Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-08 PacketDRAFT MINUTES CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION EDINA CITY HALL COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday May 8, 2014 7:04 PM I. CALL TO ORDER 7:04p.m. II. ROLL CALL Answering Roll Call was Bale, Glahn, Gubrud, Kostuch, Latham, Rudnicki, Sokol, Thompson, Waddick, Zarrin, and Chair Heer. Absent: Howard Late Arrival: Sierks Staff Present: Ross Bintner and Rebecca Foster III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Motion made by Member Latham and seconded by Member Gubrud to approve the Meeting Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes. Member Latham on VI. E. fourth sentence from bottom add "Based on the doctrine of sovereign immunity Commissioner Latham believes that, the City would not be liable, absent negligence on the City's part, " Member Latham removed "the" in VI. F. first sentence. Motion made by Member Thompson and seconded by Member Kostuch to approve the amended Minutes. Motion carried unanimously. B. Attendance report and roster. No Comment. C. Workgroup list and minutes. Chair Heer and Member Sokol suggested changing the Student Subcommittee to a Working Group to invite students attending secondary schools in Edina in environmental and energy clubs. By doing this the monthly reports will be more informative and help promote EEC event better. Motion made by Chair Heer and seconded by Member Thompson to form the Student Working Group. Motion carried unanimously. Motion made by Member Latham and seconded by Member Kostuch to approve the remaining Consent Agenda. Motion carried unanimously. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT. No Comment. VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 A. Minneapolis Sustainability Efforts. Gayle Prest, Sustainability Directorfor Minneapolis, gave an update on what they do. Minneapolis uses the St Paul Port Authority to approve Solar Panel projects. She reviewed the City's Climate Action Plan on how to reduce the City's citywide greenhouse gas emissions. They are tracking their greenhouse gas reduction through National Protocol for City's with ICLE. Gayle is proposing on how we can work better with Hennepin County due to lots of grants available. Member Sierks arrived at 7:34p.m. B. Burnsville Sustainability Efforts. Sue Bast, Environmental Specialist, for Burnsville. The City adopted Green Steps in 2009. A consultant was hired to educate the Burnsville Council members and City staff and devised a plan for the city that included educating staff, selecting a sustainability coordinator (part time role for existing employee) and a sustainability council with members from all City departments. The City has a sustainability checklist in the Planning Dept. Their Council has all staff working on goals. Burnsville said they are on track to meet 15% CO2 reduction in City Operations by 2015. C. Preparation and prioritization for June 3 CC/EEC Meeting. Chair Heer reviewed the draft Agenda for the City Council Work Session on June 3`d. The topics will be proposed ordinance changes to permit Bee and chicken -keeping, discuss EEC role in City's efforts to realize Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10 environmental commitments in the City's operation and an update on the Business Recycling. D. PACE Advisory. Member Sierks explained that St. Paul Port Authority will administer the PACE program instead of the EEC liaison. The City would need to enter a joint powers agreement with them. The only action required of the City would be to place a lien on the property, collect the money every six months and remit to SPPA. This will only be for Commercial property owners. Motion made by Member Sierks and seconded by Member Gubrud to send the PACE Advisory to Council. Motion carried unanimously. E. Local Food Working Group. Member Latham gave an update on the edits from the Police Dept. for the proposed ordinance changes to permit Bee and chicken -keeping. The Police Dept. need an annual renewal for safety in case an owner wants to discontinue the hive. Speak Up Edina had 32 residents participated in the bee and chicken keeping discussion with 100% support. The Police Dept. would like a $20 fee for bee keeping for mailings. The Police Dept. said there should be a better appeal process. VII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS A. Open Meeting Law Violation. Mr. Bintner reminded Commissioners that they can't email a majority due to the Open Meeting Law standards. Members Rudnicki excused himself from the meeting at 8:45p.m. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS A. Building Energy Efficiency Subcommittee. Member Sierks said the group learned how the City plans and designs energy projects. Each City building has different owners and budgets. Mr. Barnes has no authority or budget he can only make suggestions. There is a State program to help review the facilities on energy use. B. Business Recycling Working Group. Member Zarrin said there are five restaurants at 50th & France doing organic recycling. There is a passcode on the dumpster so that garbage won't be mixed with it. The Galleria and Southdale Shopping Center are the next goals to achieve. C. City Environmental Considerations Subcommittee. Members Kostuch and Heer meet with Eric Roggeman, Asst. Finance Director, and said Eric talked to City staff about adding the new sustainability form to the CIP by the end of May. Member Kostuch said City vehicles are not in CIP process as vehicles are replaced as needed by City departments via their individual budgets. D. Community Solar Subcommittee. Member Sierks said the next meeting will be a scoping meeting. The topics will be looking for potential sites for a solar project, for community solar do you want to contract the program and maintenance of the panels, discuss bidding requirements and does the City want more than one site. E. Education Outreach Working Group. Member Thompson thanked all the volunteers that helped with the April 28`h event. There were 110 attendees. The movie "Bag It" will be held on May 16th. The July 4`h parade theme is "Deeper Shade of Green". F. Home Energy Squad Subcommittee. Member Gubrud said there are nine discounted visits left. G. Recycling and Solid Waste Working Group. No update. H. Student Subcommittee. Member Sokol said Project Earth raised $700 of the $6200 needed for the solar charging station. There was a charging station installed at the Media Center, but it's not solar, so maybe the cost will be lower through a conversion. I. Water Quality Working Group. Member Waddick said the group is trying to figure out what they are doing. She hopes to focus on Storm Drains and runoff. She visited the City of Minneapolis to review their Storm stenciling kits. Nine Mile Creek Watershed will let the group know what areas of the city are left to stencil or be refreshed. J. Water Bottle Advisory. Member Zarrin gave an update on the profit of the City's water bottle sales. The EEC is encouraging the City to reduce its water bottle sales and install hydrations stations. The high school has five hydration stations. Motion made by Member Latham and seconded by Member Waddick to accept two changes and forward the advisory to Council. Roll Call was taken: Ayes: Gubrud, Latham, Sierks, Thompson, Waddick, Zarrin and Chair Heer. Nays: Glahn, Kostuch Absent: Howard, Rudnicki Motion Carried. K. 2014 EEC Summary and Schedule. Mr. Bintner said he'll plan an August infrastructure tour again. IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. Council Communications. Mr. Bintner reviewed the "Communications with the City Council" for Boards and Commissions. B. EEC Budget Summary. Mr. Bintner will bring EEC Budget Summary to June meeting. C. City Projects. No Comments. There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Chair Heer declared the meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m. Motion made by Member Thompson and seconded by Member Zarrin to adjourn meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Rebecca Foster GIS Administrator Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet. Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically. INSTRUCTIONS: Counted as Meetina Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE) Regular Meeting w/Quorum Type 1" under the month on the meetings' line. ENERGY & ENVOWNUENT COMONSSION, Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type 1" under the month on the meetings' line. NAME TERM J F M AIMI AIM JJ J JAI SJOI N D Work Session Work Session #of Ace'K Meetings/Work Sessions There is no number typed on the meetings' line. 1I 1 I 1 I 1 11101010101010101 1 6 Glahn, William 2/1/2017 1 1 1 6/3/2014 (enter date) Gubrud, Bob 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 Neer, John 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 $ G Howard, John 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 4 Kostuch, Keith 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 Latham, Dianne Plunkett 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 Rudnicki, Tim 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 4 67% Sierks, Bill 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 'Q°�►. Thompson, Paul 2/1/2016 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 16X Waddick, Louise 2/1/2017 1 1 1 3 75% Zarrin, Sarah 2/1/20151 1 1 1 1 1 '6 $3Y. Bale, Sarah student 1 1 1 1 1 6- Sokol, Elana student 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 46►Y Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet. Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically. INSTRUCTIONS: Counted as Meetina Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE) Regular Meeting w/Quorum Type 1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type 1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type 1" under the month for each attending member. Joint Work Session Type 1" under "Work Session" on the meetings' line. Type "1" under "Work Session" for each attending member. Rescheduled Meeting* Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Cancelled Meeting Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for ALL members. Special Meeting There is no number typed on the meetings' line. There is no number typed on the members' lines. *A rescheduled meeting occurs when members are notified of a new meeting date/time at a prior meeting. If shorter notice is given, the previously -scheduled meeting is considered to have been cancelled and replaced with a special meeting. 7 Edina Energy & Environment Commission Working Groups and Subcommittees Draft of 5-8-14 Building EnergEfficiency Subcommittee - Chair Sierks, Members: Bill Glahn, Keith Kostuch, Tim Rudnicki Objective: This subcommittee will work with City staff to recommend to Council a comprehensive approach for achieving deeper energy efficiency actions for the city's buildings that maximizes greenhouse gas reductions, maximizes energy saved and dollars saved and maximizes effective use of'city dollars. City Environmental Considerations Subcommittee - Chair Keith Kostuch, Members: John Heer, Tim Rudnicki Objective: This sub -committee of the EEC will work with City staffto find a way to embed the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10 environmental commitments into the City's capital budget process. New buildings, major building renovations and fleet purchases have large and long-term environmental implications. Consequently, environmental considerations need to be made more explicit at the inception of all capital projects and in the approval process up to City Council final approval. Timeframe: This process will be collaborative with City staff in terms of conceptualization and implementation so it will take most or all of 2014. Community Solar Subcommittee - Chair Bill Sierks, Members: Paul Thompson, Bob Gubrud Objective: Work with City Staff io evaluate whether the City can host a Community Solar site. jf so, the group will assist cls appropriate in completing the steps necessary to apply for, develop, and market this program, and involve interested members o/the public through a working group if the project moves jbrward to construction Edina Business Recycling Working Group- 3rd Wednesday - Chair Sarah Zarrin - Members: Lori Syverson (Chamber of Commerce), Ben Knudson (Hennepin County Environmental Services), Andre Xiong (HCES), Aileen Foley Education Outreach Workin G�rou,2 (EO WG) - 1 S` Tuesday at 7:00 pm - Co -Chairs Paul Thompson and Bob Gubrud - Members: John Howard (EEC), Andrew Harmon, Chuck Pretice and Mindy Abler. Objective: The mission of the Education and Outreach Working Group is to support the charter of the Edina Energy and Environment Commission by creating awareness and engaging residents, schools, churches, business' and community organizations to take action to conserve and increase energy e,ficiency, to reuse and recycle, and to preserve and enhance our environment Home EneW Squad Subcommittee (HES) - Meets as needed - Chair Bill Sierks - Commissioners - Paul Thompson, Bob Gubrud Objective: This subcommittee works with City staff, Xcel Energy, Cenlerpoint Energy, and the Center for Energy and the Environment to implement the Home F,nergy Squad program for Edina's residents. The city's gas and electric utilities have hired CEE to implement to implement the Home Energy Squad program across their service area. Our subcommittee is helping to promote the program and maximize its impact in Edina. Local Food Working Group - Chair Dianne Plunkett Latham, Arlene Forrest, Louise Segreto, David Chin, Flora Delaney, Joeffrey Bodeau, Virginia Kearney, and Jamie Bodeau Objective: Facilitate creation of home%ommunity gardens, chicken & bee keeping, and incorporation of food growing areas/access in multifamily residential developments Recycling &Solid Waste Working Group (RSW WG) —I" Thursday at 7:00 pm -Chair DP Latham, Commissioners Sara Zarrin and Tim Rudnicki - Members Michelle Horan, Melissa Seeley — City Staff Solvei Wilmot Objective: Evaluate and monitor the provision of a residential recycling program. Evaluate and monitor the provision of a privately provided solid waste program, as well as a reduction in municipal solid waste produced by city residents and businesses. Educate the public about recycling Student Working Groin — EEC Chair, Members: Paul Thompson, Student Members, and open to students attending secondary schools in Edina. Objective: To facilitate, coordinate and share information between the LEC and the School Environmental groups and to work on common energy and environmental objectives as appropriate. To assist in developing environmental leaders of tomorrow. Water Quality Working Group (WQ WG) — 1 st Thursday at 6:30pm - Chair Lou Ann Waddick — Members: David B. VanDongen , Michelle Jordan, Jon Moon, Steve Wielock, Katherine Winston Objective: To facilitate communication between citizens and city government and champion efforts to improve water quality within Edina. City Capital Process Environmental Considerations Sub -Committee meeting notes for Thurs 8 May 2014 Attendees: Keith Kostuch (chair), John Heer, and Ross Bintner (EEC City Staff liaison) Absent: Tim Rudnicki Guest: Eric Roggeman, Assistant Finance Director Meeting began at 5:00 pm and ended at 5:45 pm The Sub -committee started by thanking Mr. Roggeman for his time. Mr. Roggeman told us that he had many informal discussions with City staff members about the idea of incorporating "environmental considerations" in the CIP process. This was well received and the City Council was informed of this idea on 4/22/14 during a more general discussion of the new CIP process. Council gave approval for Mr. Roggeman and other staff members to move ahead with this change to the CIP form and process. Mr. Roggeman informed the sub -committee that the leadership of the City's 10 departments will meet in late May to be introduced to the new CIP form and process. Mr. Roggeman will have about 30 minutes at that kick-off meeting to lay out the entire revised CIP form and the new CIP process The group then discussed what was needed by mid-May support Mr. Roggeman. Mr. Roggeman suggested that 3 or 4 bullet points could be incorporated into an "under -lay text" in the CIP pdf form. He could also use those bullets in his powerpoint presentation to the staff in late May. Mr. Kostuch committed to draft some bullets, run them past the other Sub -Committee members and get a final version to Mr. Roggeman by May 16th. The City pulls together all CIP forms into an electronic format that is reviewed by City staff and Council members as the multi-year capital budget is refined and approved. A more general conversation then ensued. It was agreed that the Sub -Committee would stand by to provide any additional assistance required by Mr. Roggeman during the CIP process. We would also follow-up with him later in the year to see some or all of the environmental sections of the CIP forms. Mr. Roggeman said he expected several hundred submissions so that may be difficult to review. After this new CIP process is completed this year, we will be able to discuss possible future changes or improvements on "environmental considerations" process and impact. Mr. Roggeman also informed us that CIP does not include vehicle purchases. Vehicle purchases are handled by individual City departments through their annual budgets at the discretion/need of the various departments. It seems to handled more on an "operating expense" basis than a traditional capital expense basis. Action Items: 1) Mr. Kostuch will create "under -lay text" for the CIP pdf form that Mr. Roggeman will create and then use with City staff at a late May CIP process kick-off. (completed mid-May) 2) The Sub -committee will follow up with Mr. Roggeman on how the new CIP process with an "environmental considerations" section worked and discuss possible future changes or additional actions. This conversation should occur in the Fall of 2014. 10 CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION EDINA CITY HALL COMMUNITY ROOM Thursday June 12, 2014 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes B. Attendance report and roster C. Workgroup list and minutes V. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment," the Energy & Environment Commission will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered in the past 30 days by the Commission, or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must limit their testimony to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead the Commission might refer the matter to staff or to an EEC Working Group for consideration at a future meeting. VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Building Energy Efficiency Subcommittee (Bill Sierks /Tim Barnes) B. Local Food Working Group VII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS A. Community Solar— Email B. Pepin Plastic Bags — Email C. SHERCO — Email D. Iyer Solar— Email E. Plunkett Latham Green Step Cities - Email VIII.CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS A. June 3 CC/EEC Meeting Discussion B. Building Energy Efficiency Subcommittee C. Business Recycling Working Group D. City Environmental Considerations Subcommittee E. Community Solar Subcommittee F. Education Outreach Working Group G. Home Energy Squad Subcommittee H. Recycling and Solid Waste Working Group I. Student Subcommittee J. Water Quality Working Group K. 2014 EEC Summary and Schedule IX. STAFF COMMENTS A. June 3 advisory communications B. 2014 Great Plains City Energy Competitiveness Group C. Sports Dome D. Speak Up Edina E. EEC Budget Summary UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS: http://www.edinamn.gov/ <click calendar> 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 72 hours in advance of the meeting. E&OWG 5/6/14 Meeting Minutes Held in Community Room at Edina City Hall 1. Check in — Bob Gubrud and John Howard were in attendance. Meeting called to order by Mr. Gubrud at 7:15 pm. 2. Minutes from 4/1/14 meeting were approved unanimously. 3. April 28 Environmental Forum a. Debrief — Attendance was poor, with somewhere around 100-115 attendees. Many of those were volunteers or others involved with the event, likely 20-50 attendees fit this category. Message and purpose of the event was not clear on poster/handout, which may have hurt attendance. 4. Community Events a. April Forum 2015 —tabled b. Monthly video discussion groups — rename as environmental film series. 1. Publicity — city will be post to their usual locations. Mr. Howard will post to a few locations with Mr. Gubrud offering to post to Cub and Southdale Library. Mr. Gubrud wonders about how to get the word out for events? Mr. Howard noted that Edina website can also be a publicity vehicle. Mr. Howard will enquire if there is a way to get a view count of the website. However, it is not clear where the event gets posted on website, or how someone would find it. Facebook is another good outreach option, and Mr. Howard will check if city has established an event page. Mr. Gubrud will distribute flyers at commission meeting on Thursday 5-10. 2. Resource Tables- Mr. Howard to contact EGG, Whole Foods, Project Earth about tabling at movie. Mr., Gubrud to ask CEE. 5. 4th of July Parade a. Recruit marchers — no one signed up at April event. 6. Enhanced HES — few people appeared to register for installs or appeared interested in service at April forum. Article in About Town to be published, if not already, and will be good publicity. 7. Project Earth a. Solar Panels- raised approximately $600 at April event for their project. 8. Community Shared Solar a. Collaboration with EWG. b. Site selection- Should be city initiative. 9. Elementary Ed Projects- disaggregate Cool Planet and commission actions? Or how do we consider event. it 10. Churches- Tabled a. E&OWG presentations b. MNIPL collaboration 11. New member recruiting - Tabled 12. E&OWG "Strategic" Plan- how do we communicate with city residents? 13. Next meeting: June 3, 2014 at 7 pm in the Edina City Hall Community Room. Meeting will follow EEC work session. Adjourned at 9 pm. Minutes prepared by John Howard. IN Edina Energy Efficiency Subcommittee -Staff meeting summary April 11, 2014 Attendees: Ross Bintner, Tim Barnes, Bill Glahn, Bill Sierks, Brian Olson Absent: Keith Kostuch, Tim Rudnicki Background: At the April 10, 2014 EEC meeting, the Commission affirmed the "City Building Energy Efficiency" priority in its work plan, which states that the City should "follow on success of 2011-2012 energy efficiency retrofit project by exploring more in-depth building efficiency projects." At its April 10, 2014 meeting, the EEC also approved a motion that the City approach to its buildings should meet four objectives: 1. Achieve deep energy efficiency savings 2. Maximize greenhouse gas reductions 3. Maximize savings of energy dollars 4. Achieve effective use of City funds The EEC indicated that the MN Guaranteed Energy Savings Program was an option for achieving this work plan priority and the four identified objectives. The City staff indicated that they were looking at other approaches and intended to bring an alternative to EEC in its May meeting for consideration. Several EEC Commissioners expressed interest in participating in staff discussions on this issue, and this subcommittee was formed to enable this participation. The EEC intends to discuss this priority, the objectives, the GESP program, and any other alternative at its June 3 2014 work session with City Council. At the April 11 sub -committee -staff meeting, the participants agreed on the following important points: 1. The Cit/,s buildings offer significant opportunities for energy savings. At least 12 city buildings, according to the State's building benchmarking program (133), can achieve over $378,000 in energy savings each year. In other words, the City is wasting over $378,000 annually due to inefficient buildings. 2. There is strong support across city staff and EEC for saving energy and improving under -performing buildings. 3. The City has been diligently looking for opportunities to save energy, has consistently undertaken energy-saving projects, and continues to look for funding to do more projects. 4. The City has approximately $400,000 that is available to invest in energy saving building projects. 5. The City should address the energy saving opportunities identified in B3. 6. The City has over 60 smaller buildings that are not in B3. Staff are looking at these buildings for energy opportunities; the buildings should be entered in B3. 13 7. The following actions and steps should be part of the approach taken here: a. Use B3 to identify good candidates for energy efficiency projects b. Enter the remaining 60+ buildings in the B3 database as soon as possible c. Perform an investment-grade audit (detailed audit) on city buildings to identify energy-saving opportunities d. Identify a financing approach that effectively achieves the energy savings opportunities consistent with EEC -identified priorities During the April 11 meeting, the sub -committee & staff reviewed the B3 data, discussed energy saving opportunities, and reviewed how the City has been approaching development and implementation of energy projects. Staff expressed some discomfort with the GESP approach. The issues articulated at the meeting included a concern about loss of control, the complexities of undertaking energy projects at the city (multiple city departments that own/operate buildings; multiple funding sources; need to develop buy -in from multiple sources). Further discussion of specific concerns and how GESP actually works are necessary. The sub -committee and staff agreed to meet again before the May EEC meeting. There was a staff suggestion to evaluate best practices in city energy efficiency and possibly contact people to learn about their approaches and experiences. Ross Bittner has forwarded best practice information primarily related to recommissioning. Bill Sierks has in this memo referenced information primarily concerning deep energy retrofits (see below). My suggested topics for next meeting: 1. Determine extent of consensus on meaning of "deep retro -fit." Suggested definition is a whole -building analysis and construction project that achieves at least 30% and sometimes 50% or more energy cost savings than those of simpler energy retrofits. Deep energy retrofits create significant energy savings, not at once, but often implemented over several years. Rocky Mountain Institute, http_//www.rmi.org/retrofit depot 101; http://newbuildings.org/sites/default/files/SummitSummaryReport02 201 2 O.pdf 2. Is there group consensus that deep energy retrofits are an acceptable goal for staff? Discuss case studies of deep energy retrofit successes: http:/./www.aia.org/aiaucml2/groups/aia/documents.lpdflaiab099241 pddf; http•//newbuildings org/project-profiles-search-deep-energy-savings• http:J/www.rmi.org/retrofit depot get connected true retrofit stories#feat ures: http://www.ecbcs.org/docs/EBC Annual Report 2012.Lp 3. Funding approaches for achieving significant energy savings: http_//web ornl gov/sci/ees/etsd/btric/publications/ORNL%20TM%20201 2 235.pdf: 14 Edina Energy Efficiency Subcommittee -Staff meeting summary May 8, 2014 Attendees: Tim Barnes, Ross Bintner, Bill Glahn, Keith Kostuch, Tim Rudnicki, Bill Sierks Background: At the April 10, 2014 EEC meeting, the Commission affirmed the "City Building Energy Efficiency" priority in its work plan, which states that the City should "follow on success of 2011-2012 energy efficiency retrofit project by exploring more in-depth building efficiency projects." The EEC also approved a motion that the City approach to its buildings should meet four objectives: 1. Achieve deep energy efficiency savings 2. Maximize greenhouse gas reductions 3. Maximize savings of energy dollars 4. Achieve effective use of City funds The EEC indicated that the MN Guaranteed Energy Savings Program was an option for achieving this work plan priority and the four identified objectives. The City staff indicated that they were looking at other approaches and intended to bring an alternative to EEC in May for consideration. Several EEC Commissioners expressed interest in participating in staff discussions on this issue, and this subcommittee was formed to enable this participation. The EEC intends to discuss this priority at its June 3, 2014 work session with City Council. The first meeting of the subcommittee was on April 11. The second meeting of the subcommittee was held on May 8, 2014. The group reviewed the meeting summary from April 11. There was general agreement with most of the findings, including the opportunity for significant energy savings in city buildings (although there was not a consensus that the calculated annual savings of over $378,000 since city buildings had not had detailed energy audits performed.) City staff has worked on a number of energy projects during the past several years, and more opportunities exist. The team spent most of its time discussing how the City identifies energy efficiency (EE) opportunities; how the City pays for EE projects; how the City prioritizes or determines which EE projects become part of the City's Capital Improvement Project schedule; and the role of Tim Barnes in city building project planning, operations and maintenance work, and other aspects of energy efficiency. The team discussed that the City has approximately 10 different "owners" of city buildings. Each of these owners manages his or her capital and operating budgets more or less autonomously. For example, the City liquor stores are owned and operated by one person; the Police Department, Fire Department, City Hall, Braemer, and Centennial buildings are all owned and operated separately by different people with their own budgets. 15 4. Discuss how city building projects are funded - what exactly are the basic steps and coordination/funding challenges. S. Define the specific staff concerns with GESP approach 6. Identify scope and extent of consensus 7. Discuss difference between commissioning (retro -commissioning, re- commissioning), and deep energy retrofits. 8. Staff position on including renewables as a goal here 16 The City has no comprehensive plan to identify or finance building EE projects. Each building "owner" determines what projects to include in his or her individual budget, if EE is an important enough priority to achieve funding along with other competing priorities. The City's Facility Manager does not have authority to determine city-wide EE priorities, and must depend upon his persuasive influence to encourage the separate owners to include EE projects for funding. Often, instead of developing an overall assessment of the City's buildings and identifying city-wide EE opportunities, the Facility Manager is requested to manage or assist on a specific project. (For example, if a boiler fails in building, he will manage the contracting and oversee the project for the building owner. The team again discussed the aspects of the Minnesota Department of Commerce Guaranteed Energy Savings Program (GESP), agreeing that it had some appeal and advantages. Staff indicated they are still working on an alternative approach that would be available soon. There was consensus of the subcommittee that any comprehensive approach to EE opportunities in City buildings will require commitment and focus from City senior leadership. It will be necessary for someone with authority to coordinate the fragmented building ownership and financial process to enable any comprehensive approach, GESP or otherwise, to succeed. The sub -committee agreed to present its findings and recommendations to the City Council at the June 3 Council -EEC work session. No further meetings of the subcommittee have been scheduled at this time. 17 Best Practices for Consideration: Energy Benchmarking, Rating, and Disclosure for Local Governments Fact Sheet (Source: US Department of Energy) Summary: "You can't manage what you don't measure" and "Making the invisible, visible." Energy benchmarking helps compare energy efficiency performance to peers, watch trends in performance over time, and identify and prioritize buildings that lag energy code. Public building energy benchmarking is the foundation for strategic energy management practices and model a best practice for the private sector. Retro-Commissioninq for State and Local Governments Fact Sheet (Source: US DOE) Summary: "Public buildings go long time spans between energy tune-ups," and "pick all the low hanging fruit for an easy 10-20% energy savings and then reinvest the savings to go deeper." A re -tuning or continuous commissioning process is used to keep existing systems working at their top performance to meet building occupant comfort levels in an energy efficient manner. Typical continuous commissioning reviews can identify 10-20% savings with payback periods under 2 years. Mate Commitment Assess Performance a Set Goals Crests } g Action Plan rRecognize Implement i Achievements) ( Action Plan Evaluate Progress Figure 1. The EPA's ENERGY STAR Guidelines for Energy Management Source: U.S Environmental Protection Agency Strateqic Enerqv Manaaement for State and Local Governments Fact Sheet (Source: US DOE) Summary: The process of Strategic Energy Management can lead an organization to achieve much greater success than one-off investments. "Drive the focus to continuous improvement, rather than technology fixes." ISO50001 and DOE -Supported Superior Energy Performance Program and Energy Star programs provide frameworks. Key points for policy makers in the iterative continuous commissioning process is to make a commitment and evaluate progress. Key points for city operators are to create and implement an action plan. This strategy must receive support from the top. City Council and senior leadership need to embrace and make the energy savings effort an organizational priority. Luckily, the statewide 133 database provides a good tool to both track and evaluate key energy baseline data. 18 Energy Audits and Retro -Commissioning: State and Local Policy Design Guide and Sample Policy Language (Source: US DOE) Summary: For large building owners, performing an energy audit is a key step after benchmarking, to narrow down potential energy efficiency projects and save money. Retro -commissioning following an energy audit can cost well under one dollar per square foot, and yield energy savings with paybacks of under one year, with median paybacks between 1.1 and 4.2 year. Detailed information describing the retro - commissioning process is included in the document, as well as policy considerations to promote the adoption of the practice in the private sector. Benchmarking and Disclosure: State and Local Policy Design Guide and Sample Policy Language (Source: US DOE) Summary: This document provides technical guidance on energy performance benchmarking & disclosure policies. Sustainable Energy Management Strategies that Work (Source: APWA Members library facilities webinar) Summary: City of Charlottesville Virginia describes their balanced approach to sustainability and energy efficiency. Over the course of less than a decade the city transformed its operations from a reactive system with much deferred maintenance to a proactive system with top of their class buildings and many spinoffs with wide community benefits. Examples from Other Cities Summary of energy efficiency programs and policies that other Minnesota cities have adopted. Eden Prairie: The 20-40-15 initiative, first rolled out by the City of Eden Prairie in December 2006, calls for the City to improve energy efficiency in all of its facilities by 20 percent, increase the fuel efficiency of its vehicle fleet by 40 percent, and accomplish these goals by the year 2015. http://www.edenprairie.org/index.aspx?page=334 http://greaterminnesota. kstp.com/news/news/332802-big-energy-conservation-push- eden-prairie Oakdale: Since 2001, city policy has been that any new construction or major remodel of a city facility is required to be built using Oakdale's own Generation Green building program standards, includes building sector goal: 15% reduction goal in GHG emissions from 19 2007 levels by 2013, And the following action steps: • Complete building energy audits every two years or as needed • Replace furnace and air conditioning system at North Fire Station with energy efficient equipment as old • equipment fails • Replace air conditioning system and install radiant heat system in South Fire Station as existing equipment fails Woodbury: In July 2009, the City Council passed a resolution to adopt a Sustainable Building Standard for New and Renovated Municipal Buildings in the City of Woodbury. The resolution states that at a minimum, the city will utilize the 133 -State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines in the planning, design, construction and commission of new buildings and major renovations greater than 5,000 square feet that are owned by the City of Woodbury. Woodbury City Hall is Energy Star Certified. City Council Resolution Adopting Sustainable Building Standard Minneapolis: Goals approved by city council: • Reduce citywide greenhouse gas emissions by 15 percent by 2015, and 30 percent by 2025 using 2006 as a baseline. • Reduce municipal operations greenhouse gas emissions by 1.5 percent annually. • Citywide, permit 70 renewable energy projects annually by 2015. • In municipal operations, increase renewable electricity to one megawatt by 2015. • Additional sustainability goals appear here LEED Building Policy (pdf): The city adopted a policy that requires future municipal buildings or major renovations of buildings, to be Leadership in Energy and Environment Design (LEED) Silver Level requirements. Commercial Building Rating and Disclosure Policy (minneapolis): Minneapolis adopted an Ordinance requiring annual energy performance benchmarking for public buildings greater than 25,000 square feet and private buildings greater than 50,000 square feet in size. The city will annually disclose the energy performance of buildings in order to provide information needed in the marketplace to value the high energy performance of efficient buildings and help target incentives and assistance to buildings that could operate more efficiently. • Commercial building energy rating and disclosure ordinance overview 20 Policy Options: Potential next steps include the identification of a performance goal for city facilities and the development of a plan to achieve it. Examples of performance goals for facilities: • 20% energy use reduction over 10 years (National Better Buildings Challenge -goal -- Eden Prairie set a similar goal by 2015; • Adopt the state's SB 2030 guidelines and goals for building energy use and emissions Example of a strategic energy management process to achieve a performance goal: Goal Tool Identify least efficient buildings with the biggest B3 Benchmarking and annual opportunity for savings reporting Capture no -cost operational savings Employee Engagement Identify measures to improve building Energy Audits performance Maintain building systems for peak Recommissioning performance Maximize building efficiency by prioritizing CIP Capital Projects -- Repair, projects Replace, Upgrade, Utility rebates Considerations related to implementing a strategic energy management plan: • Staffing: Identify dedicated staff capacity with technical expertise and organizational responsibility to achieve the goal. • Considerations for Policy Guidance: o Benchmarking: Require annual B3 Benchmarking for all public facilities (continuation of current practice). By April 1 each year, publish annual report on EEAC webpage that includes B3 outputs for each city facility: ■ (1) energy use, (2) benchmark -to -meter ratio, (3) energy use intensity, (4) greenhouse gas emissions, (5) annual energy costs 21 (6) ENERGY STAR score (if available) o Benchmarking Data Access: Request utilities to provide automatic data upload into B3 tool. o Operational Savings: Determine whether a certain percentage of energy savings may be used by employees to implement energy saving projects or professional development activities of their choice. o Energy audits: should be conducted every 5 years on each public facility to determine projects to be included in CIP. Energy audits should be prioritized for the least efficient buildings, as determined by B3 Benchmarking. o Recommissioning: Large public facilities over (XYZ square feet) should receive recommissioning studies to maximize equipment performance no less frequently than once every five - ten years and prioritized for the least efficient buildings, as determined by B3 Benchmarking. o Capital Projects: CIP should prioritize building envelope, HVAC and lighting projects for least efficient buildings as determined by B3 benchmarking. CIP should prioritize the most energy-efficient projects that are cost-effective on a life -cycle basis. 22 DOE/EE-0739 FACT SHEET Existing Commercial Buildings Working Group May 2012 SEE Action Strategic Energy Management for STATE & LOM ENERGY EFFNYENCV ACTION NETWORK State and Local Governments What is Strategic Energy Management? Key Points The predominant approach to commercial energy efficiency is to focus on single - technology, one-time solutions—such as replacing lighting or cooling equipment with ■ Strategic energy more efficient technologies. This transaction -based approach limits whole -building management is a long - performance improvement and keeps building operators focused on short-term term approach to savings rather than continuous improvement. An organization -wide strategic energy efficiency, and includes management approach that sets long-term energy savings goals and uses rigorous goals, tracking, and tracking and reporting systems can drive greater savings, reach across entire building portfolios, and institutionalize such practices to sustain long-term savings. reporting. State and local governments can leverage these energy management frameworks to ■ Successful strategic energy lead by example and to encourage private organizations to adopt best practices. The management programs U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) State Energy Program and Energy Efficiency and build long-term Conservation Block Grant recipients can use a strategic energy management relationships with energy approach to sustain and extend their grant -funded energy savings. users and can improve the Why Encourage Strategic Energy Management? persistence of energy savings and the property Commercial buildings comprise nearly half of total building energy use and roughly valueof buildings. 20% of total energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.'' Z Government-owned buildings are nearly 25% more energy -intensive than For public buildings, nongovernment-owned buildings.' Energy expenditures average more than $2 per strategic energy square foot for commercial (including government) buildings,' making energy use a management can reduce cost worth managing. costs across many Strategic energy management can yield increased energy savings and greater savings facilities, and can persistence as compared to the conventional single -measure retrofit approach. Field institutionalize practices to experience in large organizations shows that—for little or no initial cost and with sustain long-term savings. simple paybacks for specific projects typically less than 3 years—organization-wide strategic energy management programs can deliver cost-effective energy savings.3 Education and training can sustain and increase energy savings over time. An organization -wide energy management program also can provide a foundation for energy -efficiency policies (e.g., benchmarking and disclosure or retro- About SEE Action commissioning laws) and program solutions (e.g., high-performance leasing, The State and Local Energy voluntary energy- or greenhouse -gas reduction challenges) by providing a long-term Efficiency Action Network (SEE institutional basis for realizing and sustaining energy savings. Action) is a state and local effort facilitated by the federal Who is Affected? government that helps states, Typically, organizations with large, energy -intensive building portfolios, such as utilities, and other local stakeholders take energy efficiency offices, hospitals, retailers, hotels, grocery stores, and public safety buildings, are to scale and achieve all cost - well -suited to benefit financially from strategic energy management programs. effective energy efficiency by 2020. These programs involve individuals at all levels of an organization—from facilities to executive management—and could include outside support. Strategic energy About the Working Group management also can be applied to an organization's suppliers by requiring that The working group is comprised of they conform with energy -performance certification programs. representatives from a diverse set of stakeholders, its members are provided at www.seeaction.energy.gov. 23 May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov 1 FACT SHEET Existing Commercial Buildings Working Group May 2012 , How Does It Work? Public agencies can start by developing and implement- ing strategic energy management programs for their own operations, and extending those expectations to suppliers. National and international efforts for the first time provide robust standards for organizational energy management programs. The International Standards Organization (ISO) has developed ISO 50001 for energy management systems4 as a framework for organizational energy management in day-to-day operations and long-term planning. Compliance with ISO 50001 is a prerequisite for participating in the DOE -supported Superior Energy Performance programs , which certifies energy performance improvement in industrial facilities and commercial properties (on a pilot scale). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Building Performance with ENERGY STAR® program6 provides guidelines for energy efficiency program sponsors to encourage building- or portfolio -wide energy improvement, consistent with ISO 50001 practices or Superior Energy Performance certification. ISO 50001 provides a useful energy management framework, and ENERGY STAR and Superior Energy Performance offer additional guidelines using the general model depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1 outlines a 7 -step model for engraining energy -conscious decision making in an organization's operations. Make Commitment Assess Performance & Set Goals Recognize Implement ehievements , Action Plan Evaluate Progress Figure 1. The EPA's ENERGY STAR Guidelines for Energy Management Source: U.S Environmental Protection Agency Governments also can reach private markets through public-private partnerships that promote organization - wide energy management (such as energy challenges), and by adopting policies that complement strategic energy management plans. Implementing Strategic Energy Management Programs Although some energy -intensive organizations practice strategic energy management as a risk (cost) manage- ment tool, other organizations might require education about the benefits of energy -conscious decision making and coordinated energy management. State and local governments can model effective energy management with their own building portfolio and encourage private organizations to follow their lead. Public Buildings State and local governments developing a strategic energy management program should consider the general steps outline below. 1. Start at the top. Senior management should fully endorse and support the efficiency strategy. 2. Build the program. An effective energy efficiency team must reach key functional and operating units at all levels of the organization. A lead energy manager should be assigned with support from executive decision makers and implementation staff at major facilities and across key functional disciplines, including procurement, finance, and engineering. 3. Develop key baseline data. Determine what data to collect (e.g., total energy used, energy intensity, emissions, dollars, water use); how to measure baseline performance (e.g., using the EPA's energy measurement and tracking tool, Portfolio Manager); and what goals to set (e.g., absolute and/or intensity reduction, near-term and/or long- term). Then determine baseline energy use and other identified metrics for measuring future performance. 4. Design a data -collection and reporting system. Build upon existing accounting and performance - measurement systems. The aim is to integrate the energy data system with existing information systems, not to create a separate specialized system. Assign responsibility for collecting data, filing and reviewing reports, and responding to data received (e.g., taking corrective action, setting new goals in light of previous achievements). 24 May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov 2 Create Action Plan L— m Recognize Implement ehievements , Action Plan Evaluate Progress Figure 1. The EPA's ENERGY STAR Guidelines for Energy Management Source: U.S Environmental Protection Agency Governments also can reach private markets through public-private partnerships that promote organization - wide energy management (such as energy challenges), and by adopting policies that complement strategic energy management plans. Implementing Strategic Energy Management Programs Although some energy -intensive organizations practice strategic energy management as a risk (cost) manage- ment tool, other organizations might require education about the benefits of energy -conscious decision making and coordinated energy management. State and local governments can model effective energy management with their own building portfolio and encourage private organizations to follow their lead. Public Buildings State and local governments developing a strategic energy management program should consider the general steps outline below. 1. Start at the top. Senior management should fully endorse and support the efficiency strategy. 2. Build the program. An effective energy efficiency team must reach key functional and operating units at all levels of the organization. A lead energy manager should be assigned with support from executive decision makers and implementation staff at major facilities and across key functional disciplines, including procurement, finance, and engineering. 3. Develop key baseline data. Determine what data to collect (e.g., total energy used, energy intensity, emissions, dollars, water use); how to measure baseline performance (e.g., using the EPA's energy measurement and tracking tool, Portfolio Manager); and what goals to set (e.g., absolute and/or intensity reduction, near-term and/or long- term). Then determine baseline energy use and other identified metrics for measuring future performance. 4. Design a data -collection and reporting system. Build upon existing accounting and performance - measurement systems. The aim is to integrate the energy data system with existing information systems, not to create a separate specialized system. Assign responsibility for collecting data, filing and reviewing reports, and responding to data received (e.g., taking corrective action, setting new goals in light of previous achievements). 24 May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov 2 FACT SHEET Existing Commercial Buildings Working Group May 2012 1. Set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time -bound) goals that are: Specific, including solid numbers with target dates for each facility, department, or business unit that roll up to organization -wide goals and energy plans. • Measurable using the data -collection and reporting system given in step 4, and be verifiable by a third party. Accounted for by assigning responsibility for implementation and reporting. Goals should be linked with facility, department, or business unit action plans that include specific equip- ment or process improvement projects and that coordinate with an organization -wide energy plan. • Aggressive yet realistic given the time frame and any technology, financial, or other con- straints. Interim milestones can help document progress and sustain motivation for future achievement. • Time constrained, meaning that they are tied to specific implementation dates that can be updated as goals are achieved. 2 Launch the program. Communicate internally and externally the purpose of, goals for, and approach for implementing the energy management plan. Include roles and responsibilities and employee - specific actions that contribute to achieving energy efficiency goals. 3. Monitor performance. Use the data collection and reporting system to assess performance. Use lagging performance situations as learning oppor- tunities versus compliance exercises. Identify and use potential efficiency improvements to correct poor performance. 4. Adjust and adapt. Seek and apply user feedback. Use building -operator experience with the data - collection system, technology, and best practices to refine, adjust, and adapt the program. 5. Publicize success information. Announce successes internally and externally. Reward individuals, departments, and business units. 6. Review and reset goals. Maintain the program for at least 2 to 3 years to enable performance trends to emerge. Reset and increase goals as perform- ance and field experience indicate. Private Buildings Local governments could consider the approaches for influencing the private sector to adopt strategic energy management practices below. • Share successes of and lessons learned from internal energy management program. Documented energy, cost, and emissions savings can be powerful motivators for other organizations to follow a government's lead. • Host or sponsor voluntary energy, green business, or greenhouse -gas reduction challenges. Such challenges promote strategic energy management practices that build energy awareness and incite energy-saving commitments. • Host energy management working groups. A government -initiated industry working group can provide a forum for learning about topics such as energy management approaches, certification and recognition options, and funding mechanisms. • Adopt policies that complement strategic energy management. Energy performance benchmarking and retro -commissioning are building blocks of an effective energy management program. High- performance leasing and procurement policies also can be integrated into energy management programs to influence supply chains. Tie development policies to energy management programs. Offering conditional incentives, technical assistance, or streamlined regulatory approvals to businesses that wish to build, buy, or expand locally and that have adopted strategic energy manage- ment programs in line with ISO 50001 or the Superior Energy Performance program can promote economic growth with less energy and environ- mental impact. Some jurisdictions have proven the effectiveness of this approach by offering stream- lined permitting or density bonuses to developers that agree to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design® (LEED®) or ENERGY STAR certification. May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov Existing Policies and Programs State of Hawaii: Hawaii Lead by Example Initiative? Adopted: 2006. Affected Building Types: State-owned buildings Key Requirements: Directs state agencies to improve energy, water, and resource efficiency in state facilities. Requires LEED certification for new construction and major renovations and ENERGY STAR certification for existing buildings. Follows a strategic energy manag- ement approach that includes a dedicated energy coordinator to oversee activities including: • Benchmarking • Whole -building energy audits • Phased -in retro -commissioning. State of North Carolina: North Carolina Utility Savings Initiative Adopted: 2001. Affected Building Types: North Carolina public buildings, including state buildings, public higher - education facilities, K-12 public schools, and local government buildings. Key Requirements: Requires state agencies and state higher -education institutions to create strategic energy plans to help achieve statewide near-term and inter- mediate energy intensity reduction goals. Designates the state energy office with the responsibility for overseeing implementation of and annual reporting on plan progress. Offers training, energy audits, and grant funding. Encourages and implements no -cost and low- cost operation and maintenance efficiency measures. Promotes energy savings performance contracts to fund comprehensive efficiency projects. State of Rhode Island: "Rhode Island Asset Protection Plans for School Districtsi9 Adopted: 2007. Affected Building Types: Public school buildings. Key Requirements: Requires the development and annual updating of asset plans that must include current building condition, cost of needed repairs, and a description of annual maintenance and cost. Requires asset plans to be certified by licensed professionals. Includes enforcement mechanisms that require annual and sustained investment in implementing asset plans. In the case of non-compliance, the oversight body can withhold approval of school construction plans and school housing aid. Complementary Policies and Programs Strategic energy management should be considered a cornerstone of a jurisdiction's commercial energy efficiency portfolio that can integrate energy efficiency policies (e.g., benchmarking, disclosure, retro - commissioning laws) and practices (e.g., high- performance leasing and procurement, voluntary energy or greenhouse gas reduction challenges) under a common energy framework and energy savings goals. For access to related SEE Action resources, visit www.seeaction.energy.gov/existing commercial.html. Other Resources Pew Center on Global Climate Change. From Shop Floor to Top Floor: Best Business Practices in Energy Efficiency. www.pewclimate.org/ energy-effi ciencv/corporate-energy-effi ciencv-report. U.S. Department of Energy. "ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard." wwwl.eere.energy.gov/ energymanagement. For more information, contact: Cody Taylor U.S. Department of Energy 202-287-5842 cody.taylor@ee.doe.gov Tracy Narel U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 202-343-9145 narel.tracy@epa.gov References 1 U.S. Department of Energy. Buildings Energy Data Book. Chapter 3. March 2011. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/ Chapterintro3.aspx. 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-20109. Table ES -8. April 2011. www.epa.gov/climatechange/ emissions/usinventorvreport.html. 3 Prindle, W. From Shop Floor to Top Floor: Best Practices in Energy Efficiency. Prepared by ICF International for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. April 2010. www.pewclimate.org/energy- effi ciencv/corporate-en ergo-effi ciencv-report. 4 International Standards Organization. ISO 50001. www.iso.org/iso/hot topics/hot topics energy/ energy management system standard.htm. May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov FACT SHEET Existing Commercial Buildings Working Group May 2012 5 U.S. Council for Energy Efficient Manufacturing. Superior Energy Performance Certification. Achieving Superior Energy Performance. http://www.superiorenergyperformance.net. 6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Building Performance with ENERGY STAR®" program. www.energvstar.p,ov/ia/news/downloads/ Building Performance with ES.pdf. State of Hawaii. "Hawaii Lead by Example Initiative." http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/`­`energy/­efficiency/ state Abe. 8 State of North Carolina. "North Carolina Utility Savings Initiative." www.nccommerce.com/energy/about-us/ utility -savings -initiative. 9 State of Rhode Island. "Rhode Island Asset Protection Plans for School Districts." www.ride.ri.gov/Finance/ Funding/construction/Documents/ FY08%20Housing%20Aid/ Prior•/. 20to%20Mav%2031%20U Pdates/ School Constr Regs FINAL.pdf. Disclaimer: This information was developed as a product of the State and Local Energy Efficiency Action Network (SEE Action), facilitated by the U.S. Department of Energy/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Content does not imply an endorsement by individuals or organizations that are part of SEE Action working groups, or reflect the views, policies, or otherwise of the federal government. 27 May 2012 www.seeaction.energy.gov 5 Local Food Working Group (LFWG) Report 6-5-14 General Background: The Edina Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) established its Local Food Working Group (LFWG) on 10-10-13 to implement the Green Step Cities (GSC) Local Food Best Practice #27 Action #2, which is defined as "Facilitate creation of home/community gardens, chicken & bee keeping, and incorporation of food growing areas/access in multifamily residential developments." To achieve GSC credit for chicken and bee keeping at the one star level, the city must "Remove restrictions to food gardening/raising of chickens/bees in residential areas." LFWG Membership - The three city of Edina commissioners were confirmed by the EEC at the 11-14-13 EEC meeting, with five additional residents confirmed at the Dec. 12, 2013 EEC meeting. The LFWG consists of: Dianne Plunkett Latham, LFWG Chair - Energy & Environment Commission — (H) 952-941-3542 Louise Segreto —Park Board — (Cell) 612-968-5195 Arlene Forrest - Planning Commission - Beekeeping experience - (H) 952-285-2795 (cell) 612-618-7973 Virginia Kearney — Edina Resident — Chicken keeping experience — (H) (952) 221-5469 Geoffrey Bodeau — Edina Resident - Beekeeping experience — (H) (952) 947-9445 Jamie Bodeau —Edina Resident —Beekeeping experience — Son of Geoffrey Bodeau and EHS senior — (H) (952) 947-9445 David Chin - Edina Resident - Beekeeping experience — (952) 942-8243 Flora Delaney —Edina Resident — Beekeeping experience — (Cell) 612-730-7941 LFWG Meetings: The LFWG meets at City Hall as needed with meetings attended as follows: Nov. 26, 2013: Present - DP Latham, Louise Segreto, Arlene Forrest, Virginia Kearney, Geoffrey Bodeau, David Chin. Absent: Jamie Bodeau, Flora Delaney March 21, 2014: Present - DP Latham, Flora Delaney, Virginia Kearney, Geoffrey and Jamie Bodeau. Absent - Louise Segreto, David Chin, Arlene Forrest EEC Meetings: The LFWG report and City Code amendments for chicken and beekeeping were reviewed by the EEC at its 4-10-14 (present DP Latham, David Chen, Virginia Kearney) and 5-8-14 (present DP Latham, Geoffrey Bodeau) meetings. The EEC approved the LFWG report and ordinance amendments for recommendation at the 6-3-14 EEC/City Council Work Session. City Council Meetings: The EEC met with the City Council for a work session on 6-3-14. All Council members were present. LFWG members present included DP Latham, David Chin, Virginia Kearney and hen Shirley who demonstrated what excellent and quiet companion animals hens are. Other EEC members present included Commissioners Herr, Sierks, Bubrud, Howard, Glahn and Zarrin. Beekeeping Background - Minnesota is among the top five states in honey production and agricultural by-products associated with beekeeping. Domestic strains of honey bees have been selectively bred for desirable traits, including gentleness, honey production, tendency not to swarm and non-aggressive behavior, characteristics which are desirable to foster and maintain. Gentle strains of honey bees can be maintained within populated areas in reasonable densities without causing a nuisance if the bees are properly located and carefully managed. Bees are a vital part of our food system by 28 pollinating flowers. The number of bees has declined dramatically due to the overuse of pesticides as well as to diseases and parasites. Residential bee keeping can help re -stabilize both native and honeybee populations by educating residents to be mindful of planting ornamental plants useful to pollinators, and by being mindful of reducing pesticide use. Objective — The objective of the LFWG is to propose to the EEC code revisions and accompanying policy and educational programs to enable Edina to obtain credit for the GSC Local Food best practice by making it possible for residents to keep bees and chickens in Edina and thus obtain their accompanying environmental benefits. Another objective of the honey bee and chicken keeping ordinance amendments is to provide an apicultural framework to enable hobbyists to safely and successfully pursue these pleasurable and environmentally, economically, culturally and agriculturally critical activities in suburban areas. The proposed ordinance amendments are designed to result in a minimum of staff oversight time. A simple beekeeping registration process is all that is required. Although renewal is required, the registration is effective unless the hive becomes a nuisance due to inadequate management or unless a neighbor within 200 ft of the lot line of an apiary site appeals the registration due to medical reasons. No registration is required for keeping up to 4 hens. Where other city, county or state regulations apply, they will be utilized and not repeated as part of Edina's enabling ordinance amendments. This includes nuisance, noise, sanitation, animal cruelty or accessory building regulations, customary home occupations among others. Beekeeping Benefits — Honey bees are efficient pollinators of garden flowers and eatable fruits and vegetables, as well as being a source of honey. Bee Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) threatens global food production. More than one-third of the world's crop species depend on bee pollination. By allowing beekeeping, we can impact the pesticide and herbicide usage of residents and landscape companies by beekeepers educating their neighbors. By creating an environment with minimal herbicides and pesticides, which is safe for bees, we are creating an environment that is safe for all residents and wildlife. Potential Beekeeping Liability — There are very few hazards associated with honey beekeeping. The majority of people who fear honey bees do so out of ignorance. In 2000, the most recent year for which data has been reported to the World Health Organization, 54 people were reported to have died in the USA due to encounters with any type of stinging insect (wasps, bees, hornets, yellow jackets, fire ants, brown recluse spiders, etc). None of the deaths can be specifically attributed to honey bees. Honey bees are bred for their gentile nature and rarely sting. If a resident has been stung by a bee, it is more likely a Yellow Jacket. Honey bees are a different type of stinging insect than wasps or hornets. They are flower feeders with no interest in human food or drink. The only food they desire is nectar (carbohydrates) and pollen (protein). They have been bred for hundreds of years to be docile/non-aggressive. Honey bees typically do not sting unless their hive is threatened (shaken or knocked over), or you threaten the individual bee (swat or otherwise attempt to harm it). Common Law Negligence - A landowner has an obligation to make reasonable use of his or her property so that no unreasonable harm is caused to others in the vicinity. This "reasonable use" rule is followed in Minnesota (Depue v. Flateau, 100 Minn. 299, 303, 111 N.W. 1, 2 (1907)). This cuts both ways with respect to a beekeeper's bees stinging a neighbor, or a neighbor's pesticide killing a beekeeper's bees. As a practical matter, causation is not easy to prove in these cases. It would be difficult to prove who was the owner of the stinging bee, or even what kind of bee caused the sting unless you obtain DNA from the bee's stinger and match it to the hive's matrilineal DNA. Conversely, it would be difficult to prove who was the applicator of the lethal pesticide, or even what kind of pesticide may have caused the bee die off. Negligence means the failure to exercise the care of an ordinarily prudent person. Since bees sting by nature, it is necessary for any plaintiff to show that the owner of honey bees is negligent in his care of the bees. In any case of injury by honey bees, the plaintiff will have to show that the bees were vicious, provide proof they were vicious, and inform the owner of the bees that they were vicious. If the owner of the honey bees failed to correct the problem and the bees continued to be vicious, a basis may exist for a claim of negligence. 29 Given that honeybees are not considered inherently dangerous (or vicious), a City's sovereign immunity would protect it, absent negligence, for honeybee hives located on city property. The Edina City Attorney can be consulted for verification. Speak Up Edina — During the month of April 2014, 32 residents registered their opinions on beekeeping and 100% were in support of allowing beekeeping in Edina. Other Cities Permitting Beekeeping - For a complete list of the eleven metro cities permitting beekeeping, see list compiled by the University of Minnesota Bee Lab at http://www.beelab.umn.edu/Resources/Ordinancesre ardingbees/index.htm Five cities bordering Edina allow beekeeping. This includes the following. Given that honey bees forage over at least two square miles, Edina already has many foraging honeybees. Bloomington — Sect. 12.116(a)(2) — One acre per hive not exceeding 24 cubic ft in hive size. Not allowed on properties having 3 or more dwelling units. Owner must live in the dwelling on the property. Eden Prairie - New ordinance passed 1-21-14, upon which Edina's proposed beekeeping ordinance is based. Registration is required with the Eden Prairie Police Department. As of 5-8-14 Eden Prairie had 16 beekeeping registrations. 191 neighbor notification letters were sent (average 12 per registration) and 8 inquiries (questions, concerns) were received. Appeals must be made within 30 days of an approved registration. No beekeeping registration appeals were filed as of 5-6-14. Hopkins — City Code does not address honey bees, so they are allowed. Minneapolis - Section 74.80 — Must get a permit from Mpls Animal Care and Control. Requires approval of 80% of neighbors within 100ft; this provision likely cannot be implemented in a Plan B City such as Edina, as it can in charter cities such as Minneapolis. The opinion of Edina City Attorney is needed if such a provision is proposed. Richfield - Section 905.41 - Bees are considered non-domestic animals. All non-domestic animals are prohibited. St Louis Park — Not addressed in city ordinance, so they are allowed as long as they are not a nuisance Proposed Edina Beekeeping Registration Process Other Cities - The Edina beekeeping ordinance is modeled upon the Eden Prairie beekeeping ordinance, which is based on the Minnesota Hobby Beekeeper Association's model ordinance. Hopkins and St. Louis Park have no registration, licensing or permitting requirements. A simple registration like Eden Prairie requires is all that is recommended by the LFWG/EEC given that Edina is nearly (with the exception of Richfield) completely surrounded by cities allowing honey beekeeping. Honey bees forage in an area of approximately two square miles such that Edina already has honey bees in the city. Nationwide, most cities that allow beekeeping are beginning to loosen their beekeeping requirements after encountering very few (if any) problems. Registration - A simple apiary registration serves to make the City aware of where bee keeping activities are being conducted. This is necessary so that if Police Officers are responding to a call, they will be alerted to be careful when walking through the backyard of a beekeeper such that they don't bump a hive or stand in front of its fly zone. A $20 initial registration fee is proposed because there is cost and staff time involved in sending out neighbor notification letters. Neighbor Notification - As a courtesy, property owners within 200 feet of any lot line of the apiary site will receive written notification of their neighbor's intent to establish an apiary. An Edina resident seeking to register an apiary would not need a neighbor's signature of approval, which could be denied by the neighbor for no more reason other than for spite. 30 Renewal - A registration renewal is proposed because beekeepers may forget to notify the City of their discontinuance of the hobby. Police officers need to be aware of active hive locations for the officer's safety. No licensing fee is proposed to be associated with the annual beekeeping registration renewal because subsequent neighbor notification letters will not be sent, thus very little staff time will be required. Apiary Inspection and Registration Approval - The City must wait a minimum of two weeks after receiving the apiary registration application before approving or denying the registration. During that time, as in Eden Prairie, the designated official - Animal Control Officer in the case of Edina - will make at least one apiary site inspection to confirm that the apiary complies with all city code in terms of setback, number of colonies, water source, etc. Only upon a finding of compliance with all applicable city ordinances will the registration be granted. During that time, neighbors are free to comment or voice concerns to the designated City official. Impact of neighbor Comments Prior to Registration Approval — Neighbor comments prior to approval of the apiary registration will not impact whether or not the registration is approved. Only the applicant's compliance with code will determine approval. In the experience of Eden Prairie, once the neighbors receive the courtesy registration notification, if they have objections they will usually contact the City quickly. Eden Prairie has found that this serves as an opportunity to educate the neighbors and alleviate fears/concerns before they feel the need to file an appeal. This window of time serves to filter out people who may file a written appeal out of ignorance or fear. Jim Schedin, Eden Prairie's official responsible for apiaries stated on 5-6-14 that " It [notification and appeal process] has worked amazingly well - I have had a handful of people contact me and have been able to alleviate their concerns. And although two neighbors threatened to file written appeals even after speaking with me, none of them actually ever followed through with their threat." Limiting initial approval to code compliance reduces staff time by eliminating unnecessary appeals. Appeal — Any resident living within 200 ft of a lot line of an apiary site may file a written appeal of the approval of the initial apiary registration to the City Manager, or their designee, at any time after the approval of the beekeeping registration. By not limiting the window of time for the appeal period, a new neighbor, who was not living within 200 ft of the apiary site lot line at the time of the apiary registration, may appeal. If an appeal is filed, the beekeeper will be notified in writing by the City Manager or their designee. The City Manager, or designee, must then conduct a hearing with the apiary registrant and the person appealing. After hearing both sides, the City Manager, or designee, renders a decision, which cannot be challenged. Revocation Policy - If a resident appeals the approval of a beekeeping registration, an apiary registration can be revoked under the following circumstances. Stating that "I'm allergic to bee stings" would not be persuasive to cause a denial because there are many species of bees and individuals are not allergic to them all, but only to specific specis of bees. A note from an emergency room or other physician stating that you, or a family member, have suffered past anaphylaxis due to honey bee stings, would be sufficient to disapprove the registration. The registration could also be revoked if the apiary can be shown to have become a habitual nuisance due to improper maintenance despite the City having asked the bee keeper to rectify conditions such as consistent water source, etc. Number of Hives - Limitations on the number of hives are based upon lot size, starting with two apiaries for lots less than one-half acre and increasing in number up to no limit for those properties that are adjacent to neighboring undeveloped land such as a park natural area, for example. Home Occupation - The Home Occupation ordinance, section 36-1254, has been amended to permit beekeeping so that Edina beekeepers could sell their honey at a local Farmer's Market, if desired but cannot sell honey directly from their home. Chicken Keeping Benefits - The benefit of a limited number of hens (a maximum of 4 female Gallus gallas domesticus) is that they are interesting companion animals, which can be used as part of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) gardening program given their appetite for insects. They can be used as a source of fresh eggs and fertilizer. In order to foster bee keeping, residents must greatly reduce using herbicides and pesticides. Chickens are a nonchemical, 31 environmentally sound method of reducing garden pests such as slugs or Japanese beetles. Chickens lay eggs for 4 — 5 years, but live for 10 — 12 years, thus must be viewed as companion animals. Only hens, not roosters, will be permitted given that hens are nearly silent. Only roosters crow. Chicken Keeping Registration Process — None is proposed. Other Cities Permitting Henkeeping - At least 10 metro cities allow the keeping of hen chickens, including three cities on Edina's boundary. This includes Bloomington, Burnsville, Centerville, Circle Pines, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Robbinsdale, St. Louis Park, St. Paul, and Shoreview. Other metro cities allowing chickens do not allow roosters. Cities that have a specified a ceiling on the number of hens in residential settings generally allow a maximum of four. This includes Bloomington, Centerville and Shoreview. Robbinsdale requires permission for more than two chickens. At least three metro cities prohibit keeping chickens - Eden Prairie, Wayzata and White Bear Lake. LFWG Educational Programs for Keeping Chickens and Bees To foster residential chicken and beekeeping, the following educational programs are planned or have been completed. 1. Friday, March 21, 2014 — Free movie "More than Honey" — 7:00 pm Council Chambers sponsored by the Edina Park and Recreation Department and the Energy and Environment Commission's Local Food Working Group and EEC's Education and Outreach Working Group. Approximately 110 members of the public attended and offered many supportive comments on chicken and beekeeping. After the movie the LFWG members Dianne Plunkett Latham, Flora Delaney, Virginia Kearney and Geofrey Bodeau led a panel discussion while Jamie Bodeau passed out samples of honey produced by their honey bee colonies in Taylors Falls. 2. Saturday, April 19, 2014 - "Planting for Pollinators" - 10 a.m. in the Terrace Room of Arneson Acres Park, 4711 W. 70th St. Elaine Evans, a Ph.D. candidate in the University of Minnesota Bee Lab, and the University's foremost expert on planting for pollinators was the presenter. Sixteen members of the public heard the free program about what kinds of flowers residents can plant to attract pollinators as well as common non-native plants to avoid because they offer no food for pollinations. She explained how to design your yard to attract native bees by providing nesting areas for them. 3. Saturday, May 24, 2014 - "Integrated Pest Management to Preserve Pollinators" - 10 a.m. in the Terrace Room of Arneson Acres Park, 4711 W. 70th St. The speaker was David Tobelmann, a Hennepin County Master Gardener, who will tell us about what kinds of chemicals are implicated in Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) and provide alternatives for managing insect pests in your yard. There was no charge to attend this program. Five attended this program given over the Memorial Day weekend. After passage of the proposed bee and chicken keeping ordinances, the following educational programs are proposed to be offered: 1. "Bee Keeping Basics." Date TBA. Arneson Terrace Rm on a Saturday morning. Consider someone from Dr. Marla Spivak's Bee Squad program for a speaker. See http://beelab.umn.edu/BeeSquad/. Consider also a speaker from the Minn. Hobby Beekeeper's Association at www.MNBeeKeepers.com. In the alternative, or in addition, the LFWG can advertise an Edina Community Education beekeeping class. Consider purchasing a hive from the U. of MN Bee Squad, which will deliver it, set it up and tend it for the City of Edina at a cost of approximately $3,000 for two years. A generous resident has pledged $2,000 towards this. The U. of MN Bee Squad would then use the apiary for research. See http://www.thebeezkneezdelivery.com/hostsites/ for more information on the Bee Squad Colony in a Bottle program. As an alternative to continuing to annually fund a U. of MN Colony in a Bottle, find an Edina resident who would be trained by the U. of MN Bee Squad to assume maintenance of the hive after a few years. For more information and a listing of Edina locations that were considered, see attached document on Considerations for a Proposed Honeybee Colony on City Property, which recommends Braemar Park as the best location. 32 After passage of the chicken keeping ordinance the following educational program is proposed to be offered: 1. "Keeping Chickens as Companion Animals, as a Component of a residential IPM Program, and as Local Food" — Date TBA. Virginia Kearney to find a speaker such as Al Bourgeois, "the Chicken Enthusiast of St. Louis Park" for a free program in the Arneson Terrace Room on a Saturday morning. For a video on how to get started with chickens, see video series at www. Extension. UMN.Edu/small-farms. Proposed Amendments to Current Edina Code Related to Birds & Fowl as well as to Honey Bees 8-5 Definitions. Livestock. Farm animals kept for use, pleasure or profit, including, without limitation, horses, mules, sheep, goats, cattle, swine and fowl. Chicken Run - A fully -enclosed and covered area attached to a chicken coop where chickens can roam unsupervised. 8-210 Keeping of Certain Animals Regulated. No person shall keep any rabbits, mice, hamsters, guinea pigs or other rodents, ferrets or any bird excluding female Gallus gallas domesticus, on any premises used for residential purposes except in a metal cage so constructed that it may be completely and easily cleaned and that the animal or animals kept therein are completely enclosed and protected from children and animals on the outside. Such animals at all times shall be kept within the dwelling or an accessory building. 8-211 Animal Enclosure. An animal enclosure, whether now existing or hereafter constructed, shall not exceed 300 square feet in area and shall be placed only in the rear yard and no closer than 20 feet to any property line. 8-212 Keeping of Certain Animals Prohibited. No person shall keep within the City: (1). Any livestock with the exception of hen (female) chickens of Gallus gallus domesticus which may be kept on any single-family or two-family residential property, provided the hens do not exceed 4 in number and are confined at all times by fencing. (2). Any mammal belonging to the order Carnivora except dogs, cats and ferrets. For the purposes of this paragraph, the bloodline of an individual animal must comprise not less than 51 percent domestic breeds. (3). Honeybees and apiar-ies. (1)(4). Venomous snakes. Chapt. 22 Misc Offences, Article II Offenses Regarding,Persons & Property, Div. 1 Generally, Sec. 22-31 Dumping Animals Prohibited. It shall be illegal to dump any animal anywhere in the City of Edina. 36-435 Accessory Uses. The accessory uses permitted in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R-1) are as follows: a. Accessory garages. b. Greenhouses, garden houses, chicken coop, chicken run, honeybeepiga, decks, patios and gazebos. c. Tool houses and sheds for the storage of domestic supplies. 33 d. Private swimming pools, tennis courts and other recreational facilities for use only by residents of the principal use and their guests. e. Improvements customarily incidental to single dwelling unit buildings including, but not limited to, driveways, sidewalks, flagpoles and clotheslines. f. Customary home occupations. g. Day care facilities, licensed by the State, located within the single dwelling unit building. h. Temporary retail sales of evergreen products from Conditional Use properties pursuant to a permit issued in accordance with this Subsection 850.11 Sec. 36-1254. Customary home occupations as an accessory use. (a) Customary home occupations which are permitted as an accessory use by this chapter shall comply with the following conditions: (1) Only the residents of the dwelling unit shall be employed on the lot or within the dwelling unit. (2) No exterior structural modifications shall be made to change the residential character and appearance of the lot or any buildings or structures on the lot. (3) No loading, unloading, outdoor storage of equipment or materials with the exception of honeybee aiparies, or other outdoor activities, except parking of automobiles shall occur. (4) No signs of any kind shall be used to identify the use with the exception of beekeeping; cautionary signs. (5) All parking demands generated by the use shall be accommodated within the accessory garage and the normal driveway area and shall not at any one time occupy more than two parking spaces in parking areas required for multiple residential buildings. (6) No more than ten automobile trips weekly by individuals other than the residents of the dwelling unit shall be generated to the dwelling unit as a result of the use. (7) No sale of products or merchandise shall occur on the lot or within any structures or buildings on the lot. (b) Permitted customary home occupations include the following and similar occupations if, and only during such times as, they comply with all of the conditions of subsection (a) of this section: (1) Dressmakers, tailors and seamstresses. (2) In single dwelling unit and double dwelling unit buildings only, music and dance teachers providing instruction to not more than five individuals at a time. (3) Artists, sculptors and authors. (4) Insurance agents, brokers, architects and similar professionals who typically conduct client meetings outside of the dwelling unit. (5) Ministers, rabbis and priests. (6) Photographers, providing service to one customer at a time. (7) Salespersons, provided that no stock in trade is maintained on the lot or in the building or structure on the lot. M—In single dwelling unit and double dwelling unit buildings only, rental of rooms for residential occupancy to not more than two persons per dwelling unit in addition to the permanent residents of the dwelling unit. (�}(9) Honeybee apiaries. (c) The uses set forth in this subsection have a tendency to increase in size or intensity beyond the conditions imposed by this section for home occupations and thereby adversely affect residential properties. Therefore, the following shall specifically not be permitted as customary home occupations: (1) Barbershops and beauty parlors. (2) Repair services of all kinds, including, without limitation, auto repair and painting, appliance repair and small engine repair. (3) Music, dance or exercise instruction which provides instruction to groups of more than five individuals at a time. (4) Medical and dental offices. (5) Upholstering. (6) Mortuaries. 34 (7) Commercial kennels, as defined by section 8-5. (8) Tourist homes, boardinghouses or roominghouses and other kinds of transient occupancies. (9) Commercial food preparation or catering. (10)Automobile and equipment sales. (11) Landscaping and lawn maintenance service where landscaping materials and equipment are stored or parked on the premises. (d) Permitted customary home occupations by residents who are physically unable to be employed full time outside their residence may be allowed as a temporary conditional use, with variances from the conditions of subsection (a) of this section pursuant to the provisions of article V of this chapter. (Code 1970; Code 1992, § 850.07(4)) 35 ORDINANCE NO. 2014 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING HONEY BEEKEEPING Updated 6-4-14 The City Council Of Edina Ordains: Chapter ___, Article _ of the Edina City Code is amended to add Division _ as follows: _ KEEPING OF HONEYBEES Subd 1. Definitions. As used in this Section, the following definitions shall apply: A. "Apiary" means the assembly of one (1) or more colonies of honey bees on a single lot. B. "Apiary Site" means the lot upon which an Apiary is located. C. "Beekeeper" means a person who: (i) is a resident of the lot where the Apiary is located who owns or has charge of one (1) or more aparies of honey bees; and (ii) Any person who owns or controls a lot on which a colony is located. D. "Beekeeping equipment" means anything used in the operation of an Apiary, such as hive bodies, supers, frames, top and bottom boards and extractors. E. "Colony" means an aggregate of honey bees consisting principally of workers, but having, when perfect, one (1) queen and at times drones, brood, combs, and honey. F. "Hive" means the receptacle inhabited by a colony. G. "Honey bee" means all life stages of the common domestic honey bee, apis mellifera species. H. "Lot" means one unit of a recorded plat, subdivision or registered land survey, or a recorded parcel described by metes and bounds. I. "Nucleus colony" means a small quantity of honey bees with a queen housed in a smaller than usual hive box designed for a particular purpose, and containing no supers. J. "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, company, limited liability company, other entity, or unincorporated association. 36 K. "Rooftop" means the uppermost section of a primary or accessory structure of at least one full story and at least twelve (12) feet in height. Areas including but not limited to decks, patios and balconies shall not be considered a rooftop. L. "Swarming" means the natural process where a queen bee leaves a colony with a large group of worker bees. M. "Undeveloped property" means: (i) any lot that is not improved with a structure that has or is required to have a certificate of occupancy; and (ii) all streets and highways. N. "Unusual Aggressive Behavior" means any instance in which unusual aggressive characteristics such as stinging without provocation or attacking without provocation occurs. O. "Super" means that part of a honey bee hive used to collect honey. Subd. 2. Registration. A. No beekeeper shall keep honey bees in the City without a current registration from the City of Edina Police Department. B. Each beekeeper shall register with the Police Department prior to bringing any honey bees into the City. C. Beekeepers operating within the City prior to the effective date of this Section shall have four (4) weeks from the date this Section goes into effect to register with the Police Department as a beekeeper. D. The registration shall be upon the form provided by the City and shall include the applicable fee as set forth in section 2-724 Schedule A. If a beekeeper adds or relocates a hive or colony, the beekeeper shall update the registration prior to the addition or relocation on the form provided by the City. All questions asked or information required by the forms shall be answered fully and completely by the beekeeper. E. The City beekeeping registration shall be valid until December 31 of each calendar year and shall be renewed prior to expiration each year by submitting a renewal form to the Police Department on the form provided by the City. A person no longer keeping honey bees in the City shall notify the Police Department within thirty (30) days. F. Upon the initial registration, annual renewal, or change of address within City, each beekeeper shall allow the Chief of Police or his designee the right to inspect any Apiary for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Section. MrA G. Upon initial registration or change of address within the City, the City shall notify in writing all owners of lots within two -hundred (200) feet of any lot line of the Apiary Site, of the presence of said Apiary. H. Any resident within 200 feet of any lot line of an Apiary Site may file a written appeal of the approval of the initial registration to the City Manager, or their designee, within thi" (30) days of the appr-eval Of the beekeeping registr-at . If an appeal is filed, the beekeeper will be notified in writing by the City Manager or their designee. Subd. 3. Required Conditions. A. Honey bee colonies shall be kept in hives with removable frames, which frames shall be kept in sound and usable condition. B. Each colony on the Apiary Site shall be provided with a convenient source of water located on the Apiary Site. Every effort should be made to ensure that the water source is free of chemicals that are typically found in tap water, such as chlorine and fluoride. C. Materials from a hive or colony which might encourage the presence of honey bees, such as wax comb, shall be promptly disposed of in a sealed container or placed within a building or other bee -proof enclosure. D. For each colony permitted to be maintained under this Section, there may also be maintained upon the same Apiary Site, one nucleus colony in a hive structure not to exceed one standard 9-5/8 inch depth 10 -frame hive body, with no supers. E. Beekeeping equipment shall be maintained in good condition, including keeping the hives painted if they have been painted, but are peeling or flaking, and securing unused equipment from weather, potential theft or vandalism and occupancy by swarming honey bees. F. Hives shall be continuously managed to provide adequate living space for their resident honey bees in order to prevent swarming. G. In any instance in which a colony exhibits Unusual Aggressive Behavior, it shall be the duty of the beekeeper to promptly implement appropriate actions to address the behavior. If requenning is required, queens shall be selected from European stock bred for gentleness and non -swarming characteristics. H. Fruit trees and other flowering trees, which are located on an Apiary Site, shall not be sprayed, while in full bloom, with any substance which is injurious to honey bees. Subd. 4. Colony Location. A. No hive shall occupy any front yard.. 38 B. In no instance shall any part of a hive be located within ten (24.0) feet of any lot line. C. In no instance shall any part of a hive be located within ten (10) feet of any adjacent dwelling unit in any zoning district. D. All apiaries shall comply with Edina City Code Subpart B Land Development Regulations, Chapter 36 Zoning, Article XII, Supplementary District Regulations, Division 2 General Requirements, Section 36-1254, Customary home occupations as an accessory use. Subd. 5. Colony Density. A. Every lot within the City shall be limited to the following number of colonies based on the size of the lot: i. '/2 acre or smaller = 2 colonies ii. more than %2 acre to 3/4 acre = 4 colonies iii. more than 3/4 acre to 1 acre = 6 colonies iv. more than 1 acre to 5 acres = 8 colonies B. Regardless of lot size, if all lots within two hundred (200) feet of any lot line of the Apiary Site are undeveloped property, there shall be no limit to the number of colonies that can be 39 i 11111 1 Mill OPMOMMOM D. All apiaries shall comply with Edina City Code Subpart B Land Development Regulations, Chapter 36 Zoning, Article XII, Supplementary District Regulations, Division 2 General Requirements, Section 36-1254, Customary home occupations as an accessory use. Subd. 5. Colony Density. A. Every lot within the City shall be limited to the following number of colonies based on the size of the lot: i. '/2 acre or smaller = 2 colonies ii. more than %2 acre to 3/4 acre = 4 colonies iii. more than 3/4 acre to 1 acre = 6 colonies iv. more than 1 acre to 5 acres = 8 colonies B. Regardless of lot size, if all lots within two hundred (200) feet of any lot line of the Apiary Site are undeveloped property, there shall be no limit to the number of colonies that can be 39 kept on the Apiary Site. However, upon the development of any lot within two hundred (200) feet of any lot line of the Apiary Site, the Apiary Site shall comply with the restriction set forth in this Subdivision 5. C. If any person removes honey bees from locations where they are not desired, that person shall not be considered in violation of the restriction in this Subdivision 5, if the person temporarily houses the honey bees on the Apiary Site of a beekeeper registered under this Section forgo more than 30 days and remains at all times in compliance with the other provisions of this Section. Subd. 6. Inspection. A. Upon prior notice to the owner of the Apiary Site, the Chief of Police or his designee shall have the right to inspect any Apiary for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Section. B. It shall be deemed a violation of this Section for any person to resist, impede or hinder the Chief of Police or his designee in the performance of their duties in inspecting any Apiary and surrounding grounds. Subd. 7. Denial, Revocation or Suspension. A. Registrations issued under the provisions of this Section may be denied, revoked or suspended by the Chief of Police after notice and the right to request a hearing, for any of the following causes: (1) Fraud, misrepresentation or false statements on the registration or during the course of the registered activity. (2) The keeping of honey bees in an unlawful manner or a manner so as to constitute a breach of peace, or to constitute a menaee to the health, safety or general welfare of the public. (3) Any violation of this Section. B. Notice of the denial, revocation or suspension, shall be in writing, specifically set forth the grounds for denial, revocation or suspension and the person's right to request a hearing before the City Manager or his/her designee. Such notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid, to the person to his/her last known address, or shall be delivered in the same manner as a summons. Any person who desires a hearing before the City Manager or his/her designee must request the hearing in writing, within fifteen (15) days of the date of the notice, by filing a written request for a hearing with the Chief of Police. If a hearing is requested it shall be held before the City Manager or his/her designee within thirty (30) days of the request. The City shall notify the person in writing of the time, date and location of the hearing at least five (5) days prior to the hearing. Within fifteen (15) days after the hearing 40 the City Manager or his/her designee shall issue a written decision in the matter and that decision shall be final. If the person fails to request a hearing within fifteen (15) days of the date of the notice, the denial, suspension, or revocation shall automatically be deemed final. The right to request a hearing before the City Manager or his/her designee shall be in place of any right to appeal. Section 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK James B. Hovland, Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2014, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 52014. City Clerk 41 DIVISION 2. FEES, CHARGES AND FUNDS Sec. 2-724. Schedule A, fees and charges. The following table is a schedule of fees and charges: Article Chapter and Division and Section Purpose of fee or charges Amount Honeybee Apiary Registration $20.00 Terms Initial Registration 42 Proposed Honeybee Demonstration Apiary on City Property 5-18-14 Having a demonstration honeybee apiary in a city park as an educational tool is advantageous. It demonstrates to residents that honeybees are not to be feared, but instead protected. It also encourages the protection of native bees and other native pollinators such as butterflies, moths, bats and birds. An ideal location for a honeybee apiary on city property has the following characteristics: 1. Suitable nectar/pollen plantings in the area within two square miles 2. A consistent source of de -chlorinated, chemical free water within one-half mile from May through October. Having a bucket with water and a landing spot for the bees within a few feet of the apiary works well. 3. Having a city facility nearby with a room that could be used as a class room for educational programs on pollinators and beekeeping. 4. Having a site with a location remote enough from frequent users of the facility, yet close enough to a nearby facility where those using the facility could see the apiary and keep watch for vandals. Five locations below have been considered. These are Arneson Park, Braemar Park, Rosland Park, Yorktown Park near the community garden, and the Public Works prairie. Only one site met all the above requirements, Braemar Park. The most sustainable way to manage a demonstration honeybee apiary would be to find a resident with beekeeping skills who would be willing to pay for the apiary equipment, give 2 classes per season on beekeeping, and take responsibility for the apiary in return for having their apiary on city property and for keeping the honey. If a resident with beekeeping experience cannot be found to do this, then funding could be raised to have the U. of MN Bee Lab implement their Colony in a Bottle program. The U. of MN Bee Lab would then set up an apiary and operate it for two years during which time an Edina resident who is a prospective beekeeper could be trained to take over apiary management after two years. The cost of the U. of MN Colony in a Bottle two year program is approximately $3,000 as detailed below. $2,000 has already been generously pledged by a resident for a fund, which is proposed to be established at the Edina Community Foundation for this purpose. The following city locations have been considered. 1. Public Works — The prairie has many native plants with nectar/pollen. The Public Works facility has meeting rooms, which could be used for educational classes on bees. Locating an apiary in the prairie or on the roof was considered. City Horticultural ist Tim Zimmerman and EEC Liaison Ross Bintner indicated that the rain garden ditch there is often dry in the summer so there would be only a sporadic source of water for the bees unless de -chlorinated water was periodically replenished in an artificial container by volunteers who would need to keep it full as well as periodically replace it to avoid attracting mosquito larvae. Ross Bintner indicated that the EEC Energy Working Group would like to put a 10 KW solar garden on the roof, so space there may be an issue. Animal Control Officer Timothy Hunter indicated that "the roof of the Public Works building has numerous pieces of equipment for the HVAC system that must be accessed regularly by staff. Many of those pieces of equipment are large fans and other mechanical units that make noise and cause significant vibration. If that may disturb a apiary or if the apiary cannot be placed far enough from the units to allow them to exist in peace, I'd suggest considering other locations, both for the apiary and for the personnel that have to access the 43 rooftop units. For more detailed information on the rooftop layout and equipment placement, I'd suggest contacting Tim Barnes, the Facilities Manager." 2. Arneson Park — The 20 or more city gardens located in this 14 acre park have many flowering plants and trees with food for bees. The Arneson House facility has the Terrace Room, which could be used for educational classes on bees and other pollinators. City Horticulturalist Tim Zimmerman indicated that the only source of water is the fountain, which is chlorinated. De -chlorinated water would need to be periodically replenished in an artificial container by volunteers who would need to keep it full as well as periodically replace it to avoid attracting mosquito larvae. Tim Zimmerman expressed concern regarding the placement of an apiary, which would have to be away from the fountain and gazebo, which are frequent sites for wedding photos and rentals, as well as away from the terrace at Arneson House, which is also frequently used by the Terrace Room renters. The only outside hose hook-ups are likely at the greenhouse, the fountain, or the Arneson House, making carrying de -chlorinated water to a remote site in Arneson Park difficult for volunteers. Because Arneson is a Class A park under Edina's Turf Management Plan, herbicides can be applied to the lawn. The U. of MN Bee Lab indicated that this would not pose a threat to the bees, provided that responsible choices are made, though it would destroy some useful food for pollinators such as dandelions and clover. Yorktown Park Community Garden — There is an ornamental garden to the left of the YMCA parking lot entrance. There are many vegetable plants in the community gardens. The bees would increase pollination and vegetable productivity. The YMCA could be asked to schedule educational classes on bees. Yorktown Park is a Class C park under Edina's Turf Management Plan so no herbicides are applied to the lawn. The park may need to be beautified with additional food for honeybees such as crab apple trees, which provide early spring food. If 9 Mile Creek is within one-half mile, it would be a good source of water for honey bees. The community garden of 50 plots established a steering committee, which first met in Nov. 2013, with a 2nd meeting in March 2014. The steering committee is composed of the flowing plot users: Sue Neuhart and Vicky Kent who are also Edina Garden Council members (Sue is a past EGC President), Joel Stegner who is also a Community Health Commissioner, Sandy ? and one additional woman. Hennepin Co Master Gardener Larry Cipolla is their advisor. The steering committee should be consulted to see if they would be willing to hold a meeting asking the renters of the plots if they would be willing to have a honey bee apiary in proximity to the community garden. Anyone with a documented allergy to honey bee stings could step forward at that time. For the summer of 2014, steering committee member Sue Neuhart plans to find out if the community gardeners would support a native Mason Bee nest box. These have about 50 holes drilled in them in which the native Mason bees can lay their eggs. They cost about $50 and Sue plans to ask her Normandale Garden Club (Edina Garden Club affiliate) to donate it. One disadvantage of the community garden is the fact that it is at the base of a bowl and is situated in clay soil. The plots are inundated with water in the spring due to snow melt, which can be exacerbated by heavy spring rains as in spring 2013. As a consequence, during the spring of 2013, most community gardeners had to dig a trench around their plot and pile the excavation in the plot center to raise it enough to be able to plant in the plot. The trenches remained filled with water until sometime after at least 6-12-14 when the photo below was taken. The water stood there so long that green algae grew in it. Bees would likely come to the water in the trenches as opposed to flying farther away to 9 Mile Creek and this may create apprehension on the part of some community gardeners, though the bees would be widely dispersed among the plots moats and would pose no actual threat. 4. Rosland Park — Tim Zimmerman suggested Rosland Park. With Lake Cornelia nearby, there is plenty of water. The park has some city gardens. Rosland is a Class C park under the City Turf Management Plan, thus no herbicides are applied to the lawn with the exception of the baseball field. The Edina Art Center has classrooms that could be used to give educational programs on bees. Tim suggested the area 44 between the tennis courts and the woods for an apiary. DP Latham cannot picture the area he is referring to. All LFWG members should take a look at the park and recommend a location. A concern about the area recommended by Tim Zimmerman is that there is no city facility next to it to monitor the apiary for vandalism. Braemar — Has some gardens, a prairie, and 200 acres of natural area making it well positioned with food for bees. It also has several ponds, which have water throughout the year. There are meeting rooms in the Club House, which could be used for educational programs. Braemar is a certified Audubon Wildlife Sanctuary with minimal application of chemicals. The 200 acre golf course is Class A under Edina's Turf Management plan and is treated with chemicals, though the U. of MN Bee Lab indicates that this will not harm the bees provided responsible choices are made. Ray O'Connell indicated that 25 — 30 years ago some residents did successfully keep honeybees at Braemar Park. Ray O'Connell is a long-time Braemar Men's Club member and Edina resident who is a former member of the Edina Park Board and the Edina Energy and Environment Commission. Braemar Park is the only City location found to meet all four requirements above, thus making it the preferred location for an apiary on City property. Braemar management should be approached about once again keeping apiaries in Braemar Park. An optimal location is the prairie to the left of the entrance. There apiary(s) could be observed from the road, which should help deter vandals. Ray O'Connell indicated that there was no vandalism problem in the past when apiaries were positioned in approximately the same area. U. of Minn Bee Lab Colony in a Bottle Program Costs Yearly management fee for 1 colony: $1125.00 1 st year bee cost: $90.00 (plus tax)- would need to be purchased again if bees don't survive winter 1 st year equipment cost: $360.00 2nd year equipment cost: $300.00 2nd year queen purchase: $30.00 Summary: First year costs approximately $1,575. Second year costs approximately $1,455. Total for two years approximately $3,030. (Costs for bees and equipment are only estimates because the U. of MN Bee Lab does not sell equipment, but they will help you purchase the equipment if you would like the U. of MN to do so) 45 Ross Bintner From: Paul Thompson <ptflydisc@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 6:04 PM To: bill.sierks@state.mn.us; Ross Bintner Subject: Re: Community Solar Subcommittee - Process reminder Thanks Bill, Sounds accurate to me and the EEC ok'd us (John H, Bill and myself ) to sit on the Shared Community Solar Subcommittee and that we will report back tomorrow evening at the EEC meeting. Ross, i did speak with Deb M about Cool Planet's being a Community Partner with MN Community Solar and she said to be transparent in all discussions and opt out of voting when appropriate. Anything else? See you tomorrow. Paul Cool Planet- engaging new people to take action for a sustainable climate Citizens Climate Lobby- political will for a livable world 4244 Crocker Ave Edina MN 55416 952-920-1547 cell 612-810-4664 -----Original Message ----- From: Sierks, Bill (MPCA) (MPCA) <bill. sierksO-state. mn. us> To: Ross Bintner <RBintneranEdinaMN.gov>; Paul Thompson (otflydisc(@aol.com <Dtflydisc aol.com> Sent: Wed, May 7, 2014 4:33 pm Subject: RE: Community Solar Subcommittee - Process reminder Hi Ross — I could prepare meeting summaries for EEC, although the first meeting was basically Ken Bradley repeating the same discussion on Community Solar that he gave to EEC already, so there was nothing new there, and we did not really get into any specific decisions moving forward. I'm involving the manager & council members because in order to get into 47 the details, we need to make sure City leadership is on board and willing to spend resources needed to select a site, manage a bid/RFP process to select a provider, etc. Once we get a green light that they are on board not only with the concept but the high-level details, the sub -committee and the staff they assign can get to work on the details and we will only need to bring the higher-ups in when we need a major decision. Hopefully that's where we'll be on Friday. My understanding is the Commission OK'd moving ahead with the concept for a project when they approved the sub- committee and Ken answered their questions about the program, and I think we should provide updates but not ask for approval for anything until we actually have a location and decision to apply, but I can confirm that tomorrow with EEC. My 2cents is that Paul should be able to participate up to the point when the City starts preparing contract docs for bid — but obviously that's the City's decision. Thanks! Bill From: Ross Bintner [mailto:RBintner(ZDEdinaMN.gov] Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 2:32 PM To: Paul Thompson (offlydisc(a)_aol.com); Sierks, Bill (MPCA) Subject: Community Solar Subcommittee - Process reminder Paul, Did you reach out and get any advice from Deb Mangen on your potential conflict of interest on the Community Solar issue? Bill, I understand this meeting is a top priority for you, but I am a bit uncomfortable how ad-hoc this feels, as we are involving the manager and council members at a pretty granular level of detail, and before we get the consensus of the commission. Do you plan to take minutes and summaries of the two subcommittee meeting conversations to the commission? Ross Bintner, PE, Environmental Engineer 952-903-5713 1 Fax 952-826-0392 RBintnerkEdinaMN. og_v I www.EdinaMN. oovv ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business -----Original Appointment ----- From: Sierks, Bill (MPCA) fmailto:bill.sierksa-state.mn.us] Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 1:15 PM To: Josh Sprague(ioshsora4ueaedinarealty.com); Tim Barnes; Ross Bintner; John Heer; Nathan Franzen (nathan geronimoenergy.com); Scott Neal; Paul Thompson; James Hovland (ihovlandakrausehovland.com) Subject: Edina Community Solar Scoping Meeting When: Friday, May 09, 2014 4:00 PM -5:00 PM (UTC -06:00) Central Time (US & Canada). Where: City Hall Hello - It seems that this Friday, May 9, at 4 PM works for everyone who replied to the poll. Let's plan on meeting at City Hall at 4 PM this Friday. Ross could you reserve a room? Please let me know if this no longer works for you. The week of May 19 also was open, but I'd rather not wait if we can meet on Friday. Thanks Bill 48 West roof area 16,000 ft sq This section has three large rooftop obstructions and is an older roof. This roof should be excluded. 923 modules, 378 kW dc; 265 kW ac. Will need to accurately measure and locat all RTUs and skylights. Will need to verify capacity of roof through structural engineer. The nearest substation is less than 1 mile NW of the building. The distribution line serving the location is likely to have capacity for an interconnection. Name - City of Edina Public Works Facility Install Address - 7450 Edina, MN 55439 Main roof area 90,000 ft sq The main area of the roof is a very good community solar host site. There is a generous area for an array. The white TPO roof is less than 5 years old. East roof area 25,000 ft sq This section has too many rooftop obstructions to consider for installing a solar array. Edina Public Works Building Preliminary Site Plan Community Solar Garden 1"=60' smc 6/3/2014 �?SOLARMNCommunitySolar.com COMMUNITY MN Community Solar Minn Mipolis, M Ave Minneapolis, MN 55406 612-345-71,0 Ross Bintner From: Brad Pepin <BTPEPIN@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2014 7:36 AM To: swensonannl@gmail.com;joshsprague7@gmail.com; Mary Brindle (Comcast); jonibennettl2@comcast.net; Edina Mail Cc: Ross Bintner Subject: Edina "Green" Initiative: Eradicate Those Darn Plastic Bags! Dear Edina Leader Team - A couple of weeks ago my teenage son and I enjoyed the Energy & Environment Commission's presentation of the documentary "Bag It!" in the council chambers. It was very eye-opening! The movie was a good reminder that we have SUCH a LONG, LONG way to go toward being better stewards of our resources and planet! A few things we learned that evening: • 90 % of plastic bags in the U.S. are NOT recycled • it is estimated that it takes about 1,000 years for a plastic bag to break down in a landfill • plastic bags are one of the most littered items on our roads, parks and public lands. They choke wildlife & pollute our oceans, rivers and lakes as they blow around until they make their way into the stormwater system or natural waters • common chemical additives used in plastic bags have been shown to contribute to a wide range of health and developmental disorders; our CHILDREN are especially at risk when they are exposed to these chemicals in our everyday environment. • AT LEAST 100 CITIES IN THE US HAVE BANNED or put a significant FEE on plastic bags That last bulleted item is one of the main reasons for my communication to you today. In the discussion after the screening we learned that a sub -committee has been studying this issue as part of the Environmental Commission, and benchmarking other cities. I understand that they intend to make a formal recommendation to the City Council that plastic bags be banned or that a fee is imposed on plastic bag use in our city. As a resident, I wanted you to know that I FULLY SUPPORT any initiative that takes us in the direction of eradicating plastic bags in Edina and challenges us as a community to change our "single use mentality" of resources. Good, reasonable alternatives exist if we muster the will to make a better choice. I cannot think of many things that would make a statement about the environmental values of our citizens and city like a policy that makes such a bold statement about our intent to eradicate this form of resource drain and source of harmful litter in our community. I would like to see Edina be a LEADER on this issue, not a follower, and use it as a springboard for other important environmental statements at a policy level. While I'm sure many residents would balk initially at the idea, I think with a careful phased -in approach that creates a STRONG dis-incentive for using them, and that promotes other more acceptable alternatives, we could all learn to modify our behaviors and quickly adjust to a life without problematic plastic bags. Thanks for considering my opinion as a proud resident of Edina. And thanks for the leadership you provide to our community! You make a difference! —Brad Pepin 5105 Meadow Ridge I Edina, MN 55438 612.743.6081 mobile btoeoingcomcastnet 50 Ross Bintner From: Ross Bintner Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 2:01 PM To: John Heer (1Heer@visi.com); Keith Kostuch (kostuch.eec@gmail.com) (kostuch.eec@gmail.com) Subject: FW: Cities for Clean Energy Attachments: ShercoResolutionofSupport20l4.docx; ShercoFactsheet2014.pdf, Updated True Cost of Coal Fact Sheet.pdf, American Heart Association - Air Pollution Fact Sheet.pdf Here is correspondence for your consideration. Ross Bintner, PE, Environmental Engineer (*-, 952-903-5713 1 Fax 952-826-0392 RBintner@EdinaMN.gov 1 www.EdinaMN.aov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Cory Hertog [mailto:cory.hertog(&amail.com) Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 1:56 PM To: Ross Bintner Subject: Cities for Clean Energy Hello Ross, My name is Cory Hertog and I am working with the Sierra Club to reach out to neighborhood organizations and city committees to discuss our initiative to persuade Xcel Energy to replace Sherco coal units 1 &2 in Becker, Minnesota by 2020 with cleaner and healthier energy sources. Xcel will be submitting a long-term energy plan to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission in January, and we want that plan to include transitioning off of coal at Sherco 1 &2. Attached is a resolution that I would like to ask the committee's support on to send to Xcel. We would also love to work with you on opportunities to make the public aware of this issue and include a list of options on the resolution. It would be great if I could come to a meeting or develop an article for a newsletter. As Xcel customers, it is important that we continue to build public awareness and engagement in this important decision. Xcel's Sherburne County Generating System (Sherco) is currently on the EPA's "watch list" as one of the nation's top emitters of sulfur oxide and toxic mercury, contributing to health problems in Minnesota, including asthma, lung cancers, and neurological damage. Not only do these harmful chemicals hurt the well being of our people and environment, they also cost us money. Along with the electricity we pay for on our utility bills, we also pay more money for health-care costs related to the ailments caused by these harmful pollutants. Coal plants also emit large amounts of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides that are harmful to our environment and affect climate disruption. Please see the attachments for more information on costs and consequences. There have been successful efforts to transition off of coal at other plants, and we can do this with Sherco 1 &2 to not only create a better quality of life for Minnesota but also support a clean energy economy. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, I hope that we will be able to work together on this issue to make all of our communities healthier. Sincerely, Cory Hertog Sierra Club North Star Chapter 2327 East Franklin Avenue, Suite 1 Minneapolis MN 55406 (612) 804-4646 cory. hertoaCfgmail. com 51 Minnesota policies have put our state on a clean energy path that benefits our air, water, health and climate. But our work is not done! The majority of Minnesota's electricity still comes from burning coal, which pollutes our air and water and is the largest source of carbon pollution. We need to continue down the path of replacing our old, coal -burning plants with clean energy; especially, wind, solar and energy efficiency. On July 1st 2013, Xcel Energy announced its plan to continue burning coal at Minnesota's most polluting and dangerous coal plant, Sherco. Sherco, located in Becker, is the largest soot and carbon polluter in Minnesota, and is on the EPA's "watch list" as one of the top emitters of toxic mercury and sulfur dioxide in the nation. Minnesotans overwhelmingly support transitioning beyond coal to clean energy. The time to make a plan for Sherco 1 & 2 is now. SHERCO IS MINNESOTA'S SINGLE, LARGEST POLLUTER. In 2011, Sherco emitted: • 14.5 million tons carbon dioxide CO2. Sherco is Minnesota's single biggest source of carbon pollution, the main contributor to climate disruption. • 12,000 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx) & 20,000 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2). Soot and smog pollution from coal plants contribute to significant health impacts, including asthma, lung cancer and other respiratory ailments. A study by the Clean Air Taskforce study found that particle pollution from Sherco leads to an estimated 1600 asthma attacks, 150 heart attacks and 92 deaths each year. • 440 pounds mercury. Coal plants are the largest source of mercury pollution in the United States. Mercury can lead to neurological damage, particularly in young children or infants. The Minnesota Department of Health recently found that 1 in 10 babies along Minnesota's North Shore are born with unhealthy levels of mercury in their bodies. People are exposed to mercury through fish consumption, and Indigenous women are three times more likely to have dangerous mercury levels. Xcel Should Plan for a Sherco Transition Now In 2011, community partners, environmentalists, labor, utilities and the Governor reached an agreement to transition beyond coal at Washington's Trans Alta power plant, similar size to Sherco, between 2020 and 2025. The planned phaseout provided job security and transition time for the workforce and a fund for local economic development which was important for community members. For more info, hktplLlep.Qrt,lakJ9r.4utittkrltx,Arg/ 52 MINNESOTA HAS MORE POTENTIAL FOR CLEAN ENERGY • Solar Energy. In 2013, Minnesota's legislature established a statewide goal of 10% solar by 2030; including a 1.5% by 2020 standard for utilities that will result in more than 30 times the solar installed when the law passed. From community solar projects on schools, churches and local stores to rooftop solar on your own home, solar provides an opportunity for everyone to participate in clean energy and reduce your energy bill. • Wind Energy. In 2013, Xcel Energy proposed wind projects in several states that would save Xcel's customers nearly $1 billion in the long run. • Energy Efficiency. Minnesota's utility energy efficiency programs are ranked #2 by the American Council for an Energy -Efficient Economy. Energy efficiency projects are labor-intensive, so they create more direct jobs than other sources of energy. When businesses and individuals spend the money they saved on their energy bills, that spending creates even more jobs. COAL IS NOT A GOOD INVESTMENT • Minnesotans export at least $20 billion ($3,800 per Minnesotan) per year to pay for energy (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2008.) By investing in wind, solar and energy efficiency, we can keep more of those dollars cycling through Minnesota's economy, providing an enormous economic boost, enduring investment, and economic development opportunities for our state. • 53% of the electricity generated in Minnesota came from coal-fired electric power plants in 2011; most of its coal supply was brought in by rail from Montana and Wyoming. • Solar energy development creates 14.1 jobs per $1 million invested. That's compared to 5.3 jobs created by fossil fuel energy development for the same investment (Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts.) • Great River Energy's brand new Spiritwood coal plant is too expensive to run and sits idle while ratepayers pay $30 million a year to cover the costs of the non- operating coal plant. • The move away from coal creates pathways to the middle class and allows American workers to transition to safer and more sustainable family wage jobs in developing clean energy and energy efficiency. PLAN FOR A SHERCO TRANSITION NOW Xcel and community partners have successfully planned for transitions beyond coal at three plants in Minnesota (Minneapolis, St. Paul and Burnsville) in the past decade. Now, it's time to plan for a transition of Sherco units 1&2 in Becker, MN. We need to urge Xcel to invest in wind, solar and efficiency and work with partners to plan for the transition beyond coal at Sherco. Planning for a clean energy transition will ensure cleaner air to breathe, cleaner water to drink, stronger communities and better health for Minnesotans and our great outdoors for our kids and the next generation. Coal power plants Fossil Fuel Power Costs Minnesota $2.2 billion Annually in Health and hurt human and envi- Environmental Impacts ronmental health, yet Recent data show that fossil fuel pollution costs Minnesota between $0.9 billion to $3.1 billion annu- are responsible for ally, with a best estimate of $2.2 billion per year*. This means that in addition to the price we pay for electricity on our utility bills, we also pay on average 4.1 cents/kWh in increased health care expenses, 94% of electric utility lost productivity, and environmental damages. When coal power is considered alone, for each kWh we pollution in Minne buy, we also pay 6.0 cents more in pollution damages. sofa. We pay not only for the electricity from coal plants, but also for increased medical costs, lost human productivity and increased environ- mental contamination caused by coal power pollution. In contrast, clean energy; options, such as wind and solar power, do not cause this harm. Outdated State Pollution Cost Estimates When Minnesota utilities make decisions about how to meet our electricity needs, they are required to determine the hidden health and environmental costs of fossil fuel power using pollution cost estimates established by the state. That way, we can all see how much fossil fuel pollution really costs us. However, the state has not updated its estimates, except for inflation adjustments, since 1997. Using the state's out-of-date numbers, the health and environmental costs of fossil fuel pollution are estimated to be between $58 million and $257 million, far less than the range of $ 0.9 billion to $3.1 billion using recent data and analysis. Costs of Pollution in Dollars per Ton Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy 26 East Exchange Streit, SUlte 206 Saint Paul, N4innesora 55101 Phone: 651-223-5061) httll://Nvtivw.mncenter.org For more information, please contact: Kevin Reuther Legal Director rector kreuther(,,)tnncenter. org 651-297-4861 'A. Goodkind and S. AoGak% Kenkh tri F.rnvironmerntal Cosa ofEJatricity Generation) in Minnesota (June 18, 2013) 1990s Est. - Urban Updated Est. - Urban 1990s Est. - Rural Updated Est. - Rural SO2 $0 $11,400 $0 $5,100 NO. $1,379 $3,300 $144 $2,300 CO2 Low $0.42 $11 $0.42 $11 CO2 Mid $2.40 $36 $2.40 $36 CO2 High $4.37 $55 $4.37 $55 Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy 26 East Exchange Streit, SUlte 206 Saint Paul, N4innesora 55101 Phone: 651-223-5061) httll://Nvtivw.mncenter.org For more information, please contact: Kevin Reuther Legal Director rector kreuther(,,)tnncenter. org 651-297-4861 'A. Goodkind and S. AoGak% Kenkh tri F.rnvironmerntal Cosa ofEJatricity Generation) in Minnesota (June 18, 2013) Ross Bintner From: Surya Iyer <suryaiyer@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 9:15 PM To: Ross Bintner Subject: Fw: Solar startup event Sat May 31 3-6pm - please send to EEC members Hi Ross: Please forward to EEC commissioners. Some may be interested in attending this event sponsored by a local entrepreneur. Please inform them that RSVP is required to attend. Thanks Surya (Former Commissioner and Chair, EEC) Surya Iyer, PhD; Cell: (612) 309-2392; suryaiyer yahoo.com Operations Engineering Manager, Polar Semiconductor Inc., (952) 876-3178; iyersyolarsemi.com Adjunct Professor of Engineering, Univ. of St. Thomas, iver65680-stthomas.edu Commissioner, Transportation Commission, City of Edina, MN On Tuesday, May 6, 2014 9:25 AM, Mouli Vaidyanathan <mouli0mouliengg.com> wrote: 55 Mouli Engineering has great pleasure in inviting you to the marriage of It is perhaps the perfect example of being made for each other. Your roof and the all new Solarl'od Crown. Thanks to a trailblazing technology from Mouli Engineering. No compromise in roof strength, because no holes will be drilled ever on your roof. So no worry of water leak. Approved for wind speeds of tip to W mph. High yield panels that comes with easy to install design. All this with the cost efficient, prompt and honest service that is the hallmark of Mouli Engineering. Do join us for the live information session* at Tryg, S. And see how you can start a lasting relationship with Solar Energy. Thank you and regards Mouli, PhD, PE, CEM NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional 2 56 www.mouliengq.com www.mysolarpod.com 612-424-5176 © Ldoee This information is confidential and is for the use of the intended recipient only. Any improper use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to the sender immediately and delete this communication. 57 Ross Bintner From: Dianne Latham <Dianne.Plunkett.Latham@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 8:32 AM To: 'John Heer' Cc: Keith Kostuch; Ross Bintner; Bill Sierks Subject: Green Step Cities Update - Multimodal Transportation and Living Streets 5-22-14 John, Updating Edina's GSC website really needs to be an annual agenda item. By leaving it to commissioner comments, which come up after 9:00 and when everyone wants to leave (and some already have left) it gets forgotten, or left to the 'next month'. March is the best time to schedule it because the GSC updates must be complete by May 1. GSC evaluates each city's website in May and then GSC/MPCA passes out awards in June. I doubt that Edina's website has been updated this past year to any meaningful extent so no Edina awards will be forthcoming this year. The transportation and mobility steps need updating at a minimum. Ross probably shouldn't even be the person responsible for that. I recommend that the Edina contact name for these steps be changed to Mark Nolan and that Ross train Mark how to update these steps. Is there any reason this can't be an agenda item and made a formal part of the annual schedule? At the June meeting we would explain what each commissioner needs to do for their GSC BP's and then they could report at the July meeting in the form of passing updates along to Ross and also talking about any new actions EEC should consider. Those then could get folded into the work plan when each commissioner submits items for consideration. But going forward the GSC update should be done at the March and April meetings. It doesn't do Edina much good to be a GSC member if we aren't actively updating Edina's GSC site and watching for new actions to undertake. Dianne From: John Heer [mailto:jwh9000@visi.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 10:06 PM To: Dianne Latham Cc: Jennifer; Ross Bintner; Keith Kostuch Subject: Re: Green Step Cities Update - Multimodal Transportation and Living Streets Thanks for following up on this Diane - it points out that we have a lot good activity happening in the city. I think it would be a good group discussion in our June EEC meeting. Will you bring it up during commissioner comments? Jennifer, thank you so much for all the detailed information. John On 16 mai 2014, at 10:50, "Dianne Latham" <Dianne.Plunkett.Lathamgcomcast.net> wrote: 5-16-14 Jennifer, 58 Thank you for responding so quickly. As I suspected, the Transportation and Mobility Options portion of Edina's Green Step Cities web page is in need of update. Who is Mark Nolan? Could you respond by copying him on this communication? Ross Bintner is charged with keeping Edina's GSC web page up to date, but he cannot do that unless the applicable groups give him the language with which to update it. I would recommend Ross scheduling a meeting with you and Mark Nolan to work out the updated language. For any actions that Edina has taken that you think may qualify, but are not sure, Ross could then call Phil Muessig at GSC to make a final determination. As part of EEC's work plan for next year, all EEC commissioners should be asked to review their Working Group's applicable best practices to determine if we are missing any credit for anything, give those updates to Ross, then see if there are any new actions Edina should take as part of the proposed 2015 work plan. Discussion of this would be a good agenda item for the June EEC meeting. Dianne From: Jennifer [mailto:dmgyoyy(&comcast.netl Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 10:24 AM To: Dianne Latham Cc: Ross Bintner Subject: Re: Multimodal Transportation and Living Streets Hi, Dianne. Mark Nolan is in the best position to update this information. Here are some thoughts: BP 11: Complete Green Streets Action 1 (adopt complete streets policy) is up to date. Action 2 (adopt zoning language or approve a development agreement) is not currently included—not sure if something like Byerly's, with the improvements to the Hazelton and the Promenade would qualify. Action 3 (document inclusion/installation of green infrastructure elements in at least one street reconstruction project) could be added. Tracy may qualify. Arden Park D would qualify. Action 4 (identify, prioritize and remedy complete streets gaps) was updated last September and is fine, but could be updated if there is more recent information. Action 5 (identify and remedy street -trail gaps) could be added because this is part of updating the sidewalk and bike plan. Action 6 (traffic calming measures) should be updated. There is a traffic calming section of the living streets plan. BP 12: Mobility Options Action 1 (promote walking, biking and transit) could be substantially updated (information could be taken from BFC application). Action 2 (launch active living campaign) could be updated with more recent information about the ARTS plan and the living streets branding/education campaign. Action 3 (identify mobility options) could be added—include work of transportation options working group and continued interest in exploring a circulator bus in Southdale area. Could add that Commuter Services provides information/education for people seeking an alternative to driving alone to work or school. Action 4 (carpooling or ridesharing) could be added—Commuter Services offers this service. Action 5 (telework/flexwork)--?? Action 6 (add/expand transit service or promote car/bike sharing) --could be added as something that has being discussed (for example, circulator bus and getting a Nice Ride station [probably not going to happen per Nice Ride person I talked with a couple of weeks ago]). BP 13: Efficient City Fleets I don't have information on this, but PW would. District Transportation could also be called to see if they are working on anything like this. BP 14: Demand -Side Travel Planning 2 59 Edina might qualify for some of these—Planning Department would have the info. (1) Does PUD have a parking minimum? A developer can also ask for a parking variance and providing less parking than required by code. (2) and (3) Zoning kind of does this already in that, generally speaking, the areas zoned commercial or for high density housing are also the areas served by regular transit. (4) The transportation impact analysis (TIA) requires a statement on TDM—but this could be greatly improved (ETC used to review these reports, but hasn't for a few years, so I don't know if changes have been made to the policy). Hope this helps some. Jennifer On May 15, 2014, at 1:31 PM, Dianne Latham wrote: 5-15-14 This is great news! I suspect that Edina's Green Step Cities page for Transportation and Mobility options is not up to date. Jennifer — Could you go to Edina's GSC page at http://ereenstep.pca.state.mn.us/cityinfo.cfm?ctu code=2394621 and scroll down to Transportation and Mobility Options to see what is listed for Edina as having been accomplished. Then go to the complete list of possible actions at http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPractices.cfm and scroll down to Transportation. Read the best practices under steps # 11-14 and see if Edina is doing any additional actions for which we have not yet received credit. If you find additional actions that Edina has already taken, please report them to Ross Bintner who will then update Edina's GSC website. Thanks so much for all you are doing for transportation Dianne From: Ross Bintner [mailto:RBintner(�bEdinaMN.gov] Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 1:51 PM To: Ross Bintner Cc: Mark K. Nolan Subject: Multimodal Transportation and Living Streets Take a look at the latest from Mark Nolan and the Edina Transportation Commission. http://bikeleap,ue.org/content/bicycle-friendly-communities-released I'm told we were really close to the silver award this year. Congratulations everyone! Ross Bintner, PE, Environmental Engineer <ima e002. �f>952-903-57131 Fax 952-826-0392 g g RBintnerftEdinaMN.aovI www.EdinaMN.aov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business 60 CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION March 2014 — February 2015 Term SUMMARY AND DRAFT SCHEDULE Item Workplan WK City building energy project March motion to table building advisory, April motion to recommend approach of deeper energy efficiency savings, maximized greenhouse gas reduction, and energy savings. WP2 Environmental purchasing policy WP3 Energy efficiency community outreach May motion for PACE advisory communication. WK Integrate comprehensive plan chapter 10 into city operations. WP5 Business recycling task force WP6 Local food April motion to research council advisory to use Fred Richards as second community garden. ORI Green Step Cities Reporting OR2 Urban Forestry OR3 Solid Waste and Recycling March motion to table and modify water bottle advisory, April motion to approve water bottle advisory. OR4 Support city and commission activities WP = work plan number. OR = ongoing responsibility number Choose Month/Date for 2014 JOINT EEC / CC Workshop March 13, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: Elect Chair and Vice Chair. Sierks Advisory proposals (WP1) (PACE) (Water bottles) (GHG emissions) Presentations: Bill Sierks April 10, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: WP6 Presentations: Dianne Plunkett Latham May 8, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: WP6, PACE, June 3 meeting prep. Presentations: Gayle Prest, Sue Bast, June 3, 2014 EEC/CC Joint Workshop Item of focus: WP6, WP1, WP4 Presentations: Dianne Plunkett Latham, Bill Sierks, John Heer, Sarah Zarrin June 12, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: WP1, Presentations: Tim Barnes, Bill Sierks July 10, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: 2014 Budget, 2015-2019 CIP Presentations: 61 August 14, 2014 Meeting City Infrastructure Tour— PW Building +virtual tour (flooding, neighborhood reconstruction, residential redevelopment), Golf Dome, Sports Dome, Public Safety Training Facility, Cold Storage September 11, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: Create 2014 Workplan (Due September ?? to Karen Kurt) October 9, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: Presentations: November 13, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: Presentations: December 11, 2014 Meeting Item of focus: Prepare and review annual reports, awards, recognition. Presentations: January 8, 2015 Meeting Item of focus: Presentations: February 12, 2015 Meeting Item of focus: Presentations: Staff Suggested Topics Three Rivers regional trail project and Nine Mile Creek stream stabilization projects The future public uses for Fred Richards golf course Urban ecology, nutrient flows and clean surface waters. Natural resource management, wildlife habitat and comp plan chapter 9 Local energy conservation strategies Regional energy systems Urban soils, contamination, site development and wellhead protection. Consumer goods, materials and waste. Growth of personal device energy use. 62