HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-07-12 EEC Meeting PacketAgenda
Energy and Environment Commission
City Of Edina, Minnesota
City Hall Community Room
Thursday, July 12, 2018
7:00 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda
IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A.Minutes: Energy and Environment Commission June 14, 2018
V.Special Recognitions And Presentations
A.Water Resources Annual Report, Jessica Vanderwer* Wilson
VI.Community Comment
During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues
or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the
number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items
that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment.
Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their
comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for
consideration at a future meeting.
VII.Reports/Recommendations
A.Partners in Energy Closeout Report
B.Sustainability Business Recognition Program
VIII.Correspondence And Petitions
A.Residential Organics Recycling
B.Working Group Objectives and Members List
C.Working Group Minutes
D.Working Group Minutes
IX.Chair And Member Comments
X.Sta* Comments
A.GreenStep Cities
XI.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public
process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli5cation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861
72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: IV.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Minutes
From:Casey Casella, City Management Fellow
Item Activity:
Subject:Minutes: Energy and Environment Commission June
14, 2018
Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to approve the June 14, 2018 Minutes for the Energy and Environment Commission.
INTRODUCTION:
Receive the Energy and Environment Commission Minutes of June 14, 2018.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Minutes June 14, 2018
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Energy and Environment Commission
Edina City Hall Community Room
Thursday, June 14, 2018, 7:00 PM
I. Call To Order
Chair Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Answering Roll Call were Chair Jackson, Commissioners Glahn, Hoffman, Horan, Manser, Seeley,
Fernands
Late: Satterlee, Hussain, Kostuch
Absent: Madhok
Staff Present: Liaison Brown, Casey Casella
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion made by Commissioner Seeley to approve the Meeting Agenda. Motion seconded by
Commissioner Hoffman. Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion made by Seeley to approve the May 10, 2018 minutes. Motion seconded by Manser. Motion carried.
Commissioner Satterlee arrived at 7:04 PM.
V. Special Recognitions and Presentations
A. St. Paul’s Sustainable building Policy, Kurt Schultz
Commissioner Hussain arrived at 7:06 PM.
St. Paul Program Manager, Kurt Schultz, presented about the Sustainable Building Policy of St. Paul. The
city adopted its model policy in 2010. The presentation addressed why a city would adopt a Sustainable
Building Policy, the process of adopting a model policy, and what a policy would look like.
Commissioner Kostuch arrived at 7:16 PM.
VI. Community Comment
Bayardo Lanzas introduced himself to the Commission. He will be a new Commissioner at the next
meeting.
Chair Jackson tells the commission that LouAnn Waddick has resigned from the commission and Bayardo
Lanzas will take that seat.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
VII. Reports/Recommendation
A. Partners in Energy Closeout Report
Chair Jackson asked for review and comment on the Partners in Energy (PiE) closeout report.
Commissioners shared their feedback to complete their work plan initiative. Highlights of the feedback
included easily displaying the action items in a summary, while also recognizing this is a first step in a larger
perspective. Staff Liaison Brown will create the bulleted summary.
B. Residential Organics Recycling
Staff Liaison Tara Brown presented a staff report on Residential Organics Recycling. Staff recommendation
in the report was to provide curbside organized collection similar to recycling program with cost of
service dispersed to all.
Commissioners gave comments to complete their work plan initiative. Staff Liaison Brown will write a
report and submit to the next council meeting detailing the feedback.
VIII. Correspondence And Petitions
A. Working Group Minutes
• Minutes received from the Education & Outreach and Business Energy Efficiency and
Conversation Working Group.
With Commissioner Waddick’s resignation, the Water Quality Working Group no longer had a
Commissioner chairing the working group. Chair Jackson asked what action should be taken with the
Water Group and if any Commissioner would want to Chair the group. No Commissioner volunteered
to chair the working group.
Chair Jackson made a motion to dissolve to Water Working Group. Commissioner Manser expressed
interest to explore options. There was no second, and the motion was not considered.
The discussion was tabled until the next meeting. Commissioner Manser will provide a report on options
to keep the working group.
Chair Jackson offered a motion to change the name of the Business Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Working Group to Business Environmental Working Group. Commissioner
Horan seconded. Motion adopted.
IX. Chair And Member Comments
A. Council Work Session Update
Chair Jackson gave an update on the May 15 work session with City Council.
B. Education and Outreach
Commissioner Manser left at 8:40pm.
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Commissioner Satterlee let the Commission know the EEC is registered for the July 4th parade and asked
for volunteers to assemble pinwheels and walk in the parade.
Commissioner Kostuch passed out materials that estimated U.S. energy consumption.
Commissioner Fernands announced Project Earth at Edina High School would like to be more involved in
the Commission’s working groups.
Commissioner Satterlee announced Jeff Lundgren resigned from the Education and Outreach Working
Group.
Commissioner Glahn made a motion to remove Jeff Lundgren from the Education and
Outreach Working Group, Commissioner Jackson seconded. Motion adopted.
X. Staff Comments
Staff Liaison Brown updated the Commission on a Fix It workshop that was hosted in the Edina Senior
Center. Liaison Brown also announced bottled water has been eliminated from city council meetings.
Staff Liaison Brown updated the Commission on the PACE program and announced her intent to set up a
meeting with St. Paul Port Authority to understand how they incentivize their PACE program.
Staff Liaison Brown asked where the Commission would like the EEC table at the Open Streets event.
Commissioners decided they would like to be near the Water Resources group.
XII. Adjournment
Motion made by Glahn to adjourn the June 14, 2018 meeting at 8:53 p.m. Motion seconded by Hoffman.
Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Casey Casella
City Management Fellow
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: V.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
From:Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, Water Resources
Coordinator Item Activity:
Subject:Water Resources Annual Report, Jessica Vanderwerff
Wilson
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
Edina’s Water Resources Coordinator will present the annual Water Resources Coordinator’s Report to share
current events, upcoming projects, and receive input on the City's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPP P).
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VII.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Partners in Energy Closeout Report
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
PiE Recap for Businesses
PiE Closeout Slides
Business Energy Efficiency and Conservation Working Group
The BEEC strategies:
1. Engage the top business energy users to take action to reduce GHG.
2. Target smaller businesses such as restaurants, retail, and others with recognition programs.
3. Ongoing management and tracking.
4. Assess and recommend policy options to support greenhouse gas reductions for Edina
businesses.
Accomplishments
1. Created various documents to assist businesses in their energy reduction.
1. Business Survey
2. Office Energy User Inventory
3. Checklist to Save Energy at Work
4. Energy Efficiency for Office tenants presentation
5. High Impact Actions for Energy and Overhead Cost Reduction
2. Turn Key presentation to 50th and France Business Association.
3. Workshop for Centennial Lakes tenants.
What we learned
1. Outreach to businesses is difficult.
1. Difficult to reach the decision makers.
2. Tenants vs property owners/managers. Control of use vs Control of structure.
2. Electricity is a major expense for businesses.
Going forward the BEWG will focus on:
1. Benchmarking
2. Business Recognition Program
Closeout Meeting
April 17, 2017
2
Agenda
2
Time
(mins)
Agenda
10 Welcome & Introductions
Agenda Overview & Meeting Objectives
10 Electricity Action Plan Overview
10 Review of Accomplishments
10 Review of Progress Toward Goals
30 Feedback and Lessons Learned
•Planning
•Plan itself
•Implementation
10 Best Opportunities to Continue the Momentum
10 Next Steps
3
Edina’s Electricity
Action Plan
3
4
Community Energy Action Team
4
Energy Action Team included City staff, Energy and
Environment Commission members, residents, Chamber
of Commerce, Edina School District, and Xcel Energy
Planning Phase: September 2015-July 2016
5
Electricity Action Plan
5
Vision:
Edina’s residents, schools,
businesses, and government
will successfully reduce the
community’s greenhouse gas
emissions by 30% by the
year 2025 through strategies
and actions that are
sustainable, practical, and
measurable.
6
Municipal Facilities
6
Goals:
•Lower the City’s GHG emissions by 7.5% over 18
months
•Reduce the City’s GHG emissions 30% by 2025 from a
2012 baseline
Strategies:
•Implement recommended energy use reduction projects
from CR-BPB building study
•Negotiate renewable purchase for municipal electricity
7
Residential Information Campaign
Goals:
•750 homes take energy saving actions each year
•Double the number of subscribers to Windsource®, and
double the average subscription amount within 18 months
Strategies:
•Drive traffic to City-operated web resource through City
communication channels
•Foster neighborhood-based outreach and leadership
•Leverage outreach events for Windsource sign-up
7
8
Business Energy
Goal:
•Reduce and/or off-set 2% of electricity usage annually
Strategies:
•Engage the top business energy users to take action on
greenhouse gas through offsets and reductions
•Target smaller businesses such as restaurants, retail, and
others with recognition programs
•Ongoing management and tracking
•Assess and recommend policy options to support
greenhouse gas reductions for Edina businesses
8
9
Accomplishments
9
10
Municipal Facilities
•Setting a strategy and budget to
make energy efficiency a facility
management priority
–Facility Management is 1 of 4 City
Work Plan and Budge Pillars. Six of
the 30 actions are related to
sustainability
–Increased the CAS Fund to support
work
•Acting on 15 lighting and HVAC
replacements
•Utilizing experts for a Turnkey
Service at Centennial Lakes and a
recommissioning study at Braemar
Arena
•Continuing to identify future
opportunities in office computers
and street lights
11
City Communications
Energy House Parties
www.EdinaMN.gov 12
13
Outreach at Community Events
13
Windsource Campaign
14
15
Home Energy Fair
16
Other Residential Outreach
Materials
17
Business Outreach
•Business survey
•Email through account
managers
•Turn Key presentation to 50th
and France business
association
•Turn Key walk-throughs
18
Office Tenant Engagement
19
ROI on Residential Outreach
Efforts
19
Outreach Effort Input Output Outcome
Tabling –Edina Open Streets
(2016)
Volunteer time, city staff 16 pledges Unknown
Conservation MN Presentation Partners in Energy
presenter time, city staff
31 attendees, 8
pledges
Unknown
Xcel Energy email to residents
(April 2017)
Partners in Energy and
Xcel staff time
1,753 emails delivered 28% open rate, 2%
click through rate
Home energy party City staff time to prep,
volunteer host
40 attendees, over 20
pledges
9 actions taken
Film Series Volunteer time, city staff 15 pledges
Fourth of July Parade Volunteer time, city staff Unknown
Tabling –Edina Open Streets
(2017)
Volunteer time, city staff 30 pledges Unknown
Xcel Energy email to residents
(September 2017)
Partners in Energy and
Xcel staff time
4,455 emails delivered 61% open rate, 4%
click through rate
Xcel Energy email to residents
(October 2017)
Partners in Energy and
Xcel staff time
6,705 emails delivered 15% open rate, 5%
click through rate
Home Energy Fair City staff and volunteer
time
150+ attendees 17 HES signups, 7
Windsource
20
ROI on Business Outreach Efforts
20
Outreach Effort Input Output Outcome
Business survey sent through Xcel
Energy account managers
Letter and survey link ? Letters sent 1 response
Turn Key presentation to 50th &
France business association
Presentation,door-to-
door outreach
24+ attendees 24 signups for
walk-throughs
Turn Key walk-throughs 2 Turn Key staff for 1 day 20 walk-throughs 1 signup
One-on-one outreach to large
businesses
City staff and EEC time 7 businesses
contacted
Unknown
Centennial Lakes office tenant
engagement presentation
Partners in Energy and
City staff time
5 attendees Unknown
21
Resources utilized
21
Printing,
production,
postage or ad
placement
Social Media
Advertising
Business Energy
Conservation
Event (Large)
Business Energy
Conservation
Event (Small -
Med)
Xcel’s PiE MOU Fund $ 3,000 $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,000
Spent $ 1,500 $ 218 195$
Left to spend $ 1,500 $ 282 $ 805 $ 1,000
4th of July $ 2,100
Business/Resident Outreach
October 750$
Windsource Social Media
test on YouTube $ 280
Coffee Talk $ 450
Continued Actions
22
Impact
22
23
Updated -Municipal Energy
Goal: Lower the City’s GHG emissions by 7.5% over 18 months, or 1.35 million kWh
Impact:
•Energy efficiency plays a key role in City’s 2018-2019 Work Plan. Items include:
–Create and implement a green building policy for City Facilities by Q4 2018. Administration -(Sustainability)
–Create a master replacement schedule and budget for physical buildings, plumbing, HVAC and other mechanical systems, furniture, fixtures, and equipment that optimizes long-term financial resources to meet sustainability goals by Q3 of 2018. Public Works -(Facilities)
–Create and implement energy-efficiency plan for City Hall, Braemar Arena, Edinborough Park, and Centennial Lakes by Q4 of 2018. Public Works -(Facilities)
–Additionally, electricity emission reduction is now a performance metric for facility management
•22% reduction of GHG emissions from baseline 2012
•Estimated 336,992 kWh savings from projects implemented
•Additional 546,063 kWh savings can be captured through completion
of the Braemar re-commission report
Residential Information Campaign
Goal Actual Percent of Goal
750 Actions Annually 1,185 Actions in 2017 158%
1,350 Windsource subscribers 926 Windsource®Subscribers*68%
700 kWh Average Windsource
Subscription 346 kWh/month 49%
24 *Edina had 917 Windsource subscribers as of the end of December 2017. An estimated 9 new residential
customers subscribed to Windsource between December 2017 and March 2017
25
Business Energy
25
Goal Actual Percent of Goal
Save 7.3 million kWh
annually
10,027,003 kWh saved
in 2017 137%
26
Emissions Reductions from
Conservation and Renewables
26
Focus Area Emissions Reduction over
Implementation Period*
(MTCO2e)
Municipal (only rebate programs)131**
Residential –Energy Efficiency 398
Residential –Renewable Energy 1,477 (annually)
Business 4,420
TOTAL 6,426
*Does not include savings from Saver’s Switch **Does not include other municipal energy reduction action
27
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
27
*Data Notes
-Emissions factors from Xcel Energy-Energy Use for 2017 is from Xcel Energy
-Energy Use for 2009 is a MMBtu value for Edina’s electricity use from the Regionals Indicators Initiative, converted to kWh
and MtCO2 using Xcel Emissions Factors
-Use is not weather normalized
•33%reduction in electricity-related greenhouse gas
emissions from 2009-2017*
•Electricity use accounted for approximately 55% of
CO2 emissions in 2009, and 37% of emissions in 2013
28
Next Steps for Edina
•Continue actions to meet annual goals
•Review 18 month goals and actions
•Look at policies that support efficiency
and renewables
28
Residential Information Campaign
Goal Actual Percent of
Goal
City Facilities
Lower emissions by 7.5%
over 18 months, or 1.35
million kWh
Estimated 336,992 kWh in
savings
25%*
awaiting
Braemar #’s
Residential goals
750 Actions Annually 1,185 Actions in 2017 158%
1,350 Windsource
subscribers
926 Windsource®
Subscribers*68%
700 kWh Average
Windsource Subscription 346 kWh/month 49%
Business goal
Save 7.3 million kWh
annually
10,027,003 kWh saved in
2017 137%
30 *Edina had 917 Windsource subscribers as of the end of December 2017. An estimated 9 new residential
customers subscribed to Windsource between December 2017 and March 2017
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VII.B.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Michelle Horan, Commissioner
Item Activity:
Subject:Sustainability Business Recognition Program Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
The Business Environmental Working will propose a program to engage and recognize businesses for being
sustainable.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Sustainability Business Recognition Program
Sustainability Business Recognition Program 1
July12, 2018
Commissioner Michelle Horan
Background
According to several studies, American consumers are increasingly willing to purchase, even at
slightly higher prices, products and services from companies that are committed to
sustainability and positive social impact.1,2,3,4 In the SCA’s Tork Green Business Survey, 82% of
US Adults are aware of which companies and brands have a history of sustainability, and 80%
of those adults take into consideration a company’s sustainability history when purchasing from
them.5 In addition, this survey shows that American adults want these companies to show their
commitment to sustainability by specific means: 26 percent want to see a designation on their
menus or store shelves, 20 percent want businesses to display poster or flyers with their “green”
information and 14 percent want to see businesses explain their environmental programs on
their website.6 A business recognition program, as we propose the Energy and Environment
Commission, and City Council to endorse, would benefit business by helping them become
environmental leaders, save on resources and money, provide a marketing edge and would
help match up customers with the types of business they want to do business with.
Reaching the City’s Goals
As our work with Xcel and PiE ends its formal partnership, we, as a city, will continue to try and
meet our goal of reducing GHG 30% by 2025. The only way the City can reach this goal is by
engaging the business community — 60% of the city’s energy use comes from the
business/industrial sector. The introduction of a Business Recognition Program is an
opportunity for the City to reach out to businesses and educate them on best practices for GHG
reduction as well as recycling, composting, solid waste reduction, road salt reduction,
purchasing, transportation and employee/customer training and resources. It in turns gives
businesses support and a means to promote their positive environmental actions to their
customers, which has proven value. This is how we can partner with businesses to reach our
city and county goals, as well as have a positive influence and partnership with our businesses
and their customers.
One vs Many Winners
In discussions about how to recognize business for their sustainability, the Business and
Environment Working Group (BEWG) decided it to be more effective to create a recognition
program that rewards all businesses that reach levels of sustainability, instead of awarding just
one business each year. The reasons we came to this conclusion are:
1. We want to incentivize as many businesses as possible to apply for recognition.
2. When you have one winner you have many losers. We want many winners.
3. When there is only one winner some businesses may not bother doing anything, thinking
that they would not have a chance to win.
4. It can be demotivating.
1. Especially for those who are already doing it
2. Once a business has already won
5. Instead of creating a competitive atmosphere we want to create a collaborative one. We
want businesses to work with each other, see each other as partners and resources.
We are unified in reaching a city wide goal.
1. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-consumers-take-sustainability-to-the-next-level-
300147756.html
2. http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/stakeholder_trends_insights/sustainable_brands/survey_60
_americans_resolving_more_env
3. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/green-generation-millennials-say-sustainability-is-a-shopping-
priority.html
4. http://betterbusiness.torkusa.com/green-business-survey-tork-bbc/
5. http://betterbusiness.torkusa.com/green-business-survey-tork-bbc/
6. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-consumers-take-sustainability-to-the-next-level-
300147756.html
2
Looking into best practices from other business recognition programs (BRP) around the country
we have concluded that a certification program based on a questionnaire/survey that recognizes
all businesses that meet certain standards, would be the best way to encourage businesses to
take environmentally positive actions.
Implementation
The following is an outline on how we foresee proceeding with creating and implementing a
BRP (we fondly call this program BURP).
Business Recognition Program
1. Recruit more members for Business and Environment Working Group
1. Residents
2. Business people
3. EEC members
4. IT or computer savvy person
5. Students (could be used on an as needed basis)
2. Build out the survey to be sent to businesses and a process for that information to be
gathering into one document.
1. Copy/modify Marshall survey and others around country
2. Copy/modify Marshall’s google form
3. 1-2 dedicated working group members in charge of survey and data. Member
would be alerted anytime a survey is completed and information dumped into main
document
3. Establish duration of recognition (1 or 2 years).
4. Confirm goals of program
1. What does success looks like?
2. How do we measure?
5. Create a marketing brief/strategy
6. Establish channels of promotion for recognized businesses.
1. Window cling
2. Website
3. Articles
1. Sun Current
2. About Town
3. Edina Magazine
4. City marquee
5. Other
4. Fourth of July Parade
5. Public recognition at Council meetings
6. At EEC events have a poster with those business we have recognized.
7. Possible advertising at any of the city facilities?
8. Other
7. Reach out to businesses
1. Create a program presentation
2. Set up and make presentation to various groups
1. Chamber of commerce
2. Rotary
3. Kiwanis
4. School Board
5. 50th and France
6. Southdale
7. Centennial Lakes
8. Other groups
3
3. Follow up after presentation. Email to thank and encourage taking survey.
4. Website. Add information about program and link to survey on the City of Edina’s
website.
5. Contact businesses post survey completion.
1. Congratulations you are recognized
2. Let me help you get there
6. Delivery of window cling (personally).
8. Work with the high school students
1. May Term Coordinator to establish an ongoing May Term/May Term for All
program for students
2. Project Earth.
3. Projects for students include:
1. Website
2. Presentation follow up
3. Survey information tally
4. Awarding recognition
5. Delivery of Window Cling
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VIII.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Correspondence
From:Tara Brown
Item Activity:
Subject:Residential Organics Recycling Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
See attached for the Residential Organics Recycling reports being sent to Council
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
EEC Review and Comment
2018 Staff Report on Residential Organics Policy Options
July 9, 2018
Mayor and City Council
Tara Brown, Liaison to Energy and Environment Commission
Residential Organics Recycling
Action Requested:
Select resident organics recycling policy to be implemented by staff.
Situation:
Energy and Environment Commission’s (EEC) 2018 Work Plan charges the commission to
‘Review and comment on policy options for residential organics recycling.’ Below are the EEC’s
comments on this report and the recommendation.
Background:
Attached is the staff report dated, June 8, 2018 listing the policy options for the EEC to review.
Council stated their goal was to increase the residential organic recycling rate. Based on
Council’s goal, staffed recommended that while all policies have trade-offs, the policy that will go
beyond incremental increase in organic recycling rates and has proven results in the metro area
is creating a policy and program around curbside organics recycling. Staff recommended starting
a program that would bid out with the next recycling program, and would require one full-time
person to manage the RFP, launch the program, and manage the program.
EEC Commissioner
Comments:
Fernands – It’s reinforced in society at schools and wouldn’t be a huge societal shift. It was a
success in other cities
Glahn – Edina simply can't afford to be the region's leader on every single issue. I'm comfortable
in letting other communities take the lead on this topic. I don't see that the bottom line benefit
is worth the cost to the city's citizens and consumers at this time. Let other communities work
out the bugs in a program for citywide organics recycling and then we can reconsider later.
STAFF REPORT Page 2
Horan – I support the recommendation and it’s the best way to have organics recycling received.
We’ve seen other cities succeed. Our kids are doing it at school, and it would allow them to
continue the practice at home, help their parents and establish lifelong behaviors. Food in
landfills is a huge production of methane gas.
Hoffman – I support as proposed.
Hussain – I’m undecided as to whether the proposal is what I agree as there are too many
unknowns and variables. For our house, there is more recycling than garbage.
Jackson – It addresses the inertia to get people to make the change. I support a residential
organics recycling policy as proposed. We should piggyback on the recycling RFP.
Kostuch – This would be a rate charged to all households. Currently recycling cost is $23.80,
the other cities with organics and recycling is $60 which will be double the current recycling
rate. As a resident, the Council is getting very good on indirect taxation and that will cause a
problem down the road.
Manser - Having lived in a City that has a successful organics recycling program, it took the path
of mandatory organics recycling. A fundamental component of GHG reduction is to keep
organics out of landfills. I am sensitive of the cost of organics recycling to Edina residents, but the
hidden cost of continuing to send food waste to landfills and the true cost of not recycling
organics is greater. I support the solution provided.
Satterlee – The case studies and related data from other city's methods of implementing organics
recycling programs detailed in the report demonstrate that the method recommended in the
report is the most likely to result in Edina achieving success with organics recycling. This is the
same model that was successful for Edina in increasing traditional recycling participation rates
significantly. The know from engagement with residents that there is interest. We can issue a
RFP with the recycling contract and then make a recommendation on implementation based on
the results of the RFP.
Seeley – I support the recommendation.
June 8, 2018
Mayor and City Council
Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Solvei Wilmot, RS, Environmental Health Specialist/Recycling Coordinator
Residential Organics Recycling
Information / Background:
Vision Edina’s Environmental Stewardship Strategic Focus Area states: ‘Edina community is focused and invested
in world-class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental
sustainability.’ In the 2018-2019 Budget Work Plan, a strategy under Budget Goal #3 Connected & Sustainable
Development is to ‘Determine strategy and timeline for meeting waste reduction goals with residential organics
recycling by Q2 2018.’ This report details key information and policy options to support the community in
meeting the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) and Hennepin County’s goal to recycle 75% of waste
as well as the city’s sustainability goal to reduce our GHG emissions 30% by 2025.
Current waste management success in Edina
• Residents’ participation rate for the curbside recycling program is at 91%.
• Edina school system’s organics recycling makes up 21% of total waste; one of the highest diversion rates.
• Based on reporting from haulers, estimated residential waste mix is 50% waste, 26% recycling, 20% yard
waste, and 3% source separated compostable material collected by hauler that offers organics recycling.
MPCA and County Direction
• MPCA’s Metropolitan Solid Waste Mater Plan 2016-2036 was approved on April 6, 2017 and outlined
the goals of municipal solid waste:
• See Appendix A for organics waste, yard waste, co-mingled, and other waste definitions
STAFF REPORT Page 2
• State statute requires Hennepin County to respond to MPCA’s plan to reach the goal of recycling 75%
of waste by 2030. To meet this, the County developed the 2018 Solid Waste Management Master Plan
and in it:
o County proposes to amend Ordinance 13 in 2018 to require cities to provide residents the
opportunity to recycle organics by 2022.
o County will focus more on organics; including allocating 50% of SCORE Funding to organics
recycling residents by 2020.
• As a County, residential organics recycling sits at 3-4%, and the organics with yard waste sits at 10%.
Edina’s rate was approximately 23% (organics with yard waste) in 2017. There has not been an uptick
in this number for seven years at the County level, which is one reason they are mandating organics
recycling to assist in getting the organics recovery to 12% by 2020 countywide. The other reason is
organics make up the largest percent of residential waste.
Why organics?
Each year, 40 percent of food in the
United States goes to waste. Not only
is an individual’s money spent on
purchasing food and hauling wasted
food, but there is the resource
investment in fertilizer, energy, water,
cropland, and production costs
expended that is a loss to the greater
community when food is sent to
landfills.
In 2016, Hennepin County completed a
residential waste study report. The
study found 25% of the trash was
organics; yet only 4% of all residential
organics is being recovered (recycled). Figure 1 shows the recycling rates by material. Clearly, Organics has the
biggest opportunity and impact in reducing waste to landfills.
Other municipalities, counties and states are seeing the value in separating organics at a larger scale including
Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, and our city comparables of Highland Park, IL, Manhattan Beach, CA, and Menlo
Park, CA have all implemented some form of organics recycling to recapture the resource, reduce waste and
reduce GHG emissions.
Figure 1: Graph from 2016 Hennepin County
Waste Study Organics makes up 25% of the
trash
STAFF REPORT Page 3
City City
Contract
Everyone
Pays Hauler(s) Collection Method Program Cost Structure
Cost/
Year
Households
w/ Organics
Households
w/ Curbside
Recycling
Partici
pation
Rate
Minneapolis Yes Yes City & MRI Organics alone Included in solid waste cost NA 46,228 106,855 43%
St. Louis Park Yes Yes Advanced Collected w/ yard waste Included in solid waste cost NA 3,596 12,362 29%
Wayzata Yes Yes Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Included in recycling cost ($96/year)* NA 379 1,285 29%
Medina Yes Yes Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Included in recycling cost ($60/year) NA 385 2,035 19%
St. Bonifacius Yes Yes Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Included in recycling cost ($60/year) NA 86 843 10%
Osseo Yes Yes Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Included in recycling cost ($70/year) NA 41 595 7%
Medicine Lake Yes Yes Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Included in recycling cost ($60/year) NA 37 168 22%
Maple Plain Yes No Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Additional cost $59-79 35 916 4%
Loretto Yes No Randy's Co-collected w/ trash Additional cost $59-80 16 268 6%
21 cities with
blue bag
organics
No No Open:
Randy's
Co-collected w/trash) Additional cost $59-89 1,226 149,157 0.8%
Edina No No Open:
Vierkant
Collected w/ yard waste Additional cost $59-89 not
reported
14,185 NA
Totals 52,029 288,669
Organic Recycling Programs in Hennepin County
Current programs reported in September 2017 as a part of SCORE grant applications
*Wayzata has a higher than average recycling and organics cost due to receiving a discount on trash
**See Appendix D for a list of 21 cities summarized in ’21 cities with blue bag organics’
STAFF REPORT Page 4
Current Policy Options
After engaging with multiple stakeholders, below is a high-level summary of potential policies. By 2022, Edina
will need to provide residents the opportunity to recycle organics. Additionally, to improve the organic
recycling rates, encouragement, education, and services will need to go beyond current actions.
Ordinance/
Policy
Meets
County
Mandate
Potential
Impact to
Organics
Recovery
Rate
Pros Cons Estimated cost
to residents
Resource
needs
No action No Remain at
3%
participation
Keep status quo Does not meet County
mandate. Penalty unknown.
None None
Include organic
collection
service as a
requirement for
hauler licensing
Yes Unknown.
No other
city has
tested this
policy.
- Be a test for the policy
- Gives parties interested in
organics the ability to
request service from hauler
- Ties organics recycling to
trash choices
-Delivery of service is left to
haulers which can lead to
inconsistent delivery and
education of service
-Depending on collection,
method there could be
more trucks
Organics is $59-
$89 per year by
two haulers that
choose to provide
the service in the
county
0.5 FTE
for
education
and
outreach
Curbside
Organics
Collection:
Voluntary Sign-
up, charge to
only those that
sign-up
Yes Of the 2
MN cities,
participation
ranges from
4% to 6%
-Gives parties interested in
organics the ability to
request service
- Will be challenging to get
the best rate, as the count of
participants will be a moving
target
- Cities that started with this
have moved to dispersing
cost of service to all
-Depending on collection
method there could be
more trucks
No current data
on cost.
1 FTE
headcount
to manage
organics
and
recycling
Curbside
Organics
Collection
similar to
recycling
program: cost
of service
dispersed to all.
Yes Of the 7
MN cities,
participation
ranges from
7% to 43%,
average is
23%
-Increase in participation
-Consistent service and
communication
-More consistent and
complete metrics
-Depending on collection
method, there could be less
trucks
- Depending on collection
method there could be
more trucks
- Depending on collection
there could be more bins to
move in and out
-Residents not composting
will subsidize residents in
citywide collection
Organics +
recycling is $60-
$96 per year
1 FTE
headcount
to manage
organics
and
recycling
Further breakdown of Policy Options
No action – The proposed Hennepin County ordinance does not require the City to offer organic recycling
upon request to residents until 2022. The City can choose to take no action at this time and relook at the topic
in the future before the 2022 deadline. Note that the Energy and Environment recommended against this type
of action in their recommendation to Council in their Advisory Communication on September 14, 2017:
‘…Edina should look to institute city-wide curbside organics collection sooner than the 2022 date set forth by
the MPCA Solid Waste Master Plan. With the recycling contract up for bid in 2019, staff time would be best
spent drafting an RFP for organics collection by the end of 2018…’
STAFF REPORT Page 5
Hauler license requirement – There is currently no city in the metro area with this type of policy and
therefore, there is no data on how this impacts recycling rates. This policy is an opt-in for residents on
participation and rates. If this policy was chosen, staff would recommend updating the licensing requirements to
include in renewal of licensing that residential waste hauler must provide organic recycling services if requested
by an Edina customer. This ties organic recycling to trash haulers. Additionally, staff would recommend requiring
haulers to disclose organic recycling household counts to ensure SCORE funding is received and can be passed
on to residents. Depending on how organics is picked up by each hauler, there could be an increase or a
decrease in trucks.
In 2016, Energy and Environment Commissioners, Michelle Horan and Melissa Seeley, and Recycling
Coordinator, Solvei Wilmot, met with four haulers to discuss the impacts of an organics recycling mandate.
Haulers voiced similar feedback. Feedback included:
1. The main concern is the lack of compost processing facilities. In 2016, there was no facility taking new
customers with mix yard waste and organics.
2. Concern over raising all customers’ yard waste rates if organics are collected with yard wastes.
3. Haulers are unsure if they will subcontract organics hauling or add truck to existing route. Concerned
about additional distance to travel to process and collect
4. Frustration regarding County’s mandate to reduce solid waste by 12% without the proper infrastructure
to collect/process organics.
5. Felt that it was too early for the city, but would comply if customers request organics
6. Overall, not entirely opposed to the organics collection, more concerned about the process of
collection and processing.
Since this discussion, additional site capacity opened in 2018 to take on organics collection, which lessens
concerns 1 and 4. This is a moving target as the market is always changing. While the program could launch
under current staff resources, it would take away from current education and staffing could not take on the
additional educational support and outreach for both haulers and residents to increase organics participation
rates. It is recommended that funding up to $50,000 be provided annually for a part-time staff resource to meet
educational needs. Additional cost beyond staff resource for this policy would be a small budget for marketing
and outreach which could be covered by SCORE funding.
Curbside Organics Recycling – City-wide organics recycling program will allow residents a consistent
service like the city-wide curbside recycling program, will likely provide reduced rates for recycling and organics
collection to residents, will create more rigor around metrics, and allow consistent education to reduce
contamination and improve recycling rates. Case study cities have seen large participation and recovery that
continue to grow year over year from this service, but note this is a large endeavor as it would mean the City
would launch a new service to residents.
To support the new service a full-time staff resource is necessary; estimated funding would be $90,000 annually.
This request is based on learnings and efficiencies from neighboring cities that have implemented services. A
headcount is needed to answer residential requests, manage vendor, create and manage marketing engagement
plan, deliver ongoing education, and manage reporting. A full headcount is needed as there is a significant
learning curve for many residents. Similar to curbside recycling, funding the staff resource could be a part of the
organics recycling service fee. Depending on the collection type, additional cost could include marketing
materials to launch the program or carts for organics collection. SCORE grant can be used to offset some these
costs as well contract cost of the curbside organics.
STAFF REPORT Page 6
While neither of these are a guarantee, there are two resources that might be available to launch a program.
Hennepin County is looking to support two to three organic recycling pilots. The County may grant $20,000 to
$30,000 per year for two to three years. The second opportunity is GreenCorps members dedicated to waste
minimization that Edina could apply to host.
Some Edina residents complain about the number of trucks on the road as they add to noise pollution, air
pollution, and wear and tear on the roads. While the amount of trucks on the road cannot be known for
organic recycling policies until operation is planned, curbside organics does present the greatest opportunity for
a reduction in trucks. Depending on pickup, a curbside recycling program could reduce the amount of trucks on
the road if co-collected with yard waste and/or recycling and organics were picked up in a split truck.
Through the stakeholder process, Council directed staff to reach out to those that offer organics service to
Edina residents now. When asked how about organics recycling could look in the future, Vierkant Disposal
stated that if the city wanted to get ahead of organics, bidding out recycling and organics recycling across the
entire city would be the best bet. Edina’s current recycling contract ends December 31, 2019. At the end of
2018, Edina will have to bid out for a recycling contract that will begin in January, 2020. If curbside organics
recycling is taken on, bidding it out for organics at the same time as recycling could make the process efficient,
present savings, and reduce the amount.
Other considerations
No matter what policy Edina moves forward with, the below topics are considerations to advance organics.
• Capacity at processing sites – The capacity and type of materials accepted at processing continues
to change. Previously, a large hurdle to organics recycling was the little to no new capacity at processing
sites. However, this year Specialized Environmental Technologies (SET) site opened with additional
capacity with source separated for organics only (not co-mingled organics and yard waste). Shakopee
Mdewakanton Sioux Community Compost Facility (SMSC) has expanded capacity co-mingled organics
recycling and yard waste. The current capacity removes one of the largest barriers to increased organic
collections, but this could change if capacity is contracted out.
• Data and its impact on measuring success and attaining grant money. Currently, data is
inconsistent for waste collection, which makes it challenging to measure progress. For organics
recycling, the hauler that does provide organics recycling will not disclose the count of households
signed up for organics recycling. Without this data, we cannot report to Hennepin County the organic
recycling rates within the city. Not only does this leave us without an understanding of adoption rates,
we cannot request SCORE funding to support organics recycling.
• Shifts in SCORE Funding - County has already begun to shift the SCORE funding from general
recycling to organics. By 2020, half of the $3,600,000 in SCORE funding will be allocated to organics
recycling. This means the current funding of $172,857 Edina receives will be reduced to $108,035 in
three years. Edina’s ability to apply for the $1,800,000 SCORE funding available to organics recycling
will depend on the count of households recycling organics as a percent of the total county households
recycling organics.
Final recommendation
Vision Edina’s Environmental Stewardship Strategic Focus Area states: ‘Edina community is focused and invested
in world-class citywide resource management systems, built around the leading principles of environmental
sustainability.’ Council stated their goal was to increase the residential organic recycling rate. All policies have
trade-offs, but the policy that will go beyond incremental increase in organic recycling rates and has proven
STAFF REPORT Page 7
results in the metro area is creating a policy and program around curbside organics recycling. The program
would bid out with the next recycling program, and would require one full-time person to manage the RFP,
launch the program, and manage the program.
Appendix
APPENDIX A: Definitions
Organic Waste: includes compost ingredients such as: coffee grounds, food wastes, fresh fruit, vegetable scraps,
fish and animal waste, plant materials, sanitary products, tissues, paper towels and paper that is not recyclable
because the commissioner of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has determined that no other
person is willing to accept the paper for recycling. It does not include yard waste.
Yard waste: grass clippings, plants, leaves and small branches
Source Separated Compostable Material: includes organic waste and may include yard waste. Collected
separately from refuse for the purpose of biodegradation at an approved compost facility.
Co-mingled: Organic waste and yard waste have not been separated and are mixed together in one cart or bag.
Co-collected: Organic waste and yard waste are separated by placing organics into a sealed compostable bag and
placed into a cart with yard waste, or a cart with recycling, or a cart with refuse. The bagged organic material is
then removed later at a recovery facility and then delivered to a compost facility. The other materials in the cart
(yard waste or recycling or refuse) are processed separately.
STAFF REPORT Page 8
APPENDIX B: Content from Hennepin County Staff from reviewing organic collection programs
What do we know from existing organics programs?
The following program elements yield better results:
• Curbside (vs. drop-offs)
• City contract (vs. open system)
• Everyone pays (vs. only subscribers pay)
• Opt out (vs. opt in)
o Opt in means only those who sign up get a cart/service
o Opt out means everyone gets a cart/service to begin with
All programs are currently opt in (sign up to participate) with weekly pickup.
The table below summarizes the most commonly cited barriers to implementing organics recycling.
Barriers to Organics Experience
Don’t really want another cart
Minneapolis has successfully implemented organics with another
cart. St. Louis Park residents receive another cart if they sign up
for organics. Both those cities are higher density cities with less
space. Wayzata initially used a separate cart for organics and
participation was actually higher than it is now with the Blue Bag
system.
Don’t want another truck on the streets
Trash collection is responsible for putting the most trucks on the
roads. Cities with open trash collection often have 4+ garbage
trucks driving around. St. Louis Park has 3 trucks total, for all its
programs. Cities with the best organics programs have fewer
trucks than cities without organics.
Low demand from residents
The same was said about Minneapolis and St. Louis Park. It’s
difficult to promote a program that doesn’t exist. First, people
need the opportunity to participate. Then participation will grow
over time with education and outreach, following a path similar
to the development of recycling.
STAFF REPORT Page 9
It’s an additional cost
Residents that live in cities with the best organics programs often
pay less for waste services than residents in cities without
organics. Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, Medina, and Wayzata
charge less than $275/household/year for recycling, organics and
trash. Most residents pay $275 to $315 per year just for recycling
and trash service.
STAFF REPORT Page 10
How can we move forward on organics?
Organics Options County Staff Comments
Status quo
Without requirements, progress has been slow. The county has provided
extensive technical and financial support to get organics programs going.
The only new citywide programs in the last 6 years are Minneapolis and St.
Louis Park. The county board required Minneapolis to implement curbside
organics. St. Louis Park has a progressive council.
Drop-off sites
Drop-offs are a good way to build awareness and support for organics, but
only the dedicated participate. Drop-offs helped Minneapolis with a smooth
transition to a curbside program by educating residents on why organics
recycling is important and what’s accepted.
Hauler licensing conditions
If every licensed hauler had to provide organics service upon request, the
market would be fragmented. This fragmentation would likely inhibit
efficient collection and financial viability. Haulers may choose to sub-
contract or essentially price themselves out of the market by only offering
organics service at an exorbitant price.
Organics with recycling RFP
Organics are defined as a recyclable material by state statute. Of the 44
cities in the county, 42 contract for recycling. Including organics with the
recycling RFP is a low-risk way to see what options are available. The city
reserves the right to choose if and how to proceed with organics after
proposals are received and reviewed.
Separate contract for organics
If a city doesn’t want to include organics with their recycling RFP, they can
put out a separate RFP for organics. This is an option if the expiration of the
recycling contract doesn’t align with the timeline for organics
implementation and the city prefers not to amend the recycling contract.
Organized collection This would allow cities to create the organics program of their choice at the
best price; however, it’s not politically feasible in most cities.
County requirement
Hennepin County staff proposal to increase organics diversion is to revise
Ordinance 13 to require cities to contract for organics by January 1, 2021.
The goal is to give residents the opportunity to participate in organics
recycling and create programs that yield the best results.
STAFF REPORT Page 11
APPENDIX C: List of cities using blue bag
City Blue Bag Participants Open or Organized
Brooklyn Center 4 Open
Brooklyn Park 9 Open
Corcoran 115 Open
Crystal 27 Open
Dayton 7 Open
Golden Valley 41 Open
Greenfield 4 Open
Greenwood 6 Open
Hanover 4 Open
Independence 16 Open
Long Lake 5 Open
Loretto 16 Organized
Maple Grove 52 Open
Maple Plain 35 Organized
Medicine Lake 37 Organized
Medina 385 Organized
Minnetonka 596 Open
Minnetrista 13 Open
Mound 18 Open
New Hope 11 Open
Orono 96 Open
Osseo 41 Organized
Plymouth 99 Open
Richfield 50 Open
Rogers 13 Open
Shorewood 40 Open
St. Bonifacius 86 Organized
Wayzata 379 Organized
Total 2,205
STAFF REPORT Page 12
APPENDIX D: Example of City Promotions that Launched Organics Programs
St. Louis Park
New customer incentive. As of May 1, 2016 the city is offering two free quarters (a $20 value) to the first 1,000
new customers who sign up for organics recycling. This will appear as a one-time credit on the quarterly utility
bill. Already part of the program? Receive one free quarter (a $10 value) for each new customer you refer who
signs up and mentions your name and address.
Minneapolis
Education campaign:
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/groups/public/@publicworks/documents/webcontent/wcmsp-187850.pdf
Minnetonka
In Minnetonka Memo newsletter: The first 150 Minnetonka residents who sign up for organics recycling in 2016
will receive one free year of service, paid for by the city. Existing organics customers, don’t feel left out! As part
of the grant program, the city is providing a limited supply of compostable bags and kitchen containers to both
new and existing organics customers for no charge. Stop by the Public Works Facility at 11522 Minnetonka
Boulevard to get a container and 25 bags.
http://eminnetonka.com/images/Minnetonka%20Memo/Memo_feb2016_final.pdf
Medina
$20 credit on your garbage bill if you are a new organics recycling customer and or an existing organics
customer who refers new participants. This offer is limited to the first 340 new customers and referrals and
only available to Medina residents. The referral incentive is only available to organics recycling customers who
were part of the program prior to August 1, 2016. Referrals must mention your name and address when signing
up. You can receive a $20 credit for each new customer you refer, up to 4 new households – that means you
could receive up to an $80 credit on your garbage bill!
http://medinamn.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Aug-Sept-2016-Newsletter-Story-Organics-Incentive-20-
Credit.pdf
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VIII.B.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
From:Tara Brown
Item Activity:
Subject:Working Group Objectives and Members List
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Working Group Subcommittees Lists
Edina Energy & Environment Commission
Working Groups and Subcommittees
Updated 3/5/18
Business Environmental Working Group – 1st Tuesday at 7:00pm - Chair Michelle Horan - mhoran00@gmail.com
Commissioner Carolyn Jackson, Members: Paul Hussian, Mike Woolsey, and Bill Sierks
Objective: Business energy efficiency and conservation, 30% GHG emission reduction by 2025.
Residential Energy Efficiency and Conservation & Education Outreach Working Group – 4th Thursday at 7:00pm – Chair
Howard Hoffman howard.hoffman@gmail.com - Commissioner: Richard Manser, Members: Bob Gubrud, Clover
Graham, Paul Hussian, Gauri Madhok, Mathias Samuel, and Jeremy Voigts. Chair Lauren Satterlee Lauren Satterlee
lauren.satterlee@gmail.com - Commissioner: Ramesh Shanmugavel, Gauri Madhok, Members: Paul Thompson, Bob
Gubrud , Clover Graham, Chuck Prentice, Kristopher Wilson, and Jeff Lundgren.
Objective: Residential energy efficiency and conservation, 30% GHG emission reduction by 2025.
Objective: The mission of the Education and Outreach Working Group is to support the charter of the Edina
Energy and Environment Commission by creating awareness and engaging residents, schools, communities of
faith, business' and community organizations to take action to conserve and increase energy efficiency, to reuse
and recycle, and to preserve and enhance our environment
Merged 2/8/18
City Operations Energy Efficiency and Conservation Subcommittee – Chair Keith Kostuch Commissioners: Bill Glahn,
Ramesh Shanmugavel, and Richard Manser
Objective: City Operations energy efficiency and conservation, 30% GHG emission reduction by 2025.
Recycling Solid Waste and Organics Working Group(RSWO) – 1st Wednesday at 7:00 pm - Chair Melissa Seeley Melissa
Seeley msee10@me.com – Commissioners: Lauren Satterlee, Michelle Horan, Joanna Kim, Members: DP Latham –
City Staff: Solvei Wilmot
Objective: Evaluate and monitor the provisions of the recycling, solid waste and organic waste collection
programs in Edina. Evaluate and monitor the reduction in municipal solid waste by residents and businesses in
Edina. Educate the public about recycling, organics and solid waste reduction.
Student Environmental Leadership Council (Subcommittee) – Chair Melissa Seeley Melissa Seeley - Student Members:
Gauri Madhok and open to students attending secondary schools in Edina.
Objective: To facilitate, coordinate and share information between the EEC and the School Environmental
groups and to work on common energy and environmental objectives as appropriate. To assist in developing
environmental leaders of tomorrow.
Water Quality Working Group (WQWG) – 2nd Tuesday at 6:30pm - Chair _____ – Members: Jon Moon, Steve Wielock,
Katherine Winston, Sue Nissen and Randy Holst, Richard Strong, Walter Lavesque, Erin Hunker, and Richard Manser
Objective: To facilitate communication between citizens and city government and champion efforts to improve
water quality within Edina.
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VIII.C.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Minutes
From:Casey Casella, City Management Fellow
Item Activity:
Subject:Working Group Minutes Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
Received Minutes from EEC Working Groups.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Minutes: BEEC, June 13,2018
BEEC Meeting Minutes June 13, 2018
Attendees:
Michelle Horan, Carolyn Jackson, Paul Hussian
Discussed next steps towards a Business Recognition Program.
1. Fine tune the Marshall program
1. Research other recognition programs around the country
2. Divided links to other recognition programs between Paul, Carolyn and Michelle, to get
an idea of best practices
2. Establish questionnaire platform and data collection/management
1. How?
2. Who ?
3. Does the City have resources to share - ask Tara
3. Recruit additional working Group members
1. Stake holders
1. Business people
2. Restaurant managers
3. Building owners
4. Apartment complex managers
2. High schoolers
1. Project earth
2. May Term
3. Create job descriptions for
1. Electronic data manager
2. Business outreach
3. Follow up
4. Create an outreach plan
1. Create presentation
2. List of groups to contact
3. What type of marketing pieces do we want/need
4. What resources do we have available to us
5. Timeline
1. Now through September recruit new members to working group
2. October/November do presentation
3. January/February businesses fill out questionnaire
Talked about establishing baselines for each sector - Paul will look into regional
indicators
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: VIII.D.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Minutes
From:Casey Casella, City Management Fellow
Item Activity:
Subject:Working Group Minutes Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None.
INTRODUCTION:
Received minutes from EEC working group.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Minutes:City Energy Efficiency Conservation, June 21, 2018
Minutes
City Energy Efficiency & Conservation Sub-committee,
Energy & Environment Commission
Edina Grill
I. Call To Order: 21 June 2018 at 7:30 a.m.
II. Attendees: Keith Kostuch, Richard Manser, Bill Glahn
III. Topics Discussed
a. Annual metrics for City operations to succeed Partners in Energy (PiE) goals
i. Discussion:
1. We discussed the PiE summary report,
particularly the section on City operations. We brainstormed some
possible annual goals for the City to reduce its energy use and GHG
output. We agreed that we wanted a simple, measurable goal for the
City’s operations for the next 5-10 years. There was some discussion
about how to have incentives or penalties for annual non-attainment in
the event that occurs.
We agreed we needed to get an update from our city liaison, Ms. Tara
Brown, to get her current plan and to understand where she is in the
approval process. The sub-committee needs to get her thoughts on what
metrics are both appropriate and implementable for the City operations.
After that meeting, we can finalize some metrics to present to the full
EEC for discussion.
ii. Timeline
1. To be determined
iii. Next steps:
1. Mr. Kostuch will contact Ms. Brown to
schedule a meeting with the sub-committee, ideally before the next EEC
meeting.
b.
i.
c.
d.
IV. Next steps
a. Schedule a meeting with Ms. Brown to get update on her progress in
getting her City operations environmental plan approved and to discuss ideas for on-going
metrics post PiE
V. Other meetings and invitations to consider - None
VI. Adjournment: 8:20 a.m.
VII. Next Meeting: Not scheduled but will be a meeting with Ms. Brown to discuss annual metrics
Date: July 12, 2018 Agenda Item #: X.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:GreenStep Cities Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
The City of Edina received an award for advancing to become a Step 4 city in the GreenStep program at the
League of Minnesota Cities annual conference June 21. Edina is one of five cities in the state to have the Step 4
designation. Step 4 includes measuring and reporting on 7 to 15 performance metrics.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
GreenStep City Metric Reporting
Units
Previous
Year
Values
(edit)
Current
Year
Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
3.1 Miles per year 914,755 1021864 107109
3.2 Miles per gallon 12.0 12.85 0.88
3.3 Miles per year 119,561 106929 -12632
3.4 Miles per gallon 3.41 3.73 0.32
3.5 Number of EVs 1 1 0
CO Gallons/Year 53692 71912 18220
CO Gallons/Year 96918 104168 7250
CO Gallons/Year
Units
Previous
Year
Values
(edit)
Current
Year
Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
4.1 Miles of sidewalk &
trails 6.7 5.2 -1.5
4.2 %N/A #VALUE!
4.3 Walk score 37 37
Units
Previous
Year
Values
(edit)
Current
Year
Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
5.1 Number of
stations 3 4 1
#5 Car, Transit, and Bike Options OPTIONAL
#4 Infrastructure for Walking and Biking
OPTIONAL
Miles of new or reconstructed sidewalks & trails completed in the
past year
Percentage of housing within 1 mile of a bicycle route
Walk Score for your city or downtown
Number of electric vehicle charging stations:
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
Average MPG for gasoline fleet
Annual vehicle miles traveled for diesel fleet
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
Average MPG for Gasoline and Diesel fleet based on straight and not weighted average. Gas and diesel consumed include amounts for off-
road vehicles and small equipment such as lawnmowers.
Transportation
To be considered for Step 4 or 5, please complete the following form by entering the appropriate metric measurement in each orange box. For
assistance, please refer to the guidance sheets available for each metric. The green boxes indicate metrics that are eligible for Step 5 recognition if
a city shows improvement between year 1 and year 2. The blue boxes indicate metrics that are used to calculate your city operations greenhouse gas
inventory.
Number of electric vehicles in city fleet
#3 City Fleets CORE
Annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for gasoline fleet:
In consideration of city vehicles:
Average MPG for diesel fleet
Gallons of diesel consumed
Gallons of gasoline consumed
Gallons of e85 consumed
5.2 Number of stations 0 1 1
5.3 Yes or No No Yes
5.4 Yes or No Yes Yes
5.5 Number of services 0 0
5.6 Yes or No Yes Yes
5.7 Yes or No Yes Yes
5.8 % N/A #VALUE!
Units
Previous
Year
Values
(edit)
Current
Year
Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
6.1 Miles/person/day 31.47193 31.47193
6.2 Miles/person/day
6.3 % 46.80%46.80%
6.4 %
6.5 % 78.40%78.40%
6.6 % 7.90%7.90%
6.7 % 3.10%3.10%
6.8 % 2.20%2.20%
6.9 % 8.30%8.30%Percent working from home/telecommuting:
Percent who bike or walk:
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
Does the city have structured transit routes? Enter yes or no:
Percent of city population commuting 20 or fewer minutes:
Transportation Mode of Commuters
Percent of city employees commuting 20 or fewer minutes:
Percent using single-occupancy vehicle:
Percent using a car/van pool & ride sharing:
Percent of housing units within 3/4 miles of transit routes:
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
We are testing a bike sharing service this year
City employees in single occupancy vehicles: Vehicle miles
traveled per person, per day:
City population: Vehicle miles traveled per person, per day:
#6 Transportation Modes and Miles CORE
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Percent using transit:
Number of alternative fueling stations (e.g. e85, CNG):
Shared Services
Does your city have a bike sharing service? Enter yes or no:
Does your city enable car or ride-sharing services? Enter yes or no:
Number of telecommuting businesses/services:
Is the city served by weekday transit? Enter yes or no:
Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
8.1 %15.00% 15.00%0.00%
8.2 Acres 1,553.00 1553 0
8.3 % 99.00% 99.00%0.00%
8.4 %
8.5 Genus Ash, Elm, Oak
8.5a %
8.5b %
8.5c %
8.6 Number of trees 93 1037 944
Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
9.1 %
Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
Percent of housing within 1/2 mile of parkland:
Tree Canopy
Net number of new trees planted:
Percent of total city acres in open space:
Environmental Management
Open Space
#8 Open Space, Parks, Trees CORE
To be considered for Step 4 or 5, please complete the following form by entering the appropriate metric measurement in each orange box. For assistance, please
refer to the guidance sheets available for each metric. The green boxes indicate metrics that are eligible for Step 5 recognition if a city shows improvement between year 1
and year 2. The blue boxes indicate metrics that are used to calculate your city operations greenhouse gas inventory.
Acres of parkland:
Parkland Quantity and Access
#10 Drinking Water OPTIONAL
What percent of canopy coverage is made up by the second most
prevalent genus?
What percent of canopy coverage is made up by the third most
prevalent genus?
Percent canopy coverage:
Three most prevalent tree species (by percent genus):
What percent of canopy coverage is made up by the most prevalent
genus?
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
#9 Storm Water CORE
Assessment number (percent) from the Minnesota Blue Star
City program:
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics: 37 with 1000 DNR bare root stock seedlings. 93 trees in 2016.
We have completed a tree survey of all boulevard ash trees and Arden park, but have not completed a tree canopy survey of all public and private property.
10.1 Gallons/person/
day 79.8 84.2 4.4
10.2 Gallons/job/day 27.2 28.4 1.2
10.3 Gallons/year 1216654000 1260875000 44221000
10.3a Gallons/year 990622000 911020000 -79602000
10.4 Peak:Average 2.11 2.15 0.04
10.5 MMBtus 0.15035
10.6 $/million gallons $1,451.44 $1,397.77 -$53.67
10.7 % 4.10%2.20%-1.90%
10.8 stable stable
CO MWh/Year
CO Therms/Year
CORE for Cities with
wastewater collection system Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
11.1 Gallons/person/day 79.3 83.8 4.5
11.2 Gallons/ job/day 17.5 18.4 0.9
11.3 MMBtu/million
gallons 12
11.4 $/Million gallons
11.5 I&I:total volume
CO MWh/Year
CO Therms/Year
Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
12.1 %
12.2 % or number of
monitors
12.3
% DNR protected
waters impaired for
recreational
Annual cost in dollars spent per million gallons of water distributed
Percent of annual losses in drinking water system
Ratio of Inflow and Infiltration volume to total volume entering
the wastewater collection system
Trend of source water levels: falling, stable, or rising
Residential gallons of waste water produced per person per day
Annual operating cost in dollars per million gallons treated (report
only if you own a treatment facility)
Percent of lake, river, and wetland shoreline with at least 50'
vegetation buffer
Percent of water bodies showing at least good clarity readings OR
number of citizen lake/river monitors
Business gallons of waste water produced per job, per day
Annual energy used per million gallons treated (report only if you
own a treatment facility)
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
Annual electricity used to treat and distribute water
Annual Natural gas used to treat and distribute water
One city-defined metric or index number concerning surface
water
#12 Surface Water OPTIONAL
Annual electricity used to treat wastewater
Annual natural gas used to treat wastewater
Annual city operations gallons: non-summer (November-May)
Annual city operations gallons: summer (June-October)
Ratio of maximum day use to average daily use
Annual energy used per million gallons of water distributed
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
#11 Waste Water
Residential gallons used per person per day
Business gallons used per job per day
Units Previous Year Values
(edit)
Current
Year Values
(edit)
Annual
Change
13.1 Lbs 31 31
13.2 Lbs NA #VALUE!
13.3 %36.00%36.00%
13.4 %15.00%15.00%
13.5 Tons per year 63.5 63.5
13.6 Tons per year
13.6a %
13.6b % 25.00%25.00%
13.6c %
CO Tons per year
CO Tons per year
Percent of waste recycled
Commercial solid waste generated per job, per day:
What percent of city operations construction and demolition waste is
reused?
Percent of waste composted
What percent is recycled?
What percent is landfilled?
Enter any justification or explanation for variation of metrics:
City operations solid waste generated per year
City operations construction & demolition waste per year
Residential solid waste generated per city resident per day:
#13 Solid Waste OPTIONAL
City operations incinerated each year
City operations landfilled each year