Good morning. Welcome everyone to our Committee on the Environment. It is 10 o'clock and we
do have a quorum present. We are participating regular meeting via video and teleconference
and we will begin our first item for individual consideration. A, consider approval of the
minutes of February 3rd, 2020. Yes. Councilmember Muthler. I move approval. Second. All right.
So all in favor say aye. Aye. All right. And we will go right on down to our next item
B, receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction regarding update of the
2012 Sustainability Plan. Okay. Can you hear me? New at this? All right. So we'll just
jump right in. The Sustainability Plan update. We're bringing it back to you today as requested
at the June 6th council meeting. We have our timeline, the plan overview and then some
of the questions and comments that were forwarded to the staff and then we'll be seeking your
direction today. So just a little bit about the plan update. The plan is designed as a
framework to guide sustainability through the next five years, provide guidance and
direction. It's a guidance document and not an action plan and I think that's what's most
important to distinguish today. We set out to update the existing sustainability plan
with internal stakeholder and community feedback and we were updating the goals and strategies
and then we were going to move forward for council consideration and adoption and then
develop an implementation action plan. So just a quick look at our timeline. Beginning
back in 2017, we met with the COE about updating the plan. We held some internal stakeholder
meetings in 2017. In 2018, we moved into community feedback, presenting that to the COE and discussing
how that feedback was going to be incorporated into the document. We met several times about
the update. Then we moved into 2019. We had some changes that impacted the plan for the
star communities and the USGBC transition to lead. So that held us up a little bit.
We moved into 2019, reviewed the goals, strategies and the additional considerations that we
were going to put forward in the full draft back in September. In November, we did bring
that forward with the full draft of the plan for review. We had some questions and clarifications
that we brought back in January of 2020 and at that time, we were directed to take the
plan to the full council and we also have the advisory committee as a separate item
to consider adoption of the advisory committee along with the plan. And then we went to council
in June and we had some additional questions. So we're back today to address those.
Just a little bit, we had some questions about stakeholder engagement. So we had two surveys,
two online surveys where we received 551 responses. We had three public meetings with 33 participants.
The feedback was summarized and presented to COE in June of 2018. That was where, again,
we outlined how the community feedback would be incorporated into the plan.
So just brief overview, broad goals and strategies, set the next steps for developing new plans
and programs, advancing sustainability in the city of Denton. A couple of the big items
that would come out of the update would be setting the greenhouse gas reduction target
and then fully developing action plans to meet the target. And the community resilience
planning. So the community resilience plan is kind of an all-encompassing plan and it
rolls up a lot of the different focus areas and allows us to have that full plan and actions
to implement that. And both of those would be created with future community engagement.
Just a quick side-by-side comparison, we still had the eight focus areas. We did expand focus
area eight in the 2020 plan. We added ten new goals, six new strategies, and six new
KPIs in the 2020. So next steps, just have a conversation today and see what we need
to do to move forward and what the direction is if we need to do additional community engagement,
have additional questions answered. We're here to answer whatever we need to today and
get this moving forward.
All right. Thank you. Go ahead, Councilmember Meltzer.
So before getting into the line item level, my thinking has evolved on the macro process
on a couple of points. One is that it was lost on me that the action plan was something
different than the simply sustainable plan. So I hear that, but a lot of my discomfort
is the sort of lack of specificity. And I think that that's what I'm seeing reflected
back from public comment as well. And I think that's not really a helpful distinction. I
think putting it out, I guess I would call it something different, like some notes. If
it's not actually the plan, I don't think it's that helpful, honestly, to share. I think
we should get it more fleshed out so people see direction. So that's one. Second is on
how to get to that result. My thinking has changed in terms of the role of sustainability
committee that was brought momentarily to council. Rather than have them jump in after
the development of the plan to help instantiate it, I think we do a better job as a body and
as a community if we form that group and had them integrally involved in creating the plan,
creating the action plan. So those are my two main points I'd be very interested to
hear. Reaction and what my fellow committee members feel.
>> Councilmember Davis? >> Sure. Well, I think I agree in part and
disagree in part. I thought it was clarifying for me, I mean, staff just had it in the presentation,
to hear it previous to this as well. The role of this plan, it's kind of like the citywide
comprehensive plan. You have your big 50,000 foot goals in the big plan and then each one
of these things, I mean, just look at the feedback that we got on each one of these
points. You could spend one that we get all the time that we get repeatedly is where's
our climate action plan? Where's our climate action plan? Well, that doesn't function as
well at the 50,000 foot level. The climate action plan has to be very granular and very
specific and so it fills a different role. I think in the ecosystem of action plans and
strategic plans and comprehensive plans, I think this one fills its intended niche well.
It sets big 50,000 foot goals and then we have to go department by department. We go
to solid waste and we have a solid waste plan and it may hit three, four of the different
focus areas, but I think that's by design and then we have, you can think of more examples,
department by department, what each part of the city needs to do to fulfill the overall
big plan. I think that also relieves some of the pressure that we get in some of the
feedback for where's the specificity? Well, the specificity comes at those granular levels.
What is each department doing? I know that there are some folks in the community who
see that as kind of passing the buck. Well, here's the big plan. When you're going to
get to the real plan, when's the real action going to happen? Well, I think in an organization
our size and the duties that we have, the stewardship duties we have to the taxpayers
and rate payers, I think that's how it works is you start 50,000 foot and you have to work
your way down. I understand the frustration, but I think this plan fulfills the role it's
intended for pretty well. Now, does that mean that we can't do a better job of keeping the
gas on and maybe gas is a bad, you know, keeping our foot on the accelerator? Sure, we can
do a better job of that and council can do a better job of making sure that we're pushing
forward. And so that's why I agree to the second part of what you said, Paul. I think
that a community committee would do a better job of putting together the, sorry, my office
line is ringing. I think a community committee would do a better job of putting together
specific action plans. The same folks that we would expect to have a lot of really good
input, if we were to sit in our offices and put it together ourselves, those same folks
would be the ones that we would expect to serve on a committee. And I think they would
do, like you said, a better job of getting the whole thing together with the kind of
action plan the community would want to see. I think it's got to be grassroots in the way
that you're describing. So I agree with that part.
Yeah, yes, I would agree with both of you on that the advisory, the sustainability advisory
committee is vital in this process. And to hear that this is a guiding document, not
an action plan, it helps alleviate some of the, like the other council member said, uncomfortableness
with not any specific metrics and specific goals. There's a high level, but I also think
that they go hand in hand and they should be looked at and worked together. Because
if we approve this plan, and the committee that's established, hopefully goes back and
has something to add, is it a working document? Can they add things? Can they change things?
Or is it just council approve this? This is all that you can talk about and measure for
this implementation plan. I think that's something we need to make sure of before going forward.
And also, yesterday we had, Jesse and I were on the Economic Development Partnership Board,
and we had an update from our TIFF strategies. And one of the main goals, sustainability,
was a strategic growth portion for our community. And so not only does this plan impact our
climate, our health, it's also going to be used for economic development within the city.
So it's going to touch every single department. Many people need to weigh in. And it's kind
of like when we talk about, Councilmember Davis, you said, you know, each department,
do we have this plan? And then the departments do their information and their goals off of
this plan? Or is it, do we look at what they're doing and kind of implement it here? It's,
you know, which one do we want to be the main guiding document for every department? And
will they be able to implement the kind of things that the committee wants them to, is
the main question. And Mario, if you could just weigh in. I know that I asked about the
committee recently, and you sent some information about that establishment. Could you just update
us on where that stands in the process, please? For the committee itself, as far as the establishment
of it? Yes. So it'd be the advisory committee. Correct. Sure. Well, we were really just waiting
for Council to adopt the plan, as Catherine mentioned earlier this month. And we would
have been able to work with the city secretary's office to go ahead and, again, part of that
is making sure that we understand what the scope of the committee is so that we can go
ahead and start, staff can begin advertising for the committee itself, is the number of
candidates or not candidates, but the size of the committee. Is it one person per council
member? How do you all want to establish it? And so then we can just work with the city
secretary's office to get the process out. I mean, we're about to go through the committee
agenda recruitment process anyway here this summer, so it could fall right in line with
that. Councilor Metzler? You're on mute. Well, it probably sounded more intelligent, but
let me say a couple of things. One is I'm hearing sort of the consensus, but I would
say then let's call this then simply sustainable plan goals and strategies draft, because it's
not the plan. If you call it the plan, that flies in the face of what plans are. So I'm
fine with this concept, but if it's misleading or doesn't communicate clearly to me, as well
as to members of the public, I mean, why call it something that's going to create this confusion?
So why not just call it even simply sustainable, leave the word plan out at this point. It's
a plan once you have a plan. So simply sustainable goals and strategies draft, then that simple
change I think would help a lot. Secondly, question on the composition of the committee.
I think something worth discussing is, is it just, we're going to have X number of people
and everybody appoints one, or as in some committees, should we define certain areas
of expertise that we want represented on that committee? And maybe everybody can nominate,
but that we're specifically looking for expertise in some areas. I'm interested in reactions
on that. And I lean toward that. I'm not sure I know what the answer is, but what they would
be like, I think that's worth talking about. Well, if I could just interject here, I would
think that each goal or would have someone specifically tied to it. Or, you know, and
then just another person, I don't know that seven members are going to be enough for this
committee. We need nominate. So maybe there are people directly tied with information
to certain goals, renewable energy, you know, solid waste or recycling, that type of thing.
And then we have regular or just any citizens with other input as well. Yeah, I'm not sure
that just a seven member committee. Oh, sorry, Mario. Oh, no, go ahead. Go ahead, please
finish your thought. I just have a wanted to put my hand up to ask a question in a minute.
So, yeah, again, that that's all I just I'm not sure that with a plan or an attended plan,
this big seven members would would be enough. But that's just my opinion. Councilmember
Davis, do you have anything to weigh on the committee? Or is this something you think
we should even discuss here before it goes to council or just? Well, I think if we've
got some discrete thoughts on it, I think we ought to put those together before the
council gets them, because otherwise they just all turn their heads and say, Well, what
did the committee talk about? So I know I agree with that. I hadn't really thought about
that at all. But I think that's a good approach. You know, that we have kind of representatives
kind of like Paul said, I'm not sure I get off the top of my head right now give you
the definitive list of all the different areas we need represented by like the focus areas
as a starting point. There may be some others that we want to include on there. I think
I agree with you that eight to seven is not not a big enough committee that we'd want
the focus areas and then some couple three at large kind of kind of folks that may not
either fit into one of those areas or they just may represent something else entirely.
It's not one of the focus areas. So I think as a as a rough draft, I think I like that.
You know, I'd love to see us get deeper into the expertise in the university communities
than we ordinarily do in drawing on citizens. I think if they get a really media assignment
like this, you know, we may may do better at attracting that kind of talent. Mario, go
ahead. Sure, I just wanted to ask Councilmember Milster. So is the is the concern that you
have just the title of the document? Well, that's one of the concerns I have, because
it because I mean, you know, it led to a different expectation for me. And and I know it did
for others, too. So I think we should do these. Do you think that, you know, beyond the title
and certainly, you know, I mean, you know, a comprehensive plan is that uber document
that that that major document and then things from there are delineated from those from
those those those key areas, key focus areas. You know, certainly, we can look at beefing
up the the narrative in the document, not to add that many more pages, but just to be
able to give more better description of what this what this document is because. OK, sorry
to jump on. Oh, no, it's just because if someone just sees the title and then just brushes
it off, oh, it's just it doesn't mean anything. Well, there's more to it than just a title.
It just goes into the sort of narrative, the preamble, per se, of the document, the introduction.
OK, so I'll say a couple of things about that. One is that for sure, in the opening description,
it should say this isn't the plan. This is the over, you know, a draft of the overarching
goals and strategies that together with an action plan will create the plan. But, you
know, in any kind of management setting, you know, I'm sure you've experienced in your
long years, a plan is something that has actions and dates. You know, that's what a plan is.
So so I would just not represent this as the plan. So so I would say the main thing would
be and I'm not saying add tons of stuff. Probably a sentence would do it at the beginning and
the title. You know, it's this is the goals and strategies document that will be paired
with an action plan. Say that. And for the title, I'm fine with simply sustainable goals
and strategies and probably keep the draft watermark that goes to the committee. So they
know as you know, as member Briggs, what do we say, Chair Briggs in the Senate, as she
suggested that they should feel, you know, the liberty to suggest changes back into this
as well as into that. But we do. But even before you have a committee to review it,
I think there needs to be some council direction, whether it's a resolution ordinance, something
that the council adopts as this is what you're working on committee. And then from there
it gets it gets it morphs and evolves over time. No, no disagreement. And you could have
a resolution of support for the simply sustainable goals and strategies. Which and have it be
clear goals and strategies are not tactics, you know, calendar.
And if I could just interject, I mean, one of the first things we started off in this
presentation was this is a guidance document, not the action plan. And so we can continue
to use those words as this being the guidance document. And then it will turn into the action
plan. And I think part of the hesitation is if we say that this is the plan, and you know,
all the comments that we got was that, you know, well, these are just overarching goals,
there's no action. So they actually they go together for the community. And, and if we
could just find a way to, to integrate those two together, I think we'll be doing okay
for the committee. And I think I think mostly people just don't want to see a plan that
has no goals and that is going to just be sitting somewhere, you know, without without
any other specific measure rules, especially with something like sustainability, which
is so important to a majority of our, our residents.
I think they want the specificity, as you say, and the, you know, sort of the sense
of action, but they also want some some really, really aggressive, challenging goals. And
I think that we'll be able to endorse those or not based on having, you know, that knowledgeable
group advises.
I will say that the document, what we have now the guidance document is really great
to work from and we this committee went over it and through it and added to it. And I'm
not knocking it at all. I think it's it's great. And I think just having that distinction
between the action plan and this document helps a lot of people understand the process
a little better.
Councilmember Davis.
I agree with I think most of what's been said. I agree with Councilmember Meltzer that semantics
can be important, you know, using precise wording can be important and it conveys the
right message. I'd be fine with, you know, something like simply sustainable strategies
or sustainable goals or anything kind of in that in that realm. I think I'd be fine with
that.
I'll tell you why I said goals and strategies, just because those are the headings that are
in it. Every page is broken up into goals and strategies. I think we'll probably see
shortly that that's why I made that suggestion. But yeah, I'm not coming up on it. But yeah,
I think that's why it's goals and strategies. Although, you know, it's almost misleading
in a way that it's got metrics in it because it's like, that's it. These are the metrics.
Maybe it's just sort of high level metrics, because once you get into more specific actions,
you know, those will have their own metrics, you know, complete by X date, achieve X level
of, you know, output and so on. So maybe it's high level metrics. But anyway, I'm done wordsmithing.
I think at this point is communicated.
Okay, Mario, Catherine, do you have everything from the committee that you need going forward
on? Or is there still?
Well, I think just kind of frame it up, the guts of the document, the committee is happy
with, correct?
Well, I was hoping we would go into the guts as well. Although most of my comments will
go away now, because a lot of them were like, where's the action plan? So but I think it's
worth at least seeing others' notes.
Well, because because you know, with an action plan, I mean, it's gonna, it's gonna require
funding, whether it's using an outside consultants or staff time. I mean, there's a variety of
ways to achieve the goals and strategies that are that are laid out in the sustainable simple
sustainable planner, however you want to call it. So we will continue to move things forward,
bring them down to counsel to the COE to the Public Utilities Board, all the various committees
that that are involved. And certainly this this new committee that will be established
to again, move the needle forward as we keep ticking off these goals and strategies that
you all have laid out for for our community. So but just going back and Councilmember Melser,
you may want to go into the more the details of the document itself. But from what I could
gather is the committee for the most part was was happy with the contents, what was
laid out the recommendation of the committee. And then so really, it's just more trying
to tweak and wordsmith the title of the document, whether it's a simple sustainable goals and
strategies plan or we just need to make sure we land on something so that we can bring
it to Council at some point.
I will continue to strongly object if it has the word plan in it.
You just don't like the word plan. Yeah, until it's a plan. When it's a plan,
I'm I'm all for having the word plan. I want us to have a plan with the word plan on it.
But this isn't that yet. Okay.
That's my minority view, maybe.
And I mean, we can we can go into some specifics that you want Councilmember Melser. Mario,
how how long do you think it would take to establish a committee or an advisory committee
because I know that some of these, even the, you know, like the, the EV goals are in here
for the next year or so, or some
other reductions. I just I want to make sure that even the smaller goals within this goals
and strategies will not be overlooked in the meantime, because, you know, time is of the
essence when we're talking about no climate. Right. Well, just going back on my experience
when we established the Committee on Citizens and Disabilities Council, I think authorized
that in August of the previous year, not previous year, but the year before it started. And,
and we kicked off that committee with its first meeting, I believe, either in January, February,
the following year. So it takes a little bit of time just because you do have the holidays,
you have to go through the process of going through the application process. But, but
we can get it relatively we can get it started probably within 90 to 120 days.
And I don't I don't see this as a consultant type of
Oh, no, I'm just talking about just the committee itself. Yes, by establishing the committee,
I'm just saying when we established the Committee on Citizens with Disabilities, the council,
they authorize you all authorized the resolution creating the committee, we went through the
application process because you all had nominations that you made. And then we finally established
it was an 11 person committee. And then we had, I believe we kicked our first meeting
off and in 2019, early 2019, January, February of 2019. So it started within 120 or so days
after after the council authorized the resolution. Okay, well, I would like to hear some feedback
from our committee members on the establishment. And if we want to go ahead and try to figure
out something today to send to council so that we can start the process. Yes, I would
like to do that. Yeah, I think we've got the bones of it already. I don't think we have
too much more to flesh out there because I'm, I'm sure that council will have further input.
So I think we're we're almost there now with with our rough suggestion. Right. Okay. Yeah,
I, I agree. And so Councilman Mouser, did you want to go over some specifics that you
had for today? Yeah, if you can be, you know, a little patient with me as I sort of sift
because some of them have, you know, been addressed. I don't think I have anything under
water, under air. You know, one question I have is where is expanded monitoring to pinpoint
local issues? Maybe that's something that would fall in an action, an action plan. Fleet
metric, it just says increase, you know, renewability in the fleet, but you know, there's no specificity
like even if we increase by one, is that adequate? You want me to stop at any point? Actually,
yeah, tell me if I'm going too fast, or if you want me to stop to discuss. Here's one
we probably ought to discuss. Under energy, there's a lot of narrative about achieving
100% renewable. So that's now out of date. I mean, we're there. At least, you know, you
can debate about the use of recs and so on. And, you know, the committee probably ought
to get into that. But if we say by our adopted definition that we're there, so what's the
new goal? And I don't necessarily have an answer to that. But that's, I don't think
we can just say, you know, our goal is to get to where we are already today. Yay. So
that's one. You want to talk about that? You want to keep going? I mean, maybe maintaining,
or you know, we have reached the goal, or we could add, you know, other types of energy.
And that would be something I think for the individuals of the, you know, advisory committee
maybe to say, hey, let's make sure we add, you know, 10 more percent solar to our, you
know, generation or, you know, you add more specific generation to that instead of just
this overall goal that we've already met. And I do believe that as we go down, certain
things will fall off and those percentages will change. So, you know, making sure that
goal continues, we're going to need to make sure that it's coordinated with, you know,
other purchases along the way. I'm trying to go through the chart in my mind that, you
know, the percentages, so. Let me respond to that if any. For me personally, absent
any other information, I don't have a feeling like we ought to be more solar, more wind.
I mean, unless we hear, you know, one of those has got other environmental considerations
that, you know, but within the concept of how much energy we generate, I think at least
something worth discussing is whether it's our goal to help green the grid, right? A
hundred percent means we just meet our needs. So there's absolutely no need, for instance,
to encourage rooftop solar. Why encourage rooftop solar? We already buy renewable, right?
The reason to encourage rooftop solar, if you want that, is because we can produce more
energy than just what we need. And then we're greening the grid for the rest of our region.
So I think that's at least worth a discussion. Does it belong? I don't know if it belongs
in here. Now I'm confused, but I think maybe we ought to talk about whether that's a relevant
goal for Denton or not. Maybe I'll just keep going so we get all this stuff from the table.
Let's see. All right. Also on energy, there's a list of additional strategies for consideration.
Can we consider them? Isn't this the group that would do the consideration? We should
say in or out, you know? So I'll keep moving. On land use, we didn't specify the 10 minute
walk goal in the metrics. I think it should be in the metrics. We also didn't include
specific canopy goals from the urban forest plan. And I don't think we should be disconnected
in that way. I think the goals from other subcomponents, you know, should be reflected
in these goals with a kind of a how much by when, ideally. Let's see. There's a discussion
of brownfields. We don't say how much we want to fill in by when. Maybe that's action
plan stuff. Let's see. Under land use, on strategy three, I personally advocate for
evaluating code improvements to further protect eases. Especially upland habitat. Strategies
to reduce the reliance on alternative eases. That's my thing. I don't know if others agree.
Let's see. On strategy seven, it wasn't clear what we were saying about gas wells. There's
a statement sort of saying gas wells exist. But it's not clear what goal it applies to
and whether there should be anything related to gas wells under the air quality chapter.
Strategy eight on land use, it talks about Clear Creek. There's nothing saying what the
status of the six year old Clear Creek master plan is. You know, should we be attaching
to some goal that we have for that? Then there's also another additional strategies for consideration.
So I'd say why don't we consider them then? Under transport, let's see. A lot of my notes
are about wanting specificity. And whether we have ticked and tied to the expressed goals
in the mobility plan. That's a question. I think it's worth doing the look. And again,
there's additional strategies. Same point. Chapter six, metrics. There's a reference
to what we want to do by 2020. It's already 2020. Shouldn't we have some kind of survey
result of awareness or attitude or an attitude result that we want to target? That can be
a metric too. If we're talking about education, the goal should not be just to have a level
of activity. The activity should be to achieve a goal. And the goal should be either, you
know, awareness, attitude, or behavior. Those are measurable things. Strategy three says
implement green business program, which is implemented already. So we need, you know,
certain kind of goals. Expand it some way if we want to do that. Strategy four also
talks about, you know, making more stuff, but not what we want to achieve in terms of
awareness, attitude, or behavior. Strategy five, expand from what level to what level
by doing what. Maybe that's action plan stuff. Then there's additional strategies there.
Same comment. Materials management chapter should tie with solid waste strategy in some
explicit way. And goal one, you know, how about explicitly saying we want to target the
large commercial recycling opportunity as strategy one, or expansion of concierge program.
Now is that action plan stuff? You know, I think it's at least worth talking about that.
Chapter eight has three things in the title, one of which is resilience. And one of them
is environment. Isn't environment like all of these things? I really don't understand
why that's one of three things in one topic. I think that chapter eight is really primarily
about resilience, and that's just a wordsmith thing. I would just, you know, leave the focus
on that. I think the goals in it are probably not in priority order. I'd probably go three,
two, one. But, you know, we can talk about that. And I just wonder if there are other
metrics for sustainability than just food production. You know, Council Member Briggs
has some NLC experience in sustainability. I imagine there's other stuff we can get into.
Also, we talk so much about pollination, but it's unclear to me whether it's a goal or
a strategy, or, you know, the discussion is a little unfocused there. And I'm almost at
the end, I think. Yep, that's it. Thank you, Council Member. Could somebody, the additional
goals for consideration under those items, were those for council to consider, or this
committee to consider, or for the action plan? Can somebody weigh in on that? Those are strategies
that may not have been quite ready to, sorry, quite ready to fully write out and update
into this document. But since this is a living document that is updated annually as departments
get closer to, you know, making a decision about how they want to move forward with that,
that would be further developed and implemented into the plan, written into it. So this plan
is a living document that can be updated as actions occur, as new opportunities arise.
It's not a limiting document. So those could be something, as the implementation
committee goes through, can look and consider. Council Member Metzler brought up a good point
that I also had a note on. I mean, we have a bike and pedestrian plan, a mobility plan,
and urban forestry plan. We're working on a mobility plan, you know, which includes,
you know, infrastructure for sidewalks. And a lot of the comments that I received had
to do with, you know, with these things. So making sure they all coordinate. And one
of my concerns or question is, I know that we have a solid waste plan or a consultant
or something that was on the agenda to get approved and it got moved. I don't know where
that is at this point. But I do know that a lot of the comments and a lot of the things
that are in this plan have to do with, you know, solid waste strategies, zero waste,
maybe diversion, recycling, which could be correlated in that in that other plan. So
the comprehensive solid waste management strategy. Yeah. So how, how would these work, work together?
So I'm sorry. I don't know what's going on my voice. So the comprehensive solid waste
management strategy will be integrated into the sustainability plan whenever that document
is complete and approved by council. So there will be lots of opportunity for input on what
goes into that plan and then we'll, we can come back and rewrite that materials management
chapter based on the goals in that strategy. Would, would it not work in the reverse way
though, where if this is, you know, it goes to council and it's approved as a, a goals
and strategies where whoever's working on that solid waste plan would get these and
see that these things are important at this. I mean, I'm just, I can see it going either
way. Um, because we're kind of in parallel process right now and, and the same with mobility
plan and the urban forest plan went the same day, urban forest master plan went the same
day that this plan went to council. So we didn't have those goals to include in the
sustainability plan, but that's why we call it a living document because things change.
Um, and we want to be able to update and, and grow with that. Um, the comprehensive
solid waste management strategy, it's in, um, the scope has already been put out, um,
and they're reviewing the document, their proposals now. So let me Brian burners on
the phone, on the line, he can kind of chime in if he's available, um, to kind of give
a quick status on that, on that, on that process. Thank you. Ms. Briggs, uh, and the members
of the committee, Brian burner, solid waste director with the city of Denton. I do appreciate
the opportunity to talk a little bit about our strategy and the process that we're going
through. Uh, as, as, uh, Ms. Barnett said, we are, um, in the process of actually evaluating,
uh, that the four submittals that we have received for consultants to come in and complete
the strategy, uh, now that we have, uh, resuscitated or resurrected it, uh, after the COVID, uh,
financial scare that, that we had, uh, we do anticipate here with probably, uh, either
very late July or first part of August, uh, bringing that before the council to award
and start the process, uh, with regard to, you know, which comes first, the chicken or
the egg. I think part of what will come out of this strategy is the tools we need to actually
set development, uh, uh, diversion goals. One of the big problems that we have right
now is, uh, we've got a very, very bad market that's out, uh, for the sale of recycled materials.
There are certain, uh, constraints, uh, that are, that are put on cities, uh, related to,
uh, state and federal laws. Probably the biggest one, uh, is, you know, the bag ban, uh, city
of Laredo, uh, wanted to put a plastic bag banning in place. And, you know, basically
that's against state law. Cities can't do that. So what, what are the hindrances that,
that are in place? And as a result of this evaluation, what we'll be able to do is step
into this wide open. And as, as the, as part of our process, uh, create, uh, uh, achievable
goals, uh, based on the, uh, the information that we have, uh, but also it will help us
strategize how we want, how we move to that next level. If we're not happy with the goals,
uh, given the constraints we were presented with, what steps will we as a city need to
take to help sort of clear the path to get to that next level of diversion recycling
that we need to be? So again, this is, this, this is something that's a little bit innovative.
It's not a management plan. Uh, it's a strategy that helps us, that looks at, at everything
from a 360 degree angle, uh, uh, impacts and, and, and processes, uh, and allows us to go,
uh, through the rest of this century, uh, with, with a, a, a clear understanding of,
of how we, we meet those goals and, and what are the, the, the hindrances that, that are
in our way, uh, so that we can maximize the, the, uh, commitment that we have to the residents
and the businesses, uh, while retaining and obtaining the lowest possible price for those
goals.
Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Go, go ahead. Yeah. I think it would be, uh, not just superficial,
uh, but kind of superficial to, to just indicate, since this is a draft, um, you know, mobility
plan goals will go here. Solid waste strategy, you know, goals will go here just to at least
reflect the intentionality for this all to get knit together. And, uh, you know, if some
of us aren't sitting here, you know, in six months and they're still looking at this,
uh, they can go, Oh, okay. We're supposed to be knitting all these things together. You
know, it won't be dependent on anyone's memory that that really is our intention. Uh, so
I, I, I suggest doing that. And that would be pretty simple to do that just to be able
to rope in and, and, and, and, and add in the, the various, um, strategies and plans
that the city's working on mobility plan, the, the solid waste strategy plan and development
code forestry plan, you know, tree mitigation, all those things we can certainly call out
into the document. You know, reflective, you know, sort of a, a really more comprehensive
vision, you know, even though it's just a little superficial thing. One of the things
I'd like to just make a comment on after hearing, um, Brian speak and thank you for that update.
I'm glad to see it's going to be moving forward and, and not, um, put on the back burner for
now because it's really important, um, that we have in this, we have goals for like next
year or, or the next year. But if, if the, um, advisory committee could look at the implementation
of these goals and what that looks like, you know, 10 years away and how that's going to
affect us if these are implemented, I think that that's critical. Um, not, not just that
we meet this goal next year, but if we meet it for two years, what difference is that
going to make, you know, 10 years down the road? Um, so that's, uh, for, for me, that
would be, you know, pretty important on the implementation plan to, to see that, you know,
that's a very important framing thought is what is the time horizon, the intended time
horizon of this document, right? If, if, if, if, if we are explicit that this is a 10 year
vision that leads you different directions than if this whole thing is a two year vision.
Council Member Davis, do you have any comments on what you've heard?
Sure. I was going to kind of let us work through Paul's list, but, um, I had some of the same
things, not all of them. Um, the, I think what we've just touched on, um, brings in
a lot of my, my comments, the references to other plans. You know, for instance, the first,
the first minutes I had was on the tree canopy percentage. Um, I think we use on page five,
I think we use an old, old number and we've got a better number now from our urban forestry
plan. Um, and I just pulled that as, as an example of, uh, a place where we can, we can
mesh these things together a little bit better with some references. Um, you know, in the,
the web version, we can have them hyperlinked even that, uh, you know, you can hyperlink
in a PDF to, to the other plans. So all you have to do is click over to the other plan.
They're all going to look different because they're all different consultants, right?
But they're going to be basically one part of one ecosystem of plans. Um, I also had
Council Member Meltzer's note, uh, myself on the 100% renewable goal. Um, I don't know
the absolute best way to update that. I think, I think he's correct in that that's no longer
the goal. That's the achievement. We've done it. Um, we can either move up, uh, like the
consider other goals, the other things to consider. Number one has to do with on-site
generation and some of the things that we've been talking about on council. And it's broadly,
maybe too broadly, but it's broadly talking about other renewable opportunities. So maybe
we promote that one. It's on the bottom of page 20, I think. Uh, maybe we promote that
to a full, a full status goal and not an alternative goal because we're already having those conversations.
If we did that, I'd probably prefer, it's just me personally, I'd probably prefer to
leave, uh, methane out of it, just using the word methane because, um, that's a kind of
an ongoing policy choice that council is going to have to make based on some fiscal concerns.
So if we just said alternative fuels and on-site generation, that kind of stuff that leaves
us, leaves us open to have those conversations depending on what we, what we decide to do
and that those decisions may be made, you know, while this plan's under consideration. Um,
I like again, broadly under the heading of making references to other plans, I think,
uh, Paul's right about the 10 minute walk. Um, that's one of our big guiding principles
in open space. So it'd be good to reference that. Um, and let me see if I can understand
my note here. Um, page 32, hold on, let me, let me check the document and see what I had
to say about page 32. I know it looks like I'm staring right at you, but that's because
the document's on my screen. I'm not like, um, oh, I think, um, yeah, Paul, you mentioned
this one. Um, the sustainable businesses that we, you know, we, we don't need to say implement
the program anymore. We need to say, uh, you know, grow or expand or, and set ourselves
a new, a new goal. If we have 10, uh, I don't recall if we have 10 and let's set ourselves
a new goal, you know, 15 or 20. If we, if we don't, then let's change it from implement
to expand and then keep the 10 or 15 as the goal. Um, and then I agree. I hadn't thought
about chapter eight's title, but I agree there. Maybe just resilience is the best, best title.
I understand how, um, each of those things in that chapter can also tie to overall public
health. Um, but I think, I think I prefer just resilience as the title of that chapter
or something, something like that. Everything else that I've got down here, I think, um,
ties to what we've already talked about something, something else we've already hit on in one
way or another. So those are, those are my notes.
Uh, go ahead. Yeah, kill. You may have, you know, your own list of, uh, in sort of individual
points as well. Uh, but if not, or after that would the committee be open to just looking
at each of those groups of additional strategies for consideration and at least, uh, you know,
evaluating interest level, you know, so we've added something to the fact that that's been
presented to us. And I, I mean, I haven't really given them deep thought, you know,
either because it's like, okay, it's just part of the plan, but I think giving them
some consideration would be appropriate. Yeah. My, uh, my comments were, were all, were sent
in and, um, great creating green infrastructure, universal recycling ordinance, um, waste diversion.
Um, and then a lot about, there was several comments about, you know, solid waste, um,
zero waste, also melding the plans together. I think we've, we've touched on, on a lot
of it, um, land use canopy goals. Um, I want to make sure that, you know, food deserts
are, are addressed in our area. We talk about food. Um, that's a, that's a big deal for
some of our communities. And again, I'm just, I think that this may be, um, a discussion
that the, the committee can have as well. The, the advisory committee on implementation
of these and where those, where those are and how we should address that. And, and also
just one comment on the green business program. I am, I'm very excited that that is, um, established
and I know that this committee, you know, waited on that and started here and, um, it's
grown and I would love for it to keep growing. And I think there's other ways and programs
that I've messaged Catherine about the compost, um, program and individual businesses getting
points for, you know, participating in other programs. So not just growing it, but adding
different programs that the businesses can participate in. I think is something that
the advisory committee can discuss as well.
I don't know if JT may want to weigh in on the green business program. We're going through
the evaluation now after we finished the first year of it.
And a big thank you to JT for managing that and handling all that. It's a, it's a big
deal. So thank you.
Does he want to, does he want to comment?
Yeah, I'm trying to get the microphone working. Am I good?
You're good now.
Thank you. So we did finish the first year of the program. And so some of the feedback
that we got was basically to shift the program to a more open-ended approach for those people
that are in the program. And so the businesses that we do have so far are doing some really
awesome things. And the evaluation form that we sent out was kind of in line with the sustainability
plan in terms of those major overarching areas. But to be honest, some of the businesses are
doing some amazing things that are specific to their industry that we wouldn't have thought
of to put in there. And so I think that we're going to switch to a more open-ended approach
and really let those, those leaders take the lead on those different items and share with
other businesses what they're doing. And so that's kind of the direction that we're headed
and we'll bring updates on that soon.
That sounds like a strategy, you know, just sharing best practices from green business
participants.
And is there a list handy where of our green business participants that are in the program
on our website?
We have that list internally. There's currently not a list on the website, but we can definitely
have that discussion about adding that.
I mean, if it was okay with the businesses, I think that would be, you know, a pretty
cool thing to do so that people can find out who's participating and it may spur others
to want to try the same.
But we're off topic a little bit here. So sorry about that. Thank you. I think there's
a lot to discuss within all of these, these categories.
I'm sorry. One other comment that I had was about, and I'm not sure which, which goal
it's under, but it would be, it would probably be where the codes come in and parking and
concrete and removing that and, you know, allowing, you know, less parking and more
green space flexibility. And so again, that's, you know, two different departments coming
in and that would be, I think a council planning type decision as well. So having someone sitting
in the advisory committee from the planning department would, would be a recommendation
of mine. Absolutely. And then they're also in our internal team, our internal stakeholder
team. So we're introducing, we introduced to resiliency in November. And so getting
everyone thinking about co-benefits of programs and how, you know, if you have a drainage
channel that's natural and then you bring trees in, what does that do for air quality?
So trying to look at everybody whenever they're planning, thinking about the co-benefits of
the project. And that's what the sustainability plan really is. It's everybody meshing together
and trying to have a more sustainable community. Walking through some of council member Meltzer's
questions, I think that you're referring to the fleet goal of the 25% reduction in fuels
usage by 2025. Catherine, I'm sorry. Paul, could you, could you hit mute? We're getting
some feedback. Just to make sure. Thank you. Here we go. So the 25% reduction in fuel usage
by 2025 was a fleet management strategy that they said as they have adopted new versions
of the COG clean fleet policy and they're working towards a greener fleet, a right sized
fleet. So, so that was something that was set by that department. And that's going to
be ongoing. They're, they're going to be continually reviewing opportunities to green our fleet,
reduce fossil fuel usage. And I think they're being pretty aggressive now. And, and 2012,
those were some things that we, we didn't ever, you know, contemplate. We would be where
we are now. So I would just say that, you know, I'm sure everybody's like kind of always
working on improving and doing better. But the point of doing an exercise like this is
to sort of set the big goals to guide, you know, where are they trying to get to? So
I'm not saying I have an answer to this, but, you know, if, if we say this is a five year
outlook or a 10 year outlook, and, you know, then we know what we're trying to get to by
then, you know, that would indicate that would kind of give a signal to them about how aggressive
they should be to, to hit that, you know, I mean, I know everybody will keep trying
to improve, but how much? Well, and I think that whenever we have the discussion about
the greenhouse gas target setting and we decide, are we going to look at that 50% or are we
going to look at the 80% that will help us create the scenarios that we need and those
hard targets to meet those goals. You know, we, we may be looking at electrification of
homes. So, so that's going to increase the amount of power that we need, renewable power
that we need to stay at that rate. You know, we may need to look at a much more aggressive
fuel goal. If we set an 80% target reduction for greenhouse gas, I think you're illustrating
the point perfectly why, you know, those sort of challenging metrics ultimately need to
be part of the, what ultimately gets called the plan. Well, and we have to have the policy
direction set so that we can incorporate them into the plan. It's, you know, once we set
a target, then we can go back and build that. Moving on. So the energy, the 100% was just
maintaining was our thought and we can, sorry. Okay. That's okay. Keep going. Okay. Sorry.
Maintaining that 100% as we grow. So, but we can, we can wordsmith that and make sure
that we're capturing that. The land use, the 10 minute walk was the proximity to parks
was in the additional strategies. I think we can be more overt about the 10 minute walk
and include that. Incorporating the plans that have been adopted since this was brought
to you in 2019, we can do that. We can, I like the idea of hyperlinking those. That
would be awesome. Gas wells is just so that doesn't fall off our radar. We don't ever,
I mean, if we have an opportunity to do more about gas wells, we want to have the framework
there to do that. If I can interject, I know we have an item that was supposed to have
come before council, but we ran out of time. That includes proposals to encourage plugging
of wells through, you know, possible incentives. I mean, it's not baked yet nor has direction
been given, but that might be something that would plug into that place if that does get
approved. That's a great idea. The Clear Creek master
plan implementation. Clear Creek's been so flooded since 2015. It's a shame. We actually
may get the logjam removed south of 380 this year and then the water will drain and we'll
see where we stand. But until that's gone, unfortunately that area north of 380 has just
suffered greatly. The Green Belt and Clear Creek.
Oh, Keely, you're muted. I saw that the logjam was going to get cleared or was proposed to
get cleared and I'm pretty excited about that. So that would help. And you mentioned the
Clear Creek plan and that was in one of my questions to ask you. Is that something that
needs to be updated or is it still just, we're still working on it?
It is still valid. We've worked on the education components of it, just not the construction.
Funding for construction and some of the areas that we wanted to do improvements, they've
just been flooded. And since 2015, I never imagined after years of drought that we would
go through and have this much water. Go ahead, Councilmember Meltzer.
You know, should that, I mean, the fact that that's been the case for five years is, you
know, horrible, obviously, but is that something that's just purely, you know, nature or is
that something we failed to do in terms of acting? You know, when you, if, cause if it's
the latter, then, you know, over five years, a plan ought to have focused our attention
back on it, you know, so that we're forced to act.
I would say that nature has not been our friend. After the years of drought followed by two
out of four years of the highest rainfall we've ever seen since we've had that lease,
did create a lot of erosion. A lot of trees went into Elm Fork and Clear Creek and that
just completely silted up and created log jams south of 380. We have been trying to
get the Corps to do something about that for years and lobbying them. It's finally reached
a point where TxDOT's concerned about 380. So TxDOT is going to go in and work on it.
But I think should, should sort of persisting in that effort be part of our plan? Maybe
that's action plan, you know, to ensure it doesn't happen in the future after we get
it cleaned up. Well, you know, get it cleaned up and ensure
it doesn't happen. And then, I don't know, something bigger and more inspiring beyond
that. I have one last question about this because
we talk about implementation and, and how it costs money. Once we have an implementation
plan or the goals and strategies to go along with it, does that increase our ability to
apply for grants to, to get some of these things done if we have a specific goal tied?
We could, I could see where transportation funding, we might be able to apply for more
care. I'm looking at JT to see if he has any ideas about anything specific.
You know, this plan, I think as far as funding, this plan was developed in house. You know,
we didn't have a consultant to help update this plan at all. The original plan was developed
with a grant from Department of Energy in 2012. So, you know, if, if funding becomes
available through the federal government, again, through Department of Energy, I think
we could jump on that. Yeah, and I don't, I don't think that we need
a consultant. I think that this in-house and the committee and the plan, what we've talked
about is enough. I just mean actionable goals. Like when I see, you know, certain federal
grants for, you know, certain solid waste programs. And for me, it just seems like if
we have a goal or something attached to it, it would help us know when to apply for certain,
for certain grants. I see that as, as a benefit for this.
The solid waste side, the TURP funding through the state, the VW funding, I think those would
all be great opportunities. Okay. Thank you. Does anybody else have anything
on this item? And I want to make sure that you guys have what you need for next steps.
I'm still muted. Would you like to at least look at the different patches of additional
strategies and say, we're definitely not interested or you're definitely interested?
Who, who are you asking council member? There's, there's, there's little patches throughout
that say additional strategies for consideration, which to me suggests, you know, that we ought
to at least cursorily consider them, you know, and give some kind of, some kind of feedback.
I mean, if nobody else wants to do it, that's, that's okay. But that's my question.
Go ahead. Council member Davis. You know, I think I've been, since you brought
them up, I was a little bit curious about them also. And I've been trying to, trying
to think through what the best way to manage those are. I understand their purpose and
why they're there. I don't know. I don't know if it'd be best use for time today to kind
of go through and see which ones we promote, you know, individual chapter by chapter. But
I think that could be a good task for the committee to say here, here's some other things
to consider which of these in the next draft of the strategy or in the, you know, in the
action plans as we go, which of these needs to be promoted to full goal status or adopted
in some form in an action plan, something like that. I think that'd be good work for
the community. That's fine with me.
Yeah, I, I agree. That way that they don't get lost and they don't become, you know,
just non-considerations, but we give them the charge to, to go over and consider those.
Okay. Mario?
Well, so it sounds like what I heard is I'm going to tackle the folding and the other
plans first. So what we will do, staff will do is take the comments that the committee
mentioned this morning and fold in all the various plans that are being worked on across
your organization and make sure they're identified within the plan, literally called out. So
that way there's a placeholder there and there's something to tie back to. So I think
that, I think there was consensus amongst, amongst a group for that. As far as a title,
and again, I'm not, I'm not big on wordsmithing, but could we go with Denton's simple sustainable
goals and strategies? We good with that? Okay. So, uh, looking to Catherine, have I missed
anything? Cause we, cause it sounds like the committee, the new committee, not this committee,
but the new committee that will be newly formed will tackle some, some of the, some of the
items that were discussed today, some of those other items to be considered down the road
that can be tackled by the committee. So I think what staff will be doing is making those
revisions within the document, the draft document, reformulating it or refining it, reformatting
it, and then bringing it back to council for full consideration. Again, I don't want to
over promise and under deliver, but certainly by, by early August to make sure that we get
everything fully incorporated in there. So if that's okay, then that final version would
not, unless you want this to happen, would not come back to the committee. It would just
go straight to council based on your direction today.
Um, yeah, that, that's okay with me. Um, just to clarify, when this comes back to council,
will the ability for council to create the committee at the same time be within this
document? Because I see it as, um, as pretty important to go hand in hand.
We can certainly do that and have a, um, um, certainly with the recommendation from the
committee to make that happen and then have a, a second action item per se to go ahead
and establish the committee. So one thing that we may want to have happen though is,
uh, cause we're in, we're in June. Does the committee meet in July, Catherine? So maybe
what we'll do is before, um, we bring the, and I'm just running through my head the schedules
so, maybe one of the things that we would want to do is before we bring, um, the committee
structure to council, we will run it through the COE first to make sure we, we've covered
the adequate scope of the committee and the size of members. Cause you, you all said that
you believe seven is too small. Uh, so we want to make sure what, what is the right
number and then to make sure that the scope is appropriate.
All right. Go ahead. Council member Davis. So I, um, I kind of tongue in cheek said earlier,
I think the council is going to have a lot of input on that. Um, I really think we're
going to hear more at the council level. I'd be comfortable with, you know, setting a dual
work session items with corresponding action items, um, on the plan and the committee pretty
soon. Um, I don't know that we necessarily have to have, I think we've gotten pretty
good direction for the bones of what we'd like to see. And then staff can, can run with
that and put together a proposal and then present that to the full council. Um, I would
be extremely surprised if that, even if we were to sit here and fine tune the committee
in this committee, um, I'd be very surprised if that was the final product out of council.
Um, so I don't want to, I don't want to spin our wheels and do a lot of work fine tuning
something that's going to be further refined down the road. Um, uh, and we've already kind
of said that chapter titles are the focus areas. We like those as a, as the starting
point. Um, again, I think council is going to have further input there. And then all
three of us, of course, are there on the council. So if we, if we dream up something new on
the way, um, I think staff has the tools to put together a proposal. Now we can certainly
do that. Councilor Metzler, do you have anything? Yeah, I would just, uh, uh, to affirm, you
know, what councilor Davis just said that, you know, just to put up a sort of straw,
I think now you say straw dog, you don't say straw man, um, proposal for council to bat
around as far as the composition of the committee, uh, would be, uh, you know, uh, one person,
the goal would be that one person with expertise in each of the chapter areas that any member
could nominate, you know, could look for talent, uh, to nominate for those positions, uh, and
then add just for a starting point three, uh, you know, kind of ad hoc, uh, members
of the community that don't have, you know, that they could be jazz drummers or, you know,
anything. I don't know. Some of us are going to have to think hard about which jazz drummer
we know around town. Um, I'm fine. I think three is a good number of at large, non non
pigeonhole kind of folks. And we, we may use some of our ad hoc people in some of those
expertise roles. We'll just have to see how the appointments go. Sure. We'll put, we'll
put a proposal together and bring it to council. Thank you, Mario. And I know that, um, just
so that council's aware that the charge of this implementation committee and this advisory
committee is to, to look at this plan and create the action plan so that, um, we're
not, when they're up there, we're not trying to give them more, you know, jobs to do or
take away jobs that they're supposed to do. Um, just so that it's clear. Yes, ma'am. Thank
you. All right. Are y'all okay with that? Having a kind of an action for the committee.
Okay. All right. Well, I guess that will finish that item up unless anybody has any more,
you know, questions on that. Are we good to, to move on? So our next item is C city deputy
city manager update and the matrix. Yes. Well, uh, it's been several months since the committee
has met, obviously. I think the last time was in January, uh, timeframe, maybe February,
I guess it's based on the minutes. Uh, so, uh, we have a few items here. Um, item number
one, as, as we mentioned, that will be part of that solid waste strategy. So as Mr. Burner
said that we've been being brought forward to council to award the contract to the consultant
here in an upcoming meeting, uh, believe it's in early August. Um, the implementation committee,
as we mentioned, uh, we'll be bringing that forward to council here, uh, near, uh, soon
based on our most recent discussion. And, uh, based on the information here on my chart,
uh, DME will be bringing forward the soul smart designation information in August. So,
uh, Catherine, you said that they do nothing. The committee does not meet in July normally.
So your next meeting would be in August and, and, and, you know, we can work with, with
Kim Macon to make sure, um, when do you all want to meet? Cause typically in the, in the
past you've met the first Monday of the month. Um, but if we need to continue that or if
we need to pick another date, that's certainly up to the committee's discretion. Okay. Does
anyone have any, uh, closing concluding items? No. Um, I just, I have a question. I know
that before, or the last time we met or the time before that we were talking about, uh,
carbon reduction and we had a presentation on it. And so I wasn't sure if that was going
to come back to this committee at some point for more discussion or if that is, um, in,
in another category right now. This is James Douglas. I can take that one. Um, so we are
currently working with ICLE. Um, we've got all of our data in, um, for the portfolios
that were, uh, asked to be created to meet the, uh, different targets so that we can
kind of get a better idea of what strategies we would need to meet those. And so, um, about
last month, all of that data is in and those portfolios are currently being developed.
And so I would say by the August or September meeting, we would be good to have an update
on that. Okay. Thank you. Um, okay. So, and I, I guess that doesn't need to be added to
the matrix since that's already coming back to us. Um, so, all right, well, I appreciate
everyone joining us today and for the conversation and all of those, all of the participants
on that I, that I can't see. Thank you for being here and we will adjourn at 11 23 AM.
Thank you very much. Thank you all. Thank you. Bye bye.