The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-12-12 EEC Meeting Packet Meeting location: Edina City Hall Community Room 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN Energy & Environment Commission Meeting Agenda Thursday, December 12, 2024 7:00 PM Accessibility Support: 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 amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. Minutes from November 14, 2024 Meeting 5. Special Recognitions and Presentations 5.1. 2023 Greenhouse Gas Inventory 6. Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. 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. 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 staff for consideration at a future meeting. 7. Reports/Recommendations 7.1. Time of Sale with Energy Disclosure Staff Report Follow Up 7.2. Paved Area / Community Gardens Work Plan Item 8. Chair and Member Comments 9. Staff Comments Page 1 of 59 9.1. Approved 2025 Work Plan 10. Adjournment Page 2 of 59 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: December 12, 2024 Item Activity: Action Meeting: Energy & Environment Commission Agenda Number: 4.1 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Minutes Department: Engineering Item Title: Minutes from November 14, 2024 Meeting Action Requested: Approve minutes. Information/Background: Approve minutes from Nov. 14, 2024 meeting. Supporting Documentation: 1. EEC Meeting Minutes, Nov. 14, 2024 Page 3 of 59 MINUTES OF THE ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2024 Meeting location: Edina City Hall Community Room 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 1. Call to Order Chair Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. then shared the procedure for public hearing and community comment. 2. Roll Call Answering roll call were Commissioners Lukens, Haugen, Walker, Bartholomew, Tessman, and Weber. Absent were Commissioners Schima and Dakane, and student Commissioners Langsweirdt and Srivastav. Commissioner Martinez-Salgado arrived at 7:06 p.m. 3. Approval of Meeting Agenda Haugen made a motion, seconded by Tessman, to Approve Meeting Agenda. Motion Carried. 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes 4.1. Minutes from September 12, 2024 Meeting Tessman made a motion, seconded by Weber, to Approve Meeting Minutes. Motion Carried. 5. Special Recognitions and Presentations No special recognition and presentations were received. 6. Community Comment No community comment was received. 7. Reports/Recommendations 7.1. Staff report on Time of Sale with Energy Disclosure Sustainability Manager Marisa Bayer and Chief Building Official Nate Borwege presented the draft staff report on time of sale with energy disclosure, summarizing the staff recommendation to not adopt a policy. Commissioners provided feedback on the staff recommendation, including a request for additional data about home energy audits and Page 4 of 59 building permits before deciding on a Council presentation or Advisory Communication. Staff will bring this data back to the EEC when ready for further discussion. 7.2. Tree Recognition Campaign Commissioners Haugen and Martinez-Salgado discussed the Tree Recognition Campaign, noting 23 nominations were received. Of those 23 nominations, nine are being recognized with formal awards and others are being recognized as honorable mention at the Dec. 17 Council meeting. 7.3. Parking Project Advisory Communication Planning Commission provided a draft outline of the report. EEC discussed their general comments on the report, which will be sent to the Planning Commission work plan leads for incorporation. 7.4. Paved Area / Community Gardens Work Plan Item Commissioner Weber discussed the work plan item, noting some confusion about the language in the work plan and intention of the EEC's role and working with the PARC. Commissioner Weber will move forward with her report based on the discussion to bring forward at a future meeting. 8. Chair and Member Comments • Commissioners discussed the proposed city budget, how the Climate Action Plan will be supported, and if an Advisory Communication makes sense on this topic. 9. Staff Comments • Edina's 2023 GHG inventory will be presented at the December meeting. • Staff Liaison Bayer discussed how she is reviewing Edina's benchmarking ordinance and alignment with the State of Minnesota's program, as some ordinance updates are needed. EEC members suggested the City maintain benchmarking for Class 3 buildings, which are not included in the State of Minnesota's program. 10. Adjournment Haugen made a motion, seconded by Weber, to Adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m. Page 5 of 59 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: December 12, 2024 Item Activity: Information Meeting: Energy & Environment Commission Agenda Number: 5.1 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Other Department: Engineering Item Title: 2023 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Action Requested: Receive presentation. Information/Background: Ted Redmond with PaleBlueDot will present Edina's 2023 greenhouse gas inventory, which includes community-wide emissions calculations for transportation, energy and waste, plus progress toward Edina's Climate Action Plan goals. Supporting Documentation: 1. Edina 2023 GHG Progress Report Page 6 of 59 2023 Community GHG Emissions Progress Summary September 2024 Revised 10/10/24 Prepared by: Page 7 of 59 Table of Contents ExecuƟve Summary SecƟon 01 IntroducƟon SecƟon 02 Findings In Brief SecƟon 03 Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics Appendix 1 GHG Inventory CalculaƟon Summary Spreadsheets Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary TOC-1 Page 8 of 59 Path of AnƟcipated GHG emissions levels if we do not act. Path of GHG emissions reducƟons by implemenƟng our CAP plan. Avoided GHG Emissions Projected City-wide GHG reducƟons from CAP implementaƟon The City of Edina’s GHG emission reduction goals are to be compatible with the 2015 Paris Agreement and shall target a reduction in City operations and community- wide emissions of 45% below 2019 levels by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050. Page 9 of 59 ES-1 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary ExecuƟve Summary 2023 Total Community-Wide Emissions: 588,428 GHG Emissions Reduced Since 2019: 121,081 17% below 2019 GHG Emissions ReducƟon SƟll Needed by 2030: 198,198 33% below 2023 Community-wide GHG emissions for 2023 were 17% below 2019 levels. This reducƟon was achieved largely through emissions reducƟons from the electricity sector from grid carbon reducƟon efforts. Natural gas and transportaƟon emissions have also contributed to the overall reducƟon, but each have seen an increase over 2021 emission levels and transportaƟon emissions are above emissions targets for 2023. Meanwhile, emissions associated with solid waste have increased since 2019. The charts to the right indicate the 2023 key metrics for each of the sectors. Metrics on track for 2030 goals Metrics near/slightly above being on track Metrics off track for 2030 goals increase in GHG emissions decrease in total solid waste handled tons of organics collected 2023 Metrics tons of recycling collected landfill diversion (including waste-to-energy) increase in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics total water consumpƟon GHG emissions per capita for sector decrease in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics decrease in vehicle miles traveled public transit commuter use electric vehicle share of vehicle stock people / acre decrease in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics renewable energy share of total total electricity consumpƟon total natural gas consumpƟon LMI PopulaƟon in Energy Poverty * 2020 staƟsƟcs, updated data not available Page 10 of 59 ES-2 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary ExecuƟve Summary TransportaƟon and Land Use · Enhance density along transit corridors and within areas of change to support expanded Metro Transit services · PrioriƟze alternaƟve transportaƟon infrastructure to increase micromobility and empower residents and visitors to mode shiŌ and reduce VMT Buildings and Energy · PrioriƟze Climate AcƟon Fund incenƟves for weatherizaƟon paired with electrificaƟon · Update Sustainable Building Policy to include electrificaƟon requirements when feasible · ParƟcipate in regulatory processes to support expanded efficient fuel switching incenƟves and pilots Waste Management · Complete policy review to ensure compliance with exisƟng Hennepin County ordinances and State statutes related to waste · Collaborate with Hennepin County on Zero Waste Plan implementaƟon to reduce waste generaƟon and increase landfill diversion rates Water and Wastewater · Evaluate new rate structure to incenƟvize water efficiency and dedicate new revenue to fund water conservaƟon outreach and programs · Complete data analysis to idenƟfy top water users to target engagement and technical assistance Resiliency and Equity Impacts · Invest in a climate adapƟve and resilient tree canopy and other shade structures to address extreme heat dispariƟes · Reduce or remove parking minimums and de-pave exisƟng surface parking lots to reduce impervious surfaces · Integrate climate resiliency and adaptaƟon into 2050 Comprehensive Plan and new small area plans Suggested 2025 Climate AcƟon PrioriƟes Based on the trends seen in the 2023 GHG inventory, the following are suggested priority acƟons to achieve Edina Climate AcƟon Plan goals: Page 11 of 59 1-1 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary GHG Emission Sector Project Resource ResidenƟal Energy ConsumpƟon - Electricity Data Source: Xcel Energy Emissions Factors: Same as above ResidenƟal Energy ConsumpƟon - Natural Gas Data Source: Centerpoint Energy Emissions Factors: US EPA Commercial/InsƟtuƟonal Energy ConsumpƟon - Electricity Data Source: Xcel Energy Emissions Factors: Same as above Commercial/InsƟtuƟonal Energy ConsumpƟon - Natural Gas Data Source: Centerpoint Energy Emissions Factors: US EPA TransportaƟon - On Road Data Source: State of Minnesota DOT Emissions Factors: US EPA MOVES model Waste - Solid Waste Data Source: City of Edina, State of Minnesota Emissions Factors: US EPA Warm Model, State of Minnesota Waste CharacterizaƟon Study Water and Wastewater Data Source: City of Edina, Metropolitan Council Emissions Factors: US Community Protocol populaƟon based emissions models / Fuel Mix Disclosure Report / US EPA eGRID Edina’s Climate AcƟon Plan In December 2021, the City of Edina adopted a Climate AcƟon Plan (CAP) with a commitment of reducing the community-wide carbon footprint and fostering sustainability. Edina’s CAP is anƟcipated to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 45% by 2030, upon successful implementaƟon of the strategies and acƟon items detailed in the Plan. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory paleBLUEdot has conducted an update to the City’s GHG Inventory for 2023. This inventory includes community-wide emissions as well as emissions associated with municipal operaƟons. The inventory is summarized in the following pages with detailed calculaƟon spreadsheets provided in Appendix 1 of this report. Methodology, Sources, and Terminology This GHG inventory follows the Greenhouse Gas Protocol for businesses and communiƟes and aligns with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability. Terminology is consistent with internaƟonal Carbon FootprinƟng standards. Unless stated otherwise, GHG emissions are measured in metric tons of CO2e (Carbon Dioxide Equivalent), which accounts for all greenhouse gases, including methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases like CFCs. GHG emissions in each sector are esƟmated by mulƟplying consumpƟon data (e.g., total electricity used) by an emissions factor, which defines the gases emiƩed per unit of consumpƟon. The chart shows the sources for the data and factors used. 01 S e c t i o n Introduction Click here to return to TOC Page 12 of 59 1-2 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary IntroducƟon Energy Emissions are produced from the combusƟon of heaƟng fuel, natural gas, coal, and other fossil fuels primarily for heaƟng, cooling, and electric- ity generaƟon. TransportaƟon Emissions come from the combusƟon of fossil fuels for ground transportaƟon and air travel.* Solid Waste Emissions in the waste management system come from the decompo- siƟon of biodegradable waste (e.g., food and yard waste) in the landfill. Water + Wastewater Emissions from energy uses are calculated for treatment and distribu- Ɵon of water and the collecƟon and treatment of wastewater. Key Greenhouse Gas Sectors Where do GHGs come from? IntroducƟon What Are GHG’s? A greenhouse gas (GHG) is a mole- cule in the atmosphere which does not react to light energy in the visi- ble range (like sunlight), but does react to light energy in the infrared range-like that which is emiƩed from the Earth aŌer being warmed by the sun. The most common greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Why do GHG’s MaƩer? GHG’s let the sun's light shine onto the Earth's surface, but they trap the heat that reflects back up into the atmosphere. In this way, they act like the insulaƟng glass walls of a greenhouse. The more GHGs there are, the more heat that is trapped in our atmosphere and the more we experience the impacts of global warming. What can we do to reduce GHG’s? Greenhouse gases can be reduced by making changes within the key greenhouse gas sectors within our community—parƟcularly through the reducƟon and eliminaƟon of fossil fuel combusƟon and the ad- vancement of clean energy sources. * Due to data availability, the Edina GHG Emissions Progress Summary does not include community member air travel. Page 13 of 59 2-1 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary 02 S e c t i o n Findings in Brief Click here to return to TOC Edina GHG Emissions Overview Community wide total emissions for the City of Edina have decreased 17% from 709,509 metric tons in 2019 (Climate AcƟon Plan Baseline Year) to 588,428 metric tons in 2023. GHG Emissions ReducƟon Achieved vs Goal The community-wide annual GHG emission goal for 2023 to be in alignment with the Climate AcƟon Plan’s 2030 targets is a total reducƟon of 16.4% below 2019 CAP Baseline levels. GHG emissions for the year 2023 achieved 17% reducƟon exceeding plan goals for the year. * PopulaƟon esƟmates from US Census Bureau Quick Facts, Employment esƟmates from US Census Bureau On The Map data, GDP values are City of Edina pro-rata share of county total based on data from US Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2019 By The Numbers 2023 By The Numbers 4 CAP Year Trend Dashboard GHG Emissions GHG Emissions GHG Emissions 709,509 588,428 -121,081 -17.1% 13.4 MT Per-Capita 11.0 MT Per-Capita -2.4 MT Per-Capita 16.7 MT / Job 14.1 MT / Job -2.6 MT / Job 0.1335 MT / $1,000 GDP 0.0925 MT / $1,000 GDP -0.041 MT / $1,000 GDP PopulaƟon* PopulaƟon* PopulaƟon * 52,857 53,348 +491 +0.9% GDP * GDP * GDP * $5,312,326,108 $6,363,673,642 +$1,051,347,534 +19.8% $95,863 GDP Per-Capita $119,286 GDP Per-Capita +$23,423 GDP Per-Capita Employment* Employment Employment 42,386 41,853 -533 -1% Page 14 of 59 2-2 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary How Large Are Community-wide GHG Emissions? The community’s total emissions have reduced 17% from 2019 levels (Climate AcƟon Plan Baseline Year) - equivalent to eliminaƟng over 2.4 Billion cubic feet of human-made greenhouse gas atmosphere—shown in green in this image. The volume of the remaining 2023 emissions are equal to 10.5 Billion cubic feet, or a cube 2,400 feet wide and deep and 2,004 feet tall— shown in blue in this image. The depicƟons of Edina’s emissions viewed here are seen from over 2 miles away. Page 15 of 59 2-3 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Findings in Brief Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory paleBLUEdot has conducted an update to the City’s GHG Inventory for 2023. This inventory includes community-wide emissions as well as emissions associated with municipal operaƟons. This GHG inventory is assembled based on the Greenhouse Gas Protocol for businesses and communiƟes established by GHG Protocol (www.ghgprotocol.org/) and is consistent with the protocol established by ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability. In December 2021, the City of Edina adopted a Climate AcƟon Plan (CAP) with a commitment of reducing the community- wide carbon footprint and fostering sustainability. Edina’s CAP is anƟcipated to lower greenhouse gas emissions by 45% by 2030, upon successful implementaƟon of the strategies and acƟon items detailed in the Plan. On an annualized basis, the community-wide GHG emission goal for 2023 to be in alignment with the Climate AcƟon Plan’s 2030 targets is a total reducƟon of 16.4% below 2019 CAP Baseline levels. TransportaƟon Water + Wastewater Solid Waste Buildings + Energy 2030 GHG Emission Goal City of Edina 2023 Community-Wide GHG emissions are 17.1% below 2019 levels, on-track with Climate AcƟon Plan goals. Community-Wide Annual GHG Emissions Page 16 of 59 2-4 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Findings in Brief Community-Wide Sector GHG Trend Lines 2019 CAP Baseline 2023 Value 2030 CAP Goal On Track Buildings + Energy Water + Wastewater TransportaƟon *2019 value corrected from original Community GHG Inventory based based on new city data availability . Solid Waste Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Page 17 of 59 2-5 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Findings in Brief Municipal OperaƟons GHG Emissions Municipal OperaƟons GHG emissions include energy consumpƟon related to vehicle and equipment fleet operaƟons, building and site operaƟons, solid waste generated on municipal sites, and the municipal porƟon of water and wastewater treatment. On an annualized basis, the Municipal OperaƟons GHG emission goal for 2023 to be in alignment with the Climate AcƟon Plan’s 2030 targets is a total reducƟon of 21.4% below 2019 CAP Baseline levels. Fleet Water + Wastewater Solid Waste Buildings City of Edina 2023 Municipal OperaƟons GHG emissions are 35.6% below 2019 levels, on-track with Climate AcƟon Plan goals. Municipal OperaƟons Annual GHG Emissions 2030 GHG Emission Goal Page 18 of 59 2-6 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Findings in Brief Municipal OperaƟons Sector GHG Trend Lines 2019 CAP Baseline 2023 Value 2030 CAP Goal On Track Water + Wastewater Fleet *2019 value corrected from original Community GHG Inventory Solid Waste Buildings + Streetlights Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Page 19 of 59 3-1 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary 03 S e c t i o n Climate Action Goal Metrics Click here to return to TOC Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics The 2021 Edina Climate AcƟon Plan’s purpose is to guide acƟons to advance sustainability, climate change resilience, and greenhouse gas (GHG) reducƟons community-wide as well as within municipal operaƟons through 2030. The structure of the plan establishes aspiraƟonal goals organized in 8 sectors of community-wide focus which are supported by 36 strategies to be achieved through the implementaƟon of 200 detailed acƟons. The Climate AcƟon Plan established GHG reducƟon goals across four sectors as well as 16 addiƟonal performance metric goals across six of the eight total sectors. This secƟon provides a review of the current status of the GHG reducƟon and performance metric goals for the four sectors included in the GHG Inventory: TransportaƟon, Buildings and Energy, Solid Waste, and Water + Wastewater. The metrics for each of the performance goals of the four GHG Inventory sectors are outlined on the following page. Metrics whose progress is on-track for meeƟng the City’s 2030 Climate AcƟon Plan goals are shown with a symbol while metrics whose progress is near but slightly above goals are shown with a symbol and metrics currently not on-track for meeƟng 2030 goals are sown with a symbol. Page 20 of 59 3-2Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target decrease in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics decrease in vehicle miles traveled public transit commuter use electric vehicle share of vehicle stock people / acre TransportaƟon emissions have decreased since 2019, however they are above 2023 targets to align with the pathway for the CAP 2030 goals. Vehicle Miles Traveled are below the 2023 target but are showing an upward trend since 2021 which, if conƟnued, will place them above the 2030 goal pathway. Transit use appears flat since 2021. Electric vehicle adopƟon has increased but at a much slower rate than the 2030 goal pathway. Page 21 of 59 Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics 3-3 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Building sector emissions have declined since 2019 and are on track for CAP 2030 goals. Customer-owned renewable energy has grown but is just below 2023 targets. Natural gas use is slightly under the 2023 target but rising since 2021, potenƟally exceeding the 2030 goal. Electricity use has remained steady since 2021, though emissions have dropped due to grid carbon reducƟons. decrease in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics renewable energy share of total total electricity consumpƟon total natural gas consumpƟon LMI PopulaƟon in Energy Poverty * 2020 staƟsƟcs, updated data not available Page 22 of 59 3-4Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary * Updated data not available. Solid waste sector emissions have increased since 2019. Overall solid waste collected has remained flat, however, organics and recycling collecƟon have both decreased since 2021, while solid waste managed as waste-to- energy has increased. Total landfill diversion, which includes waste-to-energy, organics, and recycling collecƟon has increased. increase in GHG emissions decrease in total solid waste handled tons of organics collected 2023 Metrics tons of recycling collected landfill diversion (including waste-to-energy) Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Annual Target Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics Page 23 of 59 Climate AcƟon Goal Metrics Emissions associated with water distribuƟon and wastewater collecƟon for the City of Edina have decreased due to decreasing electricity emissions due to grid carbon reducƟons. Water consumpƟon and wastewater generaƟon have both decreased since 2021, however, both are above 2023 targets to align with the pathway for the CAP 2030 goals. increase in GHG emissions 2023 Metrics total water consumpƟon GHG emissions per capita for sector Annual Target Annual Target 3-5 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Page 24 of 59 A1 S e c t i o n GHG Inventory Calculation Summary Sheets Click here to return to TOC A1-1 Edina 2023 GHG Emissions Progress Summary Page 25 of 59 Updated 9/9/2024Citywide Emissions Inventory Data Calculations2019 2021 2023MMBtu Change SinceGHG Change SinceConsumption MMBtu GHG Consumption MMBtu GHG Consumption MMBtu GHG2019 2019Notes:Gross ConsumptionConsumption Consumption ConsumptionResidential 194,511 663,673 69,246 -2.1% 208,787 712,383 59,713 7.3% 205,794 702,168 51,654 -1.4% 5.8%-25.4%Commercial and institutional 121,249 413,703 43,165 -13.1% 114,687 391,311 32,800 -5.4% 328,343 1,120,305 82,414 186.3% 170.8%90.9%Iindustrial 216,137 737,460 76,945 -5.8% 208,979 713,035 59,768 -3.3% - - - -100.0% -100.0%-100.0%Streetlights - metered and non-metered 1,345 4,590 479 -35.2% 1,293 4,410 370 -3.9% 1,231 4,201 309 -4.7% -8.5%-35.5%SubtractionsSubtractions Subtractions SubtractionsResidential - Utility Purchased Renewable (4,746) (16,195) - 45.7% (6,926) (23,632) - 45.9% (14,227) (48,543) - 105.4% 199.7%Residential - Onsite Renewable - - - N/A (124) (422) - N/A (700) (2,390) - 466.4% N/ACommercial - Utility Purchased Renewable (281) (958) - 920.8% (1,387) (4,732) - 393.7% (11,778) (40,185) - 749.1% 4092.6%Commercial - Onsite Renewable (110) (375) - 0.0% (4,046) (13,805) - 3578.2% (7,501) (25,595) - 85.4% 6719.5%Industrial - Utility Purchased Renewable - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AIndustrial - Onsite Renewable - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/A2Industrial - Waste, Water, Wastewater Process (4,932) (16,830) - 37.8% (5,986) (20,423) - 21.4% (6,400) (21,838) - 6.9% 29.8%Streetlights - Utility Purchased Renewable - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AStreetlights - Onsite Renewable - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/ANet Consumption With EmissionsGHG Emissions GHG Emissions GHG EmissionsResidential 189,765 647,478 67,556 -5.3% 201,738 688,329 57,697 -14.6% 190,866 651,235 47,907 -17.0%-29.1%Commercial 120,858 412,369 43,026 -15.4% 109,254 372,774 31,247 -27.4% 309,064 1,054,525 77,575 148.3%80.3%Industrial 211,205 720,631 75,189 -8.8% 202,993 692,612 58,056 -22.8% (6,400) (21,838) (1,606) -102.8%-102.1%Streetlights 1,345 4,590 479 -36.8% 1,293 4,410 370 -22.8% 1,231 4,201 309 -16.4%-35.5%1Subtotals 533,243 1,819,426 186,250 -9.3% 533,745 1,821,139 147,369 -20.9% 535,367 1,826,674 124,185 -15.7%-33.3%Blended emission factor (tonnes per MWh) 0.356 -2.5% 0.286 0.251 -12.2%-29.5%Electricity as a % of total citywide amounts 18.6% 26.4% 21.1% 24.7% 20.7% 21.1%Notes:Gross ConsumptionConsumption Consumption ConsumptionResidential 20,414,761 2,040,988 108,172 23.1% 17,286,611 1,728,248 91,597 -15.3% 17,883,112 1,787,884 94,758 3.5% -12.4%-12.4%Commercial and institutional 19,549,817 1,954,514 103,589 21.6% 16,663,145 1,665,916 88,294 -14.8% 17,830,291 1,782,603 94,478 7.0% -8.8%-8.8%Iindustrial (Included in Commercial) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AN/ASubtractionsSubtractions Subtractions SubtractionsResidential - Renewable Natural Gas Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/ACommercial - Renewable Natural Gas Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AIndustrial - Renewable Natural Gas Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/A2Industrial - Waste, Water, Wastewater Process (8,075) (807) - N/A (9,505) (950) - 17.7% (16,470) (1,647) - 73.3% 104.0%Net Consumption With EmissionsGHG Emissions GHG Emissions GHG EmissionsResidential 20,414,761 2,040,988 108,172 23.1% 17,286,611 1,728,248 91,597 -15.3% 17,883,112 1,787,884 94,758 3.5%-12.4%Commercial 19,549,817 1,954,514 103,589 21.6% 16,663,145 1,665,916 88,294 -14.8% 17,830,291 1,782,603 94,478 7.0%-8.8%Iindustrial (Included in Commercial) (8,075) (807) (43) N/A (9,505) (950) (50) 17.7% (16,470) (1,647) (87) 73.3%104.0%1Subtotals 39,956,503 3,994,695 211,719 22.3% 33,940,251 3,393,214 179,840 -15.1% 35,696,933 3,568,840 189,149 5.2%-10.7%Emission factor (tonnes per MMBtu) 0.053 0.053 0.053Natural gas as a % of total citywide amounts 40.8% 30.1% 39.3% 30.2% 40.5% 32.1%Change from Prior Study YearEmissions SectorsChange from Prior Study YearElectricity (Scope 2, MWh): Natural gas (Scope 1, therms): Change from Prior Study YearPage 26 of 59 9Vehicle miles traveled (thousands of miles) 581,109 510,402 537,719 -7.5%7Estimated number of vehicles in community 36,545 0.0% 38,384 5.0% 39,446 2.8%8Registered electric vehicles in community (BEV 357 1.0%N/A 574 1.5%60.8% 993 2.5%73.0%Estimated EV Share of VMT 5,677 7,633 13,536 Net VMT with emissions502,770 524,182 Average MPG18 19 Estimated Fuel Consumed 32,047,026 3,952,213 293,164 4.4% 27,563,216 3,408,186.34 255,444 -14.0% 28,276,675 3,402,830 261,452 2.6% -13.9%-10.8%Subtotals 3,952,213 293,164 3.5% 3,408,186 255,444 -12.9% 3,402,830 261,452 2.4%-10.8%Emission factor 0.509 0.508 0.499-2.1%Transportation as a % of total citywide amounts40.4% 41.6% 39.4% 42.9% 38.6% 44.4%Notes:Electricity (MWh) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AN/ANatural gas (therms) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AN/A3Solid Waste Handled* 31,362 -32.7% 30,814 -1.7% 31,069 0.8% -0.9%N/ARecycled (tons) 9,628 - -17.7% 9,772 - 1.5% 9,152 - -6.3% -4.9%N/AOrganics (tons) 3,211 - -45.4% 3,446 - 7.3% 3,233 - -6.2% 0.7%N/AMSW managed as RDF (tons) 8,082 3,356 -56.1% 7,841 3,321 -3.0% 9,596 4,446 22.4% 18.7%32.5%On-Site (tons) - - N/A - - N/A - - N/A N/AN/ALandfill (tons) 10,442 3,622 -1.4% 9,755 3,384 -6.6% 9,088 3,153 -6.8% -13.0%-13.0%Subtotals - 6,978 -40.8% - 6,705 -3.9% - 7,599 13.3%8.9%5Emission factor - RDF (tonnes per ton) 0.42 0.42 0.464Emission factor - Landfill (tonnes per ton) 0.35 0.35 0.35Solid waste as a % of total citywide amounts 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 1.3%Notes:Water Flows (gallons) 1,968,715,000 -10.8% 2,447,505,000 24.3% 2,235,880,000 -8.6% 13.6%N/AElectricity (MWh) 4,932 16,830 1,756 37.8% 5,423 18502 1551 9.9% 6,400 21838 1606 18.0% 29.8%-8.5%Natural gas (therms) 8,075 807 43 N/A 9,505 950 50 17.7% 16,470 1647 87 73.3% 104.0%104.0%Gasoline (gal.) 10,431 1,253 84 0 0 0 0 0 0Diesel (gal.) 9,606 1,218 98 31.9% 0 0 0 -100.0% 0 0 0 N/ASubtotals 20,108 1,980 33.3% 19452 1601 -19.1% 23485 1694 5.8%-14.5%Emissions Factor: MT / MMGal 0.0010 0.0007 0.0008Wastewater as a % of total citywide amounts 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3%Notes:Wastewater Flows (gallons) 1,986,000,000 -3.1% 2,272,003,023 14.4% 1,986,120,000 -12.6% 0.0%N/A6Wastewater Treatment Process Emissions 0 0 4,349 N/A 0 0 4976 N/A 0 0 4350 N/A N/A0.0%City Facility Electricity (MWh) 0 0 0 N/A 563 1922 161 N/A 0 0 0 -100.0% N/AN/ACity Facility Natural gas (therms) 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A N/AN/ACity Facility Diesel (gal.) 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A 0 0 0 N/A N/AN/ACommunity share of biogenic emissions Included above 0 N/A Included above 0 N/A Included above 0 N/AN/ASubtotals 0 4,349 -3.1% 1,922 5,137 18.1% 0 4,350 -15.3%0.0%6Emission factor - Wastewater Process per million gallons2.19 2.19 2.19Wastewater as a % of total citywide amounts 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 0.9% 0.0% 0.7%Citywide Totals (Scope 1 & 2):9,786,442704,439 3.7%8,643,913596,097 -15.4%8,821,829588,428 -1.3% -9.9%-16.5%12345678(Reported maximum capacity for HERC: https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/recycling/master-recyclers/mrc-manual-ch-1.pdf )2013 and 2016 Values based on Met Council Wastewater Reporting provided by David Ponder. 2019 and 2021 data not yet available and is estimated.Total number of vehicles in community is based on US Census data ACS Table: A10030 ; Housing Units by Vehicles Available. Data for years 2019 and later are for previous calendar year due to annual data availabilityRegistered Electric Vehicles in Community do not inlcude HEV or PHEV categories and is based on registration data reported by EV Hub https://www.atlasevhub.com/materials/state-ev-registration-data/Electricity in MWh, natural gas in therms. Carbon dioxide equivalents (GHG) are expressed in metric tonnes, which equal 1,000 kilograms, 2,204.6 pounds, or 1.102 US tons. To avoid double-counting, energy consumption and emissions associated with process electricity and process natural gas for wastewater treatment and solid waste management are subtracted Electricity and Natural Gas sectorsMSW volumes are based City pro-rata share of County SCORE reporting to MPCA for years 2013 and 2016. Data shown for years 2019 and later are based on City reported values which combine waste hauler data and MPCA SCORE report data.Solid Waste emissions factors based on Met Council community level reporting https://metrocouncil.org/tcghginventory.aspxSolid Waste RDF emissions based on emissions reported data from HERC with an assumed maximum reported waste capacity of 365,000 tons MSW: https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/service/facilityDetail/2019?id=1004795&ds=E&et=&popup=trueNotes:Transportation (Scope 1):Solid Waste (Scope 1):Wastewater (Scope 1):Water (Scope 1):Page 27 of 59 Updated9/9/2024City Operations Emissions Inventory Data Calculations2019 2021 2023MMBtu Change SinceGHG Change SinceFTE1,181 FTE729 FTE7502013 2013Consumption MMBtu GHG Consumption MMBtu GHG Consumption MMBtu GHGNotes:Gross ConsumptionConsumption Consumption Consumption3Buildings, Grounds, Streetlights 16,085 54,883 5,726 53.4% 16,476 56,216 4,712 6.8% 16,525 56,382 4,148 1.0% 73.1%0.3%SubtractionsSubtractions Subtractions SubtractionsBuildings and Grounds - Solar/Wind Sourced - - - N/A (8,141) (27,777) - N/A (1,057) (3,608) - -87.0% N/AStreetlights - Solar/Wind Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/A(other)- Solar/Wind Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AWaste, Water, Wastewater Process (below) (4,932) - - 37.8% (5,986) - - 21.4% (6,400) - - 6.9% N/ANet Consumption With EmissionsGHG Emissions GHG Emissions GHG EmissionsBuildings, Grounds, Streetlights 11,153 54,883 3,970 57.5% 2,349 56,216 672 -83.1% 9,067 56,382 2,276 238.7%-10.4%Subtotals 16,085 54,883 3,970 57.5% 16,476 56,216 672 -83.1% 16,525 56,382 2,276 238.7%-10.4%Blended emission factor (tonnes per MWh) 0.356 -2.5% 0.286 -19.7% 0.251 -12.2%N/AElectricity as a % of total citywide amounts 35.6% 37.7% 37.0% 9.9% 36.4% 29.1%Notes:Gross ConsumptionConsumption Consumption ConsumptionBuildings and Grounds 614,449 61,430 3,256 6.6% 553,087 55,295 2,931 -10.0% 533,938 53,381 2,829 -3.5% -1.4%-1.4%(other) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AN/ASubtractionsSubtractions Subtractions SubtractionsBuildings - Renewable Natural Gas Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/A(other) - Renewable Natural Gas Sourced - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AWaste, Water, Wastewater Process (8,075) (807) - N/A (9,505) (950) - 17.7% (16,470) (1,647) - 73.3% N/ANet Consumption With EmissionsGHG Emissions GHG Emissions GHG EmissionsBuildings and Grounds 606,374 60,623 3,213 5.2% 543,582 54,345 2,880 -10.4% 517,468 51,734 2,742 -4.8%-4.4%(other) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/AN/ASubtotals 606,374 60,623 3,213 5.2% 543,582 54,345 2,880 -10.4% 517,468 51,734 2,742 -4.8%-4.4%Emission factor (tonnes per MMBtu) 0.053 0.053 0.053Natural gas as a % of total citywide amounts 39.4% 30.5% 35.8% 42.3% 33.4% 35.0%Change from Prior Study YearEmissions SectorsChange from Prior Study YearElectricity (Scope 2, MWh): Natural gas (Scope 1, therms): Change from Prior Study YearPage 28 of 59 Notes:Grand Transportation Fuel 1,214 Consumption 1,375 Consumption 1,052 Consumption11Diesel (gal.) 47,921 6,078 487 -12.3% 58,936 7,475 599 23.0% 46,915 5,950 477 -20.4% -23.8%-23.8%11BioDiesel B50 (gal.) - - - N/A - - - N/A 600 76 6 N/A N/AN/A10Gasoline (gal.) - - - N/A - - - N/A - - - N/A N/AN/A10e10 Gasoline (gal.) 90,709 10,895 727 1.3% 96,766 11,623 776 6.7% - - - -100.0% -100.0%-100.0%11e87 (gal.) - - - N/A - - - N/A 92,316 8,148 568 N/A N/AN/A11Propane (gal.) - - - - - - 250 8,447 1 Fleet Vehicle Count By TypeFleet Vehicle Count By TypeDiesel--58 Diesel 30%Gasoline (standard) - - 95 Gasoline (standard)50%Gasoline (HEV)--31 Gasoline (HEV) 16%Gasoline (PHEV)--4 Gasoline (PHEV) 2%Electric (BEV) - - 3 Electric (BEV) 2%Total Fleet 0 0 191Airport 0 0 0N/AAv Fuel 0 - 0 N/A 0 - 0 N/A 0 - 0 N/A N/AN/AJet Fuel 0 - 0 N/A 0 - 0 N/A 0 - 0 N/A N/AN/ASubtotals 16,973 1,214 -4.6% 19,097 1,375 13.2% 22,621 1,052 -23.5%-20.8%Transportation as a % of total citywide amounts11.0% 11.5% 12.6% 20.2% 14.6% 13.4%Notes:Solid Waste ShareCommunity Wide City Ops Share Community Wide City Ops Share Community Wide City Ops ShareEstimated Commercial Share of MSW 45.0% 45.0% 45.0%4Community Wide Solid Waste Handled 31,362721 30,814 418 31,069 269 Recycled (tons) 9,628230 0 9,772 86 0 9,152 79 0 20.9%Organics / Yard Waste / Trees 3,21177 0 3,446 - 0 3,233 28 0 161.6%MSW managed as RDF (tons) 8,082252 105 7,841 148 63 9,596 83 39 -26.1%Landfill (tons) 10,442162 56 9,755 184 64 9,088 79 27 26.7%Subtotals 1,442 161 83.5% 837 127 -21.2% 538 66 -48.0%11.7%Solid waste as a % of total citywide amounts 0.9% 1.5% 0.6% 1.9% 0.3% 0.8%Notes:Gross Consumption ShareConsumption Consumption Consumption7Water Flows (gallons) 1,968,715,000 -10.8% 2,447,505,000 24.3% 2,235,880,000 -8.6%N/A8Electricity (MWh) 4,932 16,830 1,756 37.8% 5,986 20,423 1,712 21.4% 6,400 21,838 1,606 6.9% 73.8%0.7%Natural gas (therms) 8,075 807 43 N/A 9,505 950 50 17.7% 16,470 1,647 87 73.3% N/AN/AGasoline (gal.) 10,431 1,253 84 -19.9% - - - -100.0% - - - N/A -100.0%-100.0%Diesel (gal.) 9,606 1,218 98 31.9% - - - -100.0% - - - N/A -100.0%-100.0%Emissions from combustion of digester gas (tonnes) - N/A - N/A - N/AN/ASubtotals 20,108 1,980 33.3% 21,374 1,762 -11.0% 23,485 1,694 -3.9%-4.9%Emission factor -Water (tonnes per million Ga0.0010 0.0007 0.0008Wastewater as a % of total citywide amounts 13.1% 18.8% 14.1% 25.9% 15.2% 21.6%Citywide Totals (Scope 1 & 2):154,02910,538 25.2%151,8696,816 -35.32%154,7607,829 14.87% 28.2%-8.7%Per-FTE:8.92Per-FTE:9.35Per-FTE:10.44-26.5%Share of Citywide1.5%Share of Citywide1.1%Share of Citywide1.3%1234567891011Not usedAll "standard" gasoline sold in Minnesota is e10.Emission factors based on US EPA Emission Factors for GHG Inventories: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-03/ghg_emission_factors_hub.pdf Transportation:Solid Waste:Water and Wastewater (Scope 1):Notes:Electricity in MWh, natural gas in therms. Carbon dioxide equivalents (GHG) are expressed in metric tonnes, which equal 1,000 kilograms, 2,204.6 pounds, or 1.102 US tons. To avoid double-counting, energy consumption and emissions associated with process electricity and process natural gas for wastewater treatment and solid waste management are subtracted Electricity and Natural Gas sectorsOn-site solar generation for City Hall and Public works are both understood to have REC's retained by others (City Hall under Solar Rewards and Public Works as a community solar garden)Municipal Operations share of Solid Waste for 2013, 2016, and 2019 are estimated ProRata share of commercial portion of MSW based on FTE share of community-wide employment. Shares for 2021 are based on City of Edina reported solid waste data.Municipal Operations share of wastewater is estimated ProRata share of commercial portion of wastewater generation based on FTE share of community-wide employment.Emission Factors are based on Xcel energy reporting.Water flows relate to reported distributuion within community only.Energy data for 2013 is not available. 2015 data has been used as most recent available informationPage 29 of 59 Prepared by: 2515 White Bear Ave, A8 Suite 177 Maplewood, MN 55109 Contact: Ted Redmond tredmond@paleBLUEdot.llc Page 30 of 59 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: December 12, 2024 Item Activity: Discussion Meeting: Energy & Environment Commission Agenda Number: 7.1 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Other Department: Engineering Item Title: Time of Sale with Energy Disclosure Staff Report Follow Up Action Requested: Receive information. Determine who will draft Advisory Communication and discuss if Council presentation is desired. Information/Background: At the Nov. 14 EEC meeting, staff presented their report on the Time of Sale with Energy Disclosure item. Commissioners requested follow-up data related to permits, home energy audits, and reflections from peer cities with similar programs. Staff gathered data from internal and external sources to help answer these questions. To complete this 2023 work plan item, EEC should draft an Advisory Communication as an attachment (e.g., cover letter) to their report, which will then be submitted to City Council once approved. EEC has the option to present their report to City Council as noted in the "Study & Report" column of the Council Charge overview, but this is not required. Supporting Documentation: 1. 2023 EEC Workplan 2. Council Charge Overview 3. EEC Report, Time of Sale Energy Disclosure 4. Staff Report Draft, Time of Sale with Energy Disclosure Page 31 of 59 Energy & Environment Commission Work Plan 2023 - Energy & Environment Commission Report Created On: Nov 29, 2022 Plan Number Initiative Type Description Deliverable Council Charge Target Completion Date Leads Budget Required Project 1.1.1 Project No Mow May 2.0 •Consider, if any, recommended changes to No Mow May (NMM) are needed, including program expansion to other property types (condos, commercial, etc.)and report-back method for residents. •Establish a communication strategy with support from the City Communication area. •Link NMM promotion with the promotion of rain and pollinator gardens. •Explore ways for residents to add additional "greening" efforts beyond NMM, including soil health Support No Mow May event.Charge 4: Review & Decide Q2 Tessman, Martinez, Rawat Funds are available. Project 1.1.2 On-going / Annual Green Business Recognition Program •Strengthen and bring more business to the Green Business Recognition Program. Establish an annual outreach and recruitment calendar including spring communications campaign; present at Chamber, Rotary and other relevant business associations •Add bike rack fund participation as part of rubric, as well as one-stop lighting audits, tree preservation. Support Green Business Recognition program.Charge 4: Review & Decide Q4 Lukens, Hovanec, Lanzas Budget available for materials. Page 1Page 32 of 59 Plan Number Initiative Type Description Deliverable Council Charge Target Completion Date Leads Budget Required Project 1.1.3 Project Tree Recognition Campaign •“Parade of Trees” tree recognition campaign around Arbor Day •Residents submit photos and locations of special trees. Trees are mapped and residents are invited to do a walking tour to see the trees. Tree photos can be used in social media to raise awareness around Edina’s tree canopy. •EEC may award special tree recognitions: “most climbable tree,” “spookiest,” etc. •Mayor will be invited to recognize beloved trees during Mayor’s Minute Develop a campaign for tree recognition.Charge 4: Review & Decide Q4 Lukens, Hovanec, Haugen Budget available. Project 1.1.4 Project Commercial Tree Ordinance Assess Edina’s Commercial Tree Ordinance by comparing to similar ordinances adopted in relevant cities; determine if changes should be made. Report and recommendations to City Council.Charge 3: Review & Recommend Q4 Haugen, Martinez, Tessman None required. Project 1.1.5 Project Time of Sale Energy Disclosure Program Review the program currently under implementation in Bloomington and Minneapolis. Analyze local data and evaluate if it is a program that can be implemented in the city of Edina. Report to City Council.Charge 1: Study & Report Q4 Martinez, Schima, Lukens None required. Project 1.1.6 Project Parking Consideration of future of parking in Edina to identify parking initiatives to pursue in the next 10-15 years, in what order and what commissions/resources should be assigned to each. Planning Commission will be the lead. ETC & EEC will review and comment on final report and recommendation from Planning Commission. Recommendation to Council. EEC & ETC: Review and Comment Charge 3: Review & Recommend Q4 Alkire, Miranda, Strauss None required. Project 1.1.7 Project Boulevard Tree Planting Review options for replacement and new boulevard tree planting program. (Greenspace + Trees Strategy GS1). Report to City Council. EEC: Review and Comment. Charge 1: Study & Report Q4 Rubenstein None required. Page 2Page 33 of 59 Plan Number Initiative Type Description Deliverable Council Charge Target Completion Date Leads Budget Required Project 1.1.8 Project Climate Action Plan HS 4-3 Evaluate community organizations, networks, and connections serving those who require special attention, such as people who are elderly, homebound, isolated, living with disabilities, or those likely to need financial assistance, during or after extreme weather events (e.g., heat, cold, and heavy precipitation). EEC will review and comment on approved report. Report to Council. EEC: Review and comment. Charge 1: Study & Report Q4 Segall, Ismail, Stringer Moore None required. Report Legend No Update Overdue #Priority Page 3Page 34 of 59 Level of Impact Council Charge 1: Study & Report 2: Review & Comment 3: Review & Recommend 4: Review & Decide 5: Event Commission Role Study a specific issue or event and resport its findings to Council. Provide a report to Council. Review a specific policy issue and staff will seek comments from each individual member of the group to pass on to Council. Commission comments included in staff report. Review a specific policy issue and provide a recommendation on the issue to Council. Provide report and recommendations to Council. Study, review and decide on an issue. The Decision will be the City’s official position on the matter unless the issue is formally reversed by Council. Commission makes the decision. Plan & implement a community event. Commission Vote Majority vote required for advisory community report No vote is taken by the commission Majority vote required for advisory communication report A majority vote is required No vote is taken by the commission Commission Recommendation No official recommendation is provided to Council or staff No official recommendation is provided to Council or staff An official recommendation is provided to Council No official recommendation is provided to Council No official recommendation is provided to Council Report Type Needed Required: Advisory Communication & Staff Report Required: Staff Report Required: Staff Report Advisory Communication at commission discretion or requested by staff Required: Staff Report Advisory Communication if requested by staff None Report Information Needed Cover Sheet: Description initiative, additonal staff involvement Staff Report: Staff recommendations based on expertise and City’s stance Staff Report: Inclusion additional staff impacted by decision Progress update should be recorded on work plan progress portal Progress update should be recorded on work plan progress portal Presentation to Council Commission Presentation Optional None Commission presentation encourgaged None None Council Action None or mid-year work plan modification directed None Majority vote by Council required None None Staff Considerations Liaisons should communicate what City staff will recommend Individual comments of each commissioner should be included in the staff report Liaisons should communicate to the commission what City staff will recommend Not every decision must have commission action. Not every decision for an event must have commission action Page 35 of 59 Final Draft 1 Time of Sale Energy Disclosure Program Report January 2024 Page 36 of 59 Final Draft 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 3 2. Background 3 3. Why Time of Sale of Housing Inspection? 4 4. Case Studies: Austin, Portland, Minneapolis, and Bloomington 6 5. Recommendations 8 6. Bibliography 11 Page 37 of 59 Final Draft 3 1. Introduction Across the country, cities and states are increasingly adopting measures requiring disclosure of the energy efficiency of residential properties prior to them being sold. In the Midwest, states such as Kansas and South Dakota have adopted energy efficiency disclosure policies for new construction and cities such as Minneapolis and Chicago have likewise adopted some form energy efficiency disclosure requirements for residential home sales. The contours and requirements of these policies vary, but the overarching goal of lowering energy costs, reducing GHG emissions, and improving the health and safety of communities is a consistent theme across all these measures. The City of Edina should consider adopting a similar policy to meet the goals of both its Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan. 2. Background The state of Minnesota Statute 412.221 gives cities direct authority to protect public health and safety, and to enact ordinance for fire prevention, allowing the establishment of health and safety inspections (Minnesota Legislature, 2022). Additionally, under the state building code Minn. Stat. 326b.121, cities can enact ordinance requiring homes to be kept in good conditions or good repair. (Minnesota Legislature, 2022) In 2020, the City Council of Edina formally adopted its decennial Comprehensive Plan (CP) which, among other things, outlined a vision for Edina on issues related to both housing and energy and the environment. The Comprehensive Plan noted that, in terms of housing, “demographic changes are driving a demand for different housing types, including smaller units which are more affordable, and have lower costs for maintenance, energy, and water” (CP, 4- 16). Relatedly, the Energy and Environment chapter found that Edina’s energy use per capita was the highest in the region, second only to Bloomington which has already enacted a time of sale disclosure requirement. As a result, the plan concluded that continued focus on improving energy efficiency “will be critical to reducing emissions and keeping costs down” (CP, 8-4, 8-5) (City of Edina, 2018) Shortly after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, in 2021, the city of Edina published and approved its Climate Action Plan (CAP). The plan set a Greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goal compatible with the Paris Agreement, targeting reductions in City operation and community wide emissions of 45% below 2019 levels by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050 (Pale Blue dot LLC, 2021). To achieve those goals, the CAP identified 200 actions in an eight-section framework, including Section 3 on buildings and energy. The plan proposed 8 strategies in this area, with a goal of reducing total community wide GHG emissions by 40% over 2019 levels in the Building and Energy sector (CAP, p3-6). In addition, section BE1 articulates a goal to “improve total community wide residential, commercial, educational, and industrial building energy efficiency by 15% for electricity and 15% for Natural Gas by 2030”, which includes action BE 1-13 to “establish a performance rating/labeling program for all homes listed for sale or rent so that Page 38 of 59 Final Draft 4 owners, tenants and prospective buyers can make informed decisions about energy cost and carbon emissions.” 2.1. Housing in Edina: In 2020, Edina had 23,862 housing Units, with 59% of those units built between 1950- 1979, with median year structures built in 1968 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). Around 70.5% of the housing stock is owner occupied, 62% being single family (56 % single-family detached and 7% single-family attached or duplex) and 38% multifamily units (City of Edina, 2018). For the most part, buildings in the city are in average to good conditions. However, sales statistics demonstrates that in the last 6 years, between 2016-2021 around 14.5% of the houses being sold have been demolished. See table 1. Table 1. Houses sold and demolished, City of Edina. Year Edina # of SF home sales Edina # SF demo permits % demo’d 2016 545 91 17% 2017 552 88 16% 2018 479 71 15% 2019 534 64 12% 2020 513 72 14% 2021 629 66 11% Source: Edina’s city staff (assessing division and building department). While Edina may see a relatively high rate of homes demolished, most of the existing housing stock is over 40 years old, thus predating decades of energy efficient technologies and policies. 3. Why Time of Sale of Housing Inspection? Information disclosure is key when you are making decisions, especially when that decision is to invest on an asset as significant as a house. Key information related to health, safety and energy consumption is paramount to homebuyers because it enables more informed decisions. Inadequate information about a home’s energy inefficiency is widely understood as a market failure (Jaffe, Newell, & Starvis, 2004). The lack of information about energy efficiency dis- incentivizes potential seller investments in efficiency improvements for fear of not recovering their investments, while shielding potential buyers about home characteristics that can lead to substantial long-term savings (Cassidy, 2019). In the absent of a public policy intervention in the form of a time of sale requirement, the market failure of inadequate information may continue unabated and threaten the Edina’s ability to meet goals outlined in both the Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan. The potential benefits of time of sale disclosure and housing inspection programs are documented and likely why municipalities across the country are adopting similar policies Page 39 of 59 Final Draft 5 (Myers, Puller, & West, 2019). Those benefits include, but are not limited to, increased investment in energy efficiency by homeowners, reducing homeowner energy costs, making housing more affordable1, reducing Greenhouse gas emissions, improving the health and safety of residents, and increasing the value of residential property. Adoption of a time of sale housing inspection would make Edina’s policies consistent with neighboring municipalities. Several nearby cities mandate what is known as a Truth-in Sale of housing (TISH) inspection which is focused on the risks to life and /or health the property might have. These ordinances required every home seller to have a pre-inspection completed by a licensed inspector before they list their property for sale. The TISH inspections are paid by sellers and are different than the standard inspections performed for and paid by most buyers. Depending on the cities, the inspection may vary but most include checking hazards related to smoke detectors, railing, plumbing, electrical, etc. Currently, cities with TISH mandates include Bloomington, Golden Valley, Maplewood, Minneapolis, New Hope, Richfield, Robbinsdale, Saint Louis Park, Saint Paul, South Saint Paul. Both Minneapolis and Bloomington have expanded their TISH inspection to include energy disclosure in 2020 and 2022, respectively. By adding the energy component, homeowners have a road map of improvements that can improve comfort, save energy, and cut costs. 3.1. Residential Disclosure Policy Options: Asset Rating v. Operation Rating As the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) mentioned in its report Transforming the Market for Energy Efficiency in Minneapolis: Recommendation for Residential Energy Efficiency Rating and Disclosure (CEE, 2018), “there are two basic methods to benchmark the efficiency of homes: based on a home’s actual energy bills (operation) or based on a home’s physical assets related to its energy performance (asset rating)”. Based on the research of CEE, our analysis and interviews done with different cities, and lastly our interest to include the Health and Safety components, we decided to focus on the asset- based rating, which considers the home’s physical assets. This approach evaluates the level of insulation as well as the efficiency of furnace and a/c, providing objective information on the energy performance of the home, and its results can be used to compare to other homes. This approach also provides actionable information on what can be done to improve the efficiency of the home. As previously noted, there are several cities in the Metropolitan Area of the Twin Cities that have Truth-in Sale housing inspections, which focus on health and safety components. Two of them, Bloomington and Minneapolis have also included the energy disclosure component as part of its inspection. It is important to mentioned that in these two cities, the health and safety 1 “The average homeowner spends up to $2500 per year on energy bills. Energy efficiency upgrades can reduce homeowner’s energy costs by 20-45%, while creating comfort, safety, and quality of life benefits.” CEE, 2018. Page 40 of 59 Final Draft 6 remarks make on the inspection need to be address by the seller before selling the house, while the energy component is only a disclosure component, and it doesn’t have to be addressed. There are also other programs around the country that have focus solely on the energy component like the ones established by Portland, Oregon and Austin, Texas. 4. Case Studies: Austin, Portland, Minneapolis, and Bloomington Over the last several years, there has been an explosion in residential energy disclosure policies being adopted by states and municipalities. Over ten states and 30 major cities have adopted such policies in the last decade, not to mention smaller cities and municipalities. This section explores in more details the four programs, analyzing their pros and cons to have a baseline of information that can help tailor the type of program that will be more beneficial to the city of Edina. Table 2, in page 10 is a resume of the four programs being evaluated. 4.1. Austin, Texas Austin’s Energy Conservation Audit and Disclosure (ECAD) ordinance went into effect in June 2009 and was amended in 2011 to push the disclosure timing to at least 3 days before the close of the option period, during which the prospective buyer may legally cancel their contract to purchase the home penalty- free. The program is managed by Austin Energy, the community owned utility of the city (Austin Energy, 2023). The program applies to residential properties with four of fewer dwellings that are sold within Austin city limits, which are 10 years or older, and are serviced by Austin Energy. The energy audit report must be disclosed at time of sale remains valid for ten years. Home sellers are exempt if they do not meet one or more of the conditions. All audits are conducted by certified professional technicians who have been trained by Austin Energy and are approved contractors for the program. Although compliance is officially mandatory for all encompassed property sales, in practice, few resources are dedicated to enforcement and compliance is incomplete – about 60% of targeted homes comply. Noncompliance can result in financial penalties from $500-$2000, but penalties for non-compliance have almost never been incurred, since it is not in the mission of Austin Energy to track or enforce compliance. The cost of inspection is around $100-$300, depending on the size of the house. 4.2. Portland, Oregon Portland established its Home Energy Score Policy in 2016 through the adoption of its ordinance on Residential Energy Performance Rating and Disclosure, as a results of its 2015 Page 41 of 59 Final Draft 7 Climate Action Plan, since residential buildings contributed to nearly half of the emissions from buildings in the city (City of Portland, 2015). The program requires that all single-family home sellers in the city obtain and disclose a Home Energy Report estimating the energy-related use, associate cost, and cost-effective solution to improve the home efficiency. The policy has been in place since 2018, and in the year between passing of the ordinance and the start of its implementation, city staff built a network of home energy assessors trained by Earth Advantage, a non-profit, to perform the inspections. By doing so they made sure that this new requirement didn’t generate any disruption in the house market. Realtors were also trained regarding the new policy, and although they complained that the new requirement could delay the process of selling the properties, once the ordinance passed, they embrace it and are now the ones pushing the sellers to comply with it. The report must be included in any listing or public advertising. The cost for the city in a yearly basis is around 200,000 USD, which includes mainly wages of the staff running the program, fees paid to Earth Advantage to train, manage and certify the network of assessors (30,000-40,000 USD) and the low-income homeowners inspections, that cost around 7,000 USD. The assessors use the National Home Energy Score (HES) tool from DOE as their scoring tool and data gets collected according to this process. The complete process, which includes gathering the data, uploading the score in the mapping software and disclose the information on the webpage takes less than a week. The energy program doesn’t apply to renters of single-family house or multifamily. However, they do need to comply with state requirements related to health and safety like having a gas stove or furnace, and access to cooling. Noncompliance can result in a financial penalty of $2000, but penalties for non-compliance have almost never been incurred, since the sending of a warning have made homeowners comply with the ordinance. They current compliance rate is between 50-60% and they aiming to at least 80%. 4.3. Bloomington, MN Bloomington established its Time-of-Sale Housing (TOS) evaluation more than 25 years ago, and include the energy component in April 2022, through an amendment of their 1995 ordinance. Page 42 of 59 Final Draft 8 The program requires that all dwelling, including single- family, accessory, two-family, multiple- family and manufacture homes complies with the Time-of-sale evaluation before it offered for sale. If the house will be torn down, no inspection is required. When the policy started and only focused on health and safety, contractors licensed by the city were the ones in charge of the inspections. However, since the energy component was included and due to a high number of complaints, they switch to in-house inspection. By having oversight of the program, they have control of the inspections and can make sure they are done more effective and efficient. For the energy disclosure component, they use a software developed by CEE, and include both a/c and water heater. They city staff in charge of the program includes an office coordinator and 3 inspectors, which have been train both by CenterPoint and the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE). In a regular basis, inspectors will do checks on sales and look for the TOS, if one wasn’t done, they will send email notifying violation of ordinance. The cost of the inspection is of $255, which $5 going to CEE to support training and the rest to the city. 4.4. Minneapolis, MN Minneapolis is one of the Twin cities that mandated the Truth in Sale (TISH) inspection, but it was until January 2020 that energy data started to be collected as part of this inspection (Minneapolis, 2022). Properties like single-family houses, duplex, townhouses, and first-time condominium conversion requires the TISH evaluation before selling them. The inspections are done by 3rd party evaluator, who have always been doing the home inspections in the city. With the energy components added they are now required to go through ongoing yearly training to maintain their credentials. One of the main challenges they faced was the opposition from the realtors, but once the program started, they have been supportive. The compliance of the program is one of the highest of the 4 cities studied with 70-80%. This since they monitor MLS and force owners to take down their listing if the disclosure has not been conducted. The cost of the inspection is between $200-300, depending on the evaluator used and the size of the house. Page 43 of 59 Final Draft 9 5. Recommendations The Vision Edina strategic framework noted that community residents and stakeholders “believe that Edina can take an active and ambitious internal and regional leadership role in embedding environmental stewardship principles through actions” such as “smart building and energy efficiency practices.” The Comprehensive Plan and the Climate Action Plan built on this commitment to residents and stakeholders by committing to policies that improve the affordability of housing in Edina by reducing the costs of energy and reduce Greenhouse gas emissions by improving energy efficiency practices. The cities studied showed that certified energy efficiency residential audits capitalized energy efficiency and leads to residential investment in energy saving technologies. These programs also show that energy improvements can be linked to existing rebate programs. In the case of Minneapolis, 33% of all the rebated energy improvements completed in 2021 were done by residence that had received an energy disclosure report (CEE, 2023). Adoption of a time of sale initiative is a logical first step into fulfilling the vision of both the CP and the CAP. If a time of sale initiative is to be adopted by the City of Edina, the Energy and Environment Commission recommends that: ● Health, Safety, and Energy: The Time of Sale Initiative developed by the city needs to include both health & safety and energy components. ● Housing Types: Should include all single-family homes, duplex, and townhouses being sold in the city. ● Inspections: Both inspections schemes, in-house or third party, could work for the city. The decision will depend on human resources cost, that eventually could be cover by part of the fee pay for the inspections. ● Criteria: Considering the median year of houses built in the city is 1968, and that this initiative will only focus on houses being sold it should be complemented with the Home Energy Squad Initiative, to help the city achieve their climate action goals. ● Financing: the energy efficiency improvements resulted of the inspections could be linked to Edina’s Community Climate Action Fund that seeks to help residence complete high-impact energy efficiency projects (City of Edina, 2023), or to other rebates programs available through utilities or at the state level. ● Enforcement: Several of the cities reviewed do have enforcement policies, but in practice there is little to no enforcement of the policy. Nevertheless, compliance is relatively high, and seemingly getting higher as the programs are in place longer. Page 44 of 59 Final Draft 10 Table 2. Residence disclosure policies studied. Jurisdiction Name Enacted/ Effective Component s Type of homes Trigger Inspection Cost for the city (yearly) Cost for seller Sale Rent Austin, TX Energy Conservation Audit & Disclosure (ECAD) 2009/ 2011 Energy Properties with four or fewer dwellings X 3rd party inspection NA $100- 300 Bloomington, MN Time-of-Sale (TOS) 1995/ 2022* Health & Safety, Energy Single- family, accessory, two- family, multiple- family and manufacture homes X In house inspection $435,000** * $250 Minneapolis, MN Truth in Sale (TiSH) 1995/ 2020** Health & Safety, Energy single-family homes, duplex, townhouses, and first-time condominium X X 3rd party inspection NA $255 Portland, OR Home Energy Score 2016/ 2018 Energy Single-family homes X 3rd party inspection $200,000++ $200- 300 * In 2022 the included the energy component ** In 2020 they include the energy component *** This is an estimate and includes 3.5 full- time inspectors, support from their sustainability coordinator and a fee paid to CEE per house inspected. ++ Include wage of staff running the program, payment to Earth Advantage and the inspections for low-income homeowners. Page 45 of 59 Final Draft 11 6. Bibliography Austin Energy. (2023, 12 01). ECAD Ordinance. Retrieved from Austin Energy: https://austinenergy.com/energy-efficiency/ecad-ordinance/ecad-for-residential- customers Cassidy, A. (2019, July 13). How Does Mandatory Energy Efficency Disclosure Affect Housing Prices? . Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3047417 CEE. (2023, 03). Time of Sale Energy Disclosure. Minneapolis, MN, USA. CEE. (2018). Transforming the Market for Energy Efficiency in Minneapolis: Recommendations for Residential Energy Efficiency Rating and Disclosure. Minneapolis: CEE. City of Edina. (2018). 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Edina: City of Edina. City of Edina. (2023). Community Climate Action Fund. Retrieved from https://www.edinamn.gov/1929/Community-Climate-Action-Fund City of Portland. (2015, 06). City of Portland. Retrieved from Climate Action Plan: https://www.portland.gov/bps/climate-action/documents/2015-climate-action- plan/download Jaffe, A. B., Newell, R. G., & Starvis, R. N. (2004). Economics of Energy Efficiency. Encyclopedia of Energy, 79-90. Minneapolis. (2022, 02 25). City of Minnepaolis. Retrieved from Energy disclosure report: https://www.minneapolismn.gov/resident-services/property-housing/buying- selling/tish/energy-disclosure-report/. Minnesota Legislature. (2022). Office of the Revisor of Satutes. Retrieved from https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/326B.121. Minnesota Legislature. (2022). Office of the Revisor of Statues. Retrieved from https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/412.221 Myers, E., Puller, S., & West, a. J. (2019, October). Effects of Mandatory Energy Efficiency Disclosure in Hosuing Markets. Retrieved from University of Chicago: https://e2e.uchicago.edu/pdf/workingpapers/WP044.pdf Pale Blue dot LLC. (2021). Climate Action Plan. Edina: City of Edina. U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/profile/Edina_city,_Minnesota?g=160XX00US2718188#housing Page 46 of 59 Date: November 12, 2024 To: Mayor and City Council From: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Nate Borwege, Chief Building Official Chad Millner, Director of Engineering Subject: Time of Sale Inspections and Energy Disclosure Policy Staff Recommendation: Do not adopt a Time of Sale policy. Information/Background The Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) completed a “Time of Sale Energy Disclosure Program Report” as part of their 2023 work plan, and approved the report at their February 8, 2024 meeting. A TOS policy aligns with Edina’s Climate Action Plan Strategy BE 1-13, “Establish a performance ratings/labeling program for all homes listed for sale or rent so that owners, tenants and prospective buyers can make informed decisions about energy costs and carbon emissions. Rating program to require Energy Audit/Energy Efficiency Program participation.” This staff report is a response to the EEC’s report and includes a summary of existing policies, Edina permit and housing stock data, and implementation considerations. Time of Sale Inspections Time of Sale (TOS), Point of Sale (POS) and Truth in Sale Housing (TISH) are local government policies that require an inspection to be completed before a home can be listed or sold. The goal of these policies is to ensure safety and quality of residential properties. These inspections are in addition to private inspections typically completed during a real estate transaction at the discretion of a buyer. These policies require inspection of the health and safety of a home as it relates to building code, submission of the inspection report to city staff, and in most cases, require remediation of hazardous issues before a home can be listed or sold. This differs from typical private home inspections where an item flagged by the inspector is not required to be remediated by the local government agency. Page 47 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 Eleven metro cities require some sort of pre-sale inspection of the home. Robbinsdale, cited in the EEC report, repealed their policy in 2024 due to diminishing value of the policy because of repeat inspections of the same homes and a decrease in the number of hazards being identified. Columbia Heights, not cited in the EEC report, adopted a TOS policy in 2024 to address unpermitted and unlicensed work completed by “housing flippers” that create hazards for new homeowners and to address sewer inflow and infiltration issues. Appendix 1 summarizes existing and repealed policies in the metro area. Energy Disclosure Minneapolis and Bloomington include energy disclosure as a component of their policies. Energy disclosure is an additional report that provides an “energy score” of the home’s energy efficiency, plus improvements to increase a home’s score. Unlike health and safety hazards, cities cannot require improvements to the mechanical equipment or building envelope. Both cities worked with the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) to update their existing time of sale inspection policies to create energy disclosure criteria and inspection processes. CEE also supported realtor engagement and evaluator training on the new criteria. Both cities currently contract with CEE to generate energy disclosure reports in coordination with home evaluators, publish energy scores and support policy education and outreach. Policy Need Staff collected permit, assessing and energy audit data to understand the quality of Edina’s housing stock and what value a pre-sale inspection might add to identify potential health, safety and energy improvements. Permit & Assessing Data Building Inspections gathered 2021–2023 permit data for single-family and town/twin homes to understand the level of investment being made in Edina’s residential housing stock. There are 12,533 single-family and 1,005 town/twin homes in Edina. Permit data indicates that residents are actively investing in their homes, including upgrades to items that would be evaluated in an energy disclosure report (e.g., heating and cooling systems, building envelope). Although insulation only permits are low, projects often upgrade insulation as part of a building permit, which is not tracked separately, or in some cases, might upgrade insulation without permit approval. Table 1. 2021-2023 Permit Data for Single-Family and Town/Twin Homes Permit 2021 2022 2023 Total 3-year Average Demos 66 55 52 173 58 New Homes 68 62 57 187 62 Window/Door Replacements 475 378 350 1,203 401 Insulation Only 15 9 6 30 10 Page 48 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 3 Permit 2021 2022 2023 Total 3-year Average Furnace/AC's 825 915 827 2,567 856 Boilers 20 12 23 55 18 Water Heaters 551 587 583 1,721 574 As part of the property valuation and market value determination process, assessors determine the property’s “effective age,” which is a way to state the age of the property based on its current condition rather than its actual age (i.e., year built). For assessing purposes, maintenance items like roofs and HVAC systems do not change a property’s effective age. Assessing data complements the permit data by illustrating that although the average year built for Edina’s single-family and town/twin-home housing is closer to 1960s and 1970s respectively, the level of investment being made shows a newer, higher quality and condition of Edina’s homes. Table 2. Actual and Effective Age for Single-Family and Town/Twin Homes, All Homes Property Type Average Actual Age Average Effective Age Average Difference Single-Family 1962 1991 27 Town/Twin Home 1977 1993 15 Energy Audit Data The City of Edina partners with CEE, Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy’s home energy audit program implementer, to provide discounted audits to residents who live in 1–4-unit homes. During a home energy audit, energy experts inspect the home’s insulation, heating and cooling systems and water heater to provide an energy savings plan report with recommended energy-saving upgrades and associated rebates and incentives to help cover project costs. The cost for a home energy audit includes advisor services to support project implementation. In the past three years, 565 homes received a home energy audit with 73% of those visits resulting in at least one recommendation to invest in their home’s energy efficiency (Table 3). The most common recommendation is insulation and air sealing (Table 4). Permit data in Table 1 complements CEE’s audit recommendation data by demonstrating that investments in these types of recommendations are being made in Edina; however, the most common recommendation–insulation–doesn’t have the same level of investment based on permit data alone. Table 3. 2021-2023 Home Energy Audit Data Audits 2021 2022 2023 Total 3-year Average Total Number of Audits 157 183 225 565 188 Audits Receiving Recommendations 94 144 173 411 137 Page 49 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 4 Table 4. 2021-2023 Home Energy Audit Recommendations Audit Recommendations 2021 2022 2023 Total 3-year Average Water Heater 35 53 71 159 53 Cooling System 41 60 50 151 50 Insulation and Air sealing 77 96 135 308 103 Heating System 31 50 43 124 41 Policy Development & Implementation Considerations If City Council directs Staff to move forward with a TOS inspection policy, Staff time will be needed to determine inspection evaluation and energy disclosure criteria, plus time to hire staff, create internal processes and forms and make software improvements. In addition, Staff time for engagement with realtors, brokers, home evaluators and other interested parties is recommended for policy education. Scope If City Council directs Staff to move forward with a TOS inspection policy, Staff recommend the following when it comes to policy scope: • Require inspection prior to closing (e.g., time of sale or point of sale inspection policy) to avoid confusion or debate about what the definition of listing is or when a listing is effective. • Applicable to single-family homes and town/twin homes with exceptions for planned demolitions, new construction (first owner) and public transfers to stay consistent in its scope with neighboring cities to reduce confusion. • Include a provision that only items posing an immediate hazard to the occupants of the structure are required to be repaired. Allow transfer of hazardous repairs to the buyer with city approval, an escrow and timeline requirement to ensure repairs are completed. • Inspection to evaluate health and safety hazards, with an energy disclosure inspection component. The specific criteria to be evaluated would need to be determined during a policy development process. Budget and Staffing Inspection implementation varies—some cities have dedicated inspectors on staff to complete the TOS inspection, and others approve or license home evaluators and allow home sellers to choose from that list with staff managing the licensing and documentation for the policy. There are approximately 670 single-family and town/twin home sales annually. Staffing will need to cover conducting or reviewing inspections for a majority of those home sales dependent on policy structure. Staff estimate that for in-house implementation, where staff inspect properties and issue certifications, 2 FTE are needed, costing approximately $205,573 to $258,474 annually, plus a one-time cost to purchase inspection equipment (e.g., tools, ladders) and vehicles that are not currently budgeted. This estimate is based on the number of property sales and providing timely inspections, staffing levels other Page 50 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 5 cities have when implementing internally, and the current capacity of Building Inspections. The staff costs for doing inspections in-house could be recouped through an inspection fee, but a fee to fully cover staffing costs might be higher than peer cities with similar policies and in-house implementation. Supplemental staff time would be required from the Chief Building Official and Sustainability Manager to oversee policy implementation and from central services staff for related software maintenance. For a policy that requires third-party inspections, staff recommend that at least one FTE be hired to manage implementation, license inspectors, educate the community and realtors, review inspection reports, and issue certifications. These staff costs are estimated to be $102,670 to $129,237 annually, which can be partially recouped through a licensing fee. This model would also require staff time to create licensure criteria and processes. Supplemental staff time would be required from the Chief Building Official and Sustainability Manager to oversee policy implementation and from central services staff for related software maintenance. Minnesota cities with energy disclosure (Minneapolis and Bloomington) have an annual professional services agreement with CEE to implement the energy disclosure portion of their policy. This cost is estimated to range from $15,000–$75,000 a year that is currently not budgeted. If a policy were adopted that included energy disclosure, Staff recommend hiring CEE or other firm to provide similar implementation services. In addition to budget for staffing and energy disclosure consultant services, a to-be-determined cost will need to be budgeted for software to collect documentation and track policy compliance. Conclusion Several peer cities have TOS, POS or TISH policies to ensure safety and quality of residential properties, with two cities including energy disclosure to help potential buyers understand the energy performance of a home. Based on Edina permit and assessing data, residents are actively investing in their home’s safety and quality, and upgrading heating and cooling systems and the building envelope to increase energy performance. In addition, Edina’s discounted home energy audit program has resulted in more than 560 home energy audits in the past three years, giving homeowners insight into their home’s energy use and an energy savings plan to make upgrades. Based on the data available, Staff do not recommend adopting a TOS policy. To continue to prioritize energy efficient investments, including building electrification and renewable energy, the City should: • Continue its discounted home energy audit program, exploring ways to target outreach to older housing stock and properties who haven’t upgraded their HVAC systems. • Expand funding for its Community Climate Action Fund to support more residential efficiency upgrades and home electrification projects. Page 51 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 6 Appendix 1: Summary of Minnesota City Time of Sale (TOS), Point of Sale (POS) and Truth in Sale Housing (TISH) Policies The following data was collected by Staff from city websites and education materials. City Type Scope Rating Energy Disclosure Remediation Requirement Remediation Transferability Certification Exemptions Implementation Cost Bloomington TOS Single and two- family dwellings, condominiums, townhouses and mobile homes Hazards Yes Hazards Yes Consent from city required Certificate of Compliance Multifamily, demos, first owner, public transfer In-house $250 Brooklyn Park Repealed 2013 Repealed due to perceived value of program and duplication with independent home inspections completed by buyers Columbia Heights TOS Single, two-, and three-family dwellings, condominiums, townhouses, and mobile homes Hazards Hazards Yes Consent from city and cash escrow from buyer required Certificate of Property Maintenance Multifamily, demos, first owner, public transfer In-house $160; $25 for additional unit Crystal Repealed 2015 Repealed due to perceived value of program and duplication with independent home inspections completed by buyers Golden Valley POS All properties without I/I Compliance Certificate Inflow and infiltration deficiencies Deficiencies n/a Certificate of I/I Compliance In-house $250 residential $750 commercial Hopkins Repealed 2020 Repealed due to budget cuts, staff time to ensure compliance and avoid closing delays, and duplication with independent home inspections completed by buyers Page 52 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 7 City Type Scope Rating Energy Disclosure Remediation Requirement Remediation Transferability Certification Exemptions Implementation Cost Maplewood TISH Single, two-, and three-family dwellings, condominiums, townhouses At or below ordinance standards Ordinance violations n/a Disclosure report Mobile homes Licensed 3rd party evaluators Depends on evaluator; $130 licensing fee Minneapolis TISH Single-family houses Duplexes Townhouses First-time condominium conversions Hazards Yes Hazards Yes Submit transfer form to city and complete repairs within 90 days of closing Certificate of Approval Certificate of Completion (for transferability) Licensed 3rd party evaluators Depends on evaluator Mounds View POS All properties without I/I Compliance Certificate- Sewer line only Inflow and infiltration deficiencies Deficiencies n/a Certificate of I/I Compliance 3rd party evaluators $150 plus evaluator cost New Hope POS Single-family homes, condominiums, townhomes, cooperatives, and apartment buildings Code compliance Code violations Yes Consent from city and cash escrow from buyer required Certificate of Property Maintenance In-house $160 per unit; $20 for each additional unit in MF Richfield POS Single family and two-family homes, condominiums Code compliance Code violations for code year built; immediate hazards Yes Consent from city and cash escrow from buyer required Certificate of Housing Maintenance In house $100-230 Robbinsdale Repealed 2024 Repealed due to costs, diminished need for program and repeat inspections due to property resales Page 53 of 59 STAFF REPORT PAGE 8 City Type Scope Rating Energy Disclosure Remediation Requirement Remediation Transferability Certification Exemptions Implementation Cost Saint Paul TISH Single family, duplex, condominium, and townhomes Hazards Disclosure only SF must have HWSD/A n/a Disclosure report Immediate family transfer, first owner, public transfer, demos Licensed 3rd party evaluators Depends on evaluator St. Louis Park POS Single family and two-family homes, condominiums Code compliance Code violations Yes Consent from city and cash escrow from buyer required Certificate of Property Maintenance In house $170-360 South St. Paul TOS Single family, two-family, and multiple-family dwellings Hazards Hazardous Yes Submit transfer form to city and complete repairs within 30 days of closing Letter Demos, first owner, public transfer, transfer to family Licensed 3rd party evaluators Depends on evaluator Page 54 of 59 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: December 12, 2024 Item Activity: Discussion Meeting: Energy & Environment Commission Agenda Number: 7.2 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Report & Recommendation Department: Engineering Item Title: Paved Area / Community Gardens Work Plan Item Action Requested: Receive report. Information/Background: Commissioner Weber will discuss the work plan item, including a draft report. Supporting Documentation: None Page 55 of 59 BOARD & COMMISSION ITEM REPORT Date: December 12, 2024 Item Activity: Information Meeting: Energy & Environment Commission Agenda Number: 9.1 Prepared By: Marisa Bayer, Sustainability Manager Item Type: Other Department: Engineering Item Title: Approved 2025 Work Plan Action Requested: Receive information. Information/Background: City Council approved commission work plans at their Dec. 3 meeting. The attached work plan will be entered into City's tracking dashboard Envisio by year-end with the recommended changes and staff will provide an Envisio report at the January meeting to help track and monitor work plan progress. Supporting Documentation: 1. 2025 EEC Work Plan, Approved Page 56 of 59 Page 1 of 3 Energy and Environment Commission 2025 Proposed Work Plan Initiative Type: Project Target Completion Date: Q4 Lead(s): Tom Tessman, Hilda Martinez, Brooke Bartholomew Initiative Title: Climate Action Plan Midpoint Prioritization Initiative Description: Participate in mid-point Climate Action Plan review and prioritization with Sustainability Division. EEC Work Plan Leads will work directly with the Sustainability Division to review strategy progress and discuss how EEC can support and lead remaining strategies. The full EEC will participate toward end of process to review and recommend prioritized 2026-2030 high-impact strategies to Council. This project supports CAP Action CC 1-6. Deliverable: EEC input on Staff-led CAP midpoint prioritization. Council Charge: ☐ 1: Study & Report ☒ 2: Review & Comment ☒ 3: Review & Recommend ☐ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): Anticipate 3-5 additional hours from Sustainability Manager per month for EEC engagement. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): No additional support for EEC engagement beyond Sustainability Manager required. Liaison Comments: Staff added this item to the EEC work plan to have dedicated commission engagement and gather additional perspective on CAP strategies as part of their work to support Climate Action Plan implementation. 1City Manager Comments: This initiative is staff led and part of the Engineering Department work plan for 2025. Change Initiative Description to read, “Commission will review and comment on phases of the review and prioritization of the climate action plan.” Council charge 2. Initiative Type: Ongoing Target Completion Date: Q4 Lead(s): Cory Lukens, John Haugen, student commissioners Initiative Title: Engagement and Outreach for Annual Initiatives Initiative Description: Continuation of existing annual EEC initiatives and participation/promotion of annual City events. Examples of potential ongoing initiatives include Green Business Outreach Program (GBOP), Tree Recognition Campaign (TRC), Electric Vehicle Showcase Event, student commissioner sustainability social takeover, Chamber and Rotary engagement, and Edina Schools engagement. EEC Chair and Vice-chair will create a list of annual initiatives with EEC commissioners assigned and work with communications team on calendar of communication resources needed. Deliverable: List of annual initiatives with EEC lead assignments. Delivery of annual initiatives. Council Charge: ☐ 1: Study & Report ☐ 2: Review & Comment ☐ 3: Review & Recommend ☒ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): Budget will be consistent with previous year’s CAS fund expenditures to support Chamber and Edina Magazine ads, boosted social media posts, and printing and postage costs (approx. $5,250). Anticipated 3-5 additional hours from Sustainability Manager per month for EEC engagement for each ongoing initiative identified during initiative implementation. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): Communications staff time to support owned media outreach (e.g., Edition Edina, Socials, Press Releases) and facilitate budgeted paid media outreach at direction of Sustainability Manager. Sustainability Manager staff time to coordinate communications plan and facilitate discussions with Facilities, Streets, and Police Staff for EV Event if hosted at City owned facility. Liaison Comments: Staff is supportive as EEC remains committed to its ongoing initiatives like the GBOP. Budget will be consistent with previous year’s CAS expenditures for EEC events. EEC should use January and February meetings to identify list of existing initiatives, timing of each initiative, and assign leads to inform outreach plans and timing so staff can allocate communication resources appropriately. 2City Manager Comments: Separate initiative into three initiatives Green Business Outreach Program (Council Charge 4), Student Social Media Takeover (Council Charge 4), and Tree Recognition Campaign (Council Charge 4). Remove Electric Vehicle Showcase Event. Staff have capacity concerns for continuing all past and current work plan initiatives for the EEC. The Commission is encouraged to reach out to already established community events (e.g., Rotary Car Show, Vehicle Day) in Edina to promote EV car education/participation. = commission = staff Page 57 of 59 Page 2 of 3 Initiative Type: Project Target Completion Date: Q1-Q2 Lead(s): LeeAnn Weber, Tom Tessman Initiative Title: Extreme Heat and Resiliency Hubs Initiative Description: Use existing data and reports from Metropolitan Council, Hennepin County, Climate Action Plan, and other industry experts to understand extreme heat risks in Edina. Study what other cities are doing and the best practice strategies to combat extreme heat, including existing city policies that support combating extreme heat. Compile list of best practice strategies to be considered as part of midpoint Climate Action Plan update. This project supports several CAP Actions that address extreme heat (TL 3-4, BE 1-9, GS 3-2. GS 3-6, HS 2-1, HS 2-4, HS 4-3). Deliverable: Report on extreme heat in Edina and best practice strategies. Council Charge: ☒ 1: Study & Report ☐ 2: Review & Comment ☐ 3: Review & Recommend ☐ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): Anticipate 10 additional hours for EEC engagement from Sustainability Manager during quarter of staff report delivery. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): No additional support beyond Sustainability Manager required. Liaison Comments: Staff is supportive. Deliverable will support achieving CAP health and safety goals to align strategies across multiple focus areas in the CAP that talk about extreme heat. This work will inform regional collaboration with Hennepin County’s and Metropolitan Council’s extreme heat work. Staff plan to use deliverable to provide actionable next steps for City Staff and EEC to be included in the CAP midpoint prioritization (Work Plan Item 1).3City Manager Comments: This project is staff led in coordination with their participation in USDN and Hennepin County resiliency work. Change initiative description to read, “review and comment on staff’s report on extreme heat and resiliency hubs” and change deliverable to read, “comment on staff report.” Council charge 2. Initiative Type: Project Target Completion Date: Q1-Q2 Lead(s): Brooke Bartholomew, Eric Walker Initiative Title: Food Security Assessment and Local Food Production Initiative Description: Conduct a “Food Security Assessment” to determine food insecurity conditions within Edina using existing data and reports across multiple sources, and by collaborating with others, such as the Human Services Task Force. Study what other cities are doing and the best practice strategies to increase food security, including increasing local food production and access, and increasing opportunities for food rescue. Compile list of strategy recommendations to be considered as part of midpoint Climate Action Plan update. This project supports CAP Action LF 2-1 and CAP Strategy LF 1. Deliverable: Food Security Assessment Report Council Charge: ☒ 1: Study & Report ☐ 2: Review & Comment ☐ 3: Review & Recommend ☐ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): Anticipate 2-3 hours per month from Sustainability Specialist for EEC engagement to answer questions and connect to existing resources. Anticipate up to 1 additional hour for Sustainability Manager’s EEC engagement. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): Sustainability Specialist will support this work plan item by connecting work plan leads to resources and best practices for food security assessments, plus coordinating support from MN Dept of Health who supports these types of projects. Sustainability Manager will provide support in their capacity as staff liaison. Liaison Comments: Staff is supportive. Deliverable will support achieving CAP local food and agriculture goals. Staff plan to use deliverable to provide actionable next steps for City Staff and EEC to be included in the CAP midpoint prioritization (Work Plan Item 1). Deliverable will also inform future grant applications for the State of Minnesota’s CPRG program on food security. 4City Manager Comments: No changes. Council charge 1. Page 58 of 59 Page 3 of 3 Initiative Type: Project Target Completion Date: Q2-Q3 Lead(s): Stephen Schima Initiative Title: Multifamily Organics Policy Initiative Description: Research policy levers and requirements to require all multi-family homes in Edina to provide organics recycling. Report will include exploring legality of requiring organics recycling and feasibility to implement a policy like this. Work will align with Hennepin County’s zero-waste goals and plans. This project supports CAP Actions that address waste including equity (WM 1, WM 1-3). Deliverable: Multifamily Organics Policy Report. Council Charge: ☒ 1: Study & Report ☐ 2: Review & Comment ☐ 3: Review & Recommend ☐ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): Anticipate 2 hours per month from Organics Recycling Coordinator for EEC engagement to answer questions and connect to existing resources. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): The Organics Recycling Coordinator will support this work plan item by connecting work plan leads to County resources and contacts as needed. Liaison Comments: Staff is supportive. Deliverable will support achieving CAP waste reduction goals. Staff plan to use deliverable to provide actionable next steps for City Staff and EEC to be included in the CAP midpoint prioritization (Work Plan Item 1). Organics Recycling Coordinator confirmed the EEC report will be a value add for their work and will inform next steps for a policy; and they cannot lead the research themself.5City Manager Comments: No changes. Council Charge 1. Initiative Type: Project Target Completion Date: Q4 Lead(s): All Initiative Title: City Code Update—Article III. Boards, Committees and Commissions, Division 3. Energy and Environment Commission Initiative Description: In preparation for the comprehensive plan update, Administration will propose updates to city code. Deliverable: Each commission will be asked to review and comment on the proposed changes. Council Charge: ☐ 1: Study & Report ☒ 2: Review & Comment ☐ 3: Review & Recommend ☐ 4: Review & Decide Budget Required (completed by staff): None. Staff Support Required (completed by staff): Liaisons will work with the Administration Department on updated each commission’s section of the city code. Liaison Comments: This work plan initiative will be added to all 2025 commission work plans at the request of Administration. NEWCity Manager Comments: Initiative requested by Administration. Parking Lot •Create a neighborhood-based campaign to increase organics recycling participation and regular recycling compliance. EEC to help recruit neighborhood captains and participants. Utilize incentives and create strategic messaging to target neighborhoods with currently low participation. This project supports several CAP actions that address waste (WM 1-3). •Research best practices for municipal waste diversion in municipal facility construction and demolition (WM 3- 2). •Research and develop an emergency preparedness toolkit or guide for residents (HS 2-5). •Study and report on solutions for increasing EV charging in existing multifamily and commercial parking structures, including identifying city programs and incentives to reduce upfront costs for existing buildings. (TL) Page 59 of 59