46:15 ↗ to the city. So we don't actually have

46:16 ↗ any particular a staff person um on

46:19 ↗ point. Um and then that filters through

46:24 ↗ um the staff that she raises them to to

46:26 ↗ the subject matter experts. So like

46:28 ↗ David and I are pulled into the energy

46:32 ↗ sustainability related build that come

46:34 ↗ through. Um, so it's a little different

46:36 ↗ than some other cities um have their own

46:40 ↗ government affairs or legislative staff

46:42 ↗ that are reviewing the bills, but um

46:45 ↗ here in some ways it's great because

46:47 ↗ they're pulling in the staff that these

46:48 ↗ bills would directly affect.

46:51 ↗ >> What about um other commenting

46:53 ↗ opportunities to the UTC and

46:57 ↗ other regulation?

46:58 ↗ >> Yeah, so case by case basis. So

47:01 ↗ sometimes we're flagging those to um the

47:04 ↗ contractor to say is this something we

47:06 ↗ should be uh commenting on. In some

47:08 ↗ cases it may be our legal team that

47:10 ↗ we're flagging them to and then raising

47:12 ↗ up to the mayor. We think it's

47:14 ↗ important. So many of the items that you

47:17 ↗ share with us um we would have reached

47:19 ↗ out directly to Mayor if she was

47:21 ↗ interested in commenting. Um still

47:24 ↗ figuring out how that process.

47:28 ↗ Yeah.

47:31 ↗ Great. Thank you.

47:32 ↗ >> This is just a question. Yeah, we're

47:34 ↗ talking climate action plan here.

47:37 ↗ >> We're talking a lot about electricity

47:39 ↗ and fossil.

47:41 ↗ >> Um I'm wondering where we talk about

47:46 ↗ water usage consumption, conservation,

47:49 ↗ is that in another plan

47:52 ↗ >> that um so some of that will be covered

47:55 ↗ in the section we'll cover we'll talk

47:57 ↗ about in February. be our natural system

47:59 ↗ section.

48:00 ↗ >> Okay.

48:01 ↗ >> Um but if they're

48:04 ↗ around energy consumption associated

48:07 ↗ with water use

48:11 ↗ >> more about the resources, you know,

48:14 ↗ buildings use electricity.

48:16 ↗ >> Yeah.

48:18 ↗ >> So it's covered somewhere.

48:20 ↗ >> Yep. Absolutely. Yeah. So February. Um

48:23 ↗ and we'll keep as we're preparing the

48:25 ↗ materials, we'll keep an eye out for

48:26 ↗ that. maybe flag it if we see it as a

48:29 ↗ gap because I'm trying to I can't

48:30 ↗ remember exactly the water conservation

48:32 ↗ actions there.

48:34 ↗ >> There will also be in the uh climate

48:36 ↗ resilience section if some natural

48:38 ↗ system actions get moved over to to

48:41 ↗ that. Um it would be addressed a little

48:43 ↗ bit there as well when it comes to water

48:45 ↗ quality and kind of how water

48:48 ↗ quality.

48:52 ↗ Chain did you say did you say just water

48:55 ↗ consumption or you're also talking about

48:57 ↗ how the water runs off

49:00 ↗ >> I was thinking mostly water consumption

49:05 ↗ as city builds out

49:09 ↗ all the buildings have

49:13 ↗ to

49:16 ↗ deficient

49:19 ↗ standard

49:29 ↗ That's right. And probably when the

49:30 ↗ building is built, they're about half.

49:35 ↗ Um, yeah, we should make sure that those

49:37 ↗ are February meeting the natural systems

49:40 ↗ water resources section. Um, we'll flag

49:43 ↗ those for you all or maybe we see some

49:45 ↗ gaps and need some addition if they're

49:47 ↗ not sufficiently

49:51 ↗ Rash.

49:54 ↗ >> Yeah, thanks Don. Uh so I just wanted to

49:57 ↗ add something to what um an mentioned

50:00 ↗ and you know I think an you had a lot of

50:01 ↗ good points and uh I do think the

50:04 ↗ advocacy and you know um what you

50:07 ↗ brought up is an important aspect and um

50:11 ↗ to your you know comment regarding the

50:13 ↗ data centers and you know how do we

50:15 ↗ maintain the electric uh electricity

50:18 ↗ grid stability. There has been some

50:21 ↗ tools being considered and used and at

50:24 ↗ least in India in some cities I know for

50:26 ↗ a fact they have been used where the

50:29 ↗ city um was proposed and created an

50:32 ↗ alliance between the different

50:34 ↗ businesses in that city where especially

50:37 ↗ for manufacturing plants because they'll

50:40 ↗ be using a lot of electricity in a

50:42 ↗ single day or the single shift. They had

50:44 ↗ a rotating schedule developed for the

50:47 ↗ power usage where you know each um

50:51 ↗ manufacturing plant will have one day or

50:53 ↗ certain number of hours when they will

50:56 ↗ not have the power at the facility. Mean

50:58 ↗ that was just planned power outage for

51:00 ↗ that particular manufacturing plant and

51:03 ↗ so each of them were on rotating

51:05 ↗ schedule to make sure that there is no

51:08 ↗ sudden you know like the to maintain the

51:10 ↗ stability of the electricity grid. So

51:12 ↗ these kinds of things can be done and

51:16 ↗ they need to be done more at a city

51:18 ↗ level under policy and will be pushed

51:22 ↗ out through businesses. I just wanted to

51:24 ↗ bring this up since you know you

51:25 ↗ mentioned data centers and these are

51:28 ↗ some of the things that can be done or

51:30 ↗ being done. That's pretty much it. Thank

51:32 ↗ you.

51:37 ↗ Uh yeah, on the resilience uh and energy

51:41 ↗ infrastructure point, I think um it it

51:43 ↗ was during the bomb cyclone, I think the

51:45 ↗ charging stations were a really big

51:47 ↗ thing at the resilience hubs. Uh and I

51:50 ↗ think uh if it's not already being done,

51:52 ↗ just making sure we're prioritizing uh

51:54 ↗ that and renewable energy infrastructure

51:56 ↗ at those sites and energy storage. Um so

52:01 ↗ if there is grid you know unreliability

52:03 ↗ that at least those places are um you

52:06 ↗ know uh at those and those alternative

52:08 ↗ sources energy

52:14 ↗ one of your actions was about outreach

52:18 ↗ and just thinking through that I think

52:21 ↗ that just an idea for you guys

52:25 ↗ concepts you need to really educate

52:27 ↗ homes on how best to improve their

52:29 ↗ possible.

52:31 ↗ I think I think there's a lot of

52:35 ↗ there's many ways you can your home add

52:39 ↗ insulation potentially put those in

52:45 ↗ electrical management systems that

52:48 ↗ crawl space. Um

52:51 ↗ point I want to make is that we got to

52:53 ↗ careful not to have people come and sell

52:56 ↗ us things like

52:59 ↗ our new window is really worth

53:04 ↗ a lot of times if you engage with

53:06 ↗ company do some outreach they're just

53:08 ↗ trying to sell

53:10 ↗ we need to have sort of holistic look so

53:14 ↗ we give homeowners

53:18 ↗ that if the new windows white look cool

53:22 ↗ nice but they may not do anything

53:27 ↗ they may not significantly

53:30 ↗ reducing costs as opposed to potentially

53:33 ↗ adding legislation

53:36 ↗ building

53:38 ↗ outreach is a good one but I think we

53:39 ↗ need to think about it be careful that

53:41 ↗ we don't just have window sales

53:44 ↗ committed to offer prepaid offer

53:46 ↗ discounts on

53:50 ↗ Yeah, that's a great point. Um, PSSE

53:52 ↗ used to have an MV audit program where

53:55 ↗ they would send a professional out to

53:58 ↗ your home and kind of advise you on the

54:00 ↗ top changes that could be made that

54:02 ↗ would really improve efficiency. That

54:04 ↗ program doesn't exist anymore. So, we've

54:07 ↗ this has been a priority of PCA and

54:09 ↗ we've talked about with the ESG bringing

54:11 ↗ back the audit. Sure. There's a study

54:13 ↗ that somebody's done that weighs all

54:16 ↗ these alternatives

54:19 ↗ study that could have been 30 years ago

54:21 ↗ and it's still applying.

54:22 ↗ >> Absolutely. Yeah. So, I think Yeah. I

54:24 ↗ think that's a great great point and I'm

54:26 ↗ hearing a lot of comments where this

54:29 ↗ first one I think um

54:32 ↗ while we I think we had a lot we were

54:34 ↗ intending to put in the description that

54:36 ↗ covered many of the items you all have

54:37 ↗ raised tonight, it might be best to um

54:40 ↗ break this one up to really emphasize

54:43 ↗ that conservation, the demand response,

54:46 ↗ the homeowner education. And so we'll

54:49 ↗ look at how to break up a little bit

54:51 ↗ more.

54:55 ↗ >> Yeah,

54:56 ↗ >> mine's a little It's just a little fun

54:58 ↗ thing that I heard the other day. Um

55:01 ↗ that is um in Australia so many people

55:05 ↗ have solar panels now um you can get

55:08 ↗ them put on really fast than a week or

55:10 ↗ two um that there's a whole bunch of

55:14 ↗ there's extra extra electricity

55:17 ↗ >> and so instead of storing it um they are

55:20 ↗ just giving people free electricity um

55:24 ↗ during certain times every single day

55:28 ↗ and so they can just use a whole bunch

55:29 ↗ electricity during those times and then

55:32 ↗ not as much nucle.

55:55 ↗ So yeah, I'm hearing um probably

55:57 ↗ splitting up those first one to make

55:59 ↗ sure we're covering those three topics I

56:02 ↗ just summarized. The conservation,

56:03 ↗ demand response, and then that homeowner

56:05 ↗ education around um best investments for

56:09 ↗ efficiency. Um, Don had a comment around

56:14 ↗ the state energy efficiency building

56:16 ↗ code probably retaining that in some

56:18 ↗ form that is around monitoring

56:21 ↗ um and just and then to the kind of

56:24 ↗ appendices that we continue to monitor

56:26 ↗ and assess whether to integrate into our

56:29 ↗ code. And then I didn't hear any other

56:34 ↗ major changes to the action concepts. a

56:37 ↗ lot of great feedback and comments. Um,

56:42 ↗ anything

56:44 ↗ that we missed in terms of

56:51 ↗ and as feel free to you all think of

56:54 ↗ something later this week, please

56:57 ↗ go ahead and send those to us.

57:02 ↗ All right, we will move into

57:03 ↗ transportation and land use focus area.

57:06 ↗ Um so you all have um touched this

57:09 ↗ section in one way where um last summer

57:14 ↗ we worked with a committee um to receive

57:18 ↗ some feedback on how to revise this

57:21 ↗ section. We shared that information with

57:24 ↗ you all in the fall and then um we met

57:28 ↗ with transportation advisory group and

57:32 ↗ PPC to do some initial vetting of

57:34 ↗ concepts and actions and policies

57:38 ↗ um and and shared the feedback that we

57:41 ↗ received from them with this group. So,

57:42 ↗ some of these will look familiar. Um,

57:45 ↗ but here tonight, we really wanted to

57:47 ↗ get your feedback on this section, which

57:50 ↗ is really focused on how do we improve

57:52 ↗ land use to decrease reliance on

57:55 ↗ vehicles and emissions from vehicles.

58:00 ↗ Um, so again, I will just walk through

58:04 ↗ each of these actions first to provide a

58:06 ↗ little reasoning of the revisions we're

58:10 ↗ proposing. One thing I did not know is

58:13 ↗ um I attached the ordinance for ebikes

58:18 ↗ and e- motorcycles just because that

58:21 ↗ ebikes has come up in particular at

58:24 ↗ conversations with this group and with

58:26 ↗ the transportation advisory group when

58:29 ↗ we start to think about actions that

58:31 ↗ really promote ebikes. Um that ordinance

58:35 ↗ is um it's really an ordinance for these

58:39 ↗ motorcycles um which there's a lot of

58:42 ↗ safety concerns, there's age

58:43 ↗ restrictions. Um there's usage

58:47 ↗ limitations. Um the city really wants to

58:50 ↗ emphasize that they support and promote

58:53 ↗ ebikes, especially the class one and two

58:56 ↗ ebikes that go up to um 20 miles per

58:59 ↗ hour. There will be some other

59:01 ↗ restrictions for the class 3 ebikes that

59:04 ↗ go faster um and just limitations of

59:07 ↗ what they can be used, but the city

59:09 ↗ wanted to ensure that this ordinance is

59:13 ↗ not interpreted as trying to limit

59:14 ↗ ebikes. But they really the city really

59:17 ↗ sees them as um one of our tools in our

59:21 ↗ toolkit. So um wanted to make sure that

59:23 ↗ that was included or

59:26 ↗ could be uh uh help you all in um

59:31 ↗ providing some basis as we look at the

59:32 ↗ questions.

59:35 ↗ All right. So um this first one is a

59:39 ↗ little bit of a combination. So in the

59:42 ↗ current plan we have an action that is

59:44 ↗ around incentivized dense mixeduse

59:46 ↗ transit oriented development. Um, we

59:50 ↗ wanted to

59:53 ↗ kind of uh expand what was meant by

59:56 ↗ that. Um, where this section of the plan

1:00:00 ↗ really looked at a lot of updates to

1:00:02 ↗ title 18, our land use code, which were

1:00:06 ↗ completed,

1:00:07 ↗ but we want to ensure that there

1:00:09 ↗ continues to be a climate lens applied

1:00:13 ↗ to city codes. And so we're proposing an

1:00:17 ↗ action that's pretty broad, but it's

1:00:20 ↗ about ensuring that sustainability,

1:00:24 ↗ climate, and the environment are

1:00:25 ↗ considered in updates to city code. So

1:00:28 ↗ that would include probably mostly our

1:00:32 ↗ land use code, building code, um would

1:00:35 ↗ be probably the priority ones. Um,

1:00:40 ↗ so it's a little bit of a broad action,

1:00:42 ↗ but um, instead of having uh, a whole

1:00:46 ↗ set of actions that look across the

1:00:48 ↗ different city codes, we wanted to have

1:00:50 ↗ kind of an overarching one.

1:00:52 ↗ Um, the next one does get into a

1:00:54 ↗ specific piece of city code because we

1:00:56 ↗ know this is on our war plan. This is

1:01:00 ↗ um, around expanding those sustainable

1:01:02 ↗ design standards. So I spoke about this

1:01:05 ↗ earlier. Um in title 18 we um

1:01:10 ↗ incorporated in the last update the

1:01:13 ↗ requirement for a lead certification for

1:01:16 ↗ buildings of a certain size. That is one

1:01:19 ↗ green building certification. It is a

1:01:22 ↗ very expensive certification.

1:01:24 ↗ We want to open up the opportunity for

1:01:27 ↗ other buildings to build green um but

1:01:30 ↗ receive other certifications or points

1:01:33 ↗ where they can meet the intent but maybe

1:01:35 ↗ they aren't labeled with um the lead

1:01:38 ↗ symbol. Um so I'd be working with you

1:01:41 ↗ all in our planning department to um

1:01:45 ↗ develop some additional standards to be

1:01:47 ↗ inerted into code

1:01:51 ↗ um the missing middle housing in

1:01:53 ↗ discussing with our planning department.

1:01:57 ↗ We are proposing removing this. It was

1:02:00 ↗ incorporated um there was code

1:02:02 ↗ incorporated into title 18 their state

1:02:04 ↗ requirements. um they didn't feel like

1:02:06 ↗ it was a action that was needed in the

1:02:09 ↗ IAP.

1:02:11 ↗ Uh we have a couple new ones here that

1:02:14 ↗ have come out of the committee

1:02:16 ↗ discussions this summer and further

1:02:19 ↗ discussed with uh the transportation

1:02:21 ↗ advisory board. Uh the first one is

1:02:24 ↗ around moving removing parking minimums

1:02:28 ↗ um for multifamily buildings that have

1:02:31 ↗ easy access to transit.

1:02:34 ↗ Um and then the next one is around um

1:02:40 ↗ looking at requirements for biking or

1:02:42 ↗ multi- modal networks for new

1:02:45 ↗ developments um really to improve access

1:02:49 ↗ for biking and other um modes of

1:02:52 ↗ transportation. So these are two kind of

1:02:54 ↗ development requirements um or policies

1:02:58 ↗ that would be considered.

1:03:02 ↗ Um there uh was a action around

1:03:04 ↗ implementing our mobility plan. We're

1:03:07 ↗ proposing updating that to change the

1:03:09 ↗ name. Um and then as we've discussed

1:03:13 ↗ with you all and some of the other

1:03:15 ↗ boards and commissions. What we would

1:03:18 ↗ like to do with this action is really

1:03:20 ↗ highlight some of the climate benefits

1:03:22 ↗ of that plan. um and that it will

1:03:27 ↗ the IAP will retain the importance of

1:03:31 ↗ these other plans that it's connected to

1:03:33 ↗ from the by emphasizing the climate

1:03:36 ↗ lens. Um and we're not losing that

1:03:39 ↗ connection to these other plans and

1:03:40 ↗ their importance.

1:03:44 ↗ Um the next one we're proposing to

1:03:46 ↗ retain this is promoting commute trip

1:03:48 ↗ reduction and teleawwork. Um this is the

1:03:51 ↗ program we do with uh the large

1:03:54 ↗ employers in the city um to help reduce

1:03:57 ↗ emissions through

1:04:00 ↗ uh employee commutes.

1:04:04 ↗ Um advocating and partnering regionally

1:04:06 ↗ to improve transit network. We're

1:04:08 ↗ proposing to retain this, but we

1:04:10 ↗ received feedback from you all um at our

1:04:13 ↗ last discussion around transportation

1:04:16 ↗ that we should expand the description to

1:04:18 ↗ look at the potential for demand

1:04:20 ↗ shuttles. Uh bringing back I believe a

1:04:24 ↗ circular shuttle um exploring free

1:04:27 ↗ wrership on some routes um which I think

1:04:30 ↗ Ann you've shared in the past and that's

1:04:32 ↗ come up through um people for climate

1:04:34 ↗ action. Um so it would just be kind of

1:04:37 ↗ an expanded definition of that action

1:04:39 ↗ and the types of programs we might

1:04:42 ↗ explore.

1:04:45 ↗ Um updating land use codes to promote

1:04:47 ↗ multimodal transportation. We want to

1:04:50 ↗ retain this but um just emphasize in

1:04:55 ↗ there the ebike

1:04:57 ↗ uh the scooter charging I think this

1:05:01 ↗ one. Do you want to was this requiring

1:05:04 ↗ in um

1:05:06 ↗ >> developments to make sure in multi-

1:05:11 ↗ >> Yes.

1:05:11 ↗ >> Okay. So this would be I think this

1:05:13 ↗ actually came up at tab

1:05:15 ↗ >> in just development projects

1:05:17 ↗ >> for um with new development projects and

1:05:20 ↗ particularly multifamily to make we

1:05:23 ↗ there'd be an added requirement to make

1:05:25 ↗ sure there's sufficient ebike and e

1:05:27 ↗ scooter charging

1:05:29 ↗ not just storage but there'd be a place

1:05:31 ↗ for residents to charge so that would be

1:05:34 ↗ a add-on to a building

1:05:40 ↗ um the transportation management action

1:05:41 ↗ plans. This one came up in public

1:05:43 ↗ comment that was proposed to remove. Um

1:05:46 ↗ I need to double check with our planning

1:05:48 ↗ manager, but I think that's already

1:05:50 ↗ incorporated into title 18. Um but I

1:05:53 ↗ will confirm that and we'll follow up

1:05:55 ↗ with you all anything there.

1:06:00 ↗ Um expanding EV infrastructure. The

1:06:03 ↗ current language says cityowned. Um

1:06:06 ↗ we're recommending changing that to

1:06:07 ↗ public EV infrastructure.

1:06:10 ↗ Um David and I are trying to get out of

1:06:12 ↗ the business of uh owning and managing

1:06:16 ↗ EV chargers. Uh we have a few on our

1:06:18 ↗ plate, but we really want to promote uh

1:06:21 ↗ kind of public private partnerships so

1:06:23 ↗ that the city is not spending a lot of

1:06:25 ↗ our staff time um dealing with

1:06:28 ↗ maintenance um and management of those

1:06:30 ↗ chargers. So we want to expand public

1:06:33 ↗ charging infrastructure, but just look

1:06:35 ↗ at different models for doing that.

1:06:39 ↗ um multifamily requirements um or excuse

1:06:42 ↗ me um the current language in the plan

1:06:44 ↗ speaks to requirements for EV

1:06:47 ↗ infrastructure and single family. We are

1:06:49 ↗ recommending changing that to

1:06:51 ↗ multifamily and expanding those. Um

1:06:55 ↗ single family requirements were

1:06:57 ↗ incorporated into the state building

1:06:59 ↗ code. There are multifamily charging

1:07:02 ↗ requirements as well. We are interested

1:07:04 ↗ in exploring potential increase in the

1:07:08 ↗ requirements, the percentage of parking

1:07:10 ↗ spaces that would need to be um EV

1:07:15 ↗ ready. Um

1:07:18 ↗ Redmond has done this for their

1:07:20 ↗ multifamily buildings. They just passed

1:07:22 ↗ a policy that 100% of parking spaces

1:07:25 ↗ need to be EV ready. I believe

1:07:29 ↗ um we discussed that with TAB.

1:07:32 ↗ They were not opposed to it, but they

1:07:35 ↗ want to understand if that would have

1:07:39 ↗ negative consequences where maybe multif

1:07:42 ↗ family might not want to build here. And

1:07:45 ↗ I believe we discussed this with you all

1:07:47 ↗ back in the fall and there were some

1:07:49 ↗ concerns raised. So, um, we're

1:07:52 ↗ interested in exploring, do we want to

1:07:55 ↗ go above the state code and have

1:07:58 ↗ increased requirements or Belleview is

1:08:02 ↗ running a program right now to provide

1:08:04 ↗ technical assistance for multifamily to

1:08:06 ↗ increase their EV charging. So, just

1:08:09 ↗ looking at some different options there.

1:08:14 ↗ Um, promoting state and federal um, EV

1:08:17 ↗ incentives.

1:08:19 ↗ We just were recommending removing state

1:08:21 ↗ and federal just uh not knowing where

1:08:25 ↗ incentives or reates might go in the

1:08:27 ↗ future. Uh there are no longer any

1:08:29 ↗ federal ones. Um and then a new one, I

1:08:34 ↗ think this is the last one. um would be

1:08:38 ↗ looking at the potential for any require

1:08:42 ↗ building requirements to put in solar

1:08:45 ↗ carports if there was a newer

1:08:47 ↗ redeveloped parking lot. Um both for the

1:08:51 ↗ cooling benefit um but then for also

1:08:54 ↗ potentially some resiliency that could

1:08:57 ↗ be um incorporated into a project like

1:09:00 ↗ that.

1:09:02 ↗ So wanted to just

1:09:05 ↗ if we'd want to put forward a policy.

1:09:08 ↗ So that's a lot around kind of

1:09:11 ↗ multimodal land use and that

1:09:14 ↗ intersection. So we'll open it up for

1:09:17 ↗ feedback. Any gaps, major concerns, any

1:09:21 ↗ of these you really like or

1:09:29 ↗ >> uh Okay. So one idea is evaluation of

1:09:33 ↗ escooter

1:09:35 ↗ um vendors that provide services to our

1:09:40 ↗ little town such as other

1:09:43 ↗ larger municipalities like Seattle. Uh I

1:09:47 ↗ don't know. I I have some trepidation

1:09:49 ↗ about going in that direction just

1:09:51 ↗ because our infrastructure for

1:09:54 ↗ multimodal transportation is

1:09:57 ↗ up to the mark where it should be and so

1:10:01 ↗ there will be ill consequences of of

1:10:04 ↗ flooding our sidewalks and central with

1:10:06 ↗ these devices. But I think it's

1:10:09 ↗ something we need to evaluate

1:10:12 ↗ and

1:10:13 ↗ maybe uh we could roll it out in a very

1:10:16 ↗ limited and measured way uh such that it

1:10:20 ↗ wouldn't cause a big problem. I know one

1:10:22 ↗ of the things that's being evaluated or

1:10:24 ↗ maybe acted on in Seattle, I'm not sure

1:10:26 ↗ where this stands right now, but they

1:10:28 ↗ are are geo fencing uh some some of the

1:10:31 ↗ usage so that well you you can't leave

1:10:34 ↗ that scooter just anywhere. you must

1:10:36 ↗ leave it in a designated spot or you're

1:10:39 ↗ going to get a charge to what you do or

1:10:43 ↗ some such. So those solutions are being

1:10:48 ↗ worked on and deployed in some

1:10:51 ↗ municipalities.

1:10:52 ↗ Um I think this is a thing and we should

1:10:57 ↗ move in that direction someday. Maybe

1:11:00 ↗ that day isn't this day, but in the time

1:11:02 ↗ frame of this plan, it probably will be

1:11:05 ↗ a thing. And so have a line item for

1:11:09 ↗ that sort of evaluation. Evaluate the

1:11:12 ↗ feasibility of we're not we're not ready

1:11:14 ↗ to say yes, we should do it today. But

1:11:18 ↗ evaluating the feasibility for future

1:11:20 ↗ deployment is something that we should

1:11:23 ↗ think about.

1:11:25 ↗ And that kind of feeds in with my little

1:11:27 ↗ comment on the uh one of the metrics

1:11:30 ↗ that we should be looking at is how many

1:11:32 ↗ miles of of bike lanes do we have or

1:11:36 ↗ more generally multimodal transportation

1:11:39 ↗ corridors in the city of Isiqua. There's

1:11:43 ↗ there's room for improvement in that

1:11:45 ↗ area where the squad is not that good in

1:11:48 ↗ that area in my opinion. And uh we

1:11:54 ↗ there's a there's an old adage in

1:11:56 ↗ quality and circle parlance of well if

1:11:59 ↗ you want to improve something you've got

1:12:01 ↗ to measure it. All right let's measure

1:12:03 ↗ how many miles of bike lanes multi

1:12:06 ↗ mobile transport lanes we have and that

1:12:10 ↗ will allow us to cause us to think about

1:12:12 ↗ it enough to oh yeah I guess we should

1:12:14 ↗ prove that it helps you in that

1:12:17 ↗ direction anyway. So that was just one

1:12:20 ↗ thought on the metrics. I guess maybe I

1:12:22 ↗ need to get plugged better into the

1:12:24 ↗ metrics committee on that area. You can

1:12:27 ↗ go down the the list of every action we

1:12:29 ↗ have and contemplate well how can we

1:12:32 ↗ measure that? Well, some some can't be

1:12:34 ↗ measured directly. Some can and some

1:12:37 ↗ can't and some you have to have a proxy

1:12:39 ↗ an indirect proxy measurement but you

1:12:43 ↗ need to give it some thought and try.

1:12:47 ↗ Um that's all I have.

1:12:50 ↗ >> One comment just on the e- scooter

1:12:52 ↗ ebike. Um that is an action in the

1:12:56 ↗ mobility action plan. So we'll call that

1:12:59 ↗ out because recognizing that's a

1:13:02 ↗ priority for climate action. Um there

1:13:04 ↗ was a pilot program that was proposed to

1:13:07 ↗ council three two or three years ago.

1:13:11 ↗ Um

1:13:13 ↗ >> yeah 22 or 23. and um council decided

1:13:16 ↗ not to move forward. It's been on our

1:13:19 ↗ radar to do kind of more assessments and

1:13:22 ↗ studies to look at a program that

1:13:24 ↗ council might support very maybe limited

1:13:27 ↗ pilot. So, we'll make sure to figure out

1:13:29 ↗ how to highlight that whether it's under

1:13:31 ↗ um the implement mobility action plan or

1:13:34 ↗ maybe it deserves a call out. Thanks for

1:13:37 ↗ raising.

1:13:42 ↗ >> So, as I think about when the original

1:13:45 ↗ climate action plan was approved by

1:13:47 ↗ pounds one of them work. Um I think

1:13:51 ↗ about how ebikes expand in their use and

1:13:54 ↗ their sales. I mean, they are a big

1:13:56 ↗ deal. And so, as I think about as we

1:13:59 ↗ implement this plan, they're going to

1:14:00 ↗ get to be bigger and bigger and we don't

1:14:03 ↗ really say much about

1:14:05 ↗ >> there's an opportunity here to get ahead

1:14:07 ↗ of the game instead of kind of

1:14:09 ↗ responding to the game.

1:14:12 ↗ And so, I think we and I don't really

1:14:14 ↗ have an answer of what it is, if that

1:14:16 ↗ makes sense. But I think we need to call

1:14:18 ↗ out advice because it is a huge

1:14:20 ↗ opportunity to solve a problem and that

1:14:22 ↗ is to get the cars off the road to get

1:14:24 ↗ people to transit centers to get on the

1:14:26 ↗ light rail currently trying to do the

1:14:29 ↗ buses and to get them out of their cars

1:14:32 ↗ and so I think it's something we need to

1:14:35 ↗ starting to measure and assess happening

1:14:38 ↗ with just Tom was talking to me about

1:14:41 ↗ which is the um systems to get people

1:14:44 ↗ moving around the community But we know

1:14:46 ↗ that people are going to continue to

1:14:48 ↗ purchase those and it may reduce our

1:14:50 ↗ reliance on cars and therefore create

1:14:53 ↗ our network. So I think there needs to

1:14:56 ↗ be a place to talk about that and to

1:14:58 ↗ begin to assess because there is a great

1:15:00 ↗ opportunity here to get people to

1:15:03 ↗ transit centers and to get them to other

1:15:05 ↗ places.

1:15:07 ↗ Yes,

1:15:12 ↗ I was just about this

1:15:15 ↗ section. There's nothing in the call

1:15:17 ↗ about light rail.

1:15:19 ↗ >> Seems like there ought to be some

1:15:22 ↗ specific action actions for light

1:15:26 ↗ railing

1:15:30 ↗ ahead for integration with other

1:15:33 ↗ transportation modes. all of maybe

1:15:38 ↗ service the city cities should start

1:15:39 ↗ studying lessons learned

1:15:43 ↗ best practices from other locations like

1:15:46 ↗ trails just seems like that's the

1:15:50 ↗ biggest thing that's going to happen

1:15:55 ↗ it's still a ways out but

1:16:00 ↗ we should start working in a great plan

1:16:03 ↗ now Um,

1:16:06 ↗ and we should maybe have an action to

1:16:08 ↗ try to get it here sooner

1:16:10 ↗ >> instead of just I don't know, maybe

1:16:12 ↗ that's all being discussed somewhere

1:16:14 ↗ else in the city.

1:16:16 ↗ >> That's a good flag. Yeah, that's also um

1:16:19 ↗ widely covered in the mobility action

1:16:21 ↗ plan, but I think that's one of the

1:16:25 ↗ challenges. We have so many plans that

1:16:27 ↗ are really working together. But that's

1:16:29 ↗ something we'll um we will plan to

1:16:33 ↗ emphasize

1:16:35 ↗ here. And maybe what we can do is bring

1:16:39 ↗ you all the language that's in the

1:16:40 ↗ mobility action plan for particularly

1:16:43 ↗ these two topics that you've raised and

1:16:45 ↗ make sure you feel like it's sufficient

1:16:47 ↗ or is there any add-on that

1:16:50 ↗ see

1:16:52 ↗ so yeah those are great great

1:16:53 ↗ highlights.

1:16:59 ↗ Uh as far as uh building a bike biking

1:17:03 ↗ culture goes, I think uh I think in a

1:17:06 ↗ lot of places I've lived and in Seattle

1:17:08 ↗ uh where that had a strong uh kind of

1:17:12 ↗ community of cyclists uh practical

1:17:15 ↗ reasons commuting and everything.

1:17:17 ↗ There's been like community uh nonprofit

1:17:20 ↗ like bike shops and uh at least programs

1:17:23 ↗ for folks to learn or or you know get

1:17:26 ↗ the tools and the time and space to to

1:17:29 ↗ maintain or repair bikes or even just

1:17:31 ↗ you know get on bikes and uh I think uh

1:17:34 ↗ we've got a lot of great bike shops in

1:17:36 ↗ Isl

1:17:38 ↗ but they're all you know and they're

1:17:40 ↗ kind of like geared towards uh people

1:17:43 ↗ with money to to to spend on like on

1:17:45 ↗ biking things like that. So, I just uh

1:17:48 ↗ uh I I see the tool library as a

1:17:50 ↗ potential opportunity for that kind of

1:17:52 ↗ programming. Um and even if it's not

1:17:54 ↗ like a brick and mortar type thing, cool

1:17:56 ↗ to have kind of city sponsored

1:17:58 ↗ >> uh bicycle program.

1:18:01 ↗ >> That's a Are you Yeah, we only

1:18:05 ↗ creating a biking culture is something

1:18:06 ↗ we've been talking a lot about with our

1:18:08 ↗ transportation planner. We have it in

1:18:11 ↗ here more around kind of new development

1:18:15 ↗ policy, but are you maybe pulling that

1:18:17 ↗ out as a separate action because that

1:18:20 ↗ could relate to maybe the city is

1:18:22 ↗ sponsoring free bike classes with REI or

1:18:26 ↗ working with a nonprofit to have a

1:18:28 ↗ chapter established here.

1:18:30 ↗ infrastructures obviously a huge

1:18:32 ↗ component but also as far as that

1:18:34 ↗ cultural piece goes just making sure

1:18:35 ↗ people have you know that those cultural

1:18:38 ↗ programs or opportunities to engage.

1:18:42 ↗ >> Okay. Yeah, maybe we'll think about

1:18:46 ↗ kind of action we could propose about

1:18:47 ↗ that.

1:19:00 ↗ Great. Um, so what I heard, um, when we

1:19:05 ↗ were just talking about maybe pulling

1:19:06 ↗ out something around bike culture, going

1:19:08 ↗ beyond kind of the policies that would

1:19:10 ↗ help create that, um, we will send you

1:19:14 ↗ all the language for the mobility action

1:19:17 ↗ plan around the ebike, escooter, share

1:19:20 ↗ programs, and light rail and make sure

1:19:22 ↗ you all think that's sufficient for um,

1:19:25 ↗ linking to in the climate action plan or

1:19:27 ↗ do we need something else in here to

1:19:30 ↗ emphasize boost. Um, and then we also

1:19:34 ↗ talked about highlighting ebikes and

1:19:36 ↗ ecooters. We think about how to do that

1:19:38 ↗ through the actions or maybe there's

1:19:40 ↗ even envisioning like a call out box in

1:19:43 ↗ the climate action plan that's just

1:19:45 ↗ talking about kind of the evolution of

1:19:48 ↗ ebikes and e scooters and the city needs

1:19:50 ↗ to be monitoring that and thinking about

1:19:52 ↗ how to bring in here or maybe there is a

1:19:55 ↗ specific action we call out. So, we'll

1:19:56 ↗ play around a bit with some language

1:19:58 ↗ there.

1:20:02 ↗ I think

1:20:03 ↗ those were Yeah. And around the light

1:20:05 ↗ rail language, we'll just um make sure

1:20:09 ↗ there's um language there around

1:20:11 ↗ advocating and looking at pushing up

1:20:14 ↗ timelines.

1:20:16 ↗ >> Anything?

1:20:19 ↗ >> Just another thought picking ahead. Is

1:20:22 ↗ there any actions to like work with the

1:20:25 ↗ state um lobby to make changes for like

1:20:30 ↗ widening state around 900 from all the

1:20:34 ↗ way through to

1:20:36 ↗ something where you

1:20:40 ↗ city would action

1:20:43 ↗ try to make bigger always

1:20:46 ↗ they talked about past years ago that

1:20:48 ↗ failed

1:20:51 ↗ you've already

1:21:08 ↗ lost state.

1:21:10 ↗ >> Yeah, that's a good question. I know. I

1:21:12 ↗ mean, that's council is very involved in

1:21:16 ↗ highway 18 and council's been talking

1:21:19 ↗ about 900 and ways to improve traffic in

1:21:23 ↗ Isaka. I'll take a look at what's in the

1:21:26 ↗ ability action plan. I'm guessing it's

1:21:29 ↗ probably covered there, but we'll pull

1:21:31 ↗ out that language.

1:21:31 ↗ >> Just think like back to

1:21:35 ↗ >> great.

1:21:37 ↗ Well, it was rather ineffective in terms

1:21:40 ↗ of improving the throughput on this

1:21:42 ↗ Hobart road. You know, let's do a

1:21:44 ↗ bypass. Well, let's not bother doing

1:21:46 ↗ bypass because it won't help because

1:21:48 ↗ there's so so many bottlenecks on that

1:21:50 ↗ two-lane road. And King County is not

1:21:54 ↗ solving those.

1:21:57 ↗ It was there was some effort to try to

1:22:01 ↗ through that and no problem.

1:22:10 ↗ Well, you know, nothing's going to

1:22:12 ↗ change unless

1:22:14 ↗ nothing's going to get through unless

1:22:18 ↗ I'm no traffic engineer. I always hear

1:22:20 ↗ about how widening highways and stuff.

1:22:22 ↗ There's going to be some bottleneck

1:22:23 ↗ nearby or induced demand or whatever

1:22:26 ↗ that just counteracts that pretty

1:22:28 ↗ quickly. So I think if we are making

1:22:30 ↗ infrastructural adjustments maybe focus

1:22:32 ↗ multimotal opportunities like bike lanes

1:22:35 ↗ or bus lanes or those

1:22:39 ↗ >> I'm just thinking about town I grew up

1:22:41 ↗ in the US

1:22:42 ↗ >> when I was a child they came through the

1:22:45 ↗ state came through and put took a

1:22:48 ↗ two-lane road completely lightning made

1:22:50 ↗ it into a freeway and they took off tons

1:22:55 ↗ of houses by

1:22:59 ↗ Now all that traffic just smoothly goes

1:23:02 ↗ through

1:23:04 ↗ by itself

1:23:09 ↗ to do that

1:23:20 ↗ to get get more money out of that state.

1:23:25 ↗ But uh anyway, big changes take a long

1:23:29 ↗ time to do and

1:23:34 ↗ it happens at the state.

1:23:36 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. I know it's a priority for

1:23:39 ↗ council because whenever we do the

1:23:41 ↗ community survey, traffic is the number

1:23:44 ↗ one concern from the community and so

1:23:47 ↗ council's been having some discussions.

1:23:49 ↗ So I'll I can

1:23:50 ↗ >> like even down see there are certain

1:23:54 ↗ freeways just go through the tunnels

1:23:56 ↗ through passive

1:24:00 ↗ try to reduce the

1:24:09 ↗ hugely expensive but what's it going to

1:24:12 ↗ look like in 50 years?

1:24:17 ↗ So just on that subject, um I don't

1:24:21 ↗ think so it would be great to have buses

1:24:24 ↗ and bus stops in Maple Valley and black

1:24:28 ↗ women in that area and to get people on

1:24:31 ↗ mass transit over to 405 and then they

1:24:34 ↗ wouldn't be coming on at least not on

1:24:37 ↗ the local program. So that's an idea

1:24:40 ↗ that I've had. And then maybe maybe that

1:24:43 ↗ could happen to get people off of SR 900

1:24:46 ↗ as well.

1:24:50 ↗ I don't know. Just just some thoughts.

1:24:54 ↗ How can we improve?

1:25:04 ↗ >> Maybe we need space.

1:25:17 ↗ Well, great. Thank you for all the great

1:25:19 ↗ feedback. Um,

1:25:22 ↗ maybe just real quick as we wrap up that

1:25:25 ↗ those IAP sections review. Is is this

1:25:28 ↗ process working for the IAP review? We

1:25:31 ↗ have one we have two more focus areas to

1:25:33 ↗ review next meeting and we're planning

1:25:35 ↗ to kind of bring the action revisions to

1:25:37 ↗ you in a similar way. Just want to see

1:25:39 ↗ if that is working for you all. You feel

1:25:42 ↗ like it's a decent way to provide

1:25:43 ↗ feedback.

1:25:44 ↗ >> I think so. I mean there's been great

1:25:45 ↗ discussion around.

1:25:46 ↗ >> Okay. Been great for us. Um so yes, next

1:25:50 ↗ meeting we will look at um small topics

1:25:54 ↗ uh natural systems and water resources

1:25:57 ↗ and community resilience and well-being

1:25:59 ↗ including kind of a new structure to

1:26:01 ↗ that section. Uh so we may have a bit of

1:26:06 ↗ a long meeting uh next meeting because

1:26:08 ↗ we're also planning to bring in

1:26:10 ↗ greenhouse gas inventory and a little

1:26:12 ↗ bit of overview of emergency management

1:26:14 ↗ to feed into that community resilience

1:26:16 ↗ discussion. Um, and then we anticipate

1:26:21 ↗ that'll kind of wrap up the deep dive

1:26:23 ↗ into the focus areas and then we're

1:26:26 ↗ looking at probably a special meeting in

1:26:28 ↗ March and then possibly a special

1:26:31 ↗ meeting in April to uh look overall at

1:26:35 ↗ the climate plan revisions and hopefully

1:26:39 ↗ get to your recommendation to move it

1:26:41 ↗ forward to council in April.

1:26:50 ↗ For me, it was fun breaking up that

1:26:52 ↗ first and

1:26:55 ↗ >> great. Yeah, we can look at if that

1:26:57 ↗ structure would be beneficial for that

1:26:59 ↗ final.

1:27:05 ↗ Right. And then we have a few reports

1:27:07 ↗ and other updates that All right. Um,

1:27:11 ↗ first uh thing I just wanted to know is

1:27:13 ↗ I believe this Friday board and

1:27:16 ↗ commission applications will open for

1:27:19 ↗ the environmental board. We have one

1:27:21 ↗ youth position opening, one regular

1:27:24 ↗ position, and three alternates. Um, I've

1:27:27 ↗ reached out to folks whose positions are

1:27:29 ↗ ending. Encourage you all to reapply.

1:27:32 ↗ Um, but uh, we will send out that

1:27:36 ↗ information to the full board. reach out

1:27:38 ↗ to your networks, folks you think would

1:27:40 ↗ be a good fit to bring on to the board.

1:27:45 ↗ Um, and then any questions on that?

1:27:51 ↗ Uh, and then in good news, I'll let

1:27:54 ↗ David first share about our breaking

1:27:57 ↗ news at five o'clock.

1:27:59 ↗ Yeah, as of a couple hours ago, we just

1:28:02 ↗ received news that we are getting a

1:28:05 ↗ large grant from Fiji Found Energy to um

1:28:09 ↗ electrify the community center at uh

1:28:12 ↗ transition from natural gas to uh

1:28:14 ↗ electric heat pumps at the facility um

1:28:17 ↗ which will also have the added benefit

1:28:19 ↗ of um allowing cooling in the facility

1:28:22 ↗ as well. Um so so that is one of our

1:28:25 ↗ resilience subsites. Um it's a priority

1:28:28 ↗ uh site for us to uh upgrade

1:28:31 ↗ infrastructure electrifying uses about

1:28:33 ↗ 10% of our natural gas use um from city

1:28:36 ↗ operations. So all of that will be

1:28:39 ↗ addressed through this project. Um so

1:28:43 ↗ yes we got um about a little over

1:28:46 ↗ twothirds of the projects is going to be

1:28:49 ↗ funded from the PSC.

1:28:52 ↗ >> Way to go

1:28:53 ↗ >> city funds

1:28:55 ↗ the expectation and then maybe

1:28:57 ↗ additional funds from PSC if that can

1:29:01 ↗ >> we'll see. Are you looking at batteries

1:29:03 ↗ at all?

1:29:05 ↗ >> Next step will be to look at to take

1:29:08 ↗ another look at solar and potential

1:29:10 ↗ batteries that would go with that

1:29:11 ↗ project. Um it would probably be a phase

1:29:14 ↗ two. Um as we as you plan you're

1:29:16 ↗ thinking ahead,

1:29:17 ↗ >> correct? We are just actually asked the

1:29:20 ↗ state for uh funds through an allocation

1:29:24 ↗ that would allow us to uh re-evaluate

1:29:27 ↗ the feasibility and potentially develop

1:29:29 ↗ designs for a solar uh system at the

1:29:31 ↗ facility that could also be connected to

1:29:34 ↗ a future battery similar to the micro

1:29:36 ↗ grid project going into center.

1:29:39 ↗ >> I was just asking that since the senior

1:29:40 ↗ center's not very big and power goes out

1:29:46 ↗ center has much more opportunity

1:29:49 ↗ I wasn't going to bring this up on

1:29:50 ↗ focused feedback for the energy

1:29:52 ↗ infrastructure stuff, but has anybody

1:29:54 ↗ heard of like the gravity uh water

1:29:57 ↗ pumping water up as an energy storage

1:29:59 ↗ feature? And then I don't know, we have

1:30:01 ↗ water at the end. So, we've had some of

1:30:05 ↗ those conversations with our uh water

1:30:07 ↗ manager, Gabby. She's she's fantastic.

1:30:09 ↗ And that is something that we are

1:30:13 ↗ interested in evaluating whether or not

1:30:16 ↗ some of that technology could work

1:30:17 ↗ within our water system. Um within our

1:30:21 ↗ um capital improvement plan, there are

1:30:22 ↗ some projects coming up where um in the

1:30:27 ↗ next medium term maybe um where those

1:30:31 ↗ projects could potentially be

1:30:32 ↗ incorporated into into some of those

1:30:34 ↗ projects. So that goes to some of that

1:30:36 ↗ action language related to broadening

1:30:39 ↗ from just solar to more renewable energy

1:30:41 ↗ since that could then incorporate water

1:30:44 ↗ based renewable energy wind based or or

1:30:46 ↗ any other options.

1:30:48 ↗ >> Yeah. Cool.

1:30:49 ↗ >> Some really cool stuff out there for

1:30:50 ↗ that. So

1:30:54 ↗ >> um great and then uh two other quick

1:30:57 ↗ grant updates. both PSSE, I believe I

1:30:59 ↗ may have shared at the last meeting, we

1:31:00 ↗ also received a grant from PSSE for our

1:31:03 ↗ ebike rebate. We'll be doing that in

1:31:05 ↗ partnership with Belleview and Redmond.

1:31:08 ↗ Uh that would have just come in um at

1:31:11 ↗ that last meeting. Uh and then the state

1:31:15 ↗ will also be really re-releasing second

1:31:17 ↗ round of Ebike rebates in the spring.

1:31:19 ↗ So, we'll be coordinating with the

1:31:22 ↗ state. ours will likely be released

1:31:24 ↗ after theirs, but there'll be a lot of

1:31:26 ↗ fee rebates out for the community um

1:31:29 ↗ this spring. Um and then we also

1:31:32 ↗ received a PSSE grant in partnership

1:31:35 ↗ with the school district to do design

1:31:37 ↗ work for shared fast charging and solar

1:31:41 ↗ and battery backup at the Isqua School

1:31:44 ↗ District administrative building. Um

1:31:47 ↗ that would be charging that could be

1:31:49 ↗ shared between district fleet um

1:31:52 ↗ potential electric buses in the future

1:31:55 ↗ and then for city kind of emergency

1:31:57 ↗ needs like for police or um other public

1:32:01 ↗ works trucks as we electrify them if

1:32:03 ↗ they need a quick charge um via shared

1:32:05 ↗ location. So that funding is just for

1:32:08 ↗ the design work and to develop strategy.

1:32:11 ↗ So, we have been very busy this year

1:32:15 ↗ with our grants. Way to go. Um,

1:32:20 ↗ couple other quick updates. As you all

1:32:22 ↗ may know, um, Zach Hall resigned from

1:32:27 ↗ council to focus on his work at the

1:32:29 ↗ state level. Uh, so the council is going

1:32:31 ↗ through an appointment process right

1:32:33 ↗ now. On Monday, they narrowed it from 12

1:32:36 ↗ applicants down through four. Um, and I

1:32:40 ↗ believe the next series of questions and

1:32:42 ↗ presentations, it's on the 20th of this

1:32:45 ↗ month and they're hoping to make it.

1:32:49 ↗ Um, and then legislature

1:32:53 ↗ is in full swing. Um, we've already been

1:32:56 ↗ looking at bills. Just a couple, one of

1:32:58 ↗ the flag that we reviewed last week is

1:33:00 ↗ one proposed actually by um, Senator

1:33:04 ↗ Hunt on residential battery incentives.

1:33:07 ↗ really interesting one. Um I believe

1:33:10 ↗ that one came in last year but didn't

1:33:12 ↗ move forward. Um a plastic bag ban I

1:33:15 ↗ wanted to bring up because John uh

1:33:17 ↗ recommended that when we were looking at

1:33:19 ↗ the IAP actions last month um looking at

1:33:23 ↗ a full plastic bag ban instead of

1:33:25 ↗ allowing the reusable plastic bags. That

1:33:27 ↗ is

1:33:29 ↗ the state legislature for consideration

1:33:31 ↗ this year. Um and the city I should

1:33:34 ↗ mention the city spoke

1:33:36 ↗ or um submitted signed in in support of

1:33:39 ↗ that as well as the residential battery

1:33:41 ↗ incentives. Um and then there's been

1:33:43 ↗ some other police related thing on that

1:33:47 ↗ been um supporting.

1:33:51 ↗ Um

1:33:53 ↗ and then yep already mentioned our

1:33:56 ↗ anticipated topics for February and yeah

1:33:59 ↗ just as a heads up we may go a little

1:34:01 ↗ bit long and folks um can just plan on

1:34:03 ↗ that. We just want to make sure we have

1:34:05 ↗ sufficient time to cover those very

1:34:07 ↗ timely topics. And Karen, did you have

1:34:10 ↗ any youth updates? Okay,

1:34:14 ↗ >> there's another billion look at the

1:34:16 ↗ number with me, but it's related to 6

1:34:19 ↗ PPD and fire fees

1:34:23 ↗ 1935 I believe it is.

1:34:25 ↗ >> Okay.

1:34:26 ↗ >> To try to offset the damage,

1:34:34 ↗ >> there's a bill uh proposing a ban that

1:34:37 ↗ Hall is

1:34:39 ↗ sponsored for too.

1:34:42 ↗ Okay. So, there might there's

1:34:45 ↗ >> Okay,

1:34:46 ↗ >> that sounds great. Um, yeah, we haven't

1:34:48 ↗ seen that one come in for you, but I

1:34:50 ↗ know Hall's been looking on for and

1:34:53 ↗ requiring alternatives.

1:34:56 ↗ Yeah,

1:35:00 ↗ >> other

1:35:08 ↗ Thanks, Alex. Any

1:35:11 ↗ question?

1:35:12 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:35:14 ↗ >> Thank you.

1:35:15 ↗ >> That is the new era.

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

Mina (Alexandra) Jun* - absent

Prajakta Ghatpande

Tom Anderson

Keith Gonzales

Kiran Pan

Anne Newcomb

Jonathan Smith

Staff (2)

Stacy Vynne McKinstry, Sustainability Manager

David Reedy, Sustainability Coordinator

Excused

Tommy DuBeau

Recommendations & actions (8)

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.
Board Member DAVIDSON recommended that the Environmental Board discuss the topic of streams and ditches in the annual workplan.
Staff will include topics requested by the Board for the Administration’s approval.
The Environmental Board voted to approve the 2026 Environmental Board Workplan.
Board Chair MCQUILLIAMS recommended that the City at least reference support for the existing or strengthened state energy codes through monitoring and advocacy.
Board Member DAVIDSON recommended incorporating language related to energy conservation into the Buildings & Energy section.
Additionally, Board Member ANDERSON recommended that the City include a transportation metric related to bike corridor mileage within the City.
Board Members SMITH and NEWCOMB asked staff to include an action related to Light Rail and mass transit expansion in the City.