https://otter.ai/s/Dac7eAu1TD-G4LSyIDiSyw
0:00
like to call the July 15 2020 Longmont sustainability Advisory Board Meeting to order Can we start with the roll call?
0:08
Yes. And if the board members would please show their cameras so all of the board members will be visibly present that would be super. So I have cable Meyer
0:22
here, Cody flag here.
0:26
Mary Lynn here
0:29
and Jim Metcalf and we are missing Kate colored sand and Violetta manoukian. Today, they both emailed and said they would not be able to join us today. So we have k stepping in as the chair for this meeting. That staff members Lisa Nabla.
0:52
Andy Noble.
0:54
Here,
0:55
Francis fancy Jaffe your very nice a Garcia talent Hear
1:03
Tim Ellis
1:05
and Heather McIntyre and our city council liaison, Polly Christiansen.
1:11
You’re all right. Okay.
1:15
All right. Do we have a quorum?
1:17
We do have a quorum. All right.
1:22
So I wanted a guess.
1:25
Do we want to approve the minutes from last? Last month’s meeting?
1:29
I will move to approve the minutes from last month’s meeting. Second,
1:36
Second.
1:37
All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Hi.
1:42
I wasn’t there. So. Okay. All right.
1:49
And then it sounds like we didn’t have any public that wanted to be heard or do we?
1:54
We did not have anybody wishing to comment. So
1:59
okay. All right. So agenda revisions and submission of documents. Do you have anything that you’d like to bring up this out on the agenda already? staff members?
2:11
Yeah.
2:14
All right. So on to general business, we’re just cruising today. It’s good, you know, baseball. So review and discuss the Climate Action Task Force recommendations. I’m excited about this one. Is that Lisa, are you going to lead us through this?
2:36
Yes, I, one,
2:39
eight. All right. Well, we’re gonna just go ahead and jump right in. We have a lot to cover. So Heather, if you’ll pull up the presentation, that would be great. And while she does that, I’m going to apologize to all my dad is in surgery right now. And so I’m a little distracted, and I’m going keep my eye on my phone, I’m so offended if I’m looking at my phone or seem like I’m doing something else, but I did some checking to make sure he’s coming out within the next hour or so. So if I need to, I’ll pass it off to you. But, um, so we are gonna jump in and you can go ahead and advance the next slide. So as you all know, we took the Climate Action Task Force recommendations to council over two sessions, June 30, and July 7, and we went through all of the recommendations with them. And now we’re bringing it to the relevant boards to go through the recommendations with you all and get your feedback to bring that back to Council for further discussion. So this is just a review. You all got the report. It’s 156 pages. I’m sure you all read it cover to cover with great enthusiasm. There’s a ton of Great information in there, there’s a lot of resources. main part of the document is not nearly that long. But this is just an overview of everything that the report itself covers. And you can go to the next slide. The topic areas, which you’ve mentioned to you before, this is determined determined by the Climate Action Task Force. So adaptation and resiliency building energy use, education and outreach. They do some basic management, renewable energy and transportation. And then the climate action tests were identified equity as a as a key component within climate action. But rather than have it called out in its own section, they wanted to have it integrated really throughout throughout all the recommendations. And also that’ll become clear when francy gets into talking a little bit more about the work that they did with the just transition plan committee on recommendations for you as well. Next slide. So this piece is we’re titling IT governance. I think that that terminology has has given people some confusion. But essentially, we did talk with the climate action taskforce about what their thoughts were on what should happen to the report and the recommendations now that they’re completed to make sure that they move forward. And it’s not just an exercise, we get this great now, these recommendations somewhere, but what happens who, who has some oversight and accountability in terms of making sure that things actually get put into place, and that we’re making progress, every word, and so their recommendation was that that piece gets incorporated into the sustainability advisory board, which I think we’ve all kind of talked about a little bit so that it would be within the purview of this board to look at the progress and reporting and implementation of climate action recommendations. And then separately to form ad hoc technical committees, so this wouldn’t be attached to the sustainability advisory board. But when we get into implementation of specific recommendations that we could pull together volunteer technical committees that could help with specific aspects of those recommendations, as well as incorporating the recommendations into existing plans, such as the council work plan to help further institutional lives, that climate action work. Next slide. We did our best to do some community engagement during this process. We were able to complete some activities that we have listed here. I think you all were familiar, at least with the questionnaire and some of the other things. And then obviously COVID happened and pretty much all of our community engagement efforts got put on hold as city facilities got shut down and we were no longer able to do any in person outreach, but we were able to get some stuff done next time.
6:56
And out of the things that we were able to do we have some some key takeaways. So from the questionnaire, there was pretty strong support. So we had not quite 400 responses to the questionnaire. There, there is good support for climate action in general for incentives and changes that the city might make to support climate action. There’s a lot of support, in particular for increasing services and benefits for low income communities, and particularly addressing the issue of affordability. And kind of the flipside of that there’s also some concern about the cost to the city and the impact to affordability and really making sure that we understand that as we implement climate action measures, and the lack of stakeholder engagement, and the limitations really again, as you all know, we are working under a pretty fast timeline to begin with, that makes it really hard to do community engagement, but then also with the impacts from COVID. On top of that, just really, I think that that lack of stakeholder engagement because it made it hard for us to really get proper representation as much as we would have wanted to the format of the question here. was a little bit constrained in terms of it forced people to rank their preferences around recommendations. And it didn’t give people the option to say I don’t like any of these recommendations at all. And then again, just limited in terms of the voices that we know we’re not able to participate in this process. Next slide. So I’m going to jump into the topic area recommendations and how we’re going to do this actually, you can go the next slide is we’re going to review each topic area and the recommendations within each topic, each topic area. And then I’m going to ask you all to essentially give us a vote on each recommendation of thumbs up from side or thumbs down, and then collectively have a collective vote from the sustainability advisory board on each recommendation. So we can take that to Council and essentially say, the board approves moving this recommendation forward or rejects this recommendation, and then we’ll have some comments to go along. With that, so we’re going to go one topic area at a time. And as I’m going through the recommendations, feel free to holler if you have any questions of clarification. Otherwise, let me get through the recommendations on each side first, and then, you know, we’ll go through kind of our voting process and hopefully that should become clearer as we do that. So adaptation and resiliency, even though the majority of the recommendations are focused on greenhouse gas reductions, so what we call mitigation, as as you all know, the adaptation pieces really is going to be really critical. So even if Longmont were to achieve 100% reductions of our emissions by 2030, we know that there’s already things in place and we are we are likely going to have some significant climate change impacts, particularly around things like extreme heat, extreme, more extreme heat days and things like that. And we need to be able to prepare a community for those impacts. So focus on public health and developing a coalition to identify issues and solutions for impacts of a warming climate on public health. So heat waves, severe weather events, air quality issues, and potentially looking at new diseases that might emerge with a specific focus on the needs of low income households and residents experiencing homelessness. And folks that we know are going to be most vulnerable to those impacts. And so that’s looking at putting a plan together over the next year and a half or so on how we would address those issues moving forward. The second one is water conservation. And looking at preparing the city for potential sustained drought conditions and impacts to water availability due to climate change, and promoting and incentivizing water conservation measures like xeriscaping and the use of native vegetation of the goals reducing water consumption city wide by 35 to 40% by 2025. So that’s a pretty ambitious Go, that would require a pretty extensive financial resources, and likely a significant redesign of our parks and golf courses in order to meet that goal. And we would really need to do a lot more research and analysis to understand the full fiscal impacts and identify a feasible path for implementation for to reach that goal. And then the last one is focusing on launching a public education and outreach campaign that targets residents and commercial realtors to help inform them of the dangers of flooding and the value in investing in flood mitigation projects. So this isn’t necessarily getting to the level of infrastructure and engineering. It’s more focused on outreach and education around flood preparedness and mitigation. Are there any clarifying questions that people have on any of these recommendations before though? All right, great. So well, Was there somebody I guess I can only see Jim. Like, just take it down like Alright, we’re good to go.
11:59
Okay. Did anyone have any clarifying questions if they needed?
12:04
I wouldn’t say clarifying questions I, I, I guess
12:11
I’ll say
12:14
is I would say, is flood mitigation preparedness as you like, on that point is, I want to say how necessary is it? Is there a lot of people who are not paying attention to this? Or is there people who are like, Listen, I don’t want to redo the river because I don’t understand why making it wider and taking the trees out.
12:36
Yeah, there’s still especially as we’ve been going through the resilient St. Grain project there, the flood mitigation after the 2013 flood. I think there’s still a lot of folks that just don’t understand what what’s happening along the River Corridor and how, how that’s changing the floodplain and our ability to develop or not develop within that. So this came came out of some of the For folks that work directly, I’m not so I’m not as involved in that. But I trust that if they’re identifying that as an as indeed that, that to me, so
13:12
any other clarifying question?
13:16
Yes, I just have a question about the voting. So it’s going to be thumbs up and sideways, thumbs down. But these, like, these three things here seem like they’re going to require very different amounts of like, work and input. And is there is it like a zero sum game where we have to balance everything, you know, like, or, or is it just really just weeding out things that we don’t think are worth effort?
13:46
Yeah, so it’s definitely not a zero sum game and part of this whole process moving forward in terms of are getting feedback from from the boards and then further discussion with Council is looking at one Are there any recommendations that we just discussed? Don’t make any sense. And we don’t want to pursue those. And you can make comments on that. And then to how do we then prioritize the recommendations that we do want to pursue? Based on, you know, what’s what’s feasible? What’s the cost impact, you know, what’s going to have the most greenhouse gas impact, or the most beneficial Community Impact are those sorts of things. So that’s sort of the next stage in the process is figuring out how we move forward. And so that is like, we approve it as written. We’re good to go. Nothing. The thumb side is, yeah, we approve it. But, you know, maybe we feel like we need more information, or this one is missing this thing that we want to provide some additional comments on. And then thumbs down is really like, nope, we don’t think this makes sense. Or, you know, it’s not achieving the goals or whatever. Yeah,
14:53
I was gonna say too.
14:56
So I started skimming.
15:01
The full document did not necessarily get far but there are some you know details like the public health that this is there’s a huge piece of equity in this just as a consideration when you are voting I guess that there’s a huge piece of equity in this this public health plans. It looks actually, you know, when I look at the even just the summary description of it, identifying issues and solutions for warming high, it was a specific focus on the needs of low income houses, or households and residents experiencing homelessness, homelessness, so, um, like detection, surveillance and treatment of diseases it goes, I feel like it goes a lot more in depth in this one sentence just to let everybody know who’s voting and, and so I’m like, Alright, you know, if you don’t mind, I’ll just go really slow on my boats and page on the other screen. No, I’ll try to go fast but I got this, I will say that water conservation is gonna be tough. Unless you want to let me put in a gray water system.
16:11
Well, let’s go live. if everyone’s Good, let’s start dealing with the voting and then you can drop in comments, eat for each recommendation and as you all have, okay, yes. Okay. He said there’s a lot of supporting documentation for each of these in the document itself. So let’s start with the first one. I want to make sure I can. I can see you can see all of you but um, so public health. Everyone, you want to show me your thumbs, thumbs up, thumbs down. Okay, let’s see one two. I’m
16:45
sorry, are we just we voted yes on that. Okay.
16:49
We’re voting if we like it or not,
16:51
thumbs up, thumbs up, or thumbs down. So thumbs up as you approve it written as is good to go thumb side is you approve it but you have to Some additional comments and thumbs down. Is that
17:02
okay? So you’re gonna say, disclaimer, I read the summary not the full effect. Okay? But I like it.
17:09
Okay, Steve, Jim culture, keep your thumbs up because I gotta make sure I see a thumbs up. Mary’s thumb side up, thumbs up.
17:19
Am I missing money? And I
17:20
know that there’s only four of us. Only four of us.
17:23
Oh, there’s only four.
17:24
Sorry. We’re five votes count double today.
17:27
Great. Okay, so we have three thumbs up at this side. So Mary, let us know what your comments are for some
17:36
of my comment for all of these points is going to be the same, which is, do we have examples of municipalities that are actually that have similar goals that are actually meeting those goals and I would like to see the specificity of how that’s being done. I did read the plan but There are certain things like carbon neutrality. Well, that I, I haven’t seen a definition of actually reaching that that makes sense to me. And I haven’t seen examples of cities where I think they’re actually meeting those goals. And I would like to see what the specifics of examples of, of example, cities before, I can say that I think that these things are reasonable.
18:31
All right. And what I should have mentioned, that’s fancy while we’re doing this is capturing all these things. And then at the end, she’ll pull up that where she’s captured everybody’s comments and votes, and we’ll make sure you guys are good to go with everything. Okay, water conservation. Some
18:50
lots have some side.
18:55
Sometimes that I’m going to go
18:57
Yeah, I’ll go with a big thumbs up.
19:00
Okay, Jim.
19:03
Okay, so some side folks tell me Jim, tell me about your thumbs up.
19:08
Um, I guess for me, the goal seems a little bit arbitrary. And I am fully in support of programs that are going to reduce water consumption and prepare us for a drought. I just don’t know if targeting a 40% reduction in the next four years. Is, is is going to create workable strategies that are going to be well accepted and sustainable.
19:44
Okay, I, I’m right there on everything he just said. I think it’s a I want to say that the goal itself i think is is is unachievable by 2025. I also don’t know if that’s a 40% for the city reduction or 40% individual reduction, um, and I didn’t read that part in depth, but if you know the answer to that, I, you know, anyway, anyway, okay, so we’re going to have we’re having population growth, increased housing and increased. I mean, I think it’s, I think, I think you can hire me to help, you know, just getting out. You can’t. I’m not saying that. But, um, no, I think it’s a, it’s a tough goal to meet. And, you know, just even you know, that a couple of years ago, we decided we could finally have one rain barrel for households. And, you know, here we’re talking 40% reduction. And, you know, I think it’s, I think I don’t think you’re going to see 40% reduction by changing a building building code to a low flow toilet. So
20:59
Mary, tell me About your thoughts.
21:02
Thanks, Lisa.
21:06
It’s going to be very difficult to achieve such a significant reduction in a marketplace where other cities aren’t making as ambitious goals, who don’t like it will simply move in order to make a transition. That’s so dramatic. You have to have an educated populace that staying put, they have to stay put long enough to be educated. And there has to be a significant equity component that, again, I keep bringing up gray water and the fact that the COVID there’s been a surge in people putting in their own gardens. Why aren’t we making it easier for people to use the water that’s available to them in a way that’s most efficient, rather than having to flush that water and have it be recycled and then sent back to them which takes resources? Why can’t people just gray water to grow their own garden and to use their water more efficiently, it’s even more efficient than buying your food, you know from trucked in from California or from Arizona. So I think that it’s unrealistic. And again, I would like to see an example of a similar city or region that has a similar turnover and residency, similar amount of budgeting for a means of education. That’s achieving those goals. And I’d like to know what the techniques are that they’re using. And again, I’m I want to put gray water back on the table. I think it’s an important issue for us to reconsider.
22:32
I will say if you told me I could do gray water, I’d have a system in by the end of next weekend.
22:36
I think I said that in the last meeting, Lisa. Okay. I think I said something similar.
22:41
Okay, great. So, the last one, flood mitigation and preparedness education.
22:56
think we’re good on the inside. Okay, coach. Tell me Got your thumb side.
23:01
Um,
23:03
one of the things short of this is there’s a lot of work that was done here. Obviously, one of the shortcomings I think of the document is that there isn’t been any clear prioritization or framework to link all of these different goals together. I understand maybe that’s where our board comes in. So I just think there
23:20
may be more achievable or
23:23
more ambitious goals in here that the city council could focus on.
23:29
All right. Kay, had some side thumbs down, I kinda
23:33
want to go Thumbs up, thumbs down. I and and I think the the reasoning in here is, you know, sorry, coming from an industry standpoint, information is available to developers. You know, I don’t think it’s the city’s responsibility to pay to educate developers. I also you know, when I you know, when you look around town, even at parks, there’s several locations where we have The you know, resilience ain’t brain plant plan, like on a billboard at a park where it’s just really cool to look at it and watch how, you know where the damage was from the flood and what’s going on. You know, I see it as I see flood mitigation preparedness as emergency management issue. And not that the public shouldn’t be made aware of emergency management issues. But I also look and say, you know, we did we had a 500 year flood we are making, you’re working along the route the route and, and making repairs. But you know, at this point, it’s, you know, I guess I don’t understand, I guess I look and say, to what, to what kind of presentations and what kind of education we’re looking for. And again, if it’s going towards developers, um, you maybe it’s dangerous to homework. I looked at that and say, insurance companies to be doing that sort of thing. Um, and like I said, developers should know that
25:03
or they have the money to go find that without just city putting for the resource
25:08
just to clarify specifically says that targets residents and commercial realtors in
25:14
my mind. And and you know I look and go I don’t okay and I don’t mind the you know residents but I guess I maybe this is just you know, I mean I have I guess I have a decent I have an understanding of it. So, to me I’m kind of like, oh, what do people need to know? And, um, and I think that’s the thing I don’t know what people need to know and I don’t understand what they need to know. And but again, yeah, commercial realtors I look and say they, they should know already or they can. I’m not very much into supporting commercial realtors and developers, like just on hand they generally they’re generally a grouping that has funding of zero okay?
26:00
mean nothing against that they’re great the support economy for
26:05
Okay, Jim, what was your thumb size?
26:08
So I think for me it’s just a matter of priorities and what climate change problems will be the biggest priorities for people living in Longmont. I think that there are places where flooding increases are going to be one of the significant hazards. The fact that we had the big floods in 2013 means that a lot of long term residents have a kind of an already have a heightened sense of awareness about flooding. I think a lot of the city actually isn’t in a flood zone anyways. And I think that just in terms of the the things that are going to be happening in the next five years, because of 510 20 years because of climate change, it’s just not going to crack my this needs to be a priority for us list.
26:59
So before we move on Did you have anything quick you wanted to add?
27:02
I think that what I’m hearing and what I’m also feeling in the board can tell me if I’m summing up correctly is that this seems to be an issue of proportion. That’s an issue that’s specific to Longmont. And it has to do with perhaps changes that have to do with climate, but it doesn’t seem to be on the same scale as public health and water conservation. And I’m, I’m wondering why it’s, you know, sort of listed on the same at the same scale. Okay.
27:36
Real quick, if you’re following along and voting on the fly, I found the the more detailed section like starting at page 4043. there’s a there’s a targets bullet points that don’t really talk about developers in this section. So it’s mostly property owners.
27:53
Hey, it’s helpful.
27:55
Okay, so we’re going to move to the next slide. So buildings Under energy use this before we do that
28:04
we had I just want to double check since everyone made comments is that one approve as written to prove noted consideration and one
28:14
side thumbs down or was that three thumbs side ones
28:21
leave me as a thumb side just because
28:25
I’ll honestly say I didn’t get into the dirt detail yet. So I don’t want to all out say no, when I really need to do better homework.
28:36
Thank you.
28:38
Alright, so building energies, we have a number of ones to get through. So try to move through pretty quick, but again, ask me if you have any clarifying questions. So the first is focusing on building codes. And as you guys probably know, longlife actually really good about adopting, merging the most recent building code as they come through every cycle. So it’s every three years International
29:02
is updated and we adopt and implement that. This is looking at
29:07
expanding that to solar and Evie readiness, ENERGY STAR appliances and electric heaters and hot water heater provisions in the next code cycle which starts in 2021. electrification, there’s been a lot of confusion around this one. So I do want to make sure that this is clear that this is not looking at mandating mandating electrification in the next 18 months, it seems like that that’s been a misinterpretation of this, this one here. It’s focusing on pulling together a feasibility committee to oversee the development of a plan over the next 18 months and that plan would identify a phased in approach to transition away from natural gas over the next 10 to 15 years or so. So what would happen over the next 18 months is the development of a plan. show a path forward to transitioning away from national natural gas. commercial building benchmarking, I think that folks have from LPC have talked to this group about this before, probably last year sometime. So commercial energy benchmarking is a program essentially where you evaluate the energy use of a given building and evaluate it against other buildings of the same size and type and it’s it’s an education based program, but that has been shown to pretty significantly impact energy use, as it says by up to 7% by 2025. So it’s somewhere around I’m not quite 2% per year in energy savings, which can be pretty substantial commercial energy efficiency rebates. So that’s pretty much just expanding our existing energy or efficiency works program to include more folks in that program. Same with the residential efficiency work. So it’s just expanding participation in that program, expanding the low income residential energy efficiency program. So that’s the same same, expanding our existing program. This one is pretty substantial. So currently, we’ve been serving about 40 homes per year. And this program just started in 2017. And this is looking at ramping that up to 400 homes per year by 2025. So that would be a pretty substantial increase in that program and associated resources, and then establishing a Climate Action Fund, program and staff. So that would be looking at where can we pull in additional funds through grants and through other revenue sources to establish a fund specifically to help low and moderate income residents and businesses as we implement climate action measures that might have an impact on rates or any other sort of costs. impacts that we want to mitigate, again, that impact to affordability.
32:05
So we’ll run through the voting on these ones, starting with building codes,
32:16
by thumbs down any questions that people have before we move on, okay? So, um, okay, thumbs up, thumbs. Hi. And then see Jim, where’d you go? Okay, thumbs back.
32:30
Jim, tell me about your thumbs up.
32:33
Um, I think that again, let’s see, these are I actually don’t have a problem with solid ready provisions and Energy Star rated appliances. I think the sticking point for me is dealing with electric heating systems. Right now, I think that even if everybody in Longmont switched over to electric heating, the amount of energy that would be spent doing that and our sources of electricity for now. I have a hard time with that one, as things stand right now, and I think that that is a that’s a policy that has worked very well in places that don’t have winters. But I worry that it is unrealistic right now, but more importantly, I think that we could save similar amounts of greenhouse emissions would have other incentives or other other approaches. That would be probably a lot less expensive.
33:33
Okay. Okay.
33:36
I’m right on board with Jim again. You know, I like to say, you know, yes, electric heaters, hot water heaters. You know, that means if mine goes out, that’s my only choice to buy it. I don’t know the pricing on it. Um, so for residents, it’s just, you know, it could be an extra process that folks aren’t ready for, um, you know, again, yes, the whole electric power grid. What’s the capacity, my power goes out in the summertime when it’s super hot and everyone’s running an air conditioner, what happens in the winter? And we’re all depending on that to heat our homes. Um, you know, and now we’ve got, you know, blocks going down for stress grid. So, you know, and again, you know, I look at building codes as a way to advance you know, advance sustainability. But they do also, you know, does put a burden on on builders on folks who are, you know, replacing equipment, that sort of thing too. And so there’s a plus there’s always there’s also a stress to it. So that’s, that’s
34:38
Hi. And Mary, you have thumbs down Tell me about your thumbs down.
34:43
Yes, um, I love the idea of conserving energy and being as sustainable and renewable as we can. However, the city’s making its electricity using what coal at this point and It’s Is that correct? We bought it? No, not all of it. Okay, some considerable amount of it. I think there’s an equity issue and requiring the consumer to go to all electric when there are cheaper options out there. And, and, and I think it’s both a marketplace and an equity issue. And additionally, it’s a stress on businesses. I don’t think that we should be doing anything. At this point that’s going to make things more difficult for the small businesses, which are not the primary employers in Longmont but a very, very strong component of the employment in Longmont. And I think I’m out I’m in full agreement with what Jameson k have said as well.
35:56
Next one is the electrification again, this is just looking at different thing a committee to oversee a plan to identify how we could transition. Again, those those affordability pieces I think are going to be critical. But tell me thumbs up from side thumbs down for the developing of Thumbs up, thumbs up, some side inside. Thumbs up. Okay, Mary, tell me about your thumb side.
36:25
as I’ve stated, I don’t think that electrification is a goal is, is really a fair reasonable goal when the city is not using the proportion of renewables and yet, that’s being pushed onto the customer who may be wanting to use natural gas while the city is still using coal. And I also believe it’s a choice issue and if the wording of this was to look at whether or not it is feasible to go to electrification, I would be more in favor on it.
36:53
And I just one thing I will say I think that a lot of the discussion of electrification should be in the context of the already existing plan for long months of electricity to be carbon neutral by what is it?
37:05
2030 2030?
37:07
Right. So that’s a plan that we’re already ahead of schedule on. So,
37:11
yeah, we’re about 50% renewable now.
37:17
Great, okay, commercial buildings.
37:28
But I went on this one. Okay.
37:32
Mary, go ahead.
37:33
Um, my comment is, how are we doing with a, I mean, we are in in Colorado, we are a classically ideal place to help with new construction, using passive solar, passive thermal and geothermal. And I’d like to know how much we are worth working with developers, the building code, education to bring those ideas forward to developers
38:03
Okay, moving on to the next one, increasing participation in commercial Efficiency Program.
38:12
Oh, where’s my thumb?
38:16
Thumbs up. Okay, great. Same for residential.
38:24
Okay, Cody, tell me about your thumbs that
38:28
I think the targets need to be a little more aggressive. Just the 400 homes per year over eight years to study even a quarter of live ones residential housing, so maybe more. Yeah. bigger numbers. I know that’s gonna cost more but
38:42
yeah. Okay.
38:45
Great. And then the low income energy efficiency.
38:54
Side Mary, tell me about your thumb side.
38:57
Um, I’m concerned about mandated electric For the reasons expressed earlier in this session,
39:04
okay, so this one is not talking about electrification, this is just energy efficiency
39:09
for local. Are we on 7666? Sorry, no, that’s a thumbs up. Sorry. Okay,
39:15
great. Now seven, yes. And also just a clarification. So again, I didn’t read these. This is from the taskforce, we currently don’t have any mandated electrification goal.
39:26
Okay. Well, it says that in the seven so I know.
39:28
Yeah, but I do want to clarify, so but additionally, thumbs for establishing a climate action button. Up, Up.
39:39
Up. Okay. So Mary, in your comment is the about the electric equity issues of mandate electrification. Okay, moving on. Great.
39:54
So education and outreach. These ones are pretty straightforward. Most of them are focused I’m the Director of Education through a couple of different mechanisms, the one sort of probably bigger outliers, the comprehensive workforce development. So that’s the first one. That’s really understanding how if we want to achieve a lot of these things, we really need to train up a local workforce to help us get there. And currently, I think we have one contractor to do weatherization work in town. So we have some pretty significant limitations in terms of workforce. And this one obviously, is something that is also now particularly relevant in the ties to COVID the impact to jobs and economics as a quote from the pins and I. The second one is looking at developing a climate lecture series and working with the museum in educating and engaging the public in climate issues and solutions. A third one pretty similar, but looking at an article series. So a number of different articles also focused on climate change issues and solutions. The Longmont museum teaching exhibit. So those of you that are familiar with the Front Range rising, that’s an it’s an existing, a museum that draws a lot of folks of all ages, but it’s particularly focused on elementary schools and, and looking at expanding that to incorporate climate change and produce energy use into that as well. And then the last is developing a community sustainability liaison program. So that would be like a neighborhood based kind of ambassador program and training focus on sustainability issues. I think men can be ambassadors within their communities to teach their friends and neighbors about sustainability issues, connect them with programs and resources and things like that. So voting will start with the first one comprehensive workforce development.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai