Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 06/15/2022 NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR June 15, 2022 6:00 – 8:00 pm Via Zoom 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 1 CALL TO ORDER 6:02 pm ROLL CALL  List of Board Members Present –  Barry Noon  Dawson Metcalf - Chair  Drew Derderian  Victoria McKennan  Kevin Krause- Vice Chair  Danielle Buttke – arrived 6:35  List of Board Members Absent – Excused or Unexcused, if no contact with Chair has been made  Avneesh Kumar  List of Staff Members Present  Honore Depew, Staff Liaison  John Phelan  Kira Beckham  Kelly Smith  List of Guests  Galemarie Kimmel  Jennifer Sunderland  Marie Hendrix 1. AGENDA REVIEW a. No changes to agenda 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION a. Rights of Nature – Galemarie Kimmel, Jennifer Sunderland, and Marie Hendrix joined to talk about a resolution for the rights of nature on the Poudre River. They provided materials that had a resolution that is based on a template from the Earth Law Center that has successfully been adopted in other communities around Colorado and the NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 2 West. The Earth Law Center works on rights of nature regionally, nationally, and globally. Since last fall, they have met with 6 of the 7 Council Members with a general idea of rights of nature for Poudre nature and watershed. They are asking for Board support as fellow citizens and people concerned about the river and other natural treasures. At a minimum they hope the Board can review the template provided and offer a letter of endorsement. Moreover, they would like the Boards active collaboration in this endeavor. They are also looking at expanding their working group and would appreciate any connections or recommendations. They have a PowerPoint presentation that they provided to Council Members that they can also send to the Board.  Barry – Comment – Colorado has one of the most complicated water laws of the western states. Water issues are arbitrated by water court which is dominated by lawyers and not environmental scientists. The situation in the western US is based on the concept of first in time, first in rights, prior of appropriation. It rests on a false assumption that water supplies in the west are inheritable, variable, and varied within this sort of stationary envelope. Historically we build damns, reservoirs, and other storage solutions to tide communities over between floods and droughts. Climate change is a big actor in all of this, and I think it is important to point out that all these proposals by Northern Water for damming the Poudre and Glade reservoir, in the environmental impact statement, you won’t find the acknowledgment of climate change as a reality. Climate change obliterates the assumption that ecologists call a stationary probably distribution that bounds the historic inherent variability in water flows, precipitation, and snowpack. We are bound at this point by law of prior appropriation. It remains generally unchanged, and it fundamentally contains us from addressing ecological services and environmental benefits that we are all dependent on. The Poudre River is just a case study, but it is happening all over the western US. I am very much in favor of this discussion of rights of nature and sustaining ecological systems specifically the Poudre River and its natural flow regium.  The Board will discuss towards the end of the meeting . 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – APRIL a. Kevin moved and Drew seconded a motion to approve the April minutes. Motion passed unanimously. 5-0 4. NEW BUSINESS a. Solar 120% Sizing Rule and Rates – John Phelan, Energy Services Manager and Policy Advisor, reviewed the current code regarding solar system sizing and rate compensation. Staff are seeking Council direction at the June 28 Work Session on making changes in support of scalable and sustainable solar deployment. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 3 (Discussion)  Discussion | Q + A  Dawson – Q – Regarding the recommendation slides, can you expand on that longer term impact when we think about increasing potential to increase solar use in more households? Is 50% going to Loveland? John – A – We are contractually required to buy all our electricity from Platte River. There is a number of exemptions to that and one of them is net metered customers. So, customer owned generation is not limited at all by the power supply agreement. However, if we as Fort Collins Utilities want to own and operate, facilitate, or help be in the business of getting solar, we would need to do some work with that agreement to allow that, whether it is from an equity lens, to create new types of projects, or support commercial. We have had some work around that. We have done some work over the years, but I think as Platte River is considering disturbed generation as a critical part of their portfolio, it is going to be very dynamic as we look forward to entering electricity markets in the coming years.  Dawson – Q – On the fourth recommendation regarding the current credit rate being outdated and very low, what is the current credit rate and what do you anticipate it being? John – A – The current commercial credit rate is four cents/kilowatt and most commercial solar projects don’t export energy. They are using it all because of their operations with the solar production. However, small commercial solar would not be in that and there maybe cases where larger ones might have a credit rate as well. We have not proposed a lot of specifics on that but the average wholesale price is now six cents, so we are already below the wholesale with that. At a minimum it could go to that level and our range of cost could go as high as ten or eleven cents. It would probably be somewhere within six to twelve cents but then to create a similar structure where they may increase annually over time with the same logic we have used historically on the residential side.  Kevin – Q – Can you elaborate on recommendation number three? John – A – About 90% of customers are on a standard time-of-day rate structure for gas heated homes where it is one price up until 700 kilowatt hours and then an extra charge for above 700 kilowatt hours. That tier is clearly a disincentive for electrification of vehicles and others because we expect higher electrification use and want to encourage higher use as we clean the electricity system. It also has an affect where, because the charges are weighted in those higher uses, it reduces the solar project weight for that weight class, so we were able to eliminate that tier component. We would recalculate the time-of-day rate structure across the board. The primary benefit is on electronification will be a significant conversation with Council. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 4 There is a notion that that is encouraging conservation by having that tier; however, the data shows that that is not the case. Essentially, we have a more complex structure for customers to understand and communicate, without receiving any benefit from it. We think having it removed will be a better structure in the long run.  Kevin – Comment – I have submitted feedback to Council on that more than once. We electrified when we built a home; we did a ground source heat pump and have electric vehicles and I am hitting the tiered pricing, thinking what did I do wrong? I did all the things I was supposed to do from an environmental/city goal standpoint. I think that is obviously important as related to scaling with the heat pumps like you said. I am thus in support of removing tiers because in many cases with electrification, people can't conserve anymore and then get hit in heating season. – John – Comment – I think it is an outdated model for electricity rates. When we originally proposed the time of date rate back in 2018, we did not recommend including this. We are bringing it to Council hopefully in the next six months or so.  Kevin– Q – Related to that delta you explained with solar customers paying their way, I am wondering in the total cost considerations for residential generation and solar installations; is total cost of ownership truly considered there? For example, the people installing these systems are looking at the payback and making an investment. I have some hesitancy on that adjustment. I made a big investment, and the rate structure was pulled back on me as far as the wholesale payback rate. I get there is a delta, but I also see there is a 5% community generation goal. So, I am trying to marry them up in my head. We are saying there is a dollar per month concern but does that dollar a month take in account all factors of owning, installing, and maintaining a solar system, and does it really guide us toward that local generation. John – A – How do we walk the fine line of continuing to have solar by viable proportion for customers to meet their goals and community knows? We know if we don’t adjust overtime, we are going to create an increasing challenge of an equity prospective. We have moved well away from the traditional model and the way our metering works. There is a strong incentive to self-consume as much as your solar as possible because that is the full retail value even as that goes up. As for the export side, we are not proposing to reduce anything, but that is not going to climb at the rate some people have assumed. We do have a solar fact sheet that is a disclosure form that is signed by every solar project, whether they have received a rebate or not, that describes how variable some of these things may be. There is not a guarantee from us on the return of investment or business model. It is up to the customer and vendor. We try to put in as much information as possible. We have a participating solar contractor now who NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 5 commit to best practices, and they can offer the rebates to customers. Since 2018 the time-of-day structure across all the solar projects across town, it reduces the value by about 5% from what it was before. That is also the actual value we see in the time of day which is reflected in the whole sale cost. If we want a scalable and sustainable program the rate structure needs to support that. We have seen through growth; we are successful at advancing solar. It doesn’t get any worse than we are today, and we want to be clear with the assumptions people make going into it, so they can make the best decisions. Kevin – Comment – I get what you are saying that it is not a reduction, but on paper as the years go by, solar customers’ bills will be increasing more than others because of that export amount staying stagnant. John – Comment – By doing this with a gradual approach we can tune and adjust overtime to understand the dynamics. What we are not trying to do is go immediately to radically changing the adjustment; maintain the momentum we have but know we want to adjust.  Barry – Comment – I just want to make a connection between the Rights of Nature public presentation and this issue because I see an important nexus. We recognize water is a public resource that is critical to human and ecological well being and private water rights, good or bad, are constitute property rights that must always be balanced by the greater public good. Now climate change becomes a reason for arguing that existing water use in the west needs to be dramatically reduced through conservation and increased efficiencies. I want to comment specifically on one point John mentioned about the cost shifts to non-solar consumers. I am not worried about that; I think that is important and a key incentive. I think that if we are going to solve the climate change issue, we need to have those incentives for them to contribute to solving problems that we all share as a community. John – Comment – We are seeking Councils perspective on exactly that. We are bringing some date and tools on where we stand on adoption rates to get their values and guidance. Danielle – Comment – These are really difficult decisions to make due to tall of the trade offs that exist. We all know there will be uncomfortable changes and difficult decisions that we need to make going forward. What we are dealing with right now in Yellowstone is the perfect example. The way in which we are permanently changing the way in which we allow access to and from that park because of climate change. Yes, we are inequitably placing cost on users and owners, but I think it is also not equality, its equity and if we are starting from a place of being so fortunate to be able to have access to electrification of our homes then I feel like I am personally okay with saying I will take a little bit of a bigger price crunch upfront. For the average consumer weighing this, I think marketing and the way in which we frame these issues is critically important, whatever the NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 6 decision or direction Council decides. I really encourage the City to carefully think about behavior of change approaches, marketing, and rolling these out because we know there is a very well-funded anti-solar campaign happening. b. Contracting of Waste Pick-up and Hauling – Kira Beckham, Lead Specialist for Waste Reduction & Recycling, presented and discussed considerations for a contracted system of waste pick-up and hauling for households within the Fort Collins community and received feedback on options for the issuing a request for proposals (RFP) and hauler selection process, prior to a July 12 Council Work Session. (Action)  Discussion | Q + A  Danielle – Q – I appreciate data where you can pinpoint wear and tear on the roads because of the multiple heavy trucks. Is there any data from other communities on a similar analysis regarding air pollution specifically thinking about diesel and being that it is one of the most harmful pollutants from a human health perspective? We are in one of the worst air quality cities in the nation and there are not that many diesel sources that are this heavy of use. Kira – A – We have come across that data and have looked at the overall emissions. What is interesting is when we looked at the emissions that are impacted, when you bump them up against the overall greenhouse gas inventory, they are a small percent of the overall picture. We see more measurable success when we start playing in the compost and waste diversion. The road maintenance becomes more quantifiable factor for us than the emissions themselves. Danielle – Comment – If you look specifically at black soot, PM2.5, and nitrous oxide, you might find more of a contribution from these trucks as those are unique to diesel trucks and are higher, the heavier the vehicle. Kira – Comment – One element we didn’t go into a lot of detail in because we are still exploring it is we can look to require moving toward compressed natural gas (CNG) or electric vehicles (EV). The big win with a contracted system is we can start small and grow overtime; it gives us the foundation we need to start to move in that direction. On one side you have price and the other hand the different attributes we can ask for. It will be a tradeoff. Danielle – Comment – I think that is also a great opportunity to think about those things. Middlebury, Vermont has trash haulers that use horse and buggy. It can be done and there are other options out there. I think incorporating language so that this can be flexible and adaptable based on regulations and technology as it comes out will be key. Kira – Comment – The contract terms then to be in the range of 3-7 years.  Danielle – Comment – There is always going to be this chicken and egg problem. There isn’t going to be a food scrap facility or service until you have NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 7 people that are willing to bring it. Market players can have outsized impacts on development of new markets for these products or development of food scrap composing. I think that is another incentive point if you are looking at rating and ranking RFPs; one might have a relationship with a potential food scrap facility. Kira – Comment – Part of that discussion relates to the Larimer County Landfill, the Regional Wasteshed, and the capabilities new facilities may have. So we do have a team working closely with them to understand what will and will not be possible and how local flow control of various materials might influence that. They are very passionate about getting to haulers having those relationships or their own capabilities. It will be key. One question we have gotten a lot from the community is about what will happen to the haulers/owners that don’t get selected if we go with a one contract system. The contract wouldn’t be implemented for 12-18 months after a final decision has been made so there is time for the haulers to respond and adjust staffing levels. They will still have several HOA customers that are already contracted. Three out of four haulers are large national haulers that are used to these shifts at local markets and also service surrounding areas.  Kevin – Comment – I love this project and I think it’s so on point and big for the community based on the data and some of the goals. I just want to piggyback on Danielle’s point of not just looking at greenhouse gas emissions. The one thing that came to mind is tire particulate because that alone for a bunch of heavy trucks is not insignificant. There are a bunch of these layers that make it so obvious that this is a great path for our community, and I would love to see as many of those pointed out as possible. Just as far as other options for actual service for lessening waste in the community and increasing efficiency has been to do every other week option for trash; our small bin is still too big for us. Kira – Comment – Those are two things we have heard loud and clear from our community. They want that very low volume option, not only for pricing but because it is the right thing to do. We are looking at an individual bag capability and have explored the idea of every other week trash. Right now, our base model is assuming weekly trash and recycling and, if we bundle it, yard waste. The main reason for that is the efficiency’s but we are looking at all the considerations. I think that also becomes an even more viable solution as we get increased composting for food scraps because that eliminates a lot of concerns about rodents and smell that become a real factor when talking about what’s currently in people’s trash.  Kevin – Comment – I am curious if we talk about solar, paying your own way and equity, I am curious if you start to thread some of these things together. Let’s say I opt for a 75-gallon bin every week because I throw everything in the trash and don’t compost or reduce where I can versus being a really low NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 8 trash user. Are the heavy trash users paying their own way in the community because they are increasing impacts on the roads, other facilities, and emissions? I think this is a bigger discussion for our board later, but it feels funny to me. Maybe the pricing and incentives will play out. There is the cost of the disposal but then there is an impact on city facilities like roads but just having more waste. Kira – Comment – We are looking at that, but it is a little tricky in terms of the pay as you throw design to charge more from a rate perspective for the heavy users directly. One of the other things that we have recognized with the increased price that is incurred from an open market system today is there are communities that charge a road impact fee because the city is subsidizing. So, there are considerations on a road maintenance fee and that fee shrinks a lot when you move to a contracted system because you have a lower impact on your roads.  Dawson – Q – What is the timeline on crafting a memo? Kira – A – The July 12th work session materials are due by Wednesday, June 6th.  Honore – Q – If the Board decides to act related to this item, I saw you presented on two options. Is there one that is a staff recommendation or are you presenting them side by side as options? I know this board tends to be concerned about overall ways to reduce waste, emissions and be efficient, so is there one option that would be more effective in advancing towards adopted goals? Kira – A – I think it really depends on which one you are homing in on. Whether you are focusing on diversion, equity, or something else. We have a recommended package but again that doesn’t narrow on things like yard trimmings, so I think I would almost suggest focusing more on some of those nuisances or in general in favor of a contracted system. I think it might be the independent elements that become more important to Council and speaks loudly.  Kira will share slides with Board. c. 1041 Rules – Kelly Smith, Senior Environmental Planner, discussed Draft 1041 Regulations, next steps in the process and provided an overview of how engagement has influenced the Draft Regulations, prior to a June 28 Council Work Session. (Discussion)  Danielle – Q – It is interesting to see how many proposals have already been considered under this new framework and authority. I had traditionally thought of this as a niche issue, but it is broader. Is this volume backed logged because of not having this mechanism in place, is this a typical number of permits, or do you anticipate seeing many more of these moving forward? Kelly – A – The slide that oriented you to some of the projects, NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 9 those are projects that we have reviewed already through the SPAR process. That gives you sort of a prospective of how the mechanics would work for this tiered system. In terms of potential projects, I have met with several water providers, and we will see a lot more water projects. It is doubtful we will see a lot of highway projects; they are just not significant enough. The one that might trigger a permit is the Mulberry/I-25 project because interchanges are included in that. As for City projects, pretty much all our utility infrastructure is built, so we don’t anticipate anything coming through at this moment.  Kevin – Q – The Board had expressed support in the past for moving towards this system. It seems like a while ago for some of that understanding the timeline to show for how critical is it that this Board continues to express any specific support. I know it was mentioned earlier that the LCSB express support just for context. I know we must go back and talk about some other items from earlier in our meeting and some actions we want to take, but maybe just personally just for thoughts on how important it is we continue to weigh in right now based on momentum, the direction, and so forth. Kelly – A – Yes. I will say something that was brough up at LCSB is that whether there are folks that are opposed. There are some groups who are in support and some who are not. I think if you are in support of this project, it would be helpful for City Council to know. I am not suggesting to voice support for a tiered system or getting really specific but in general your support for the project and what it offers the City as a regulatory tool would be really important for City Council to know. I will be coming back after the City Council work session to let you know updates because I anticipate other changes happening to the code. I would love to hear your thoughts and get a final recommendation once this project is ready for adoption.  Danielle – Q – As a memo, meeting minutes, or both? Kelly – A – Memo or meeting minutes are fine. I just submitted all my materials today, but I can add it as an attachment later. Whatever works for you.  Danielle – Comment – I will say I just really appreciate this project. I think it is critically important to have oversight that is necessary, particularly when there is a lot of special interest more involved at County levels. I appreciate the nature of this process, as well as the time and effort that goes into it. I think it is critically important to have in place.  Kevin – Comment – I fully agree, for the purpose of the minutes, that I am highly supportive of this tool and the examples were shown to be needed for the best interest of citizens and City assets like the lands the City resides on.  Dawson – Comment – In purpose of the minute as well, I do support going forward with this project. 5. OTHER BUSINESS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 10 a. Memo for Graywater  Dawson sent the memo to everyone. Honore reminded the team that they already voted to approve the support memo in April. The memo includes structuring the ordinance so it can adopt new allowances aligned with State regulations if water rights are modernized. Kevin included a line about hope that the City can advocate at a higher level for subsurface irrigation. b. Memo for Contracting for Waste Pick-up & Hauling  Danielle makes a motion that the Board approve a memo in support for the waste hauling plan that was presented with the addition of advocating for incentives to rate proposals that have either lower emissions, zero emissions, or future for lower emission vehicles and that allows for faster and/or more accessible food scrap pick up in the contract. Dawson Seconds. Passes 4-0- 1.  Dawson will work on the memo and will send it out to the Board.  The Board discussed the option to have an in-person board meeting as it would be nice to meet everyone in person but for environmental reason go back to virtual meetings after. They decided on an in-person meeting for their May 18th Board meeting.  Board members looked at upcoming subjects through the summer. There was interest shown in land use code, trash/recycling contracting, active modes plan draft recommendations, Halligan water supply project update, and budget review. c. Rights of Nature Presentation  Dawson asked if they wanted to review the resolution they presented first and then discuss at the next meeting or if they just wanted to invite them for an actual conversation as part of the agenda.  Danielle – Comment – I feel like since we have had discussions around this topic before, unless others feel strongly, I support inviting them as a formal agenda item on our next meeting.  Kevin – Comment – I would support that. I don’t think it is detrimental based on our area of focus in terms of the public being able to find the way onto their agenda. I think that and knowing their conversations going on with City Council.  Dawson – Q – Is an invitation for 30 minutes regular? Honore – A – I have been trying to support you by putting three items on the agenda and keep them at 30 minutes and see how that goes. It is up to you all though. Staff NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 11 loves being able to get that time. Generally, more desire than there is space, but 30 minutes is typical and for more complex items sometimes 40 minutes.  Dawson – Comment – It looks like we currently have regional water update, land use code and active modes for the July agenda. Honore – Comment – Based on timing, the land use code conversation was at the work session last night and I am not sure if having an NRAB agenda item will be as timely as the active modes plan. I am waiting to hear back from the water resources group.  Danielle – Q – Was the impression that there needed to be more discussion or additional information they wanted to present, or should we just read through and vote at the next meeting? Dawson – A – They wanted to have further conversations with us on how we can support and what that might look like. Danielle – Comment – So more discussion than just supporting a resolution.  Honore reminded of making sure the Board has a process for if the public wants to get on the agenda and how they do or don’t go about that with Council priorities. Honore recommended consulting their Council Liaison.  Danielle made a motion to invite Rights of Nature Advocates to an upcoming NRAB meeting assuming it aligns with Council Priorities. Dawson seconds. Passes 4-0-1.  Dawson will reach out to Julie. d. Memo for Solar 120% Sizing Rule & Rates  Kevin – Comment – I like some parts of that, the direction and thoughtfulness there but I have some concerns on some of the things we talked about on how it is being through of particularly on how others are subsidizing. There are other ways where that is happening in the community and to just pick that one…I just want to make sure we are taking time to talk about taking action to support that or whatever we might decide. Timing is wise and more powerful to have an additional message to carry with the original message.  Danielle – Comment – I think this is a critically important topic for us to weigh in on and I think you are right. You could equally say that early solar adopters are subsidizing the public health impacts and benefits that a community is seeing by reduced fossil fuel emissions. It is interesting that as with so many important environmental issues we externalize many public benefits and costs. We focus purely on the economic ones. This is another example of that approach being applied. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 12  Kevin – Comment – It seems overly exemplified. I think the other stuff is great to further say that rethinking the 120% rule makes sense with the factors outlined. It makes sense to rethink the tiered system, the commercial opportunities, and structures. It makes sense but that is one area that doesn’t necessarily do that. I don’t want to lose sight of it personally because there are thousands of solar customers that have made tens of thousands of dollars in investments each and then it is like, these folks are not paying their own way.  Danielle – Comment – From a purely economic standpoint, those early solar adopter customers are what enabled the market to advance the way it did in such a way that solar is now economically accessible to all the other customers. So again, it is a very myopic economic analysis on seral fronts.  Kevin – Comment – You have some of the City goals to hit and some of the greenhouse gas reduction targets, it is all contributing. As my understanding the group’s understanding is similar to mine and if we wanted to make some sort of statement, would now be the most appropriate time to start that statement?  Danielle – Comment – That was my impression.  Honore reviewed due dates and process for submitting for memos.  Kevin makes a motion to write a memo expressing support for the revisions to the solar program with respect to the City goals and making that program more sustainable and appropriately equitable not equal. To make sure that we indicate the importance of the program continuing but that we need to make greater cost benefits to residential customers, especially existing ones. The memo should show support with some concern around that structure. Danielle Seconds. Passes 4-0-1.  Kevin will write a draft and seek input. 6. ADJOURN - 8:52 pm