Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/16/2025 - NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Natural Resources Advisory Board REGULAR MEETING – Wednesday July 16, 2025 LOCATION: 222 Laporte Ave. and via MS Teams: fcgov.com/nrab-teams-meeting 5:30 CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL 1. AGENDA REVIEW 2. COMMUNITY MEMBER PARTICIPATION 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JUNE 4. NEW BUSINESS 5:40-6:15 Single Use Plastics Reduction (SUPR) Melinda Peterson (Lead Specialist, Environmental Services) will share highlights from the updated Municipal Code that expands the plastic bag ban and carryout bag remittance from nineteen large grocers to about 400 stores and allows for enforcement measures to improve compliance. NRAB is asked to offer feedback on an updated approach to shape data collection, analysis, and reporting to fulfill a Council request for better storytelling about the success of SUPR policies. (Discussion) 6:15-6:50 Our Climate Future – Strategic Refresh Honore Depew (Climate Program Manager) will share an overview and details of the process for developing an OCF Strategic Funding Plan. Starting in 2024 a voter-approved sales tax (2050 Tax) began collecting revenue to directly fund climate work. To make the best use of these and other related funds, a Strategic Funding Plan is being developed to plan for the revenue generated by defining a process to strategically guide funding allocation. City Council is scheduled to discuss this item at a Work Session October 28th. (Discussion) 5. OTHER BUSINESS / UPDATES a. Board Member Reports b. Six Month Calendar Review https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/planning-calendar.php c. Revisit action items from previous meetings & preview of next meeting City Websites with Updates: • Air Quality Advisory Board webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/boards/air-quality-advisory • Natural Resources Advisory Board webpage: https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/natural -resources.php • Our Climate Future: https://ourcity.fcgov.com/ourclimatefuture 6. ADJOURN 1 6/18/2025 - Minutes Natural Resources Advisory Board REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, June 18, 2025 – 6:00 PM 222 Laporte Avenue and via Microsoft Teams 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:03 PM 2. ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – • Kelly Stewart (Chair) • Dawson Metcalf (newly elected Vice Chair) • Barry Noon • Kelen Dowdy • Leslie Coleman • Sharel Erickson • Xavier Pereira • Sara LoTemplio • Teagan Loew (arrived late) b. Board Members Absent – • None c. Staff Members Present – • Grant Stump, Lead Specialist, Acting Staff Liaison d. Guest(s) – • Amy Gage, Active Modes Data Specialist • Rachel Ruhlen, FC Moves Transportation Planner 3. AGENDA REVIEW Chair Metcalf reviewed the agenda items. 4. COMMUNITY MEMBER PARTICIPATION 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MAY 2025 Metcalf made a motion, seconded by Pereira, to approve the May 2025 regular meeting minutes as written. The motion was adopted unanimously. 2 6/18/2025 - Minutes 6. NEW BUSINESS a. 15-Minute City Council Priorities Amy Gage, Active Modes Data Specialist, provided an overview of the 15-Minute City concept, which is essentially the ability for an individual to reach the majority of their destinations within a 15-minute bike ride or walk. Gage stated a consultant was hired to conduct a 15-Minute City analysis for the City in 2022, and the City opted to take the analysis in-house with some updated destinations and roadwork data. She noted some of the roadwork projects reduced traffic stress, which is determined by traffic volume, speed limit, and infrastructure, and it influences the scores for destinations. She stated the destination categories include bus stops, childcare providers, civic centers, grocery stores, schools, employers, medical and retail centers, social services, natural areas, and parks. She noted the destination categories were weighted differently based on feedback from City priorities and the public. Gage showed images of the map of the 2024 analysis as compared to the 2022 analysis for the bicycle network score and the pedestrian network score. She provided a list of next steps for the future, including having regular, automatic updates to the inputs (road network, census data, destinations), factoring in population density with existing results, and adding more detailed pedestrian access with ADA information and equity areas to the model. Gage requested input from the Board Members regarding what may be missing from the model. Noon asked about the basic input data. Gage replied on input is the census blocks, which are the geographic units to which the scores are ascribed , the second is the road network with levels of traffic stress, and the third is the destinations. The score is essentially the number of destinations that can be accessed within 15-minutes while being on the lower stress levels of the roadway network. Noon commented on research he has done with wildlife and radio transmitters to identify pinch points, or areas with a disproportionately high volume of use, and the protection status of the pinch points, to help facilitate flow. Noon suggested using more of a color gradient in the maps. Members and Gage discussed how the data can be used, including helping to prioritize projects, identifying areas that might need attention, incentivizing development, informing zoning, expanding trails, and creating satellite locations for government offices and libraries. Gage noted the data has been normalized based on the number of destinations. It was noted that getting feedback from community members as to what a 15 -Minute City means to them would be valuable, particularly in terms of destinations. Members commented on having difficulty identifying what the maps are attempting to communicate. Gage suggested some of this data is more valuable for the decision - makers. 3 6/18/2025 - Minutes ??? asked what constitutes high- versus low-stress roadways. Gage replied that is changing in terms of how things are evaluated now as different types of protected areas for vulnerable users are installed. She noted there is an individual who developed the level of traffic stress classification system, which is a complex matrix involving the number of lanes, width of bike lane, type of infrastructure, traffic volume , and traffic speed. She noted that system is used to identify stress levels in the road network. Additionally, the high-injury network can be overlayed to identify areas of stress. ??? asked about the community’s comfort level with an intersection having a stress rating of 3 for example. Gage replied stress levels 1 and 2 were scored; however, levels 3 and 4 were found to be too uncomfortable for most riders. She noted comfort levels are extremely variable. ??? suggested it could be useful to have a benchmark number that could be used to categorize the data in terms of census blocks meeting, exceeding, or being below the criteria for a 15-Minute City. ??? asked if this information will ultimately be used to inform future development. Gage replied in the affirmative and noted it is only one tool, though the hope is that improvements will be made to make it more useful. b. Which Wheels Go Where? – August Work Session Rachel Ruhlen, FC Moves Transportation Planner, stated Which Wheels Go Where is exploring how to accommodate more kinds of micro-mobility devices, as micro-mobility supports Our Climate Future, Active Modes, Vision Zero, and 15 -Minute City goals. She noted the project has occurred concurrently with the Strategic Trails Update. Ruhlen outlined the current Code regulations for various forms of micro-mobility and noted the current system of categories is somewhat onerous. She stated the proposal is to form two categories: human-powered or lightweight electric, which is defined by going 20 miles per hour or less. She stated anything that can go faster than that would be considered a low-powered scooter. Ruhlen outlined the proposal for addressing where each type of vehicle can be ridden. Ruhlen discussed the public survey conducted last year related to concerns about each facility and each type of vehicle. She noted the community engagement summary summarized the open comments provided as part of the survey and stated overall themes were related to accommodating more kinds of micro -mobility, protecting pedestrians, people with disabilities, seniors, and children, and the fact that it is not what vehicle is being ridden, it is how it is being ridden that matters. Ruhlen noted Fort Collins Police had been very concerned that allowing skateboards on streets would lead to severe crashes; therefore, staff had a conversation with Boulder Police as Boulder has allowed skateboards on streets since 2021. Boulder Police reported they were also initially concerned about an increase in crashes; however, that has turned out not to be the case. She stated the safety education approach for handling issues on trails has been supported. Additionally, Park Rangers utilize an ‘authority of the resource’ approach when talking with trail users who may have violated speed limits or other regulations. 4 6/18/2025 - Minutes Ruhlen discussed the CSU regulations for which vehicles are allowed where and noted the proposed changes would help with consistency with the campus. She outlined the staff proposal for allowing all micro-mobility devices to be ridden in crosswalks, on sidewalks, and on paved trails or multi-use paths, with the exception of dismount zones. Ruhlen noted the Strategic Trails Plan includes a trail safety education campaign which would incorporate messaging on social media and refreshed signage with a focus on behavior. There are also some infrastructure changes proposed as well as a Bicycle Ambassador Program which would include routine trail pop -up events. Ruhlen requested feedback from Board Members. ??? commented on scooters in Denver causing issues on sidewalks due to unsafe and careless riders. She stated the regulations were changed to only allow for riding scooters on the sidewalk if the street speed is above 35 miles per hour. She asked if a citation could be given to an E-scooter rider who was riding on the sidewalk in an unsafe manner. Ruhlen replied staff is looking at ensuring there are ordinances in the Code that would allow for behavior-focused citations. She also noted the trails have a courtesy speed limit of 15 miles per hour; however, there are discussions about codifying that, though Police Services is concerned about having associated enforcement expectations. c. Water Efficiency Plan – Memo Refinement Metcalf provided a draft memo regarding the Board’s recommendation to City Council concerning the Water Efficiency Plan. Members discussed the Plan’s 4% water use reduction goal and it was noted no other alternatives were offered to help determine if that number is reasonable or if the goal should be higher. Metcalf commented on the desire to see more metrics and information related to how benchmarks are created. Noon commended City staff and commented on how water issues are global in nature. He suggested that what is communicated is the trend in use versus the trends in availability. ??? suggested including that information in the Integrated Water Resources Plan which would address demand and water availability in a better fashion than the Water Efficiency Plan. Noon stated the extent to which efficiency is important is a function of the difference between demand and availability. Metcalf stated he wanted to see more education materials about climate -based scenarios in reference to the cost of inaction piece. He also stated he sees every tool as a behavior change tool. ??? commented on taking away barriers to doing thing . Coleman commented on efficiency being less expensive than purchasing new water and suggested the Plan could include additional information from an economic perspective as a messaging tool. Noon stated it seems that the reason staff has taken the steps to develop an Efficiency 5 6/18/2025 - Minutes Plan is because, at some level, they are acknowledging that demand is approaching the crossover point with availability. He stated an Efficiency Plan would not be necessary if a resource is not limiting and suggested the need for the Plan should be included in the Plan. Metcalf questioned whether another strategy piece should be added . He also stated he does not have enough contextual information to suggest the 4% number should be increased. Members discussed suggesting an explanation be provided in the document. Metcalf noted that was already planned as the Water Commission also requested that information. LoTemplio made a motion, seconded by Loew, to approve the memo as amended. The motion was adopted unanimously. Noon commented on the importance of including a base year. Metcalf noted the targets are comparing information to what is currently occurring. d. Board Elections Metcalf and Chair Stewart outlined the role of the Vice Chair. Metcalf stated he would be willing to serve as Vice Chair. LoTemplio made a motion, seconded by Noon, to nominate Metcalf as Vice Chair. The motion was adopted unanimously. 7. OTHER BUSINESS/UPDATES a. Reminder: Earlier NRAB Meeting Start Time in Begins in July (5:30) Metcalf suggested members further discuss the change given the number of absent individuals at the last meeting. Members generally concurred the 5:30 start time would work and agreed to make the switch starting at the July meeting. b. Board Member Reports Chair Stewart noted there is an August Super Issues Board meeting discussing ranked voting. Metcalf stated the civic assembly made a recommendation for a multi -use site on the Hughes property. He noted the bike park did not reach a majority and the super majority items were a natural area, a multi-use facility with an education focus, and other recreation types. He noted there is a potential petition forthcoming to make the entire site a natural area. It was noted there was a last minute Super Issues meeting scheduled for Monday to discuss the Hughes site recommendations. c. Six Month Calendar Review d. Revisit Action Items from Previous Meetings and Preview of Next Meeting 6 6/18/2025 - Minutes 8. ADJOURNMENT • 8:04 pm Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on X/XX/2025 Headline Copy Goes Here Presented by: Melinda Peterson, Lead Specialist Environmental Services Department Natural Resources Advisory Board: Understanding Plastics Code Efficacy 07-16-2025 Headline Copy Goes HereGratitude 2 Headline Copy Goes HereAgenda •Plastics Reduction Overview •Code Expansion •Project Timeline •Effectiveness •National Study •Current Collection •Proposed Multifaceted Approach •Discussion Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes HereDisposable Bag Ordinance (DBO) Single -Use Plastics Reduction (SUPR) 4 City adopted in 2021; voter affirmed Disposable Bag Ordinance for large grocers*: •plastic bag ban •paper bag fee of $0.10 with 6% remittance to the City •Ban on polystyrene (Styrofoam ) at retail food establishments 2025 update •expands the plastic bag ban and remittance fees to all stores* •allows for enforcement of both plastic bags and polystyrene (started July 1). “I am celebrating the lack of plastic bags stuck in our trees.” Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Why Now •Updated Code •Council is interested in: •Impacts of the policy •How to tell the story of plastics reduction in alignment with Zero Waste goals Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT ENV 1: Implement the Our Climate Future Plan to advance the and waste goals. OUR CLIMATE FUTURE Big Move 10 Zero Waste Economy 6Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting COUNCIL PRIORITY #5 Accelerate zero waste infrastructure and policies Headline Copy Goes HereProject Timeline 7 Date Feb-Apr Code Update May Process & Enforcement Design Jun- Aug Build Reporting Prototype Sep Confirm Approach Oct-Dec Collect Data Activities •City Council affirmed code updates to sunset DBO and establish our own single- use plastics reduction (SUPR) program expanding plastic bag ban and remittance to all stores* •Process design & updates •Enforcement Plan update •Initial communication with businesses •Equitable Data Team Process •EHO data considerations •NRAB Discussion & Feedback •Initial prototype •OCF-Zero Waste Staff •ESD Lead •Plastics Team •Finished prototype is sent to businesses, community, and other departments for data collection •Return to NRAB to share results if possible (Dec/Jan) Headline Copy Goes Here 8 Key Questions •How do we tell the story of the effectiveness of single-use plastic bag bans and carryout bag remittance? •Does this multifaceted approach help us move toward an improved understanding towards our Zero Waste goals? Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes HereEffectiveness: National Study •Plastic shopping bag policies are working, a new study suggests •Data: leverages the patchwork of bag policies in the US and citizen science data on 45,067 shoreline cleanups •Findings: plastic bag policies lead to a 25 to 47% decrease in plastic bags in shoreline litter •“Plastic bag policies significantly reduced the proportion of plastic bags in shoreline litter. Although less common, taxes or fees on plastic bags may be even more effective than bans.” (CNN, June 19, 2025; USA Today, July 9, 2025) Anna Papp, Kimberly L. Oremus, Plastic bag bans and fees reduce harmful bag litter on shorelines. Science 388,eadp9274(2025).DOI:10.1126/science.adp9274 Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes Here 10 Current State of Reporting •Currently, large retailers are asked to provide the numbers of carryout bags sold. •Recycled paper bags and plastic bags are not a 1:1 comparison, so the data is insufficient. •Additionally, we lack information to create conclusions about waste diverted from the landfill or natural areas. •An update is needed. Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes Here 11 Understanding Plastic Bag Waste •Can we quantify the reduction in waste accurately? •Environment America’s Single-Use Plastic Bag Ban Waste Reduction Calculator https://environmentamerica.org/center/resources/plas tic-bag-bans-work/ •Assumes each individual uses about 300 single- use plastic bags per person per year (with no behavior change) •Estimates 50,097,704 fewer plastic bags after ban •Bag bans cut single -use plastic bag litter by at least 33% •How do we continue to shape these estimates in a changing landscape? Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes HereZero Waste in Plastics •Bringing reusable carryout bags shopping are “zero waste behaviors” •Plastic bags are often difficult to separate from other waste streams •Some are recyclable •Health component and microplastics pollution impact – difficult to measure Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes HereWhat we need •A multifaceted approach with data from across three areas – business, community, and nature – to be collected annually for the purposes of building a comprehensive story of reduced plastic waste in Fort Collins. •This approach helps to address the complexity of multiple contributing factors (policy, individual behavior, and pollution). Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes Here Natural Area/Parks DataCustomer DataBusiness Data Proposed – Data 14 1. Annual Number of Bags Sold 2. Are you noticing an increase, decrease, or no change on purchasing paper carryout bags? 3. Does your business offer plastic bag recycling? How has the amount changed if at all? 4. If your business has stopped offering carryout bags, why? 1.Qualitative data from Parks & Natural Areas – What differences have staff noticed? Community? 2.Natural area waste data from clean-ups (Adopt volunteers) •To date in 2025 have collected 1300 pieces of single use plastic. How does this compare? •Will create a trend starting in 2019 (DBO began in 2021) 1.Has your carryout behavior changed since the plastic bag ban and carryout bag fee started? 2.Do you notice more, same, or fewer bags in our community since the policy? Anything in particular? 3.Have you reduced other types of plastic use because of the ban? 4.Are you more, less, or no change aware of how plastic affects natural and community health than before the ban? Headline Copy Goes HerePrototype: Data Collection 15 •Data Collection Methods •Business •Annual Reporting required in code •Community •Voluntary survey of shoppers •Nature •Requests for data made to Natural Areas & Parks Headline Copy Goes HerePrototype: Analysis 16 Analysis of data holistically helps to: •Identify interconnections between qualitative and quantitative data •Reveal unexpected insights and outliers •Highlight multiple areas of success/areas for improvement •Allow for collaborative interpretation Headline Copy Goes HerePrototype: Conclusions 17 Conclusions: •Inform Council •Align with Zero Waste Goals •Establish a baseline of understanding since code expansion •May lay the groundwork for additional single-use plastics policies •Can be shared with community Headline Copy Goes Here 18 Key Question •Does this multifaceted approach help us move toward an improved understanding? Could I return to a future NRAB to share results? Natural Resources Advisory Board: Plastics & Zero Waste Reporting Headline Copy Goes Here Thank you! 19 Headline Copy Goes Here Climate Program Manager Honore Depew OCF Strategic Refresh Natural Resources Advisory Board -July 2025 7.16.2025 Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Prompts for NRAB Discussion •What questions or feedback on OCF Strategic Refresh? •Project process and/or structure example •What questions or feedback on OCF Strategic Funding Plan? •Purpose and framing •Revenue projections •Allocation guidance Headline Copy Goes HereTimeline 3 Project Initiation Consultant hired Compile historic OCF-related material Dec—Jan Engagement Targeted Survey 1-1 Interviews Dept. Focus Groups OCF Summit February—May OCF Framework Refresh Aligned w/ Muni Sustainability Enhanced Our Climate Future Framework June—September OCF Strategic Funding / Next Moves Plan Assessment of funding/revenue priorities & needs Updating OCF Council Roadmap Sequencing of Next Move strategies June—Q4 Council Work Session (10/28) Strategic Funding Plan Informing 2026 Council Priority Setting & Budget Q4 2025 Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Our Climate Future Strategic Alignment Strategic Objective ENV 1: Implement the Our Climate Future Plan to advance the City’s greenhouse gas, energy and waste goals; reduce air pollution; and improve community resilience. •Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction •50% below 2005 baseline by 2026 •80% below 2005 baseline by 2030 •Carbon Neutral by 2050 •100% renewable electricity by 2030 •Zero waste, or 100% landfill diversion, by 2030 Headline Copy Goes Here 6 The Big Question of Local Gov Sustainability How do we achieve long-term sustainability goals for our community when commitments to transformational change can be in tension with near-term priorities and resource constraints? (2-year/4-year budget and election cycles) Our Climate Future as Strategic Framework Goals, Vision & Implementation Support Areas of Influence •Economic Drivers •Regulations & Policy •Infrastructure Investments •Behavior Change (Education) Headline Copy Goes HereProject Overview: OCF Refresh & Strategic Funding Plan 7 Process •Gaps assessment to better understand organizational needs; peer city research •Assessment of current revenue streams, funding priorities, and sequencing Outcomes •Enhanced Our Climate Future Framework •More effective and inclusive of the City’s sustainability efforts (e.g., air quality) •Aligned & integrated with municipal sustainability & adaptation efforts •Coordinated planning, implementation, and storytelling •Strategic Funding Plan •Strategy and guidance document with 15-year time horizon •High-level vision and guidance in the med/long term •Clarity and focus for implementation strategy in the near term Headline Copy Goes HereOCF Strategic Refresh – Summary of what is needed Make OCF simpler to talk about, more inclusive of the City’s sustainability efforts, and a more useful tool for planning and accountability Headline Copy Goes HereOCF Strategic Refresh – What we heard is needed •Identify and integrate related new and existing work into the OCF Framework (e.g., Air Quality) •Align & integrate municipal sustainability and adaptation •Navigate tensions between priorities (e.g., GHG impact vs. foundational climate work) •Support for resourcing OCF-related work (2050 Tax $, Council budgeting process, grants, etc.) •Clarify how Next Moves add up to Big Moves •Make OCF simpler to communicate Headline Copy Goes Here 10 OCF Strategic Refresh – Next steps •Incorporate input and feedback •From staff / community engagement & OCF Executives •Summarize enhancements to OCF framework •Assessment, Reporting & Storytelling •Internal Alignment & Collaboration •Structure & Governance •Develop implementation approach for 2026 •Algin with OCF Strategic Funding Plan Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes Here Original plan – Big Moves, Next Moves 2023 – 2024 Next Moves Plan – Big Moves, Next Moves, Actions Measure 1. Close local and regional recycling infrastructure gaps Next Move: Explore Universal Composting Infrastructure/Facilities Next Move: Secure funding for organic waste transfer station Future Move: Construct or support construction of a C&D processing facility Measure 2. Direct local recycling materials and direct to regional recycling infrastructure and reduce use of high impact items Next Move: Implement disposable grocery bag policy Next Move: Explore universal composting ordinance Measure 3. Ensure convenient collection for all high-priority materials for all community members Next Move: Identify barriers to accessing recycling services Next Move: Implement universal recycling ordinance Future Move: Add composting service to the City’s single-hauler contract Measure 4. Ensure community members and businesses know what can be recycled as well as options to reduce and reuse Next Move: Expand recycling education campaign Next Move: Implement the sharing of commonly needed items through libraries Original plan – Big Moves, Next Moves Tentative: Add level between Big Moves and Next Moves Headline Copy Goes Here San Diego Implementation Plan Example – Strategy detail Headline Copy Goes HereOCF Example Big Move strategy detail page Headline Copy Goes HereSan Diego Implementation Plan Example – Overview table Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes HereOCF Strategic Funding Plan (SFP) Purpose 19 •Strategy and guidance document with a 15-year time horizon •High-level vision and guidance in the med/long term •Clarity and focus for implementation strategy in the near term, driven by OCF Structure •Informing priority setting, sequencing, and budgeting decisions for City Leaders Headline Copy Goes Here20252026 2027 2028 2029 2030 OCF SFP $$ Vision 15-year vision, 5-year updates OCF NM Strategies Council Elections Council Priorities City Budget 20OCF Council Roadmap Headline Copy Goes HereSFP Key Components 21 Revenue Projections •Key revenue streams •Existing •Potential Future Allocation Guidance •Allocations Process •Roadmap for Allocations •Near term (2 Years, BFO aligned) •Mid-term (4-8 Years) •Long term (15 Years) Headline Copy Goes Here 22 OCF Funding Forecast – Projections by Revenue Stream Funding forecast includes “climate-driven” and “waste-driven” funding: •i.e., funds that exist primarily to address climate and waste •Portions of 2050 tax that are climate-driven •Disposable bag fee revenue •Portion of Utilities rate structure that funds energy efficiency, renewables, battery storage, etc. Funding Stream Funding sub-category 2050 Tax, Climate Portion Climate pollution, 100% RE, Air pollution, Carbon Neutrality Remittance fees from disposable bags Zero waste Utilities funds for Energy Services Climate pollution, 100% RE Headline Copy Goes HereAllocation Approach 23 Constrained Financially •Allocate according to projected revenues Multiple time horizons •Short-term – address Council priorities, emerging needs •Mid-term – planning stability, multi-year efforts, bigger lifts o Potentially select efforts to be part of multi-year climate cohort •Long-term – ongoing efforts, saving for infrastructure, etc. Bucketed Approach •Funding one-off and ongoing efforts •Holding some funding for R&D/Innovation, matching funds, etc. Headline Copy Goes Here 24 Prompts for NRAB Discussion •What questions or feedback on OCF Strategic Refresh? •Project process and/or structure example •What questions or feedback on OCF Strategic Funding Plan? •Purpose and framing •Revenue projections •Allocation guidance