April 29, 2025 Council Sustainability Committee

Video

Transcript

[00:06:31] Member Alison Hicks: Not on? Not on my apologies. Not been on and on, and I just turn on the meeting video and audio sits now. Okay, so I'll repeat a, a, repeat of that, we're on item one, which is our called order. Um, we are conducting this meeting with a virtual component. If you wish to address the committee virtually, uh, join on Zoom using the link or phone number and webinar ID shown on the screen. Um, for in-person attendees, we have speaker cards, which we can hand to you, as you enter the room. Um, So we are now on item number two, which is vocal, Ms. Lady, can you, uh, please take roll?

[00:07:19] Member Alison Hicks: Certainly, Chair Hicks. All members are present.

[00:07:26] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. Um, item number 3 is minutes approval. Um, 1st we'll look at the CSC meeting minutes from November 24 of 2024. Does anyone have comments or questions? Say none? Um, Does, uh, Does anybody have, uh, do any members of the public have comments on the meeting of minutes? And who is monitoring the virtual?

[00:08:04] Unknown Speaker: Thank No.

[00:08:06] Member Alison Hicks: Okay. Thank you. Um, would anyone like to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes?

[00:08:12] Member Alison Hicks: Of approval? Second.

[00:08:15] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, all those in favor? Fine. So that's at least unanimously. And we're on item four, which is oral communications. Uh, This portion of the meeting is reserved for people wishing to address the committee on matters not on the agenda. Um, you can speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes. And we, uh, state law prohibits the committee from acting on non-agendize items. Would any member of the public like to provide comment on an item that's not on the agenda? So I see nobody either in person or virtually. Um, so we'll now close the oral communications item and move to the discussion and action items. Item 5 Um. Which is new business. We'll start with 5.one, which is greenhouse, gas free fleet, and landscaping equipment purchasing policy. And this item will be presented by sustainability division staff. Slee will commence the presentation.

[00:09:25] Ms. Lee: Thank you, Chair Hicks, and good evening. Committee members and members of the public. Um, I'm going to introduce this item and then hand over to, um, Ms. Lynn, who will be presenting the bulk of the actual book post policy. And you'll note that, you know, within this item and then kind of across the agenda. Um, we have been shaping items for your committee and for the council's ultimate consideration, that are assuming kind of this federal context, stable. But, um, you know, there are things that work done into this analysis and other items that we've been working on. that, as of now, are standing, you know, rules around vehicles, for example, in this item. Um, and we will continue to update it if there are changes in the regulatory environment. So I just wanted to make a note of that. Um, That being said, um, were we pleased to be bringing this policy to you? Um, within the sustainability action plan for council directed staff to identify strategies for electrifying our fleet, and this policy will be a foundational piece in, I'd like to hand it over to this.

[00:10:44] Ms. Lynn: Start with some background and the context of our municipal operation, municipal operation emissions. Uh, vehicle fleet and equipment represent, um, 33% of municipal operation of emissions, and, as Miss Lee mentioned, SAP 4 direct stuff to develop a prune fleet's policy and to address off-road equipment emissions as well. A greenhouse gas free or electric 1st purchasing policy is one tool that can advance decarbonization in that vehicle and equipment sector. What is a greenhouse gas free purchasing policy? It's a policy that promotes or requires the purchase of low emission equipment and vehicles. And it provides a decision making process to prioritize low emissions, equipment and vehicles that may cost more upfront. And it helps to strategically plan with the transition, um, by supporting infrastructure deployment such as electric vehicle charging, charging accommodations for, um, landscaping equipment. Who has adopted this policy? We found at least 19 clean fleet policies across the region, state and country, with several examples, locally in the Bay Area. Let's take a look at what our fleet is comprised of. So we have approximately 250 active vehicles, 60% of which are light duty and 40% of which are medium and heavy duty. And in this case, light duty means passenger vehicles, small trucks and SUVs, whereas medium and heavy duty vehicles are larger trucks and specialty vehicles and um, emergency vehicles such as fire engines. We have a, you know, robust set of landscaping equipment, which includes both handheld landscaping equipment, as well as off-road landscaping equipment, mowers, and also construction equipment like bulldozers as well. So what is the state context in which we're proposing the, um, greenhouse gas free, um, policy? There are a few state regulations that are really pertinent to these purchases already. Uh, there is the Advanced Clean Cars 2 initiative, uh, from the California Air Resources Board, which governs the sales of passenger cars, trucks and SUVs. And starting in 2035 bans the sale of gas vehicles, but not the usage. It's the sales of vehicles moving forward. The Advanced Clean Fleet's regulation, on the other hand, is aimed at transitioning medium and heavy duty vehicle fleet specifically to 0 emission. And from 2024 to uh, 2026 requires at least 50% of annual uh, purchases uh, in the fleet to be 0 emission. And this moves to 100% requirement in 2027. As for landscaping equipment, there's the small off-road engine regulations from the California air resources board that governs these purchases. Uh, starting in 2024, the sale of gas powered equipment was banned so that includes um, handheld landscaping equipment and mowers, um, both push mowers and right on mowers. So on top of this context, um, you know, stuff is proposing this, greenhouse gas brief fleet and vehicle purchasing policy, which in short, would require that, um, all on-road and off-road vehicles and landscaping equipment to be electric, if the following criteria are met. Um, if the, if the equipment is commercially available. If it meets operational needs, um, is financially feasible, which includes fuel savings from switching from gas or diesel to electric, Um, there is EV charging available or can be made available in a reasonable period of time to

[00:14:53] Unknown Speaker: support that equipment and vehicle and purchase, and

[00:14:57] Ms. Lynn: that they're adequate accommodations. And by adequate accommodations, that means that there is, for example, for a vehicle, a parking space where, um, there can be conduit and electric vehicle charging that can reach that space to service that vehicle. So what would, you know, policy implementation entail and what's the cost of fleet electrification? So the cost of, um, light duty fleet electrification in the near term from 2025 to 2030 is about $5.50000. And this cost estimate includes the purchasing price, fueling costs, operations, and maintenance costs. Um, it does not include the electric vehicle infrastructure costs and does not include federal incentives, which we'll talk about um, later in the presentation, the value of that, that that brings to the AV, um, how that supports electric. says. And then just a further note on that. Um, the total cost analysis does consider that we provided in the report, um, is based on existing regulations, um, and we just wanted to highlight the, um, light duty vehicle costs as that would be the highest impact area for this policy. And then looking forward. aside from up one side to the um, electro vehicle charging costs. So on top of the vehicle costs, we have, of course, the infrastructure costs that are needed to support the vehicles. Um, 29 EV charging ports would need to be, um, available at City Hall, municipal operation center, and shoreline maintenance center by 2030. Those are our 3 primary, um, large uh, city vehicle domiciles. So that's kind of the short term, you know, what needs to be deployed in the short term. And then over the course of like the fleet being electrified through 2040, we'll need 113 new EV charging ports at approximately $4000000 cost total. For those installations. And throughout those projects, It's likely that there'll be some electrical infrastructure, upgrades with fire, the process to support, um, the EV charging if there is an adequate power at the site. And we're exploring some programs, which I'll go into that, support that. Um, so stuff has, um, submitted a request for the capital improvement program to, uh, for funding for the electric vehicle charging stations. And everything else on the slide mentions like other supporting efforts that we're looking at to reduce city costs. So the, um, inflation reduction I pay, uh, direct pay incentives, um, are valued at 6, uh, $7500 per, um, light duty vehicle and then, uh, $40,000 for large like heavy duty vehicles. So that's something that we're actively pursuing and applying for. There's also a program from Pacific Gas and Electra called the EV fleets program that pays for a dedicated electrical meter to charge, um, charge electric via city fleet electric vehicles. And we estimate the value of that program at around $200,000 to the city based on a comparable city with the comparable service population. Um, staff is also exploring a California Energy Commission grant opportunity, uh, which is administered through a company called Better Fleet, which will, um, which, if we decide to participate and move forward, will provide charging optimization support. Uh, for the city fleet and subsidized um, electric vehicle charging stations. And we continue to evaluate additional grant opportunities for electric vehicle charging. I'm moving into some progress updates of, you know, we've made a lot of progress so far and wanted to highlight that so in the context of this policy. Uh, the police department, um, is in the process of purchasing a few electric vehicles, including patrol rated electric vehicles and um, some electric vehicles for school resource officers. And we have our, um, police captain there, Wahid, kind of as a champion of our pilot who are working with, um, cross-departmentally to, to implement that electric vehicle pilot. The community services department has also made a few electric vehicle purchases recently to electrify their perks operations, and we see one of the vehicles there showcased that Earth Day. Um, in the background um, and there have been, yeah, a few vehicles purchased to support electric park operations. Uh, CSD also has already converted half of its handheld landscape equipment, uh, to electric already. So half of that has already been converted. And there are 2 additional, um, electric ride on mowers that have been, um, I believe, Forder have been purchased, um, uh, stop or waiting on to implement to support of parks, of servicing. The city also displayed at Earth Day was the electric community shuttle. Um, the city is leasing 4 community shuttles that will go into service later this spring, and that's what is shown on the screen. And the city was awarded a federal grant to purchase for additional, to purchase 4 electric community shuttles, which are expected to arrive in 20127. And then we are also, of course, pursuing electric vehicle charging strategically. So the purchase for 2 um, solar and battery, electric vehicle chargers are underway to support the, um, police departments, electric vehicle, pilots as well as the, um, other vehicles at the municipal operation center. So there's 2 units, one going to the police department and the one going to the municipal operation center. So to summarize, the greenhouse gas free policy would further this progress at the city by establishing a clear, um, leadership role. Integrating decarbonization goals into city operations and supporting financial and infrastructure planning by clear, providing a clear idea of how many vehicles will be electrified over time and a clear policy around that. We anticipate that the policy will have different levels of impact on the different equipment categories. We think there'll be a low level of impact on medium and heavy duty, uh, vehicle purchases because the existing regulation is very strict and very ambitious. Um, as we mentioned, there's half of vehicles need to be 0 mission. Purchases need to be 0 mission, um, from now until 2026 and then they'll all need to be 0 mission after 2027. So that's already pretty ambitious. Um, we expect a medium impact on landscaping equipment. Um, and that this policy would support continued city leadership in the area of landscaping equipment electrification. And then with light duty fleet, that would be, you know, a pretty high impact of the policy, like greatly accelerating the path to electrification. Although I will mention that it is in line with, um, the state policy to ban the sale of vehicle, of gas vehicle starting in 2035 and allows the city to have a smooth ramp up to implementing that policy, um, rather than having a very dramatic implementation, um, once the, um, they're no longer gas vehicle sold. It's kind of in it's in acceleration, but also in line with the existing. state policy. Next up, sweep, yeah, look forward to hearing your feedback and thoughts on the proposed policy and would bring it to city council for adoption if.

[00:23:13] Ms. Lee: Um, I just wanted to underscore, um, how much collaboration has happened already, um, across the many departments that are operating equipment and vehicles, um, through the city operations. This policy is really meant to cement something that's already working really well, but. Part of our efforts are to really ingrain sustainability across the organization. So this is a formalization of something that is already off to a great start. Um, we have colleagues online that are available to answer your questions from the various departments. So, if you have any questions, specific to CSD, for, um, public works, um, our colleagues are also available. And that we'd be happy to send questions.

[00:24:03] Member Alison Hicks: Great. Thank you very much. So we will start with the questions from committee members. Are there any questions? Well,

[00:24:11] Member Pat Showalter: my question really was going to be kind of what you started explaining it. Basically how different would this make it? It would formalize it. But, but in terms of cost outlays. Do you think it would make a big difference and how much money worth them? I

[00:24:28] Ms. Lee: think it will prompt us to have discussions. So already, um, you know, I've met with, um, Derek, grandpa, Bestie, to talk about, if we change the types of vehicles that we're purchasing, how do we reflect that on the budget? How do we capture savings? you know, fuel savings or typically, you know, fuel is budgeted in one department, but the Apple outlay to purchase a vehicle might be in another department. So if we if we change our procurement practice, then how do we change our budget and kind of cost recovery to follow suit? So, having a policy like this would then just open the door to say, okay, well, this is the direction of counsel, we anticipate purchasing more and more electric vehicles. And then having it be rather than it being catch as catch can, which, you know, we've been pretty successful at, as you've seen. This can be a more systematic way to do it. And then we can think about like all of the infrastructure that would support operations and finance things of it. And

[00:25:26] Member Pat Showalter: it seems like there's kind of build in a, um, uh, about. whether it was, you know, financially feasible. That seems to be something that gives, gives whoever's, um, implementing it, some necessary judgment room. So if it's, you know, just really very, very expensive. Because, I mean, in some things, I'm sure, like I was talking to the fire chief last year and fire, apparently fire engines aren't there yet. But they're watching it. And so, um, I can imagine it differs, consider you want these specialty vehicles. It differs a lot depending on which one you're talking about. absolutely. I

[00:26:11] Ms. Lee: mean, mutual aid, for example, if we sent an engine somewhere else to respond to a fire. Would we know that there are chargers there as well? You know, so many considerations for certain specialty classes, and we would definitely not be forcing electric vehicle purchases on all of the departments. This policy was developed in partnership with all of the departments. It, you know, they would be part of uh, any request for exemptions. It's, it really is meant to just turn our, our initial assumption about the kind of vehicle that we would purchase from gas vehicle where we would have to justify purchasing an electric vehicle to saying, We're going to start with the assumption that we would purchase electric, and then we wouldn't make that purchase if it doesn't make sense. or financially. That

[00:27:03] Unknown Speaker: would be, um, The, the policy mentions the capital L, like, maybe. Um... One in finance, or some... It's an interdepartmental

[00:27:18] Ms. Lucky: team, which is, um, Trasty, which our financial administration office. Sometimes works from public works. And it's kind of the inter-departure collaboration of like, does this purchase make sense when it, maybe doesn't align with like the lowest costs or somebody's requesting, something additional? That's

[00:27:38] Unknown Speaker: why I was just curious. It seems like they're they're kind of like, Um, and they go no, go no go decisions about. Yeah. Um, And then you mentioned some of this, um, The subsidies and grand opportunities and it looked like the primary state opportunity was, um, through all energy, mostly, uh, charging infrastructure. Is, is the state providing any other opportunities given that they're the ones posing the, the deadlines or not really right now.

[00:28:17] Ms. Lee: No, the, the inflation reduction act was meant to bear with it. And so it's just such a significant incentive that I think having a regulation that would also accelerate it. Made sense. Um, there aren't additional state incentives right now. We've had various grant offerings, um, for AV charging, both from the federal and state level, not all specifically targeting usable. Some are just for the public at large, to add more aviate structure. But I don't think there are additional state incentives that are current.

[00:28:56] Unknown Speaker: I was kind of getting, if the IRA, you know. You know, there are granted funds, which are probably fine, but then who knows about people ransom, but I just didn't know if anyone was in a try and backstop, any a tiny portion of that.

[00:29:10] Ms. Lee: Right. I mean, we, we, we had a, um, even charging grant application submitted to the, So this, but also, there was a federal one as well. Yeah, it was frozen. So, yeah. Um, that's a quick, that's a quickly change, shifting landscape, so.

[00:29:31] Unknown Speaker: No, I guess that leads you to the one other question I had is, I assume, it looked like in range of the policy, there's enough flexibility to where, You know, we're we're going to do things that are feasible at the moment. So, for example, if we have a temporary economic condition, hopefully a temporary economic condition, like a tariff, that makes charging infrastructure or vehicles, you know, 20% more expensive than they would be a year from now, and we could just bank that money. you know, and, like, catch up.

[00:30:03] Ms. Lee: Yeah, I mean, we may well not purchase as many vehicles in general. Yeah. Right. So, of course, um, But

[00:30:12] Unknown Speaker: we could save those funds so that we have them when the time to strike is right. Um, yeah, just wouldn't want to be in the show more, actually. Um, overpaying. for a year or two. Right.

[00:30:27] Ms. Lee: Sorry to interrupt. I just wanted to make sure, um, this policy doesn't appropriate any funds. Our current vehicle replacement. fund is, Mostly, it's calculated based on, like, for like replacements, most of our vehicles or, yes, they're, they're not GHG free vehicles. And so we have been budgeting up until now for gas vehicles. If you implement this policy, then there will be kind of another piece that has to happen. conjunction with FASD. Perhaps it'll be an accelerated spin down of the existing fleet replacement fund, the short term, and then are rethinking of like, what does the vehicle replacement cost look like? Our preference is to have electric vehicles. It doesn't appropriate. We would bring further things like that to the full council to make any changes in our budget appropriations. Does

[00:31:18] Unknown Speaker: the policy look like it accounted for that because there are options like you, deproying the replacement, retaining surplus. Um, using hybrid vehicles. So So

[00:31:32] Member Alison Hicks: I'll say the overriding umbrella, I'm, for all of my questions is, um, Actually, I'm going to channel Margaret Abic Hoga. Oh, Chris, you're the replacement on the committee who, um, you know, was saying that, uh, she wants, uh, more action and less larger action to planning ratio. And so, um, that's kind of the lens I'm seeing all of this through. Not that I don't want planning. You need planning before action. Um, and thank you for this planning, but so with this, When I read the total cost of ownership for electrification of the fleet by 2042 is, 20000000 plus, compared to 11000000 plus for replacing fossil fuel vehicles like for like. So that's just a $9000000 difference, and we're talking about 2042. Now to 2042. So over 17 years. So that's just like spending half a 1000000 more per year. Which is peanuts in our CIP budget. So, I just, Am I calculating that wrong?

[00:32:51] Ms. Lee: No, and it doesn't take into account, um, like, that's reduction.

[00:32:57] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, savings. It also... Yes. And then on the other side, it also doesn't have that's just replacement of fleet. It doesn't have the charging infrastructure. Save on electricity versus gas. So it doesn't have all the variables. But half a 1000000 a year is, honestly, compared to a lot of other things we do so cheap, that, I guess, my main, at the same time, you have the state telling you that you have to buy, oh, goodbye. But that is. Um, but it just makes me think, if there's any, are there any ways you can think of to tweak it, to do a little more because, to me, this looks like we're really doing this on the cheap, and I lean more into action. You know, and, um, like you said, I don't want to force, uh, firefighters to be an electric fire trucks that won't make it to the fire and back. And, you know, I, I don't mean push it like that. But do you have any, given that it is so cheap? Compared to other things we do, do you and, and, uh, transportation, as we'll see later in the, uh, staff report is important. And it doesn't all come from our own fleet. But, um, but it's an important, um, you know, precedent to set, to show people that we can do it, and they can too. Are there any other um, Are there any other? Are there any things that come to mind that would allow us to tweak it and push it forward a little more? Yeah,

[00:34:29] Ms. Lee: and I have a quick answer for you. And then I see that deputy director Boyer has also indicated that she has a response on behalf of public works, but I will just say that, um, we included a lot of information about the work that was underway already to underscore, um, that all of the departments are actually implementing already. You know, there's electric vehicles in our parks, and in our fleet, we're getting chargers. Um, this is a tool to empower them to go even faster, but it's not, there hasn't already been really great work, um, undertaken by our departments. led in large part by public works. Alison, did you want to add anything?

[00:35:15] Boyer: Yeah, I'll send Bloyer assistant public works director. Um, I have, I have fleet in my, uh, division and one thing I, I, really agree with where you're coming from and and, um, the more we can do to electrify the fleet is great. I just want to point that along with the charging infrastructure. There is a maintenance infrastructure side that our current, um, mechanic area would not meet code and regulation for maintaining an electric fleet. So there is a capital cost that will come as we start to build up our fleet. And I just, I just want you to be aware of that also, um, added costs when you're, you know, we're not, we're not going to change the, we're not changing policy. We're still going to keep moving, but there's a little bit more planning that we still need to do before I'm ready to jump and say we'll do all of the vehicles that we ever have to buy. Um, there, there is some, um, some other, other planning that needs to happen to make sure that we can. If we're not maintaining all those vehicles that we have the right contracts in place to do that. Okay. Um, I

[00:36:30] Member Alison Hicks: think my other questions are relative details to understand it uh, better. Um, Well, there was a little talk in the staff report about how the current federal administration may take actions that have packed the state's ability to enact carbs rules. I don't know if you have any more to say on that or other impacts from the federal administration on this. Yeah, um, well, the

[00:36:56] Ms. Lee: inflation reduction act, of course. has been identified specifically. And then both of the carb rule, referenced, have also been identified, but they're, they stand currently. Um, I don't know how that process will unfold. We're certainly watching it. So you're not going to specific. No, because the EPA granted the state, the ability to regulate the vehicles, um, So the question is whether that can be undone. I think it has to wind through the courts. I just don't know how fast quickly will no one answer. Okay,

[00:37:38] Member Alison Hicks: then, um, So, uh, I'm trying to um, understand what you were trying to tell us through tables one and two. Are you saying that, um, Table 2 is doing it sooner or what's, what were you trying to tell us through? Was it showing us how to, um, the different financial impacts depending on if we did it slower faster? So

[00:38:09] Ms. Lee: table one is for the full fleet, faster and slower table 2 is for the light duty fleet only faster and slower. And I think the, the reason we included the slower is, even though we have this, these regulations that are put in, that are in place that will, that will make us go faster. Um, if they don't, get enforced, I say, you know, if they're dismantled, then, yeah, you would know what the longer term. So that aren't regulations pushing us to just electric vehicles or if they're banned, if they're not banned. Sale of them is not bad. Not electric

[00:38:52] Member Alison Hicks: vehicles is not banned then. Okay. So your assumption is we would go with the faster route, unless... Okay, I don't know, you sound better. Um, Uh, Do you ever look at not only electrifying vehicles, but also buying smaller vehicles? Because I've seen that done in some places and I, make a lot of, That ever part of this policy. I

[00:39:24] Ms. Lee: have not done that personally, but we have looked at the size of our fleet overall. Um, when I was at the county, you know, when we're looking at the total municipal fleet and the actual utilization rate.

[00:39:37] Member Alison Hicks: Oh, okay. That's a good one. I haven't thought of that. Exactly.

[00:39:41] Ms. Lee: With COVID, kind of understanding what that pattern actually is, is a little bit harder because we don't know what our baseline station is. several years have been anomalies, but, um, soon, I think, you know, we'll have data to point us to utilization information.

[00:40:03] Member Alison Hicks: I don't know. Yeah. Oh,

[00:40:06] Ms. Lynn: yes, we have Natalie Hansen, who is with Optity, who conducted the fleet electrification study, so I believe she has a comment.

[00:40:15] Natalie Hansen: Yeah, thank you. Hi everyone. I just know I could chime in here on the downsides of the vehicles. We did look into that in the food study. So the recommendation for each of the replacements that now, you know, sleep has in hand, um, identifies a few opportunities where, uh, you know, an F 250 would have been downsized to an F 150 and it's the F 150 lightning is the 80 replacement because I can fulfill the duties of that F 250 combustion. Um, so yeah, we did. We definitely looked into that in the process of the strategic planning. Okay.

[00:40:57] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, I've heard that there's small fire vehicles that wouldn't replace the big ones, but there was talk in the staff report of doing more research on the fire, and I think that might be a productive part of it, but that's a common note. Um. See. And do we have any preliminary reports on the landscaping equipment and how that's working out? Because I, there are a lot of people interested and also people saying it does and doesn't work well, so I'd like to know.

[00:41:31] Ms. Lee: Um, Mr. Youngberg from the Community Services Department is online. Yep.

[00:41:38] Tim Youngberg: Yeah, good evening. Tim Youngberg, Parks and Open Space Manager. Uh, we've been using the electric equipment for quite a while now, quite a few years, and We've been going about it as very paced. Um, we haven't gone out and bought just one particular piece of equipment. We've actually been trying different vendors. Um, different models, different brands, to try to see what works best before we go all in. So, uh, like the staff report said, we're a little bit over 50% of our handheld equipment being um, all electric. And it's just kind of as something that is a gas 2 cycle engine. We're not going to replace it. We're not repairing it. We're going straight to electric. So no new gas, uh, powered equipment is being being purchased this time. So, um, a technology is evolving daily. You know, things that we were buying 2 or 3 years ago have gotten tenfold better. Same thing with their, our mowers. Uh, mowers just a few years ago, you didn't have the ride on more that was electric. It is now. So, uh, we're just kind of going it as slow paced. Uh, the good thing on our end as far as charging, we just need a plug to be able to charge our batteries and our backpacks, that type of stuff. Not as in-depth as the cars and the trucks that we're purchasing. So we have like little satellite, um, storage buildings along all the parks where we can charge our batteries, we can do that type of stuff. And just a little side note and self-promotion as we get ready to open Evelyn Park here in probably the month of May. It'll be the 1st all electric park. So no gas consumption will be done with the landscaping equipment at that park. Um, the mowers, the blowers, everything will be all electric.

[00:43:23] Member Alison Hicks: So are different perks done differently? It's just that you don't have all electric for everywhere. Right.

[00:43:30] Tim Youngberg: So, you know, not to get into the to the minutiae of how all the parks are, but typically one staff member has maybe 5 parks. So that person might have all the electric equipment on hand, but the other staff member might have one or 2 pieces of gas and one piece of electric. So, as things get phased out or phased in, will start to have all electric and then all the parks will eventually be all electric. But until that happens, you know, there might be somebody that doesn't have it and I don't want to, you know, put a sign up that said this park is all electric when somebody rolls up with a gas mower and that kind of defeats the purpose. I

[00:44:08] Member Alison Hicks: see, great. Thank you, because that was, I didn't understand that when I read it in the staff report. Okay, my last question, Mr. Youngberg, do you talk, do you or can you ever, uh, or anybody with your staff talk to folks from the day worker center who are training the, uh, educating, um, people who do landscaping throughout Mountain View and maybe other cities as well? You know, because you're trying so many different kinds of equipment? So,

[00:44:35] Tim Youngberg: uh, a couple of things. One is we, I know that the, the group there with sustainability has sponsored day worker events. We've held it at Ringsdorf Park, where they've used the new electric equipment, so that is definitely happening. Um, I host various events for other agencies. We've done 3 or 4 now at McKelvey, where we bring in all sorts of other agencies and try out new electric equipment. So, um, we're trying to be the leaders in it and and try to put forth, you know, when, when we're asking these local landscape companies to start using all electric and we're not, that wouldn't look very good. So we're kind of the 1st ones to be going all electric and, you know, leading by example. Okay,

[00:45:14] Member Alison Hicks: great. That's what I wanted to hear. Okay. So those are all, my questions, did anyone think of any additional questions? Okay. So then are there any comments from the audience on this item? I

[00:45:31] Bruce Kearney: do have a comment. I'm Bruce Kearney. A longtime resident. Back in 2008, I led the 1st environmental sustainability task force. And one of the core attributes that test source was our, our belief that biodiesel was the answer to many of the challenges facing the planet. Turns out that biodiesel was sort of just something that came and sort of went. And so the reason I bring that up is I would like to ask staff to be aware of staff and the committee to be aware of 2 things in particular. One is the recent announcement that a refinery in Northern California and a refinery in Southern California folks announced that they're going to shut down, reducing the supply of gasoline in our state by 21%. Our state is sort of an island for gasoline. And so if the supply goes down by 21%, even as electric cars become one more popular, I would anticipate, in the near term, very rapid increase in the price of gasoline and diesel fuel for vehicles. So wondering if that assumption was in any way in the data that you're looking at. Second thing I'd like to say is that a month or so ago out of China came the news that there was a company whose EV could be recharged about 80% and five minutes. If this technology is real. is an absolute game changer. We make me want to say, well, why are we putting chargers in multi-unit, multi-family apartments? It's just going to be the gas station model. We'll have 18 or 20 EV stations, like we have 18 or 20 gas stations in Mountain View. They'll sell you snacks and beer while you charge and refuel your EV. They must have an enormous connection to the grid. You wouldn't want too many of these around. It's almost substation level. They're going to be charging 5 or 6 vehicles all at the same time. So, all of the assumptions about city owned EV charging infrastructure up to 2040. I think have to have a huge asterisk around them. It's my understanding that this Chinese technology for rapid EV charging is something that the company who developed it will be wanting to license to other EV manufacturers. So we may see it in the U.S. quite soon. Um, Let's see. Oh, um, the woman who spoke about retraining the maintenance people. I've gone to an AV for 7.5 years. It is just a light duty vehicle, but there's no maintenance. I changed the white person, the tires and the air filters. That is 100% of the job. And you know what? I can do that myself, except for the tires. I have to buy those at America's Tire. So, um, I'm very pleased by what you put on the table and look forward to its rapid implementation. Okay,

[00:48:24] Member Alison Hicks: any other in person speakers?

[00:48:30] Hala Shawani: Good evening, my name is Hala Shawani. I am also a longtime resident in Mountain View. Yeah, the same thought occurred to me. I've had an EV for 11 years and another one for 6 years, and there's no maintenance. The electric cars have one or 2 electric motors. That's it. Uh, and batteries, and the batteries, if they, you know, They need replacement, hopefully they don't, but if they do that, maybe a big cost, but that doesn't happen for a long time. Uh, so there, there really, there is much, much lower maintenance for the eating. That's something to consider. Um, yeah, and thank you for this great, uh, Um, proposal because it makes it like you're saying, More system, systemic. So that it happens hopefully at a faster rate, and I support, uh, all of a sudden, uh, and her remarks that that would be, because we want these actions to take place faster. Or in the greenhouse gas emissions for electric, or 2 electric cars is probably the most impactful in all of the categories. Yeah, I'm trying to believe that. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, no,

[00:49:47] Mary Day: your video. I'm also excited to see that this is going to be on the new policy that's coming in place and, um, Sort of a question. Um, I, uh, I'm hoping that if the Parks and Rec Department has contractors, such as, I know they have some contractors, the tennis course of pasta, um, that they are also moving to electric, um, devices. So I see people over there are group blowers. I don't know if this is a park staff or if it's the tennis park staff. But, um, Possibly we've got contractors at Shoreline or other places too. So I'm hoping we're pushing them also to go all electric. Thank you. Triggers

[00:50:28] Member Alison Hicks: another question. to me for Tim. Tim, are you finding that the electric equipment is much quieter? Oh

[00:50:37] Tim Youngberg: yeah, yeah, absolutely. Um, I, I think it was in the report or it's, Um, I actually might have just posted it recently. It's like 50% quieter. Okay. I mean, it depends on on, you know, a blower. It's just the type of noise, the type of piece of equipment, usually like for like, it's definitely, um, less noise. Okay, thank you very much. Okay,

[00:50:59] Member Alison Hicks: are there any virtual speakers? No virtual speakers? So, uh, now I, uh, return this item back to the committee for comments, and adoption, or acceptance of the report.

[00:51:19] Ms. Lee: A recommendation that staff bring this to fun consent. Of course. So

[00:51:25] Member Pat Showalter: comments. Well, basically, I think this is a great idea, and I really liked your, um, explanation that what, what this would do. We sort of flipped the conversation. So, a standard operating procedure would be to order, unless there were reasons not to do that. I remember like that. I think that having that as a sort of stated goal is always helpful for everybody to have it just clear. So that's one comment. But another thing, we didn't really talk too much about the benchmarking. You mentioned that, um, uh, other communities in the, in the area, and, um, state had this. And, um, So, I was kind of wondering a little bit about how this is going with them. And then, again, another comment I have, is that, um, it seems like, from a health point of view, the, um, the convergence to, um, meat blowers and, um, other landscaping handheld landscaping equipment is really important from a health point of view. I mean, it's noisy and smelly enough if you're just nearby. But if you're the person holding that equipment. It really does impact you. So, so I'm interested in what we can do to, um, uh, if we could do it as an add-on to help get more of this, um, equipment out. And I know Berkeley has a lending library of, um, of basic equipment. There's apparently like 50 tools that many people have in their garage, but you only use once or twice a year, and um, you can take out of the library. So that would be something I would be kind of interested in, particularly with respect to the leaf flowers because, um, uh, it sounds like our parks, thank you, um, Mr. Youngblood. sounds like our parks has really done a lot of piloting and, and they've, they've figuring out what's good. You know, what are good, and and they're, they'll probably continue to do that. And that's very helpful for people who, um, you know, use these really sporadically. They don't really have access to information, or it's hard to get access to information about what really works well. I mean, there is consumer reports, but in other things, but I don't know, it's just not the same as you actually talk to people who... So anyway, the lending library is a comment. I would, I would like something, if we're going to do any add-ons, a living library of, um, uh, handheld equipment, something. Thank you for the suggestion.

[00:54:12] Ms. Lee: Our, our 1st attempt at the lending library was to supply the day worker center with the lending library, kind of on the assumption that they would have a very high utilization rate for all of their, that's a great height. So we started with that, and then we'd be happy to approach the library and talk about phase 2 of that. But thinking that the Day Worker Center was the best starting point. Doesn't

[00:54:36] Member Alison Hicks: act as a lending library as well as it?

[00:54:38] Ms. Lee: I know that the, um, the library does offer other items that you tomorrow besides folks. and has been a model in other locations, other jurisdiction. Oh, I meant, does the day worker center act as a lending library?

[00:54:54] Member Alison Hicks: That's a good answer to it. I

[00:54:55] Ms. Lee: didn't ask. I believe the Day Worker Center uses less of their clients. Check out those programs because they are they've been trained in how to use operate the equipment safely.

[00:55:13] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, more comments?

[00:55:15] Unknown Speaker: Comment, some move that we recommend the direct policy for council adoption. Okay,

[00:55:21] Member Alison Hicks: I think, 2nd my comments, are, are we going to add, I would support the idea of the, of phase 2 of the lending, look, exploring phase 2 of the lending library. Um, I mean, I just think the, the landscaping equipment is important to a lot of people, for the uh, carbon reduction reasons, but also, um, and probably air quality, too. We

[00:55:49] Ms. Lee: will engage with the library about that immediately. I think we would, if the committee is okay with it. Keep it separate from the municipal operations, orientation of this policy, but certainly we'll pursue that immediately.

[00:56:03] Member Alison Hicks: And the other thing I wanted to support, it was in the staff report, but it says, um, that some, Oh, I don't, I don't know if I can find my exact notes, but it said that, uh, For some kinds of fleet. I think not the light duty, but the heavier duty, maybe, maybe fire in particular, maybe it was a variety of them, that the analysis could be more nuanced than it now is. Um, so I would also, I think the staff report implied that you were going to maybe do a more nuanced analysis in future, or do we, are you going to do that, definitely, or should we, um, encourage you to do that? That's an interesting question. Um, I

[00:56:53] Ms. Lee: think right now what we're trying to do is watch and see what happens with the heavy duty, medium and heavy duty regulation. Um, If it stands, then there are exemptions for larger public safety, you know, but, um, vehicles. At that point, we could look at seeing other opportunities for accelerating, but if that doesn't stand, then maybe it's a larger question. So, I think maybe giving us a little bit of time to see what happens with those rules if they are actually implemented in the next year or so. And then deciding, you know, as we implement this, deciding if there's more action needed on heavy duty. particular. So we could certainly come back to CSC. Um, you know, immediately if things change with the regulatory environment or, Miss Lynn, would you say, a year's time would be about right to, Delve further if the heavy duty rules are still done. That

[00:57:49] Ms. Lynn: makes sense since we also report out generally on our municipal organization, if it's. Yeah,

[00:57:55] Ms. Lee: we do also plan to come back to talk about municipal emissions, broadly speaking. concept. Next year, or the year after, um. Barring any immediate changes. Yeah,

[00:58:09] Member Alison Hicks: I'd just like to hear about that. I don't think is a large part of the city's emissions is fire trucks, but, um, but I would like to hear, particularly also if they're smaller ones and it's that whole realm of things I would like to hear. Um, And thing. That's all the comments I had. Any comments? Okay. So we have a motion and a 2nd all those in favor. Five passes. Okay. Now we're on 5.2, which is 2023 community greenhouse gas emissions inventory, and this item will be presented by sustainability division staff. This league will commence the presentation. Thank

[00:58:58] Ms. Lee: you. Um, this item will be largely presented by our 2 climate fellows, which I don't believe the full committee has had a chance to leave. I'm happy to introduce Grace Conn and Remy Ren, who have, um, really been lead on the development of our 2023 greenhouse gas emissions. But to start, Ms. Conn, and this runoff. I just wanted to, I have very similar remarks to, um, the gas free vehicle and equipment policy that, you know, we're, we're doing a lot of analysis right now. You'll note that the memo includes reference to, or do you have it as the organization strategy work, which is underway and will be coming to talk with you about next month. Um, and all of this is happening in the context of, of, you know, quickly shifting bigger picture that we're trying to operate with. So, all things. from, you know, can our partners at Silicon Valley Clean Energy continue to procureable energy at affordable rates when and maybe tariff supplied to equipment that would be producing energy or electric vehicles can procure them as easily, you know, all these shifts that are happening, um, So, We've developed this inventory. Um, We're excited to share the information. Not as much with a specific focus on the year 2023. There are some trends that maybe are just the tale of COVID that are still kind of showing up in our emissions, especially around transportation. People's work from home, you know, back to return to office, patterns hadn't, I think, really stabilized yet. Shift was less, but there's still some changes in that arena. Um, So, we're trying to shift our use of this inventory to be a tool to help us think about the bigger picture. So I guess there may be individual shifts. you know, maybe, SVCEs, um, multiplication factor that they give us for how clean their electricity was for a given year. Maybe that's shifted a little bit, but, you know, we look at the long goal. They're still heading in the same direction as us of greenhouse gas free electricity. And, and if we're, if we're moving to electrify and they're moving to clean our electricity. you know we feel like that's in very good alignment. So the, the, the yearly shifts are one thing, but, but the real value in doing these inquiries and doing them annually is that it allows us to look at the trends. You know, what is happening in the big picture? You'll see we've introduced a rolling average set. We still have to kind of roll everything through COVID, so it's going to be a little bit puppy in the coming years, but at some point, we'll get to a point where we have enough of a pattern that we can say, okay, in year 2030, how did the last, how did 2030 compare to the 5 years prior to that? Um, That'll give us a better sense and it'll help reduce the noise of individual annual swings. in the long run are not, um, forwarded from where maybe they are. So, um, We're starting to shift the way we use the inventory. You'll see it, um, Like,

[01:02:20] Member Pat Showalter: for example, including the 4 year

[01:02:22] Ms. Lee: average and comparing our individual year to that as close to just comparing it to the year. Um, to try to get a clearer perspective on what, what we're actually learning from the inventory. It's a lot of data And sometimes that can be a blessing and a curse, you know, like so much information, but we don't want to read into every single category. What we really want to do is take a step backwards and say, Are we heading in the right direction? Are we going to get there quickly enough? The only other thing I'll include is that we're working on this decarbonization strategy. Currently our goals are to be carbon neutral by 2045. Um, as you know, CSC directed us to look at accelerating those goals. So, It may look good. We're on trek for now, but if we accelerate our carbon neutrality goal or a decarbonization goal, then maybe we'll have even more work for that force. So, picture takeaways that it looks good, and there's a lot of unknowns still. With that, I'd like to hand it over to... Um,

[01:03:38] Ms. Lynn: yeah, so to give some background on our methodology and diving into the inventory. It's prepared using a national protocol, the US community protocol, and through that, there are some measures that are directly measures, directly measured, and then other, um, emissions that are estimates. So we have direct, um, measurements for energy used, um, water consumed and treated, and organic, um, waste that goes to the landfill. And then we use estimates for certain measures, such as on-road transportation and usage of off-road mobile equipment. So it's just a overview on the methodology. It's about 2 Yeah, to miscant. Thanks. Uh,

[01:04:21] Unknown Speaker: this slide illustrates the results of the community inventories, 2015 through 2023, and a rolling average, uh, past inventories, 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2019, was used to compare the most recent inventory, 2023, and it was used to gauge community emissions reductions. 2020 through 2022 were not included in the rolling average, as they are considered anomalies due to the pandemic. And some impacts may still be occurring in 2023. And it remains to be seen if 2023 or 2024 is our new normal post-pandemic. The rolling average comparison allows us to view GHG emission trends over time, and it really provides a general understanding on how policies, programs, and technologies are reducing emissions. The city is on the path towards the decarbonization goal to be carbon neutral by 2045. As the 2023 emissions are 32% below the rolling average baseline. This chart also shows the percent of emissions reductions per sector. On road transportation, building energy, and the water sectors have made notable reductions due to state policies and city actions, which will be outlined in the following respective slides. This pie chart shows the breakdown of the 2023 emissions by sector. On road transportation and natural gas for building energy contribute to the vast majority of community wide emissions, totaling at 80%. And for this presentation, we will walk you through the inventory with a particular focus on these 2 sectors.

[01:06:08] Unknown Speaker: So the 1st section we're gonna focus on is transportation, which makes up 58% of our total house gas emissions. Um, here we can see emissions broken down by type of vehicle, and as we can see, the passenger light duty gasoline, uh, continues to dominate, um, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per year. So in looking at the rolling average baseline, we can see that 2023 emissions have dropped by 44% from our 4 year rolling average. Um, Daily per capita vehicle miles traveled or VMT has also decreased from the 4 year average, um, of 18.4 miles to 14.8 miles. This can be traced due to a combination of effective emission production strategies, um, as well as uh, transportation effects from the pandemic, such as increased remote work rates. Another aspect of this that we wanted to highlight was 0 emission vehicle sales in Santa Clara County and Mountain View, such as pottery electric vehicles primarily. Um, so in 2023, 0 mission vehicles made up 43% of total vehicles sold in Santa Clara County. And I believe this was mismarked in the staff report. So it is 43%. Um, and Uh, in 2024, it was actually also around 43%. But as we can see here, The numbers did rise in Mountain View zip code specifically. So, yeah, so the city continues to work on a variety of different strategies to keep our emissions down in the transportation sector, um, such as expanding transit oriented development, carbonizing, municipal fleet operations, boarding walkability, cuisine biking and public transit ridership, supporting remote work, and reinforcing the community shift to 0 emission vehicles. Also wanted to note that staff, or is bringing a multifamily EV charging gap analysis to the CSE in June, where we will talk about filling in gaps and even clothing for multifamily communities. Um, stuff is also supporting a transportation demand management measure that will be supporting increasing multimodal transportation methods.

[01:08:48] Unknown Speaker: So this chart shows energy emissions from electricity and natural gas usage in Mountain View. The energy sector makes up 32% of total community emissions in 2023. Low emission electricity from Silicon Valley Clean Energy continues to drive the majority of Mountain View's Energy Sector emissions reductions, as shown in the large drop in emissions at 2017. Reductions in electricity emissions are also attributed to the city's reach codes, which regulate the design and construction of buildings. And what's most notable about the energy sector over the years is that natural gas emissions have remained mostly constant over time and make up over 70% of the energy center. To address this, the city is encouraging electrification of space and water heating of residential and commercial buildings. And in 2024, the city council adopted low cost pre-wire requirements for new buildings that would allow gas appliances to be easily replaced with an electric alternative in the future. Additionally, we just launched the year of the water heater campaign. Um, on the screen. We have Watson, our heat pump water heater mascot. And this includes providing heat pump water heater rebates to help residents electrify their homes. And we also just received a $100,000 grant from SVCE to help further enhance the year of the water heater campaign. Additionally, council decided to include the end of flow policy and council priorities for 2025 through 2027 and reach codes are anticipated to be developed in the next year and we expect those to help reduce emissions in the energy sector. And this concludes our presentation, and I'll hand it that to. Uh,

[01:10:38] Ms. Lee: thank you. Um, I just wanted to add that we also have staff online if you have questions, especially to the transportation missions. Some pachos online from the transportation team with, um, with that, we'd be happy to take any questions. Okay. Thank you very much.

[01:11:03] Member Alison Hicks: Do committee members have pulsions?

[01:11:12] Ms. Lee: I'll just add that, um, Al and Ms. Boyer are also online from public works to answer questions about the cell waste emissions as well as, um, where I think, across all of the building submissions. Well,

[01:11:30] Member Pat Showalter: I would like to know why the water emissions went to. And then your... It's great. Yes. What?

[01:11:40] Ms. Lee: What happened? Oh, someone online? How would you like to?

[01:11:46] Unknown Speaker: No water quality control that? Probably had something. They changed their operation.

[01:11:52] Member Pat Showalter: Yeah, they went to better operations. right. I read that.

[01:11:56] Member Alison Hicks: Is that, is that... Yeah, it's in this... But the public might want to know now that you broke it. It's a big change. It's big, yeah. It's

[01:12:06] Member Pat Showalter: worth highlighting. And we pay. We pay for most of what happens at the, um, how long to get plant, although how long does the work because most of the place comes from us. So... Okay, yeah. So it was. Sorry, yeah, sorry.

[01:12:29] Unknown Speaker: Good evening, council members, you're you're asking about the wastewater emissions reduction. And energy use? Um,

[01:12:36] Member Pat Showalter: I was more. There's a water category. And there's a reduction in the water category, and I, um, the wastewater. Is it all attributed to the wastewater improvement? Okay, that mostly.

[01:12:51] Unknown Speaker: The wastewater one is attributed to the Palo Alto region of water quality control plant. Our

[01:12:57] Unknown Speaker: freshwater is mostly gravity fed. There's not a full lot of energy used. Yeah. So, delivery.

[01:13:06] Member Pat Showalter: Are we expecting additional, um, I know the Palo Alto treatment plant is is having a, they've been rebuilding for about a decade, um, Are we expecting additional, um, reductions in the future, is this kind of it for a while?

[01:13:25] Unknown Speaker: They may be working on some, um, energy reduction or looking at others, um, clean energy sources, but I don't have all the details at this time, so I'll have to get back to you on the specific.

[01:13:36] Member Pat Showalter: Thank you.

[01:13:36] Unknown Speaker: No problem. So sorry, um, sorry, you're talking about the water pump stations and that would be attributed to our use of Silicon Valley clean energy, I believe, because we do our water systems are just power from PG&E. And then we do have some solar panels installed that may be offsetting some of the energy use. So

[01:14:07] Member Pat Showalter: we have a lot to think, Silicon Valley Clean Energy for them all, that's really, which is just good. It's kind of a

[01:14:12] Ms. Lee: long love letter to SPC. Yeah. Um.

[01:14:20] Member Pat Showalter: Well, I guess my only other question is, um, Are you satisfied? I mean, this has been an, uh, uh, you know, the methodologies and that kind of thing. This has been sort of an evolving process over time that I've been watching it, which makes sense. But how do you feel about this? Do you feel that this is a mature, um, kind of procedure that you have set up now? Or are you expecting, you know, as in the next few years, there'd be big changes? I mean, how do you feel about how mature this process is now? Um, I name this list. So, it's

[01:14:58] Ms. Lee: lucky, in fact, the entire team before you, um, was not here during all of the years of the rolling average. So it is mature for the city as an organization, but all of us are new and have come from different agencies who have had different, to how to measure emissions and what level of effort makes sense. So, We've been refining this over time. You'll notice that we're stretching out, you know, the municipal inventory because that allows us to capture gains that are being made by our colleagues in the various departments. You know, it takes time to electrify the fleet or to electrify major systems in buildings. And so, conducting an inventory annually might not make sense. Likewise, for the community scale, we're moving towards this rolling average. You know, we may come to, um, this committee with a recommendation that we move to a biannual process as well for a community wide infant. So, um, it's it's, we're still evolving it, um, because all of us are still relatively new to the city. I think amongst those of us who are here. I'm the longest standing with the team and been here just over 3 years. So, um, yeah,

[01:16:12] Member Pat Showalter: the change to do it annually was involved on, uh, a really, quite a few different methodologies. And, um, and it made the process, um, uh, several years, really, uh, because there's a lot of hand work to being able to do it and understood like 3 or 4 months. So about that, people working a lot on it. It's a big deal. But anyway, I, I, so I just, I'm interested in how mature it is and, and I do think it's really valuable to continue to, um, I mean, as a comment, I guess, to continue to evaluate these processes and what makes sense for us.

[01:17:00] Unknown Speaker: I only had one for the, um, for the off road mobile emissions, can you just help me, um, It's been a few years. What category or examples of things that was been in industrial equipment versus commercial equipment. Where that where that line is drawing. Yeah,

[01:17:18] Member Alison Hicks: and I'll just, that was one of my questions. So I won't, like, what is it? is my question. Good question. I

[01:17:26] Unknown Speaker: do not know. An example of industrial would be forklift. versus commercial.

[01:17:36] Unknown Speaker: So they're trying to meld construction equipment, industrial and commercial in my head because A couple of them are very stable. construction, obviously, went with the economy. It's not an important question. It's just something. We're

[01:17:53] Ms. Lee: happy to circle back with a more specific answer for you.

[01:17:57] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, actually, my question on that, because it's been stable, but as other things go down, it becomes a more prominent, and it doesn't. It becomes more prominent. So I, I'm like, at some point, I want to understand what that is because I actually, don't have much of an idea of what it is and whether they, you know, are they electrifying? audience. Okay, so my questions were, so, overall, on the, is related to this mature. So the staff report says the inventory doesn't capture all local emissions related to the community like emissions from food, air travel, manufactured goods, they're hard to measure, et cetera. Um, So, You know, staff reports have been saying that since I've been here, and I'm wondering as methodologies, um, you know, move on. I feel like there's a lot of stuff that that is actually in the cardinal footprint of the city that we're not, that we're just like, yeah, we can't make that. But as we, um, you know, as we reduce vehicle and uh, building emissions in the water treatment. Um, Some of these are, you know, if you put them on the pie chart, they might be larger than what we have, and at some point, are we going to capture them? Is there any, there are cities doing that? Have you heard any talk of it? I'm not. Have you heard of me?

[01:19:27] Ms. Lucky: No, I think... A member of show Walter's comment too, is, you know, the value of the inventory. I mean, there's good value in measuring the things we can measure, and then trying to talk through or present, going forward, kind of the other actions, not be so much captured in the inventory, but are still impactful, HD emission reduction. Well,

[01:19:50] Ms. Lee: the way that we try to think about it is sort of, and already the, this inventory is a bit of a stretch because it's sort of like, what do we as a organization? Right, as a city. leverage over. So, this bigger lifecycle question of emissions that evolve, you know, emerge from the food choices that people make or, you know, packaging and global supply chains, even if we have that information very specific to the city of Mountain View, our sway over that is much lower than, like, our own built environment, within our city limits, or the ways that we facilitate better transportation patterns, or reduction in transportation emissions, even that, right? It's hard for us to, force individual households to purchase electric vehicles. We have some level of influence by making charging infrastructure available. We have a grid, we can handle that level of demand for electricity. Um, So, we've tended to focus on this level of emissions, mostly because from that can flow the most, the lowest hanging fruit in terms of like what programs and policies can we do as a result of this. It doesn't mean that we don't also think about those other levels of emissions. So you may have attended some of our plant-based eating, um, community events where we try to engage the community in this, these kinds of discussions. So, raising awareness, um, community engagement around bigger questions of like what's driving climate change. We still do try to focus on that. Um, but trying to put effort into measuring it. When the methodology is still quite hard. Um, We haven't gotten into that space. We haven't evolved to that yet. As soon as we can decarbonize all of the buildings and once Denise is done with that, then we...

[01:21:51] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, it seems to me there might be some opportunity, like, uh, air flight, for instance, in the same way that we measure, uh, car travel, and it might be informative. It's kind of, um, you make choices. Do you fly or do you vacation or something? Um, I realize you can work on these even if you don't measure them, but I was just wondering if they're, if I would like to know if you find other people bring some of those. We

[01:22:21] Ms. Lee: will certainly continue to ask. I was just at climate week, um, all of last week and, you know, there were 25,000. from across the country that are working. climate change. Didn't see a lot of discussion on a life cycle, but, you know, we continue to reach out to our peers. And we want to know what other folks are up to. So, certainly, on the lookout. Because we also care about that. Yeah,

[01:22:46] Ms. Lucky: I'm just interested in the same pieces. Talk to Igli as well. of the inventory about what's working or what things we would like to stand upon. We've been doing this for over a decade now, and that's why most cities use, provided by, I don't know, to their clear path tool. So you think that's promising as well that they're also very open. understanding how to cure their inventory and capture more of the emissions that makes sense for local policy. I

[01:23:20] Ms. Lee: went to an Hickory session last Wednesday, and I talked to them, and we're actually going to be scheduling follow-up meeting with them to learn about. They have a clear path 2.0. So, um, you know, we're asking, there's that intent. I, that is why the new, you know, so they have to point out. Right, exactly. They have more information about economic trade-offs for organization. Um, and I think they're starting to verge into um, adaptation. So we will we'll ask them about the... scopes of emissions as well.

[01:23:57] Member Alison Hicks: So, um, on transportation policy, uh, it says, um, it's challenging to capture, because it is aggregates and modeling, and I've, you know, I've always been a modeling from, from municipalities around us is my understanding. And I've always been a little troubled by that because if we're doing way better than them, We just assume that we're doing just as well or if we do way worse, that we're doing just as well. And so, is there an opportunity to measure that I've heard there are other ways of measuring that may be coming online. Is that true and closer to coming home? Um, Well,

[01:24:44] Ms. Lee: and the city has had an, uh, an interesting approach to long transportation emissions. We've created a customized, um, transportation demand management model, then, um, updated it periodically about every 10 years. And so our inventories have this cycle of, like, very accurate to, like, you know, over time, um, the model becomes outdated and is in need of update. I believe the update is underway. So we're very excited about having a new look on our transportation emissions. Um, Mr. Potcho is online. transportation team and Hopefully, I didn't botch that too much. Did you have anything to add? Um,

[01:25:33] Mr. Potcho: fine, good evening. Thanks for the question. So, right, I think our traffic section is kind of in the midst of updating the travel demand model. Well, uh, the transportation sections work on developing the transportation van management ordinance, um, which you're aware and will bring, bringing the, uh, framework to council on June 10th. So we've set ambitious targets for, um, trip reduction. And this follows from, um, areas in North Bay sure where we set, um, really high trip reductions for peak hour, and we've now are looking at reducing average daily trips. Um, we understand. Because of COVID, we're not seeing the volumes of traffic to the extent that we were pre-COVID. Um, so while we're, while we're seeing reduced travel volume, um, we are seeing a higher single occupancy vehicle rate. And so we do believe that the ordinance can be a key strategy for reducing SOV trips and reducing our per capita per employee VMT rate as well. So, um, It's kind of key strategies from transportation or focused on, because again, that's the stickier part. And so Danielle's point, um, The city only really has purview, I think from, My understanding is, you know, scope one emissions, the one that we have direct control that's within our city boundaries. Scope 2 and 3 emissions are a little bit stickier because it, it follows along supply chain, um, that we don't immediately have control over, but I know that they, there are policies at the state level, such as SB 253, which requires companies, uh, in gross receipts over 1000000000 having to report their scope 2 and 3 emissions. So that, I think, would give jurisdictions, visibility over how much emissions that they're actually generating, um, and would help us kind of corroborate our own inventory. So that's something that transportation and sustainability are kind of in conversation with. But I don't know if that answers your question. Thank you. Um,

[01:27:51] Member Alison Hicks: so another question, um, I was glad to see under transportation, virtual travel and EVs added. Do you, um, I was about to drop ride hailing in Mountain View. And, um, I don't know. how you're going to fit that in. I mean, I guess. Maybe it's no different. Like you have a category which is, um, taxis, that sounds a little outtaking. Taxis, motorcycles or other means. I guess. Ride hailing, EV. Ride hailing, I. So I'm just interested in how that, um, changes this, I say a weimo in front of Hope's partner idling all the time. Seen that too. Um, I don't really understand the technology and what's going on there, but I would like to know how that's affecting. I mean, it's electric, so maybe it's just, you know, charging, but are they just driving around all the time? Maybe it's more traffic than a commission's thing, but, um, and I also am afraid that they will impact mass transit use. Um, Unless policy makers make an effort to make sure they don't. So I would like to find to track that in some way. I guess that's a comment, sorry. Um, And the year of the water heater campaign, are you gonna come and report back to us in more detail about that? Okay, so that will hold all questions and comments on that. Um, Uh. And then the the food service is this ordinance is that enforced? Uh,

[01:29:53] Ms. Lee: we don't have Miss Cutter on the line. Um, I don't know what phase we are in the enforcement. I know a scale is a grace. That's kind of a transition period for commercial establishments. Yeah, good experience. I'd

[01:30:13] Member Alison Hicks: love to hear a report back on that too, because I feel like it's not frustrating. Um And then uh, figure 7 solid waste emissions, why did it spike up in 2017 through ninth? So it's figure 7 of his solid waste dimensions, and there's a big spike in 17, 19. Why? Otherwise, it's still going down. Um...

[01:30:54] Ms. Lucky: more development, um, It's being generated. Oh, really? So the economic booms in the recessions, you'll definitely see ways. So much track with economic... solid waste and building and demolition. I think there's a couple state regulations too, that have been regulating organic waste as well that have been coming online. Okay,

[01:31:18] Member Alison Hicks: those are my questions. So now, if there are no more questions from committee members, it would be any comments from the public. Could

[01:31:26] Unknown Speaker: I jump in quickly to circle back to the off-road emissions question? I looked into it a bit more. So the, um, Industrial equipment includes things such as aerial lifts, forklifts, material handling equipment, and sweepers or scrubbers. And then the commercial equipment includes air compressors, gas compressors, generator sets, pressure washers, pumps, and welders. So those are some examples of...

[01:31:55] Member Alison Hicks: Well, those things that are unique, more unique than vehicle cars that are likely to electrify more slowly. Okay. No. Thank you. Okay, if there are no more committee member questions, members of the public in person. Uh, yeah. Hello,

[01:32:19] Hala Shawani: Chawani, again. Um, I'm just curious about the natural gas. Uh, inventory. It seems like, uh, according to the one of the graphs that you presented, um, it's not going yet. Um, it's staying pretty much constant. which tells me that the efforts for, um, electrifications for, as a general or commercial use of the buildings for, you know, heating the buildings, uh, water and et cetera, is not, is is not changing, which is really surprising to me, because I think there have been a lot of efforts by the sustainability committee and the city to do electrification, um, you know, hurts and, um, programs like the cool blocks and incentives and, you know, from various places. So I just wondered if there's any explanation for them.

[01:33:24] Bruce Kearney: Bruce Kearney, again. Um, so a couple things. One of the 1st slides said the reason you do an annual inventory is compare actuals to golds, but this inventory is golden. There's no mention of the goals. In fact, the city doesn't actually have a 2023 goal and has a 20 and a 2025 that you need to interpolate to find the goal. But I think it's should be there. In previous inventories. We've had a nice graft that makes it clear that we were tracking pretty well. And then COVID came along and made it look like... But of course, we know we're not. Um, The good news about the rising electricity, um, footprint is that SVCE says that they're going to get things back under control and get the GHG emissions from the electricity that they cure very close to 0 again. In 2023, they were actually pretty substantially high. So that's a source of future reductions as more inventories are done. Um, the other thing that I learned from Denise, because I asked, but isn't in this report, is that, um, our service population continues to be well below the pre-pandemic levels. And all of that, all the decrease is from workers, not from nighttime residents. So that's something that may or may not change as the economy moves forward. Um, I believe there was a change too, to say that we're going to take a closer look at, um, emissions from those companies who have the ability to purchase power privately, not from SVC or from PG&E. And we know that they're almost all committed to zero carbon emissions. So that's a change from previous emission protocols, as I recall. Um, All right, so what is what is the takeaway I'd like you to take away from us? Um, We had the great one time impact of SVCE. We're looking forward to the ongoing impact of EVs replacing gasoline powered vehicles. So where are we not seeing progress? Has Alice said we're not seeing progress in natural gas use? And if we were to change the protocol, the one protocol change, I would suggest, is that we figure the leakage emissions of methane from the wellhead to its use here in Mountain View as part of our footprint. And not, even though it doesn't take place mostly in Mountain View, If we got off the grid, a gas grid entirely, we could claim that those emissions don't belong to us. But as long as we have pressurized natural gas pipelines, I think those emissions belong to us. And if they did, and if we're not decreasing them, that would be one more reason why getting rid of gas is the most important thing that the council can recommend. Thank

[01:36:22] Member Alison Hicks: you. More in person speakers? Hi,

[01:36:29] Mary Day: Mary Day, um, I'm excited to see the reduction um, that we've had to date. Um, Unfortunately, there, um, seem to be going in the wrong direction with the act of transportation percentage of, um, travel when you look at that chart, about how many people are walking and biking, the numbers are smaller than in 2015. Um, So, um, you know, encouraging active transportation wise a lot on capital projects that are just really slow to get moving forward. And so some of those are now starting to come into play, which I'm excited to see. Um, also on transportation demand management. Both those are long lead time items and and keeping the shuttle running. So I just hope the city sticks with it. And, um, continues to, to invest in those things, um, and isn't discouraged by these numbers. Um, You're the water heater. Um, I, So read all the details, but I wonder how applicable it is to apartments, and I hope there are some programs tailored for apartment buildings because that's such a high percentage of our housing stock in Mountain View. Um, Preferably before 2027, when the air quality management district rules come into effect, uh, banning the purchase of gas product beers. So it would be really good to start pushing the market and including apartment owners and landlords in in the direction of eliminating gas before the edict comes down and says you can't buy any new ones in 2027. Um, I also hope. It'd be really nice. I realized, um, where the metrics that we get from this are, You know, we're just now looking at 2023. Um, I know if people are getting rebates for the electric water heaters, you'll have a good count, maybe a decent count of how many people have electrified, we'll have a like a number, but it'd be really nice at the same time. To see in real time, what does our gas look like as a result of that effort? And so if there's some way to, Be able to get some kind of feel for the 2020. Yeah, as at the same time that you're reporting, here's how many water hears we did. We could actually not have to wait until 2027 to see our natural gas to see the effect of that. I think that would be a real um, uh, boost. Thank you. I'm

[01:39:10] John Scarrow: John Scarrow, the Mountain Vee resident, and I like the report overall. It's very nice. I like the rolling average. That makes sense. And I would encourage you to look into other normalizations, some things that might, although, The absolute reduction is really what counts for the environment, I think the normalizations can show us where to, uh, look at different things like we were mentioning, were those mentioning earlier, uh, the natural gas use in our built infrastructure. It would be interesting to see what the changes are for natural gas per square foot, or, you know, apartment buildings, new apartment building versus old versus single-family housing, roadhousing, things like that. Let's see where we might be better able to focus. Um, that's like the longer term aspect. Speaking of built-in structure, for a blockable bikable, and transit oriented. I think not only is that gonna help us reduce our, um, Footprint. It's also gonna make us more resilient if, uh, you're not able to travel quite as much because of increased fuel prices or other things. So I think that makes a better community and a better community and makes it easier on a residence to have that. Um, yeah, class decarbonization of buildings is focused on. And I was curious on the, Transportation, how that would break down if we could get the short trips like either in town or to Senneville or Palo Alto, things that could easily be transitable or multiple, uh, versus long trips and people driving through that we may not have much control over. So, uh, Keep up the good work. Thank you. Thank you Virtual

[01:40:51] Unknown Speaker: speakers. First England? Hi,

[01:40:56] Bruce England: everybody. Bruce England, Wisman Station Drive. Um, just in short, want to echo what Mary Dadio brought up and what John Scarborough alluded to also around. The importance of alternative transportation means particularly active transportation, and also transit. We, out in the community who've been following this stuff, can sometimes get frustrated because we feel there's a lot or maybe too much focus on vehicle transportation and not considering things like road diets and um, speed limit reductions and things like that that would help to encourage people to get out of their cars and um, onto their means. When I when I look around when I'm moving around town, I sure see a lot more cars than I do people biking. And one thing that tells me is that people feel more comfortable getting in their cars and driving than they do getting on their bikes and biking in Mountain View. I think we could improve that. Thank you.

[01:41:54] Member Alison Hicks: Thank you, more virtual speakers. Okay, so now we bring this back to the committee for discussion and then to accept the report. Are there discussion points? I assume we're going to accept the report. So are there any discussion points first?

[01:42:14] Member Pat Showalter: Well, I'm not sure whether, I'm not sure whether it's, this is the right place for it, but, um, one of the, I think it's some of the propotent cookies. And so I, you know, hit the, you know, the reach code that we, um, uh, that we, um, developed and and put into place was really impactful. You showed us how much, you know, how many houses were electrified by that. It was really inspiring. I mean, it was like 2000 houses in the time we did or we was 17 and it was a large number. And, um, so I think that, um, keeping up with building boat is something that was really important for these changes as well. But anyway, but all in all, I mean, I think this is great, and it just goes back to y'all what gets measured, um, gets followed and done. And so it's really important for us to measure these things so that we can understand, you know, how they're changing or they're not changing and and behave accordingly. So this is very, very important work. Um, I really appreciate that it's being done. I'm really proud that what's being done. And I also hope that, you know, this is an opportunity for you professionally to grow. And if you see things, you know, as you, as you work on this, that, that, you know, these methodologies do need to be matured, you know, that, that there's an atmosphere where, you know, we want to create an atmosphere where you feel very comfortable, you know, suggesting that, and bringing it to, to us because that's, you know, exactly what we need to do.

[01:44:08] Member Alison Hicks: I'll just make a few comments. First, say, um, uh, agree with what, uh, members of the public said generally that, um, and I do, I agree with adding a goal next time. so that we can, um, see how to how we're doing. With respect to the goal. Um, and then the the comment about uh, gas leakage, is that something that you know how to, How to find or is that? Do you have any more information on that?

[01:44:42] Ms. Lee: I don't have specifics. There are sort of generally agreed upon rates of leakage and we could look at the overall movement of natural gas through the system. percentage of it is coming to mountain view. And that could be the calculation. Calculate somewhat easily. Once a leakage, attributed to our community. Obviously, we're measuring that. And if we added that in, and then eliminated a natural gas use, then we can keep it back out about our emissions and show it as a reduction.

[01:45:16] Member Alison Hicks: Well, it was an interesting comment and any more information you have, I would be interesting. Um, but generally, I disagree with what some member show Walter said that this is to inform our policy. So as you work on it, if something jumps out at you, do tell us. And um, if there are ways to refine it and make it more informative, you know. Do that or does about it too. Um, and, and yeah, I agree, we have to do on the act of transportation. Those are my. And and also, I would like included more information on the, uh, sort of, uh, as the ride hailing falls out, if that's affecting anything. And mostly, I think it may have impact on mass transit, reducing it. So I would like to know about that and add some policy ideas. Um. So those are my comments, and did you make emotions? Glad to make a motion?

[01:46:20] Member Pat Showalter: Do Accept this and, um, forwarded on to the free council for approval.

[01:46:30] Member Alison Hicks: All those in favor? I passes unanimously. Um, okay, now we move on to 5.3, which is the proposed framework for the run at vulnerability assessment. And this item will be presented by a sustainability division staff, is lucky, will commence the presentation. Thank

[01:46:50] Ms. Lucky: you, Chair Higgs. The next line. Does some background on conducting the climate vulnerability assessment? Counsel approved a scope of work in November of 2024. Ultimately, decided to contract with Castate Cascadia Consulting Group to perform the work. Since November, staff has been working with the Cascadia team to develop a framework for undertaking a climate vulnerability assessment, otherwise known as a CBA for shorts. And tonight we're seeking for review and considering approval of the framework, to continue to proceed with the, the overall development of a CBA. So what is a climate vulnerability assessment? It's, um, it evaluates how such full a community is to the negative impacts of climate change, to really support adaptation planning, or, um, decision making around what we can expect in the future that we might not know now. The way this is typically done is through... on climate change. So there are some there's some guiding principles and framework to work from. So we were looking Cascadia team on what would work, where it's the Mountain View. And it does have a, it has a formula and how it gets accomplished. So we look at our exposure. So it's our exposure to extreme heat. you know, extreme wind events because of extreme weather events. And we understand what's our sensitivity to that. So even looking at how maybe different neighborhoods might be impacted. Some neighborhoods might be impacted more high winds than others, more extreme heat than others because maybe there's not enough canopy, however. And then we also subtract our adaptive capacity. So if there are neighborhoods that have a lot of canopy cover. Maybe the extreme heat impacts are different in that neighborhood versus another. And that's how we calculate what our vulnerability risk is. So, the CBA's project deliverables really include identifying what the climate risk are. I mentioned some of them, extreme heat. Wildfire. A lot of people are starting to understand. I'm being very concerned about air quality events that result from wildfires. And sensitivity to vulnerable community members like seniors or children.

[01:49:17] Unknown Speaker: Wind, I mentioned and Blooding, and there,

[01:49:20] Ms. Lucky: again, there impacts to specific mountain. neighborhoods. So I would say, too, that there's been a lot of work at the county level and understanding what, um, climate risk we face. And so this would be a deeper dive from that kind of aggregated data into what that looks like for each neighborhood in Mountain View. And the CBA would also look at potential actions that we could take, help, increase our resilience or adaptability to climate change. So the climate vulnerability assessment will help, it'll work with other plans or efforts that we're working on. So one of them is this biodiversity and urban forest plan that's currently underway. And so the CVA will help in informing, um, the biodiversity plan and what elements or what things could be incorporated such as extreme heat, and how that could be included maybe through increased canopy in certain areas. For sea level rise, we've done a lot of work as a community to address since we were so close to the bay. And so this CDA would also help fill in the gaps. So I mean, we've looked at sea level rise. We're looking at biodiversity, but it's kind of where else in extreme heat and wind. Could we also incorporate those findings into the sea level rise? I need an implementation, moving the biodiversity plan. So the proposed focus areas, there's about, there's 4 areas. So the 1st one would be buildings and infrastructure. So looking at what, how climate risk would impact single and multifamily, residential buildings, or transportation that's looking at roads, any infrastructure related to roads, all the transportation services, how they could be impacted by these extreme events. Of course, that leads into emergency management. So how would the police department, the fire department be impacted? How would we respond or how could we help prevent emergency situations with individuals who might experience like heat exhaustion? And looking at critical facilities such as schools, hospitals. Care centers. The other area that we're very interested in learning more about is how does climate change impact economic well-being and resilience. How does that impact the productivity? How does events overall impact the economic health of the community as well? And then there's also health and well-being. So this has been, or studied recently in the last several years. about, you know, there's the physical impacts, you know, when you have an extreme heat event, or you're unable, you know, to travel somewhere. Also looking at the mental health impacts, the anxiety that it can create, you're facing extreme heat events and you might not have the appropriate tools to manage, um, your lifestyle during these events. So the recommendation is to consider approval of the framework. And deliverables in the focus areas for conducting the climate vulnerability assessment and then present a draft to you in the fall. And based on your feedback tonight, our hope is to present to the city council by the end of the year or early this year. Includes my presentation. The

[01:52:52] Ms. Lee: only thing I'd like to add is that you'll know that this is sort of sparse on details, and the reason for that is that we wanted to engage the committee very early in the process. So, we've only just gotten into contract with Cascadia and started, we started 1st with the decrimonization strategy, which we'll be talking... month about. And we're starting now the work of the community. the climate vulnerability assessment. And we wanted to talk with you all very early on to say, here's the general direction we're headed. Um, when we return with more information. It'll be fleshed out. We wanted to just make sure we're in that.

[01:53:30] Member Alison Hicks: Hey, thank you very much. Committee members are there questions? I

[01:53:41] Member Pat Showalter: guess the only one I have. We're in a pandemic, student. So interesting.

[01:53:50] Ms. Lee: Right, because we don't really know about the correlation between um, endemics specifically and changes in our temperatures. Like, we've seen migration of disease, like disease incidents in areas, um, areas, um, live disease. But we don't have a real sense at the pandemic scale. So it's just fascinating, though. Yeah,

[01:54:14] Member Pat Showalter: so it's, we're not really. No, okay. I mean, so far, we've had one every 100 year, I mean, in

[01:54:20] Ms. Lee: the last 200 years.

[01:54:23] Member Pat Showalter: Okay,

[01:54:23] Ms. Lee: so hope it's not like a 100 year flood, really? Yeah. every 10 years now. Yep. I have... Okay. So, let's

[01:54:40] Member Alison Hicks: see. Um, so, you have 4 areas that you're intending to look at, buildings in infrastructure, emergency management. Um, for emergency management, um, are you intending to work at all with our search program? Emergency response? Yes.

[01:55:04] Ms. Lee: Absolutely. Um, we met, um, officially with both the chief of police and the fire team, and they asked that we talk with our opposite of emergency. And I'm forgetting his... And who emergency preparedness? Oh, manages the server COVID. Right. He has like 80 titles. He does so many jobs. So certainly the request has been that we work with. There are other impacts to public safety. Sure. that are interesting, that we haven't worked. I

[01:55:44] Member Alison Hicks: have had when we had the power shutdowns and some neighborhoods were impacted day after day and multiple clubs. People said that our cert program needs to be updated for more than earthquakes. So that was a common request. So, I, so that came immediately to mind. Um, because many residents. No, my power did. Um, and then another is health and well being. Would you be working with partners, like, uh, the county that does, That's more their thing than ours, and, um, Also, like El Camino does grants. And Kaiser does too. So are you going to be working with those kinds of partners?

[01:56:36] Ms. Lee: Absolutely. I've only had discussions so far with the community. Sorry? Um, Walmart's in this region. about resiliency and adaptation. So certainly. And then also our community-based organizations. So we've had discussions with community services agency about how to support older adults, that are clients with theirs, that are also residents. Be more impacted by units, for example. So, discussions with them, um, So certainly at all different, um, range of

[01:57:18] Member Alison Hicks: the spectrum in terms of, Well, El Camino is fairly significant, and I think they would probably, in general, be interested. Um, And then do you, with buildings and infrastructure? Um, are, I imagine you'll interface with, um, working on our housing and homeless strategy. And economic well-being with our economic quality strategy. I mean, okay. Okay, so now it's time for comments from members of the public. There are any? Some comments? Well,

[01:58:04] Mary Dadio: I'm very dedio. Um, I just, I'm not sure, but that's, I was hoping to see that slide. I'm not sure. I don't see where it fits in there, maybe it's more of a county program, if we could go back to that slide, but on resilience, I guess I was thinking to see more than just business resilience. Um, I was hoping we'd see. It's the city's going to be, is the city going to be considering taking steps for, like, cooling centers and how to coordinate with people on cooling site, because we do have quite a few city buildings that, um, could service cooling centers if needed. Um, And also in other emergencies, too flooding or earthquake. Um, I don't know if that's part of the community emergency response. I'm aware of what's going on in my neighborhood, but I have everything about a broader thing, especially again, because we have so many people in apart phones. Um, here again, for heat, especially heat pumps are so critical. in apartment buildings because it's gonna make it so much easier for so many people that don't have air conditioning today to get to have cooling in their house. So, um, I'm not sure if there are any grants that are, uh, gonna be available, that we could make use of, to help us address, HVAC in, um, heating and cooling in, in apartment buildings because of the zilious piece of it, but that, that might be another, another angle. Thank you. I'm

[01:59:34] John Scott Rogan: John Scott Rogan. And I like the idea, and would encourage to focus on people and resilience and, you know, mutual aid kind of things we could do within the local areas, to, you know, add to that.

[01:59:54] Member Alison Hicks: Any other in person speakers? Uh, virtual speakers? Oh,

[02:00:00] Unknown Speaker: number ending in 79 feet. You can unmute by. Okay, good. Hello? Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay,

[02:00:24] Bruce England: um, I want to thank the committee for all the hard work you put into this. There's a lot of detail in it. Um, what's going to be important? There's been mentioned a couple of times is to be able to continue to manage, to monitor and manage this. If somebody said, If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. And so I think that's going to be important. We need to look at it on a frequent enough basis so that if there is a need to put in corrective actions, we have the time to do so. And again, I want to thank the committee for the work they have put into this. Thank you.

[02:01:01] Member Alison Hicks: speakers. Okay. So now we bring it back to the committee for, um, for discussion and, uh, adoption of the, uh, of the, um, of the place post framer. I

[02:01:26] Unknown Speaker: think overall, it's, I mean, this is the early version, right? We have the best out version in the ball, and I think it's on the best tracks. Anything specific to danger at? Yeah,

[02:01:43] Member Pat Showalter: I'm I'm pleased with it too. I guess the only thing that I noted in my notes is, you know, buildings and infrastructure under transportation, we should add trails too. Think that, you know, really important people. I'm making sure people have been walking bike room. But no, it was great. So

[02:02:03] Member Alison Hicks: my comments were really reflected through my questions. Add anymore. That does anybody want to? No

[02:02:13] Unknown Speaker: move that we, um, a pretty new framework to a rules and analysis of this area. for conducting the... We have a second. All

[02:02:23] Member Alison Hicks: those in favor? I, unanimously, and we are now on item number six, which is committee staff comments, questions, and committee reports. Um, and no action will be taken on these. Do any CSC members or staff have comments or questions? We have very

[02:02:50] Ms. Lee: brief updates for you. It will be. See, okay. I just wanted to share a few. Good news I have. Yes. Yeah, I think we'll all chime in.

[02:03:08] Ms. Lucky: It needs purse. Oh, he's awesome. Thank you. She

[02:03:20] Unknown Speaker: had a beautiful Earth and Arbor Day celebration on Saturday, April 19th, attended by 1000s of community members. It featured the all electric dream home from Silicon Valley Queen Energy, allowing community members to experience electric devices. As well as many community booths and many hands-on sustainability focused activities.

[02:03:46] Ms. Lucky: We had Danielle's our. And I was watching the duties,

[02:03:52] Ms. Lee: science. That's me. That's a heat pump water heater.

[02:03:59] Unknown Speaker: And since last... Since we were last year, we have completed outreach and engagement events, including the city's largely De Morto celebration. went to the farmer's market twice. Uh, we did 4 coblock information sessions and 4 leadership training sessions for cool block leaders, which does cover, um, energy resilience in times of outage and other related. And then also we're at the Sunshine Gardens, Eco Mart. Um, we completed recruitment, for cold block, and our teams have started, including one of our audience members here, which we appreciate. Um, we had the earthen operate photo contest, induction cooking, and keep on water heating focused, uh, engagement with the community. We've had a plant-based pantry series hosted by Grace. They are very short reels online that are very popular with the Mount View community. And then 2 quarterly newsletters in December and May to the sustainability community list. And we have a few upcoming summer events, and that list will no doubt expand as we get closer to summer.

[02:05:14] Unknown Speaker: And I've been working on the extreme heat and community preparedness program, which is a $25,000 grant from Santa Clara County to help us support vulnerable community members during climate events such as extreme heat, import, air quality. I've been working with CSA to develop this. We're working on educational flyers, which are being translated into the top languages spoken in the city. And I'm also working on procurement for items for the resilience toolkit, such as masks, electrolyte packets, hand fans, water bottles, et cetera. And then at the beginning of summer, we'll start engaging with residents to hand out those kids. Yes,

[02:05:55] Ms. Lynn: we've been continuing our efforts in decarbonizing city operations. So for buildings, we have, um, sign, uh, contracts to secure additional 41,000, um, in PG&E incentives for additional heat pump water heater, uh, projects that are, I believe the majority of those um, should have been completed in the past week. And then we have capital improvement program, uh, projects underway for solar installation at Senior Center, Wisman Sports Center, Mountain View Sports.

[02:06:34] Ms. Lucky: Upcoming. CSE items and council items. So you can look forward to having... presentation and discussion around decarbon, decarbonization analysis, have a working session in tune. We're gonna look at kind of the wedge analysis, out of the federal state and policies like break down and what are we initially responsible for as community? Yes, I think it's

[02:06:59] Ms. Lee: a dynamic model. We've asked them to take out like entire chunks, um, federal legislation.

[02:07:07] Ms. Lucky: As Ms. Wren mentioned, we discussed about multifamily, electric, you know, charging analysis, code update as well. The council, the items we discussed tonight. Forward. Look forward to seeing these items again in the next. Okay,

[02:07:32] Member Alison Hicks: do committing members have any reports? Updates? In that case, we will, um, move on to, uh, item number seven. Which is adjournment. Um, which is the moving is adjourned at 8:03 p.m.

• ← Previous
• Next →