|
Solid Waste Program Manager Mark Bowers presented the staff report. Manager Bowers passed a reference copy of the Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement (which is mentioned in the staff report) out to Council. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated copies of this report were also available for the public in the back of the Council Chambers.
Councilmember Swegles inquired if the Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement is an annual document. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated the agreement is a one-time document; however, mayors may renew or express their individual interest in it, but it is simply what is listed in the document.
Mayor Lee explained to Councilmember Swegles that although many mayors have signed this agreement in the past, it still is not City policy because it has not been adopted and ratified by the Council at this point.
Councilmember Hamilton stated she was interested in the alternative to adopt a more ambitious goal for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions beyond 2010 and commit funding to create a community climate action plan. Councilmember Hamilton stated this alternative was not adopted; however, she inquired if any thought had been put into what would be involved in adopting this alternative. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated the more ambitious goal would be to lower emissions to more than 20 percent. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers identified that City operation emissions are a small percentage of the total within the community. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated creating a community climate action plan is beyond the scope of this study.
Councilmember Hamilton inquired if Council wished to pursue this alternative, would they do so through the study issue process, and how much funding would Council be allocating?
City Manager Amy Chan stated that if Council is interested in this alternative, then Council should direct this back to staff so that when the upcoming budget is prepared, staff can include the approximate cost for funding priorities.
Director of Public Works Marvin Rose stated that there has been confusion over the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement and explained that none of the items are required; rather it provides a list of opportunities. Director of Public Works Rose stated some items may be appropriate or cost effective, and some may not. This is an evolving process and none of these projects are currently funded; although some items may seem to make sense, they may end up on the unfunded project list. Director of Public Works Rose stated there are a lot of things that could happen.
Mayor Lee left the dais and Vice Mayor Spitaleri took over the proceedings.
Public hearing opened at 7:40 p.m.
Ursula Syrova, representative of City of Sunnyvale Cool Cities Team, stated the group learned about the many actions that the City has previously taken to reduce greenhouse gas emission and commended the City for such action. Syrova stated the group would like to offer their assistance to the City in meeting present day needs while taking care to also meet the needs of future generations.
Patrick Gallagher commended the Council and staff for open and easy access to everything that is needed for the community to become engaged in the governance of the City. Gallagher also thanked Council and staff for providing information and encouragement to Sunnyvale Cool Cities as they started their organization. Gallagher stated the mission of Cool Cities is to stimulate the community toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other sustainable practices. Gallagher stated members of Cool Cities appreciate the efforts the City has already done in substantially reducing emissions and instituting energy savings.
Gallagher stated Cool Cities supports Alternatives 1, 3.B., 3.C., and 4.
Mayor Lee returned to the dais.
Craig Horne, member of Sunnyvale Cool Cities, stated the Cool Cities organization supports staff comments in the staff report regarding a power purchase agreement (PPA). Horne explained the benefits of the City entering into a PPA.
Barbara Fukumoto, member of Sunnyvale Cool Cities, spoke about climate change and reducing greenhouse emissions. Fukumoto requested Council address 95 percent of greenhouse gas pollution that is generated outside City operations in the community at large. Fukumoto stated that members of Cool Cities request that Council accept the staff recommendation to have Council adopt the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement of 2005, and that the members of Cool Cities stand ready to help Council however they can.
Mayor Lee confirmed that the surrounding cities who have completed the first item in the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement (a citywide audit) are City of Palo Alto and Portola Valley.
Amit Srivastava, member of Sunnyvale Cool Cities, stated his support for a Citywide audit for the City of Sunnyvale.
Jeanine Stanek, member of Cool Cities, stated support for Council exhibiting stewardship practices regarding the environment.
Patrick Grant stated it would be good to have Council give direction to the City’s boards and commissions regarding these environmental practices. Grant gave a brief presentation on global warming predictions.
Arthur Schwartz explained the efforts he has made to save energy on his home. Schwartz volunteered to lead a committee to survey City residents. Schwartz stated he does not agree with paying an outside organization to audit the City, rather there are enough concerned citizens in the City that could perform this task.
Dan Hafeman, member of Cool Cities, stated part of the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement is to have environmental education. Hafeman stated the composting program is a good model for an environmental education program at the City.
Public hearing closed at 8:04 p.m.
Councilmember Moylan confirmed with Director of Public Works Rose that the reason staff is not recommending Alternative 3.B. (Adopt a more ambitious goal for GHG emissions reduction beyond 2010) is because it is premature due to the fact that any number selected this evening would be arbitrary and unscientific.
Councilmember Moylan inquired if the reason staff is also not recommending Alternative 3.C. (Commit funding and direct staff to prepare a community climate action plan) is because right now the amount of funding is unknown. Director of Public Works Rose stated that this is currently an evolving and dynamic process. Director of Public Works Rose stated that staff is aware that the City of Palo Alto has embarked on a citywide plan, but they have a distinct advantage in that they provide gas and electric to their residents. Director of Public Works Rose stated that a large part of this process involves working directly with utility companies to gain information, which makes this process more difficult for the City of Sunnyvale.
Director of Public Works Rose stated the other issue is that the original focus of the study issue was related to City operations and staff was not asked to study a Citywide plan. The Citywide plan came up along the way as staff was working on this process and was not a product that was originally part of the study.
Councilmember Moylan asked if Director of Public Works Rose thought it was extremely likely that of the tools that exist in the mayor’s climate protection agreement, that the tool (to monitor what is going on Citywide and develop some type of plan to address it) would be needed. Director of Public Works Rose stated that was a policy decision for Council to make and that tool is one where Council may find they have less control than the ones being recommended by staff. All of the staff recommendations are in areas where staff has direct control. Director of Public Works Rose stated this tool is often just an information item and should Council want to move forward on policy implementation for the community-wide plan, it might require adoption of new ordinances and placing requirements on private businesses. Councilmember Moylan stated he assumed that a community-wide plan would apply to the entire community, not just the City.
Councilmember Moylan inquired if Director of Public Works Rose thought it would be possible to implement the climate protection agreement without using the community-wide tool. Director of Public Works Rose stated he did believe it would be possible, and stated that many other cities adopt the agreement without that tool due to the difficulty in the community-wide process. Director of Public Works Rose stated that staff took a survey of the actions and found the City is already doing six of the 12 that are on the list. Director of Public Works Rose cautioned that of the remaining items on the list, staff has not evaluated them from a return-on-investment aspect, and, therefore, staff does not know where they would fall. Councilmember Moylan confirmed that as a part of Alternative 1.C., staff would evaluate the remaining actions on the list in regards to their “bang for the buck” and then staff would return to Council with the findings.
Councilmember Moylan inquired if Council approved staff’s recommendation, when would the benefits of owning the systems, versus entering into a PPA, be evaluated and a recommended strategy be brought forward to Council. Director of Public Works Rose stated that all of the items would be involved as part of the development of a capital project. Staff would evaluate each one of the projects with respect to the return on investment, and then would make recommendations to Council as part of that capital project. Staff may find some items will not have as high a return, but may institute them as they are easier to do. Director of Public Works Rose stated that some projects that pay for themselves within the long-term planning process. Director of Public Works Rose stated that the photovoltaic system and LED lighting technology are dynamic areas with constantly changing technology, and they will change by the time staff evaluates them.
Councilmember Moylan confirmed that the items not being recommended by staff will still be evaluated for return on investment and the information will return to Council. Director of Public Works Rose explained that as staff evaluates items, other things could emerge with a larger return on investment.
Councilmember Moylan questioned rather than looking at instituting items for a greater return, in the near future the City will need to institute many of these items regardless of cost, due to the seriousness of environmental issues. Director of Public Works Rose stated the City currently has flexibility, but the adoption of AB 32: Global Warming Solutions Act is the first wave of mandates and requirements. Director of Public Works Rose stated the City is an early-adopter of some items, and, as an earlier adopter, the City is able to take advantage of opportunities to obtain grant funding; whereas, once something is mandated, the funding opportunities go away. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated “bang for the buck” really relates to the global warming issue in that it is talking about energy, and energy costs money, so the more conserved, the more greenhouse gases are avoided. Solid Waste Program Manager Bowers stated there is a pretty close relationship between greenhouse gas emissions and finances.
Councilmember Hamilton stated that a few members of the audience volunteered to do a community-wide audit and an educational program. Councilmember Hamilton inquired as to what the feasibility of integrating volunteers with staff would be in order to be able to set up such programs with limited funding. Director of Public Works Rose stated that staff will certainly look at opportunities to bring the public in to assist staff on some of these issues; however, bringing in community members can get more problematic within the technical areas.
Councilmember Hamilton stated there was mention of an education program based on the composting program, and Councilmember Hamilton inquired about the viability of staff training volunteers who go out into the community and set up the infrastructure. Director of Public Works Rose stated it is a possibility and would probably be a part of the community-wide issues. Director of Public Works Rose reiterated that staff’s emphasis was looking at City operations.
Councilmember Howe confirmed with staff that there is not currently an ordinance on the books that only allows for the burning of clean, dry wood in a City park. Councilmember Howe inquired if Council were to approve the adoption of a revised Exclusive Use Permit, could a person be in violation of the Municipal Code if they were burning items in a park. Director of Parks and Recreation David Lewis stated the intent is to approach this issue from a proactive point of view, and to be able to allow people to burn clean firewood and for staff to have a permit on file. Councilmember Howe confirmed that it was staff’s intent that if someone was found burning something without a permit, they could be cited by Public Safety staff.
Councilmember Swegles inquired if surveyors in neighborhoods could assist with evaluating the community-wide effects of emissions. Director of Public Works Rose stated his concern is the cost to obtain these surveyors, and generally they are often looking for remediation work – which is a concern – and he would not want their services tied to the City. Director of Public Works Rose stated Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) might offer an energy audit to customers as part of their service, and that should be pursued before anything else. Director of Public Works Rose stated this would be part of what staff will look at if direction is given to look at the community-wide carbon footprint issue.
Mayor Lee explained that Councilmember Swegles was inquiring about the Green Challenge, which would not incur a cost to the City. Mayor Lee stated he will put staff in touch with the lead on this program in order to look into this further. Director of Public Works Rose stated he does not know much about that program, but would be happy to look into it. Director of Public Works Rose cautioned that many companies surface stating that they are nonprofit, and it can be very problematic; therefore, it is very important to be careful about what the City endorses.
Mayor Lee inquired what the cost would be for the City to perform the community-wide greenhouse gas emissions effects study, and what would be some of the challenges. Director of Public Works Rose stated not a lot of time has been spent on this issue, as it was not part of this study. This is something that staff needs to spend more time on evaluating, and when staff returns with the capital project, staff will try to put some parameters around that and give Council an idea of what that would look like. Director of Public Works Rose questioned if Council were to direct staff to complete a community-wide study on emissions, what would Council do with the results of that study? The intent of the staff report was to supply Council with as much information as possible so Council could make an informed decision, and Director of Public Works Rose suggested Council do the same thing on a community-wide process.
City Manager Chan stated the purpose of this report was to provide Council with information and there is a study session scheduled for the end of September to talk about sustainability and this is one component of sustainability. There are many projects and policy directions that will need to be considered if the City is to change its culture. City Manager Chan stated specific budgetary direction can be given at the January 2008 budget workshop and also Council will be able to express their preference after the study session at the end of September.
Mayor Lee stated he is attempting to find out what the cost would be for the baseline audit of Citywide greenhouse gas emissions, and questioned if Council could direct staff this evening to contact PG&E to come up with an approximated cost and procedure in order to see what it would take to do such an audit. City Manager Chan stated that it is Council’s option, but it could be done in the form of a motion.
MOTION: Councilmember Moylan moved and Councilmember Swegles seconded to approve Alternatives 2 and 4 as follows:
Alternative 2:
Includes Alternative 1 as follows:
- Council continues Sustainable Silicon Valley (SSV) membership and adopts the standard goal of 20 percent CO2 emissions reduction from 1990 levels by 2010;
- Council directs staff to return with project-specific plans and budget proposals for consideration in the budget process and, subject to the City’s ability to fund and execute the projects, to implement all recommended Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects; and reflect associated operating cost savings in the budget; return to Council in 2009, or as needed, to evaluate additional measures in order to reach a 20 percent emission reduction goal;
- Council endorses the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement; and
- Council joins the California Climate Action Registry and approves $25,200 in future annual funding for three years of membership fees and third-party certification of the City’s CO2 emissions for the first year.
Alternative 4:
- Council adopts revised Exclusive Use Permit to require permits for burning clean, dry firewood in open pits located in neighborhood parks.
Councilmember Hamilton offered a friendly amendment to direct staff to keep in contact and work with individuals who spoke during the public hearing and offered their assistance.
Friendly amendment accepted.
Councilmember Howe offered a friendly amendment to direct staff to preliminarily look at the cost of preparing a community climate action plan. Councilmember Howe stated his intent is to obtain a ballpark figure (does not need to be detailed or overly accurate) and have the results returned to Council in a written document. Mayor Lee added this includes working with PG&E.
Friendly amendment accepted.
Councilmember Moylan stated, by the City signing on to the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement, the City is doing what it can for the environment.
Councilmember Chu stated, when he signed the agreement as mayor in 2005, it was at the time that the agreement was first introduced in Chicago. Councilmember Chu stated at that time it was controversial and he represented the first city within Silicon Valley to sign this agreement.
Mayor Lee stated the sustainability issue is still somewhat controversial. Mayor Lee stated he reads articles from differing points of view, such as claiming that global warming is actually just climate change, because he wants to understand how the other side views this issue. Mayor Lee stated the oil lobbyists are still very strong at pushing that global warming is a hoax. Mayor Lee stated as more people are aware of the environmental concerns through efforts such as the movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” more changes are and will occur. Mayor Lee explained that informing friendship cities about these issues is also an important task.
Mayor Lee announced that he received a letter from Congressperson Anna Eshoo that the House passed energy legislation titled the Energy and Environment Block Grant Act of 2007 (HR 2447), which will allow counties more than 200,000 in population, or municipalities of more than 50,000, to be eligible to apply and receive grant money to assist with energy audits and many other energy-saving items. This bill has not yet passed Congress or been signed by President Bush, but is a huge step forward.
Mayor Lee requested Barbara Fukumoto notify the City of the upcoming Sunnyvale Cool Cities meeting dates and stated the City would be happy to publicize the dates.
City Clerk Gail Borkowski confirmed with Councilmember Moylan that the motion includes ratification of the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. Councilmember Moylan stated that was included in Alternative 1 (all of which is part of Alternative 2), and, therefore, is included in his motion.
Restated MOTION: Councilmember Moylan moved and Councilmember Swegles seconded to approve Alternatives 2 and 4 as follows:
Alternative 2:
Includes Alternative 1 as follows:
|