001e e e for the your patience and uh good evening it's 6:09 p.m my name is Gabriel harp and chair of the nror energy commission and I'm calling this meeting to order I'm participating from my home in an arbor um let's see welcome to the October 8th electronic meeting of the uh energy commission we will conduct this meeting like inperson meetings and Commissioners during the roll call please indicate your current location also during the meeting please remain on camera just as you would be visible during inperson meetings unless your camera does not connect at the moment um finally please mute your microphone when not speaking public comment will be via telephone only to speak during any of the public comment opportunities please call one of the following to three numbers 877 85352 47 or 888
00278899 and enter the meeting ID number 5 excuse me 95687 718 7876 on your phone this information is also available on the published agenda in the Public Public Notices section of the city's website or on the broadcast of this meeting on CTN Channel 16 AT&T channel 99 and online at 8 www.a2gov.org watch CN Joe would you please read the all land acknowledgement statement um if you have available yeah unfortunately I do not have access to a my computer at the moment which has the land acknowledgement on there and I do not know it off the top of my head my apologies it's all right that said I think we'll move on to the approval of the agenda um is there a motion to approve the agenda as posted in a second commissioner overp and Comm
003council member breggs a second okay um Commissioners please raise your hand if you want to propose or any changes or discuss an issue seeing No Hands raised those in favor of approving the agenda as posted please raise your hand and say I hi hi I all those opposed please raise your hand and say n okay seeing none opposed uh the agenda is approved and we'll move on to the approval of the minutes is there a motion to approve the minutes posted in a second commissioner colen Garcia and a second council member Briggs thank you uh Commissioners please raise your hand if you'd like to discuss any changes to the minutes seeing none raised um all those in favor of approving the minutes as posted please raise your hand and say I hi I all those
004opposed please raise your hand and say n seeing No Hands seeing no none opposed uh the uh minutes are approved we'll now move on to public input uh this is an opportunity for people to speak for up to three minutes you're if you're watching on CTN please call 888 78899 or 877 8535 52 47 and enter meeting ID 956 8718 7876 this information is also displayed on the meeting agenda and video feed City staff will select callers who have raised their hand one by one using the last three digits of their phone phone number um to electronically raise your hand and to indicate your desire to speak please press star N9 on your phone you will hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak when speaking please move to a quiet
005area and mute mute any television or background sound so that we may hear you clearly and please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments think I I can do this let me one hand raised all yep um yeah caller ending in 134 uh thank you Mr Lang and chair harp K Garber 28 H Hill Court um there are 32,000 rental units in Ann Arbor so getting green rental housing right is critical before you vote tonight ask yourself this question will the program meaningly Advance this a20 goal for the year 2030 25% of rental properties have fully electrified and the electricity powering those homes is coming from renewable energy sources I think the answer is clearly no last month I put together one checklist scenario which commissioner mky was nice enough to
006include in in his written comments by cobbling together a series of simple and relatively cheap steps I easily exceeded the required 80 points the way the checklist is scored there's no real incentive for landlords to Electrify appliances or to add renewable energy um the checkli the checklist should somewhat improve Energy Efficiency but I want to advance those goals last month I suggested scoring the giveaway items lower or just raising the threshold for compliance to something like 110 points uh neither was done how did we end up with such a weak ordinance I don't know I do know the task force included the Wasa area Apartment Association the association frankly is a reactionary organization dedicated almost entirely to defending the narrow economic interests of its membership on its website there's nothing about climate but lots about
007the progressive legislation that it opposes sure solicit its stakeholder input but leave it at that I hope we're not letting the association dictate the limits of this ordinance as Wayne Apple Yard commented last month in a climate emergency we need fast and decisive action for that all of us must sacrifice including landlords there's a risk that will pass on cost to tenants but landlords often raise this issue just to oppose effective regulation um Mr Lang uh in an email today which was copied to me thanks uh states that the ordinance is the limit of what's legally possible he writes quote this is what we are able to do and it is not something we are able to change end quote I think he needs to explain this because I don't know of any state law
008except for the rent control preemption that restricts the city's ability to strengthen its own rental housing code we live in a home rule state that means courts give wide discretion to local governments and the State Building Code preemption only applies to new construction so let's hear about these legal limits tonight if they're real they need to come out otherwise I think we should go back and rework the ordinance um So based on what I know now and I'll be paying close ATT attention during the meeting I would vote no on tonight's resolution um but whatever you decide please keep the climate first in mind uh as hurricane Milton is about to slam into the Florida coast thank you all for your volunteer work thank you um no further callers thank you okay um tonight on
009the agenda we have the resolution in support of an ordinance to amend chapter 105 of title 8 of the code of the city of an arbor to support Greening of the rental market um and in the documents uh attached to tonight's meeting in gentle also there's a the green rental housing ordinance along with the number of attachments uh related to that ordinance as well as the supplemental materials associated with that um what we'd like to do is I'd like to um ask if there's a motion to open up discussion on the ordinance so moved this is John MC thank you I'll second thank you commissioner overpack and Joe is it right that we have to have a vote to open discussion as well or no NOP okay thank you um okay um I'd like to
010open it up for discussion then uh of of the resolution in support of the ordinance um I know a number of uh questions and clarifications have have been raised around uh around this both through email and as follow-ups to the last Commission meeting and um Joe maybe I'll kick it off with you if you don't mind and um if there's anything that you'd like to touch on before we uh before we uh proceed to other questions or clarifications from the commission members yeah and apologies again I thought I was good on Zoom I'm not but I at least have my computer and so I'm on mobile I very much oliz um yeah so I think in general there were a couple changes that you can see that were noted in there these were largely along
011the lines of things that are related to um just some technical things as well as just some you know Corrections of things that were just incorrect or could be phrased in a in a better manner um and largely what was presented last week or last month is what where we're at what we're moving forward with at this time and what we're able to support um I'm happy to go into some of those um some of those questions that were posed as well as some I know I forwarded on some that were uh presented but wanted to just make sure um to see if there was any you know other questions anything like that um otherwise I'm happy to just kind of start going into those questions but yeah I just wanted to see if there
012was anything else that would be helpful either clarification wise or questions from folks or um any anything else for just diving into those different questions and things like that okay why don't um Joe if it makes sense for you if you don't if you don't mind if there were um top level issues that you feel like you wanted to um address immediately from those from those questions um that might help us kick off the discussion as well and then I think we can follow up with any clarifications from other commissioners sure um I do see John I think John has a hand up do you want me to go to that or do you want me to I'm happy to start wherever makes little sense for you commissioner mki yes uh thanks for recognizing me
013uh as was mentioned earlier uh I took another attempt at summarizing uh the kinds of concerns and issues that I and others um have with the ordinance as proposed um that was sent an email um early this afternoon to Joe and several others and it was shared with all of you um they tend to be ordered I think in order of importance and uh what I would propose if um Joe doesn't have any opening comments or no one else has any um specific other questions is that we potentially open that uh email and just simply go down that list um that way we make sure that we sort of cover all the points in order and um I'm not um requiring or demanding that every single point be addressed but I think all of these
014points um are relatively significant um either in general terms such as those raised by Ken Garber uh in his public comments or in terms of some specific issues um that I think are going to be important to landlords or other people that are going to be using um and having to adhere to this ordinance so that's what I would propose I am fine doing that to be clear um and I'm happy to do that I do recognize too that that could be just a lot of me sitting here reading things off so at any point people are more than welcome to jump in um but so acknowledging all that I'm happy to just I'm happy to do that if John wrote them why why not and would you be willing to do it John um
015I couldn't read them I mean I didn't know I haven't been checking my email this afternoon I've been traveling so sure I mean I can I can um if we if we um share the document the email then everybody can see it and I can summarize the points um I don't have to read every word is that okay Joe yes that is fine um again no no no you're good um yeah and again just noting I I don't know what's happening I cannot access zoom on my computer uh so I can't screen share at the moment yeah and and maybe maybe what we do is we can start there's there's sort of three top level top level issues I think bro broadly construed um that may are probably the the big the biggest ones maybe
016to start out with and and if I might just briefly characterize each of them the first question has to do with um OSI the office of sustainability innovation's confidence that this ordinance and the and the the goals outlined in the a20 plan uh will be achieved um with this so do I have that that with do I have that basically correct John yes the a20 plan um as approved by city council um has certain high level goals and uh some of those then are broken down obviously to specific goals related to rental properties and so the question is um does OSI believe that these goals are achievable um within the next um five five years and three months um using um or based on the ordinance as is it's it's personally my belief that um
017it will not um be uh an enabler to meet these targets but I'd like to hear that from OSI and um then a lot of other points are frankly you know dependent on that as to whether or not those goals can be met or not in the assessment of OSI so the first first question was about those sort of the a20 plan and the and the broad goals of the a20 plan and and this ordin with respect to this ordinance and then there was a second question with respect to the the thresholds and and the sort of point system and how they were arrived at um and then the third had to do with a variety of specific checklist items and the sort of you know framing um of particular approaches or uh options within
018the tech check within that checklist um uh for different types of of um uh changes that that uh building owners might make uh or activities that they might undertake with respect to the checklist itself so those are sort of three big buckets of questions um at the outset um and maybe we can just start sort of with the gestal of of um gestal but also uh more specifically how you know the confidence that the OSI has around um this ordinance and the program overall with respect to the a20 goals you bet um and one other thing too just noting I think we might have amidst all the technical stuff we might have missed um doing the actual attendance roll call and all that but um if we need to do that formally we can but
019otherwise I can see all who's here and I believe we have Quorum so I think we're okay there um okay so yeah the the first one just talking about do we feel comfortable with these goals and the answer is yes to that I think still with you know the way this ordinance is laid out there you know there might still be work that needs to be done on top of it but that's something that's completely doable and I think this is something that sets us up to do all of that kind of work I think it's also important to note that you know we we look at this plan and I think a thing that we've you know said about it every you know every time the day it was signed the plan was out
020of date and the plan was wrong there's always things that are changing there's always things that are new and there's things that are in our new and you our new landscape that weren't things that we would have even thought could have existed at the time of this plan I mean just to name a few um if we're looking at some of the recent you know state level legislation requiring our um you know our electricity to be uh 50% from carbon free sources by 2030 that's something that's going to have a big impact and that's going to do a lot to kind of meet um some of these goals um you know specifically that you know rental properties uh having their electricity coming from renewable energy sources um um similarly the IRA tax credits that was
021something that you know at the time of the plan was not even something that felt like something that could exist and that's already having huge impacts on our economy on our building stock obviously it's not you know at the level of where those goals are at but it is something that very much gets us to those um you know really helps in a way that again we could not have fathomed at the time that the plan was created so all of that was a lot of talking but again yes I I personally feel confident and still being able to meet these goals there's going to be you know a lot of work and as with everything there is not one solution to it you know there's not one program not one ordinance that's going to
022make all of the change and that's why we need to be working at all these different levels getting people into this getting people moving forward and working at it from there so yes I think it is still completely feasible um any follow-ups to that otherwise I can go on to the next about the points and where the points are at commissioner Mercy I personally feel that is overly optimistic uh one of the goals is that uh let me double check here um I think 25% of all R rental units will be electrified by 2030 uh if you remember the original version of this list it was an attachment sent to you before the last meeting uh Ken Garber put together a scenario where um 86 points can be achieved simply by coming up with a
023plan and by doing rental uh uh yeah renter education and a few other things but really basically no significant decarbonization uh activities I I just simply don't believe that um you can take uh osi's word for it um I I think we should um remember this when we go forward but I don't believe that the threshold of 80 points for the checklist pathway is going to get us anywhere close to uh achieving the goals that are outlined at the the beginning of my email yeah I guess it must unless there's more that kind of Segways into the discussion around the point total so I'm to jump into that again just making sure there's nothing else before I jump into that council members clarifications on that or comments I'll I'll add one um I think um
024I'm I'm not sure who was I believe it was another commission member uh commissioner mki it might it might have been you um there was a a recent article in the journal science that looked at climate policy and the impact of of climate policies and a number and did a sort of comparative approach and I think I think if I um had the and I can I'll share this with all the commission members after after the meeting but I think one of the big takeaways from that was that those um those entities that had implemented policies were large the ones that were largely successful were accomplishing that through a combined uh sort of um approach to both incentives disincentives a variety of different policies all sort of mutual mutually complimenting each other um in in
025a variety of different ways and so I think um without getting into the details of of their analysis I think one of the takeaways for that is that um for me was that this approach fits into a broader strategy um of which this is perhaps one um one part of that strategy in which there are a large number or a moderate number of programs that are also complement that both from the perspective of incentives and and potentially disincentives as well um and so uh I'm I'm I'm somewhat encouraged by that by hearing that from from uh uh um from Joe around the description of the impact of of this relative to A2 Z's goals um but I'll share that article with you all just sort of as a broader policy document uh and Analysis uh
026commissioner mki thank you I'm going to comment most on this point I'm not going to provide the same level of comments as we get further down the list um so you can rest assur of that uh this is really the key point this in the next next Point as far as where the thresholds are set um the other stuff is is important and I really encourage OSI to look carefully at these points um I agree completely with what Gabe said um I've read a synopsis of the article that he's talking about um there's no doubt that uh this Ordinance Works in concert with other actions that OSI is has taken the city has taken we as uh uh as voters have taken with the millage and the funds that are available through the millage the
027problem is is that the threshold of 86 on the checklist passway does not require anybody to do most of these really significant electrification measures or Energy Efficiency measures so you can get 80 80 over 80 points by doing things like just go back and look again um is that uh a dishwasher is available in the unit ducks are sealed and insulated um electric rain uh the often the element in range are electric windows can be opened you know things like that that's not going to make a significant difference in whether or not uh we meet our a20 uh targets at least in my view so I I I I don't dispute at all in fact I entirely agree that we need to do this as a package of activities I just really highly doubt that
028this is going to make the kind of uh significant uh impact that we need to see from this ordinance commissioner overp yeah I was just listening to a podcast um last night uh you know looking at the can the difference between the Canadian approach to decarbonization in the US approach and not doing it holistically but the thing they focused on was in Canada they had a carbon tax uh that was very Progressive and you know essentially what a lot of our friends and colleagues have been uh pushing for in the United States where you'd You' tax carbon emissions of consumers you would then um use that money and redistribute it back to in L back to the consumer and in the in the place other taxes and Barry Rabe one of our colleagues in at
029un u ofm who's total expert on this stuff I haven't had a chance to talk to him but you know he was extoling the virtues of the Canadian approach uh back when he wrote his book on different ways to to uh do carbon taxes and you know we all know that or have heard anyhow that economists see that as the you know the ideal way um but this podcast was pointing out that that tax is uh probably you know charitable to say it's dead in the water it's going to go away and the whole you know Federal uh scene in in Canada is going to go the other direction and part because of this tax um and then they compare that to what um Biden administration's done which is rather than requiring things uh just
030put uh a lot of carrots on the um you know on the table and incentivize people to do the right thing and um it just you know I'm not an expert in public policy but it's interesting uh just to note that it is this you know I haven't read the paper that you mentioned Gabriel but I think it it it's sounds very familiar in the sense that you got to have this constellation and in a way you got to take a leap of faith um um this is not to say you know because we are decarbonizing in the United States a lot faster than we were a couple years ago um and it's picking up speed you know and there's no doubt it's going to continue kicking up speed even if I think even if
031Trump is real is elected that's another point that we won't talk about but the the the thing here is is it enough and if we start requiring if we start really pushing um renters landlords to do things and others will we get a blowback that will set us back further than have we not done that and I hate to say this but I just this one podcast made me start really thinking darn you know these guys might be right you know and I want to ask um I wanted to ask Barry what he thinks because he's so smart and so Mo you know calm about all these things but um it it this does worry me and I totally Embrace what John um and Ken were pushing for here but on the other hand I'm
032just a little worried that you know maybe what we need is some kind of compromise we need something that's a little tougher um in the ordinance but you know we got to be careful not to push too hard or else we'll get this blowback it's sort of like monopolization you know if we try and do that we'll just end up like Boulder and we'll will be setting you will set everything back maybe I just don't know and I you know so sorry about that it's not very definitive I know but is that kind of what you're saying Gabriel uh I believe I think that's a part of it and I think part you know part of the takeaway is also that there's AI you know a lot of these things happen at different times and
033at different intensities um and for different folks and so you know I think when we think about impact you there's there's ways of thinking about all or nothing there's ways of thinking about getting folks on the path let's say um I I used to work for an organization it's called Uh uh called Eco America um that was based in San Francisco and Washington DC and and and a number of the programs that they ran were based on getting large organizations sort of on the path to positive as they called it uh you know that was one of the slogans for one of the the campaigns and I think that a big part of this activity and as we we SE even seen with the with the um home energy um home energy uh inspect um
034uh home energy uh audit audit thank you that's the word I'm looking for inspector was not the right word rare I can guess the word um you know I think I think part of you know part of the ethos around that program feel feels a lot like it's about getting people on the path for that so for example you know the the um uh the auditor will come by and and evaluate sort of where you're at where your home's at provide you with a a sticker let's say if you've got a a gas furnace and say that says next time this will be a heat pump and it goes on the gas furnace and it's about signaling and about um reminding folks that when the time comes there's there's there's different options that can be
035made you don't have to go into the default the default sort of setting all the time um and I think that that for a lot of folks building owners uh renters homeowners um included a lot of the value of these programs is Simply Having the program in part to help support some of the things that they may already be trying to do in different amounts and sometime a lot of times they're not perfect and a lot of times it's not all at once um but sometimes the incremental pieces can can sort of add up in in significant ways and I think we've seen that um I think both for large organizations that are trying to do changes and also for you know programs that that Encompass um sort of city-wide scale things so I think
036that's where it comes from in my my my experience Joe did you want to address the oh commissioner over just listening to you it sounds to me as though maybe we should at least agree on this if it's possible that the 80% goal in other words 80% of tenant occupied homes 80% of businesses achieve 20% reduction in electricity use and 15% reduction in natural gas usage I don't know why we didn't just focus on emissions but that one is probably more doable than the 25% of rental prop properties have fully electrified and the electricity powering those homes is coming from renewable energy sources so it's really 25 the the real thing here I think that's got John and Ken I'm guessing uh really concerned because it concerns me is that 25% of rental properties are
037fully electrified is that fair to say John I'm concerned frankly that both are going to be achieved just because I think the threshold is too low yeah the 80 points yeah you know I'm not going to argue with you what what let me let me say one other thing while I have the floor um I would feel better if the ordinance had something that says up until 2030 uh city council and City administrator will monitor the uh progress made through the green oral housing program um there's a point later on that I'm act uh have in my email about tracking results and um potentially using a database to do that um that shouldn't be a problem because there's all these audits that are being done and points have to be awarded and every two years
038um do something like that up till 2030 I mean it doesn't have to be exactly as I'm prescribing now but something like this and then if it's not having the desired effect then at that time re-evaluate the threshold that um allows the certificant of occupancy to be um reissued and potentially increased it from 80 to 90 or 80 to 100 or whatever is considered to be necessary but right now we're we're we're as Ken Garber put the example together there's it's landlords if they want to really have to do very little put up Clos lines things like that it's it's really have bike racks these are not going to make significant changes in emissions in my view they will help but they're they're not going to make a big difference yeah I'm I'm All I
039like that idea in other words give them a chance to do something and if they don't within you know remember 2030 is not that far away two twoyear cycle and we're there um almost so they then there will be a a ratchet but another thing we could do with that same data would be make it public and I think it' be very interesting to start seeing what consumer pressure might do as well you know because at the UVM for example you know there's there's definitely going to be a lot more focus on this um and students a lot more students I think will be motivated uh to not want to live in a place where the landlord's doing squat Joe uh if I might pass it back to you with respect to the thresholds and
040it and it sounds like maybe there's also two additional sort of questions or clarifications that have been posed with respect to city council and City administrator monitoring the ordinance um and with respect to sort of publishing of of of metrics associated with that um is that would that are those something you might be able to address yeah yeah absolutely and again I I appreciate everyone's thoughts opinions feelings all those I mean you know there is a lot that goes into this and with that too again there is a lot that again one we are able to control and two that we aren't able to control and I think that's something that again we do need to Monitor and we do need to discuss because it is you know I I don't want to sound like
041a broken record and keep saying the same thing over and over again to an unsatisfying response but again at the end of the day as a municipality we cannot go above and beyond the state's building code we've talked about that in many meetings here um on all sorts of different topics that's kind of a thing that we have run into in many different Avenues and you know inherently within a policy like this that is something that is looking at building that is something we have to be very careful about we simply cannot put out something that is going to be beyond our legal authority to do and that's kind of the line that we have been walking with this and this is a thing that we've really been focusing on and so we need to
042find that balance of what is the pro amount that we can do that's going to make change but at the same time is again within our ability to do and that's kind of where this is where we have landed with that um this is these are the two numbers um that we have and this is where we are with that um you know I think we can sit here and it's not just this program to be clear there's other ones out there too and you know we can sit here and spend as much time as we can trying to get to something that you know gets us to that perfect you know perfect number that's going to make the biggest change G to have the biggest impact all these things um but we again have
043to live within the reality that is before us and we have to work within in that legal landscape and all of the other things that go with that to at least have this framework out there uh something that is out there something that is having an impact something that is getting people involved in the process again kind of like we talked about last month you know getting people involved and thinking about this is important if there is nothing then they can continue operating business as usual even if we're in a spot where say we feel that you know the policy might not be the strongest it could possibly be um but it's at least something it's getting them thinking it's getting them motivated it's getting some work done regardless um that's a pretty powerful thing
044especially when we're combining it with some of the different again incentives out there stacking with different programs different policies out there um and so again that's that's where we got to these numbers and that's that's kind of why we settled where we settled um you know of course we're going to be monitoring this you know it's not just going to be a thing we put out never look at again um going to be constantly looking at it again there are real constraints what we are able to do and how far we can go um but you know to the extent we're able we're going to be looking at it going to be evaluating figuring out what you know what makes the most sense can we tweak something to make it work better um we've seen
045that in some of our you know different different programs where things haven't been going a certain way so we've been working to improve them or change things where we can um but again all of this we do have to recognize again the legal landscape we are in what we are able to do as a city um what I love a big sweeping policy to come forward from the federal government that you know gives more ability for this of course I would love you know but there's only so much we can do with what we have right now I don't know if I missed any of the follow-up questions or points there but that um so if I did please please jump in Joe I have a quick quick followup which is is there anything uh
046that would be an obstacle for for city council to revisit the ordinance and update the thresholds that are listed um it would technically no realistically it's those same situations um we've gone as far as we think we can go um so that would you know that that same barrier would be in the same spot down the line um but were any of that to change there's you know it would have to go through the whole you know city council review process all that you know all you know all feedback things like that so it could happen but again facing the the same restrictions that we might be facing otherwise uh council member Rina and then uh commissioner mki I think I think Erica had her hand up before me I'm sorry it was covered by
047the the that's okay no worries it's any fine um so sorry I had to drop off the call as I mentioned earlier I had to pop into my son's uh parent teacher conference uh for a second so I missed part of the conversation I'll to catch up on it later um I did want to mention in terms of practical realities or or challenges and I I'm um I'm getting the sense that you know the desire is to to make sure that we are um we are putting things into place that allow us to achieve our our um you know advances our our climate action um allows us to reach our climate action goals um our greenhouse gas emissions I do want to to note that it is this is one of this ordinance and there
048are a few others but creates huge amounts of tension in our community um and for real really good reasons um and I I think it's important that this commission wrestles with it as well even though our Focus here is to you know make sure that we are advancing our climate action goals that's obviously the largest issue we see our planet or you know um facing our community the largest issue that I hear over and over again is community affordability U and people are really struggling with figuring out how to um how to find a place to live and so this is one of those policies that directly um is at tension with one of our local um biggest local challenges um we're obviously working to address that through incentives and you know rebates and lots
049of different place ways to reach that um but it is it's a challenge and I I think it's one that you know uh we will just need to continue to wrestle with in relationship to you know anything that impacts our our housing stock our rental stock uh how those um costs impact our community and and how do we advance our goals council member Rina thanks yeah I was uh just thinking about addressing John's suggestion about revie language to to have Council and the administrator review it and I guess I'm trying to think logistically through that John and I don't know if maybe you can provide some some clarity I don't know if your I thought your suggestion was to include that in the ordinance um and I don't I'm trying to think through kind of
050like technically what that would look like in an ordinance um and so I'm I guess I'm I'm trying to think through what it is your suggest I guess I wonder if you could reiterate what you're suggest suggesting it seems like that type of thing is something we would generally kind of instruct staff to you know every three years evaluate or something like that would be through a resolution rather than through living in the ordinance itself where the the enforcement Falls more on like I I enforcement would be challenging I would think and so that's where I guess I'm trying to think through what your what your suggestion is and how you wanted to achieve that commissioner mki uh let me first address council member rina's comment or question I I agree it probably can't appear
051in the ordinance or in uh city code or anything like that um this would have to be in an accompanying resolution or a resolution on its own that just uh asks or requires that the city administrator revisit the thresholds uh for example you know every X years on such and such a date or something like that I don't know how the city tracks those kinds of resolutions I'm not so confident that if you look at all these different things that are passed by Council over the years that they actually then are Revisited as they should be but um you know that's why we're also here as a Council or as a commission to remember these kinds of things and to raise the flag back to our Council Lea on that this this time period is
052up and that there was an agreement that the threshold would be reviews reviewed um I I would be mollified or or I would be satisfied with with something like that um as far as uh the comments that Joe offered as far as what we can and can't do let let's be clear codes affect new building construction energy and building and we're not talking about new buildings we're not putting a requirement on new buildings we're we're asking that landlords make improvements sustainability improvements to the housing that they own we know from Michigan saves that every roughly every $1 in Energy Efficiency um improvements that are made result in $3 Plus in savings so I think the this the affordability question is really not really um a valid argument it's something that we can refute it's not
053just Michigan saes there's a bunch of other entities that study this um the electrification uh issue is a little bit more difficult because we do know that natural gas is very inexpensive and electrification um in some cases is going to um result in higher in higher uh costs um not to the landlord but to obviously to the the renters but all in all I think what we're asking here for is something that makes our housing more sustainable it's not in conflict with what the city can do based on state codes as As I understood Joe to have said Joe yeah just to comment directly on that and to like while State codes do apply to new buildings there is also um and again I am not a lawyer but from the advice I have been
054given we have received it it largely the relates to two for a existing building unless that existing building under goes a significant renovation um which is something like you know over 50% of the assessed value they're the codes they are bound by are the codes that were in place when the building was constructed that's one of the tensions that we're dealing with so the you know the existing building in energy code does not just relate to new builds it still has impacts for existing buildings as well so that's what in some cases makes some of the tension a lot harder as well particularly as it relates to existing buildings Joe would you mind just with respect to the third sort of big bucket of questions around the checklist Pathways um there were a number of
055specific items brought up sort of around you know ranging from things like um everything from EVS to air ceiling to to um electric baseboard uh Heating and and other things and would you be able to sort of comment um on some of the checklist options relative to the overall um the overall Ord sure um and with that before before I go into specifics like I said I'm more than fine to just go through and list out all the different ones go from there um if that would be helpful for folks but um two two things I do want to note of um where to look is one um these these should all be in the packet and if not they certainly were last month and I apologize if I did not get them in this
056month I'm just trying to confirm that they are in there um but there is the green rental housing um uh points breakdown um checklist Point breakdown and the green rental checklist methodology both of these are in that green rental housing supplemental materials um doc or um docket that's attached in the packet and I would really encourage folks to look through those as I think um one while that doesn't necessarily answer all the questions in the sense of like me talking through them that goes through the general outline for how most of these things took place um the especially the you know the methodology for it for how things were implemented um again as we talked about last month we have you know those um modeled points which come directly from the modeling through red stock
057we went through and looked at if you do this what level of impact will this have and that's how we got the points for that so for some of them and again I can go into more detail specifically with these um if it would be helpful but just to take you know the electric baseboard heating one for instance it gets those points because it is based around the modeling where if that were to be powered by renewable energy you would see that level of reduction in the greenhouse gas emissions from that that's something that fundamentally cannot happen if you have a furnace or any other sort of fossil fuel based um you know or any sort of gas- based Appliance um so even though yes it might be less efficient itself than say a heat
058pump it is still something that can be renewably powered and that reduces emissions um that's why it gets those points in that area similarly it does not um you know gas emissions inside the home so that's where we get to that point value from it and you can see that in that checklist Point breakdown where you see you get 13 points of that from that renewable or from the renewable energy which is based on the modeling and then you get those two standard health and safety points um and that's why and that's to be clear that's just anything that is any type of electric heating um while you know when you look into the you know the HVAC category you see that you can get additional points for having a heat pump because it is
059more efficient we know that and that's why it gets those points stack with each other you get the points for it being an electric heating Appliance and also does cooling um but that's why you get um that's why you get that stacking points there because it is more efficient so it's important to acknowledge that you know even though yes that's not the most efficient form it still can have a benefit and it still gets points and that's why um those are in there similarly with some of the ones uh where we talked about like looking at um you know I'm going to just I'm going to jump and again I can go into specific ones for this but you know um talking about how you know there's not necessarily A stacking level when it comes
060to the insulation levels um again based on the modeling we we did and we looked at that that's the amount we saw in terms of decreasing greenhouse gas emissions from doing that level of work as well as a little bit for health and safety um when it comes to insulation there is largely you get to a point of diminishing returns uh where it's set at is our 50 if you have an attic R50 if you don't or sorry R50 with an attic R30 if there's not an attic so just roof insulation once you get kind of higher than that you don't like you still obviously you see benefits it gets better but it doesn't get significantly better and so you know if we were to do points on that you'd see like half a point
061quarter of a point more um so it's not really um that impactful of the difference there based on again the modeling and things we've seen with that and so that's why kind of those don't have that same level of differentiation because it would one be more complicated you got to go through and check also if when it's in the wall it's hard to tell is that R50 is that r60 you know they're they're pretty similar uh so it's not the impact it has isn't worth the complexity that it adds um so like I said I can go into more of these specific ones but in general looking through that um the checklist methodology explains how we went about it and then the checklist Point breakdown shows how like which of those points create that total
062number number of points there commissioner mki did you have a clarification yes uh real quickly to electric baseb heating I agree with everything Joe said but taking into account what council member Brig said if we're really worried about affordability then we should discount the number of points that are earned by installing electric baseboard heating because that is going to be extreme expensive that's going to be the most expensive way of heat of space heating that anybody can use and so um I I would encourage uh OSI to look at that point total and discount that and not just evaluated based on greenhouse gas savings but if we're thinking of sustainability um is in in its broadest terms that also is in affordability and economic sustainability that's not something that we should be uh advancing thank
063you commissioner overp yeah so thank you this is interesting um I'm wondering uh first on the baseboard one just because you mentioned it John um I agree with what you're saying but on the other hand as someone who has renovated a really old cabin in the Colorado Rockies um there's no way I could have done it she cheaper than baseboard electrifying um just cuz you know I can't put in Duck work and I can't have a heat pump in every single room kind of thing um and maybe I just had a bad contractor but I think I knew what he was doing um so said there are cases where that is better than leaving in some kind of gas powered uh I'm not saying don't do it I'm saying discount the amount of points that
064can be earned and nudge people in the right direction yeah but I mean I think I think you're right but I mean maybe the trick would be if you can do a do it if you can't then you can do B um but the other thing is uh my main point though isn't the doesn't the IRA have money for a lot of these things in other words tax credits for heat pumps tax credits for insulation for induction and other energy saving not just Appliance basically but you know home uh decarbonization mechanisms and uh whatever we do you know there should be a little coordination I don't know if there is and knowing what Joe and Missy and team are doing they've already got this in there but you know we should really be highlighting that
065this money is there and then incentivizing the landlords to use that money because that money won't always be there and we want to make sure that we in Michigan get our chance to really take advantage of it if these guys think they can do nothing um and save a little money that's probably what they'll do Jo yeah that was um a lot of what I was gonna say of part of it where it's again and I I don't want to get too hung up on this because it is you know one point yes that has a decent point value um but to be clear you know the it is not specifically just saying here use baseboard to heat that gets you 15 points that's one of a suweet of options saying electricity is the primary
066type of energy used for space heating so it's not specifically just saying baseboard heat that is one of the options um but exactly what commissioner overp was just saying there is one there are there you know there's funding out there for all the different types of heat pumps for that there is not for baseboard heating um and so that one pushes and incentivize towards that and two you know with again with the structure of the checklist these points are additive so again there is the electricity is the primary type of energy used for space heating that will get 15 points and that is for those reasons uh that we just talked about um and if you have baseboard heat you stop there you get 15 points for that that's where it goes now again if
067you have a heat pump which you know even the lowest you know the lowest number in there um is 10 points which is for a low efficiency heat pump with electric backup heat that's another 10 points so that's 25 points total you know an additional 10 points towards that that goal of eventually 80 which is you know 10 points isn't nothing that's an eighth of the points right there and so there is incentivization in those numbers to go towards heat pumps um you know obviously I'm not a landlord I'm not a you know I'm not the one making these financial decisions of what I'm putting in a building or a home but if I'm looking at that and I see how much more points I would get from doing a heat pump compared to just
068doing baseboard that weighs on you when you're making that that if that's the the sole reason for you making that kind of decision um so there is incentivization both baked into the checklist in terms of the number of points but there is also again the amount of federal funding that is available and we will be heavily heavily pushing all of that um in terms of you know getting that education out there and again in some places um or in some cases with certain types of rental properties they're also eligible for um or some of the City rebates uh we've had like I mentioned last time we have had some rental properties that have taken advantage of the rebates and are getting um heat pumps in those rental units so you know there's with these different
069types of incentivization both financially and in the checklist structure um you know that that it doesn't fully result in a heavy heavy heavily biased ing towards um you know baseboard heat as a way of of sort of um perhaps moving towards um bringing a a sort of close to to this beginning to bring it close to this discussion I just wanted to ask if any other commission members had any um clarifications or comments um I'll just add from my perspective um briefly as presented I'm inclined to support the resolution at the as it as it currently exists um but I'm certainly open to to um uh language in the resolution around um around uh um follow followup by city council and and and City administrators but um but I also don't think that it's necess
070necessary I think that I was somewhat encouraged by the call caller Ken Garber at the beginning of this meeting um calling for CER fast and decisive and I sort of think that while this while the thresholds and and all of it may not be fully perfect I think there is a a degree of fast of of speed and decisiveness about about moving forward and getting a program in place that others can start to make sense of and and perhaps start to adopt and and and use to the advantage and so um I will let's see I don't know who had their hand up first but I will uh how about commissioner 11 uh yeah thanks um I guess overall um hearing from people that I respect like commissioner Mery and others um I I do
071wish it could be stronger I don't know if there's a way we can make the same number of points but make it so you can only do like a certain number of these um activities in combination like the ones that don't really make any infrastructure changes like limit the number those uh limit how many of those you can do to get to the point total um I understand the legal uh issues I I've researched some of it myself and I I do agree that it does apply to existing as well as new construction um I think that's true but what I don't understand is if we're saying we can do what we can do now now why we can't just make it somewhat stronger um I will say as an attorney who's observed um the
072legal advice that comes out of uh our office um I I think they tend to be conservative I don't mean politically conservative I mean careful about what they allow the city to do and given that this is an emergency situation I would like to push harder and I I don't think that I don't see why we can't be a little tweak this a little bit more make it a little bit stronger right now um and again I I think we're just being we're I've seen this too many times where we allow the legal department to tell us what we can and can't do and I I respect their opinion but not all lawyers not all judges are going to have the same opinion um I'd like to see us be a little more aggressive and
073push the issue a little forward a little more commissioner colen Garcia thank you commissioner harp and uh this has been a really um valuable discussion for me listening to the different perspectives and it has me looking at um like the um the enforcement aspect of this uh so reading um chapter 105 uh uh where it talks about the um period between inspections and says it shall be no longer than two and a half years so um just getting getting every unit every building inspected there could be buildings that are right now being inspected and then if this ordinance passes then it's going to be another you know like up to two and a half years before they have an inspection before they have to do any compliance so if we would have you know like
074stronger like or a higher threshold of points and obligation maybe maybe it could help it could help pull us you know closer to so it's going to be we have less than six years left before we reach 2030 and you know as far as like having two cycles of inspections happen you know by then that's not going to be able to happen and so we won't be able to track Improvement so if we have a a baseline of all the rental units in the next two and a half years between let's say today and two and a half years then then how how do we know we're making any improvements so I'm just looking at it from that perspective right now and and hoping that maybe that could be something that Council can consider maybe
075shortening that time period understanding that it would take more inspectors it'll cost the city more but just looking at different ways of approaching this that's what I have commissioner overc thanks uh yeah we have some ideas here and I just wondered if we can uh in the words of commissioner 11 be a little more aggressive and I think uh commissioner Goen Garcia just came up with one idea um and I think that combined with what commissioner mky was saying earlier of trying to figure out a way to make it clear to landlords that the longer they wait and the further they get away from this period when there all this money sitting on the table uh the more urgent it will be to decarbonize their units I don't know if there a way to do
076these a couple of these things the last one I like I still like which I don't know if anyone else liked was my suggestion that we that the we are being you know the we shorten the period I like that and then we we also between inspections but we also put it in a public domain so people can get a sense of what the truly green rentals are and the Not So green rentals are and let the P the market help us out thank you other other other comments or clarifications I'm I'm um trying to think myself about how we uh sort of bundle bundle this together um and how we should proceed next and I'm open to suggestions um as moving to sort of wrap up discussion here shortly um commissioner mury perhaps this
077is something that could Beed reflected in the resolution of support where we request that OSI together with uh the city administrator's input and Council review the threshold of 80 points whether that could be higher or not and that the threshold be re-evaluated um and that could be as we discussed ear and another resolution every X years based on the report that is supposed to be issued at the that the ordinance itself calls for um and progress in making the kinds of upgrades that are are necessary I I think that can address a lot of the points that have been discussed up till now um I don't want to go into a lot of other details that are in the email that I sent and in the comments that I sent before the last meeting but
078I think there's some really important points that still have not been addressed for example um how are fines going to be levied are they going to be on a per unit basis or a building basis or some kind of uh combination of the two um what about EV charging there's no mention at all about EV charging is all EV charging for all of these rental units going to be provided in uh with chargers that are um in the public right away uh what about apartment complexes with 200 units where they're not on public streets are people going to have to get in their car and drive to a public charging unit all the time that's a huge disincentive for P for EV charging there's just a whole lot of other issues in this document that
079I speaking now to our Council leaon that in my view cannot be ignored um there's questions about how co-ops in sororities and fraternities are going to be handled they have different sleeping Arrangements I have not seen how those that's addressed in the ordinance and these questions have not been answered so I I'm going to be quiet um from here on out until we talk to about the resolution I just think there is a lot there are a lot of things that still need to be resolved before I would support a resolution of support um I guess asking cheerart I am willing to go through and answer all of those questions I have answers for them all these things have been considered and are addressed in some way whether that feels satisfactory or not I I
080can't say but they have all been addressed but just wondering if that is what would be helpful to everyone I'm happy to go through all of these if that would be helpful can that be done in writing I mean you had you had all of these points a month ago so between we ago and now that there could have been something written in response to all of these questions where we would have had all that prior to the meeting and we could have voted tonight I'm happy to go through them part of that is difficult in the sense of again what is open meetings and accessible from that manner um so that is in part why I'm happy to discuss it now in an open meeting setting if that would be helpful I think part
081of what I think um there's a number there's a number of probably technical points in in the in the email as well um one of the questions that we might deal with was whether or not we wanted to um potentially add uh anything into the into the resolution itself um and maybe that is or is not addressed by by some of the responses Joe I don't know if you're able to to comment on that in ter just in terms of I think what commissioner mki was respecting was was commenting on with respect to the um OSI and City administrator input on reviewing the threshold and re-evaluating and and sharing progress on making upgrades yeah those could those could certainly all all be part of it um as well as you know if anything were to
082change or if something needed to change in the regulations document or anything like that or you know Point values things like that certainly all could take place um the other thing I will note broad sweeping thing especially as part of some of it with how you know units are defined how things happen in places like a sority things like that all of it is based on the existing rental inspection process that we've talked about it's in you know chapter 105 specifically you at 511 um all the information is in there for how those things are already done with the inspection how the units are determined how they inspected everything will fall in line with that existing thing nothing is changing nothing is um being gotten rid of it's all falling in line with that so
083um for next steps um in terms of the resolution that we've been discussing on the agenda today um Joe could you remind me of the process that we might undertake if we wanted to add add something to that resolution um yes and council members please correct me if I'm wrong because I forget this as well um believe we need to open discussion on the resolution we can vote on changes within it um and then once we're satisfied can might have to go back for a second reading but please someone jump in just in case I'm mistaken on any of that thanks Joe um so I'd like to suggest that we move on um from this discussion and um and potentially um open discussion on the resolution itself I I see a a nod from um
084uh motion from council member BRS is there a second second yep okay all those all and do we need to vote on that as well no okay sorry sorry did what was the original I I believe we moved and seconded something already um prior to the discussion we just had was there an action we needed to take I think it was just discussion on the information itself gotcha so we okay so it was probably we probably didn't okay yeah and so now we're now we're moving in second in on the on on discussion on the resolution itself um and any potential amendments to that resolution Council membera actually John ra his hand but I was just going to say this is so now we've moved on to the resolution so now it be the time
085to propose amendments if folks have them or open that discussion um it sounds like that's where some of this convers wanted to go and so um I guess I would just ask we have this rule at the council table I don't believe that it's a rule in your bylaws but if there are any amendments made it could be helpful to provide them in writing to Joe so that he has them so um if folks are thinking of things my suggestion would be to maybe start drafting something that you could provide to him in writing commissioner mki um yes if I could just add to that what my recollection is of action that we've done in cases like this in the past is when we've made minor resolutions um it may be a little bit difficult
086with Joe's technical difficulties um but I believe the resolution um received the first reading in our last meeting so we we could approve it in this meeting and if uh we so desired there could be changes to the resolution that could be made in real time um where someone simply for example added a resolve Clause that called for um for example a that the checklist pathway uh threshold be reviewed for possible um higher value and at least initially and that uh Council together with City Administration look at what those thresholds are and the results of the prr program um every two years or something like that something to that effect we could either do that now and vote that may as I said be a little bit difficult maybe the better proposal is to do
087what Joe suggested or what the council member Rina suggested and that is to submit a possible language uh that could then be voted on at the next meeting admittedly that's another month's delay just just for clarity I I was suggesting in either situation I think it could be helpful to provide them in writing to Joe so that you can make the the resolution or make the motion but rather than him trying to capture it in real time if you can draft it up and email it to him for him to include I think that would be helpful even if we do that now rather than at the next meeting I'm I'm trying to type up what John was saying real quick and I'm going to fire this off to Joe that's great and I'm I'm
088I'm um I've got the resolution up in a word doc ready to screen share in case we need to screen share that in just a second as well and I'm sort of doing similar that's okay with you all yes thank you and again sorry I don't everything else is now working except zoom on my computer so don't know it might be better to send those Resolute that language straight to chair harp then so he can include it in I under normal circumstances I'd be willing to do this but I've got uh a phone sitting on top of my laptop so that my video is going through and I really don't have the capability to type this up so uh if somebody else is willing to do it great um if someone would like me to
089do it I'd be happy to do it but it have to be considered before the next or in our next meeting I'm gonna go ahead and share my screen here um and what I have highlighted is um a quick draft which I don't think I have exactly right um but as things come in I may be able to um add to that sorry let me let me zoom in just a little bit for you all [Music] um we might just want to uh for a point of clarification we everything the city council does we do through the administrator and administrator assigns that so um you could for Simplicity sake instead of say request OSI with City input you could just say encourages the city council to you know direct the administrator or to review the
090threshold of 80 points or something like that that that should probably read the the checklist pathway threshold because there are we didn't discuss there's a her uh pathway um there another thing that we didn't discuss was a recommendation from Jan Culbertson also look at an energy star uh threshold as a as another path pathway um I mean I don't know if that we want reflect that in the in the resolution but um at least in this particular case it's the checklist passway that's proba DEC capitalized checklist pathway all right so I have a comment if I may yeah the the increasing the frequency to every more than every two and a half years um I understand exactly where carleen's coming from it was also concern in one of the documents that I submitted but we
091have to recognize that that's an administrative burden on everybody so I don't know that it's realistic to to do that I mean we can include that in the resolution or not I'm I'm skeptical about doing that um what I would prefer to see reflected in here is that we review the threshold initially when the ordinance is enacted and to review um the threshold and it could just be thresholds could could potentially be not just this particular pathway but other Pathways that the the thresholds be reviewed um for example it could just be every two years and um up till 2030 uh or something like that um for possible uh modifications or yeah something to that effect carlen I don't know if you want to push back on the two and a half years or not
092Joe yeah the one thing I'll not is similar what commissioner Mercy just said that that two and a half years is just as much you know for the general cycle as it is for again where the um yeah City inspectors are at it takes roughly that amount of time to go through and do all those inspections um and so you know again you're welcome to put whatever else you would like to in there but just noting yeah the the only way to be able to do inspections on a higher frequency and again because this would count for inspections for all inspections it's not just green Roa housing um so there would need to be more you know inspectors doing that kind of that kind of work so we could obviously review it at any frequency
093that doesn't change anything but yeah purely having that cycle um it's it's broader than just green rental housing uh clarification on this the um in is is the for the language would it be to direct the city to revie the city administrator to review the check Miss paway pathway um is there a when in that statement and I believe there was something mentioned at the outset of the ordinance or um or at some frequency um there's not directly anything saying we're reviewing it at you know at at this interval um rather it's just as as every inspection takes place that information is put into the system and that can be reviewed at at any time there's nothing specific spefic um on that if I may um after pathway the word b I don't think is
094necessary um and uh as to your question and and Joe's comment um I would like to see possible I don't know what you mean by modifications I think what we talked about is modifications on a certain interval that's the word that that that Joe mentioned which I think is a good one and we could Define either what that interval is or we could leave that to um city council working together with the city administrator to Define what that uh interval might be given that we have a 2030 Target and um it we obviously don't want it to be too short but we also want it don't want it to be too long that seems like the right approach to leave it um to leave it to be defined um commissioner 11 yeah I mean I
095I say we put like some sort of date on the initial time that they're going to do it and then after that it could be like at some sort of regular interval that they determine I don't know maybe like no later than two or three years after the program has been in place or something like that and then at regular intervals after that but commissioner colen Garcia I think you're on mute sorry I would be interested in having the checklist review occur prior to this being released um and then the inter interval review remember what Joe was was sharing with us in terms of all the changes that have happened in the last few years with regards to policy with regards to um you know the transition of the grid with regards to technology things
096are going to be uh may be being made available and so having the interval be greater than 2 years uh we will be not taking advantage of opportunities so I think it should be shorter maybe 18 months I know it sounds aggressive but it's it's it 2030 is around the corner commissioner msky and and I I also look to um Joe if there's a suggestion or or council member Briggs um but uh commission commissioner mki and then council member Briggs I support caren's comments and concerns I would recommend that we not Define the interval that that we leave that up to city council and uh the city administrator with o input to come to an agreement I mean also this as we discussed involves just the entire process of um assessments and everything else and
097we don't know all the details of those so I would just say you know at the onset and on a defined interval okay thank you uh council member BRS yeah thank you um so yeah I just sorry I'm having some video issues too um so I guess I would just I understand the urgency and the the desire and I think that it's being sort of communicated in in this resolved Clause I just um want to remind folks that the the whole purpose of the office of sustainability and Innovation um it it is built around achieving our our our and um our climate action and they've developed our our our climate action plan um H zero plan and um in in collaboration with the community it's been you know it is the purpose that guides them
098in their work on an everyday basis and so um this is you know I think that regardless if we they are evaluating the progress towards this as well so I know we want to make sure that this is happening um but I also think that you know just a reminder that this is this is happening as part of their their daily work plan as well is to you know or their their annual work plan as well is to be evaluating what is working what is not working um and looking to make modifications to improve upon that and and looking at what changes are happening in state law and you know different incentives and making modifications there so um you know I think this is this is going to move forward I wonder if if a
099is is is directing the city administrator versus working with the city city administrator a more appropriate uh or better fit for the for for this Clause it's okay we just we use the the language of directing the city administrator it's fine I mean I I wouldn't over you know sure it's fine as is I know it sounds like very direct it's I mean it's it's harsh language but it's it is just kind of uh council member Rina yeah I was just going to add to that I think your your action is directed at city council and you're encouraging city council um I would definitely say that uh we have had this issue in the past two commissions cannot direct City staff but you're encouraging Council to do so and that's fully within your scope thank
100you so um I'm G to stop sharing screen if that's okay if everyone has a I'll I'll email I'm going to try to email this back um here shortly um as well um and were there any other discussions around the um the resolution as as it currently exists or amendments to to the resolution commissioner mki so I'm going to support the resolution because I'd like to see a program go into effect I'm not happy with the program as it's designed I hope Council and OSI and City administrators seriously look at revisions um but we have to keep this all in context um this this program is two and a half years behind schedule that was laid out in the a20 plan this program is a huge lever and as long as we do nothing that
101lever is just sitting there blowing in the wind this involves 8,500 buildings and 31,500 units as was added to the resolution we have to do something and this shouldn't be just something that makes makes it look good that we've done something this has actually drive action and hopefully this as was discussed earlier with all the other programs that the city and the federal government and the state and others have in programed they will work in concert to really Drive changes in Behavior the other thing that I want to mention to everyone is uh uh chair harp has indicated that we're likely to review the greenhouse gas inventory the greenhouse gas inventory shows that emissions dropped 1% last year in the city um that does not reflect new housing that is coming on board and will
102create new emissions um we've been averaging roughly one to one Orum me one and a half to 2% per year um that goes back to the year 2000 if you look at the simple inventory if you look at the full inventory it's in that that range the upper end of that range since 2015 we need to do something we need to do it fast and I think this moves this forward but it should only really move forward if this is something that's done that is really going to drive results thanks for the opportunity to comment thank you um council member breaks yeah I'm just gonna um these are there's no doubt about it um reaching these goals is is challenging espe as we're having a growing growing Community um we lack the state tools to
103do this we lack some of the resources that we need to do it is absolutely challenging um I can you know I it would be we we could we could decide we we're not going to build any more housing in our community um and it would be a lot easier for us to advance those goals right in terms of we're just dealing with our existing housing stock and we're not dealing with that and so I think again I just point to there this this is a major tension in our community we're going to wrestle with it in this in our own commission and I just I'm going to always kind of bring us back to that other piece of we are trying to address um Community affordability adding more housing Supply and this is absolute
104tension with this and we're trying we're wrestling the best we can with it you know I certainly look to this commission to help us figure out how we do that better um we're looking to a lot of commissions planning commissions working on this you know a lot of commissions are trying to put their heads into this space but um you know I those numbers I want you to imagine what happens when that housing gets built in another Community with with less focus on on that and and when those people are are driving into the community from someplace else um and so although we are we have our our our goals are you know I think we're going to have to continue considering how you know are we are we using the right measures to examine
105our progress um is also something I think we need to um be always keeping an eye on in terms of our a20 plan um you know are we are we tracking the right numbers I realize we've been at this a while and I I think we skipped the Break um part of the agenda um as well um and so um I think what i' what I'd like to do though is is ask if um there's uh any um I'd like to move towards closing the discussion on the resolution itself um and uh ask if there's any um uh perhaps a motion to bring it to a vote and and please please uh correct me on process if I'm if I'm uh missing anything um in in that I I think we just need to still
106vote to accept the amendment before thank you y [Music] um I move we accept the amendment as proposed I second it thank you and um so moved by commissioner colen gar and seconded by commissioner mki um all of those in favor of accepting the amendment um and I'll just read that very briefly resolve the energy commission encourages city council to direct the city administrator to review the checklist pass pathway for possible higher thresholds or modifications at the outset of the program and defined interval all those in favor please raise your hand and say I I all those opposed please raise your hand and say nay seeing none opposed the motion passes is there a motion to move towards a vote um on the proposed resolution sorry you've actually already moved it so that's why we're
107having the discussion yep okay thank you um and so I think now we can take a vote is that is that accurate okay um with respect to the ordinance to amend chapter 105 of title 8 of the code of the city of an arbor to support Greening The Greening of the rental market um all those in favor of the resolution uh please raise your hands and say I I I all of those opposed please raise your hand say no seeing none opposed the motion passes thank you everyone um it's now 7:48 um what I might propose is that we take a a three minute break um if possible and then come back at uh 8 uh 751 and um we'll move on to the rest of the agenda we're just about done y e e
108e Joe just a quick point of clarification um You' mentioned the roll call is that something that we need to go back to or before the staff report or I think we're okay okay I can I can see it every one so I think we're okay I I think the only issue would be I think John has noted that on with the agenda and um for those of you who might be coming back uh there was just a quick note that if you are not um calling in from an arbor if you could note that you're elsewhere um that would be appreciated we will move on to the staff report of the agenda Joe do you mind yep um some of these are similar to previous ones but um still relevant of just noting again
109and specifically as it you know relates to this as we talked about EV Chargers as well um with the goal of increasing these um EV Chargers the commercial EV charger program does provide an opportunity for commercial and multifam property owners in an arbor to receive up to four Free level two EV Chargers um to learn more about the program and view the application and apply uh you can visit OSI a2gov.org charger program um another that can kind of overlap is um for homeowners lawn care service providers and property managers or anyone else who is interested in learning more about electric lawn care or sustainable lawn care in general they can join um the Alla sustainab Innovations on October 21st at Cobblestone farm from 4: to 6:00 p.m. to see electric lawn care equipment in action
110uh you'll be able to hear from lawn care service providers and experts about their experiences with electric equipment and pollinator aware practices get questions answered and view live electric lawn care equipment demonstrations um you can view our website or get in contact with me or Chrissa Ebling at cing a2gov.org um in the last to you know to celebrate an a20 achievement um through our various free tree giveaways and events we are happy to announce that we have officially surpassed our goal of planting 10,000 trees on private property in an arbor um while you know we have reached this goal uh well ahead of schedule uh naturally we you know uh we plan to keep this momentum going they'll be continue to host free tree giveaways over the next few years um and we're also beginning
111to do uh survival studies to monitor the trees that have been planted make sure they're doing okay in assess um if they are not that is all that I have for today thank you we'll move on to report uh from the environmental commission yes uh thank you uh the last environmental commission uh was focused on two agenda topics the first was a review it was just for information only on the water regulatory framework that the city operates under starting with Federal level State County City looking at all the different agencies that are involved and what they regulate and what they're responsible for that's a really interesting uh presentation um that was put together with including input from City staff so anyone that really wants to better understand that uh I encourage them to take a
112look uh at that presentation on legistar or review the uh the meeting uh video the second was a first reading of a resolution of support for or Michigan Senate Bill 228 which would repeal the 2016 PA 389 which prevents local uh jurisdictions from regulating plastic bags and other containers uh so the city of Detroit has already passed um such a resolution um I picked that up and we looked at that and um it will be considered in a second reading and hopefully approved and go on the city council um by the way uh we uh have several of our elected officials in Michigan that are behind that um including Senator shink and and Irwin so that's all one other thing about 10,000 trees we've discussed this in the environmental commission and I think the only
113thing that we can claim for sure is that we've handed out 10,000 trees we don't know whether they were planted and we don't know their survival rates at least as of yet Joe is that correct is that your understanding um I believe so I don't work directly on the program but yeah that's my understanding and they we've just started doing those um survival and follow-up studies so those are taking place currently fantastic thank you thank you for that um updates from Council I don't know why this part always catches me off guard do you have anything Erica I don't at the moment I'm sorry um oh there there were some revisions made to herd last night um which I know that um that folks have been involved in and so maybe we can provide out
114an update on that um we could send kind of the revisions for everyone to have so that they can review them that' be great thank you so much okay we'll move on to the um the last uh opportunity for public input uh this is an opportunity for people to speak for up to three minutes and if you're watching on CTN please call 888 78899 or 877 853 5247 and enter meeting ID 956 8718 7876 this information is also displayed on the meeting agenda and video feed City staff will select callers that have raised their hand one by one using the last three digits of your phone number to electronically raise your hand inate your desire to speak please press star9 on your phone you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to
115speak um and please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments Aller ending in 134 thank you Mr Lang and Cher harp it's Ken Garber again um yeah thank you for the discussion I have two things to say a question and a comment the question is um Mr Lang reiterated that um the uh checklist elements um and the scoring and the ordinance in general was um pretty much pushed the limits of what the city can legally do based on State Building Codes um and I know you don't have the information right at hand um Mr Lang but I'm going I want to warn you I'll be emailing you this question and hopefully you can give me some kind of reply you know I'm familiar with um the uh statute that governs new
116construction The Still d rosted Hil single state construction code Act 1972 as amended also known as act 231 and um you know it's a reasonable interpretation of that act that you know new the cities cannot pass construction codes that exceed um State uh construction code and energy code um elements uh but for existing buildings I wasn't aware of uh similar state preemption I know there's something called the Michigan Rehabilitation code um but taking a quick look at it you know during your meeting it looks to me like it sets a floor not a ceiling um so uh you know I would appreciate any clarification of this legal question um or from commissioner Levan who seems to have knowledge of this I'm willing to be enlightened on it um so just a warning I'll be sending
117you Mr Lang an email um any information is appreciated the comment is I want to remind energy commission that um over a year ago in September 2023 you had first reading of you know the carbon pollution impact fee ordinance um which it was modeled after the one that Burlington Vermont adopted last year that um puts an annual fee on um and new construction that uses natural based on the social cost of carbon um it's also similar to what uh Cambridge Massachusetts seconds doing and uh other cities are stepping up berky California is set to vote next month on um a an ordinance taxing um the owners of buildings you know new and existing uh large ones are 15 15,000 square feet or larger based on the amount of natural gas consumed um the funds generated
118would be estimated at around $27 million a year 90% of which would go towards retrofitting homes and buildings in the city electric hbac um anyway just want a reminder this is still on your table formally we love to see it come back thank you thank you um just make sure sorry for the juggling yeah no further callers thank thank you Joe and thank you for the for the the comments um we'll move on to items for the next agenda uh as I shared an email um that outlines some agenda items with all of the commission members um through through Joe and just to give a look ahead um in November we're hoping to have a a potential presentation from OSI staff on the greenhouse gas inventory and OSI dashboard if possible and then then in
119December um looking to potentially try to tease out some of the challenges associated with the implementation of a20 I think this came as the suggestion of a number of of Commissioners um and have a um that from MOSI staff and to have a discussion among staff and commission members around that and possible priorities for Council in the year ahead um and as as needed so that's the look ahead I think for the the next two commission me that those may be subject to change but I also want to open it up if there are additional um suggestions commissioner Mery um I support the request uh that we take up the resolution that uh Ken Garber just mentioned uh I had mentioned that um maybe six months ago um that we had left that dangling that
120resolution generally received favorable uh input I sense that the city council isn't interested in taking this up they're interested in more in uh uh carrots than sticks but I think it should be discussed um and I think when we discuss it we need to consider um the the the point that council member Briggs mentioned about uh building in an arbor versus building outside Ann Arbor but I think uh we all know that affordability is not just um rent it's also utility cost it's the travel uh or Transportation cost and it's the opportunity cost of time lost in transit so um whatever we do that minimizes that while also minimizes emissions we're doing the right thing for anabor residents and prospective residents thank you okay um seeing no further hands raised um it is now 8:04
121p.m. and as chair I will call this meeting adjourned thank you everyone and um appreciate the discussion and have a great evening thanks for thanks for bearing with my technical stuff appreciate yall