HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 10/24/2006MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
200 WEST MOUNTAIN AVE.
October 24, 2006
For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair 493-6341
David Roy, Council Liaison 407-7393
Lucinda Smith, Staff Liaison 224-6085
Board Members Present
Jeff Engell, Nancy York, Dale Adamy, Eric Levine, Gregory McMaster, Kip Carrico, Dave
Dietrich
Board Members Absent
none
Staff Present
Natural Resources Department: Lucinda Smith, Tara McGibben,
Guests
Ellen Lawson
The meeting was called to order at 5:35pm.
Minutes
With the following changes the minutes for September 26, 2006 AQAB minutes were
unanimously approved. Changes are the following:
Levine: Page 8 correct spelling of segwaying to segueing.
York: Page 9 remove charades add charette.
Levine: Page 13 correct spelling of Mizulla to Missoula. Add MT.
Public Comment
• Ellen Lawson: I wrote a letter to city council and I didn't get to finish it in the three
minutes I was allotted last August and so I haven't looked at this issue since then; other
than I've drafted a letter to tell you so I'm just going to talk through it. I moved to here
because it's a wonderful retirement place. I wanted to live in Colorado for years, it had
no stigma for bad air quality and moved here in June and I live in the historic district. I
have no air conditioning, I like to leave my windows open. In July there were a couple
days I couldn't move and I don't have asthma or health problems. I'm ordinary person,
I had to lie down. I'd get up and then I had to lie down again. I read a piece in the
Denver Post about the ozone levels in Ft Collins. I asked the city if this wasn't why I
couldn't breathe; I've never experienced anything like this in my life. I started getting
educated on ozone. I was told that it was a macro problem. It was outside of the county
and it's all the oil and gas things. Mine is the micro point of view. I tried to figure out
myself what could it be that's is so bad for me and not everyone else. (Ellen proceeds to
draw where she lives on Plum Street on the easel. She noticed garbage trucks making
16 garbage trips on her street.) I concluded the bad air that I was experiencing was
J
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 2 of 17
from the garbage trucks going up and down the ally and up and down the street. I've
never lived in a place where they've had so many private company's handle trash. I
wanted to get educated on this; it couldn't be that it's just about free enterprise. There
are other towns and places that have municipal collections and districting. It turns out
the city did have a 1998 study on districting. I read it and learned the city wanted to
update it a few years ago but the garbage interests prevented it from being presented. In
there, among many things, it says that these garbage trucks cost the city $322,000 a
year in fixing up the streets; and this was in 1998 so let's say $500,000 at least. Then I
read in the paper that we the citizens are being charged so the city can produce $3.1
million a year for road maintenance and I'm wondering why the garbage companies
getting away with paying nothing and we're paying so that their clients can have lower
fees so they can go up and down my street.16 times. That's why -I'm here, I'm very
disillusioned. I know its politics but I just don't see why you can't tackle it on this
issue. If it's the low end of this air quality thing and the high is sending it to the state.
The low end is doing what the city can do and it would save city and residents money.
It certainly would make for cleaner air. And there's noise pollution too. I call myself
the canary in the Fort Collins tunnel. I did experience this. If there's me, there's others
out there that are just not coming and telling you. So it's time to do something. In 1998
it wasn't really a problem for the city; they could save money but who cares but maybe
now the air quality can put pressure on the city to take a second look and re -do the
study, that's what I would suggest. We tried to calculate how much they spew out into
the air because this isn't just an ordinary car, these are pretty big trucks.
• York: And you have a unique situation I think because of so many different trash
haulers. I presume you live on East Plum?
• Lawson: Yes
• York: You have some options. I don't know what the air quality board can do but we
can think of some. You personally can talk to Ben Manvel who is your council rep and
explain it to him. You can get involved with your neighbors. If you can get your
neighbors to use the same trash hauler you can benefit by reducing the cost of your
service. You'd be successful in eliminating some of the emissions.
• Levine: That reduces the road degradation, that reduces the noise pollution, and climate
footprint.
• McMaster: Everybody gains and you pay less.
• Adamy: On the other hand, Ellen raises a good point. I would like this to be on our
work plan. This is a common compliant from the city of Fort Collins. This board might
have some influence on how the city does regulate that.
• McMaster: That'd be something to come in with several boards and say this is crazy.
My neighbors who've moved from California last year constantly repeat how insane
they think it is to have a contracting service. I think we've all heard that from a lot of
people, I've gotten so used to it.
• Dietrich: All of your arguments are well taken.
• Levine: I had my first presentation of it as a member of Citizen Planners early in
Citizen Planners and I told Nancy this is a 1992 and it wasn't a presentation from an
environmentalist to the Citizen Planners, it was a city presentation. They did cost of
road degradation, they had numbers like a $1.67 per mile. The road are not designed for
vehicles that heavy and it really weighs in; they're designed for very small amounts of
vehicles that heavy. The city was considering either districting or some kind of
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 3 of 17
requirement or charging the trash haulers for all of this increased road maintenance. All
I can say is welcome to the City of Ft Collins. I've been looking at this issue since 1992
and fully support a sane way to approach trash hauling.
• Lawson: The previous town I was in they had a different problem and I started
addressing it and ran into politicians right and left. Then I used the safety issue and I
got a report from the city and I Xeroxed it and gave it to all the neighbors and if this
happens the City is liable and they straightened the problem up in two weeks. I
physically was incapacitated, now I don't move here to be incapacitated and it's not my
job to sign up all my neighbors so I can breathe. I think the City of Fort Collins,
somebody may say you're not giving us the air we deserve.
• York: Sue them.
• Engle: What would you propose as a solution?
• Lawson: Right now I would like the city to do the study again so that you've got
updated information. And when they're doing the study they can price out all the costs,
street, particulate, noise. Someone can take that and then go further so that's the first
stage.
• York: As a board we can send a communique to city council and say a citizen has
come and brought this to our attention. It dovetails with the transportation maintenance
fee. It can poke them a little bit. We can say that she suggested the study be redone.
• Levine: We cut out Dial -a -Ride because it's just too much for the citizens to pay . But
yet this is a half million dollar subsidy to industry that we haven't really come together
as a community to decide if we want to do or not.
• Lawson: We're paying so they can drive and pollute the air.
• Adamy: On the issue of pollution and it never occurred to me until Ellen presented it;
from the pollution stand -point, a vehicle the amount they pollute is different when they
start and stop. And these trash haulers do that constantly. That's a separate issue that we
ought to address on haulers. They're polluting a lot more than any of the vehicles.
• Lawson: And not only stopping and starting; they are raising the arms that lift up and
drop down.
• York: Then there's the landfill problem.
• All board: Thank you Ellen.
• York: If you write a letter to Ben Manvel, I recommend that you send a copy to the
Mayor and Darin Atteberry the city manager.
Agenda Item 1
Work Plan for 2007
Levine: Next month we'll solidify the w6rkplan and send it out to council for 2007.
This is the initial workplan discussion.
Smith: I guess the way the board has done this in the past is generally a pretty fluid
process. We often started by reviewing this year's work plan to see what items you'd
like to keep and what items you'd like to add or drop. If that's how you'd like to
proceed.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 4 of 17
• Levine: I have a short list and didn't have time to review a workplan for last year. Other
items that would need to go on our workplan for this next year, that should be on top of
the list. The work that the board is required to do this year.
• Smith: Would it be reasonable to just start with suggestions on what kinds of things you
want to have on the workplan? Eric it looks like you have some items.
• Levine: I do. I'm asking you if there are other items that you know that will be part of
our product required.
• Smith: I see.
• Levine: Those will be there if they're required. And we can see.
• Smith: I would think it makes sense to draw items at least in part from things that are in
the air quality BFO offer because those are things that we'll be working on. That's one
source. Those things are obvious like ozone, high emitting vehicles.'There is something
about diesel emissions which we haven't addressed this year but if you remember BFO
is a two year process so that will be up next year. Continuing green building,
greenhouse gasses and I noted the board talked about west nile virus and that's going to
be an issue for next year. hi general, the next budget cycle will be addressed next year
and I think that's an important one for the board to weigh in on as well.
• Levine: Right. That's a lot of what I have on a short list. The council may pass the
climate change resolution and it may come up in January.
• Smith: Right, hopefully that will be something before council.
• Levine: If that got through council that would involve the creation of a task force. We
would revisit the cities for climate protection program and the board should be involved
in that. West Nile is something we said we'd address. What is the budget cycle for the
fund, is it 2007? It's funded ready?
• Smith: Yes it is. It's funded at the same level. The budget item in question would be for
the 08/09 budget cycle. That's one of the main areas that the board has opportunity to
provide input on the west nile issue to the budget process.
• Levine: When is the 08 and 09 budget process?
• Smith: `07.
• Levine: It starts in 07, when in 07?
• Smith: I think it's going to start as early as March or April. There's a lot of talk that the
City didn't do BFO thoroughly the first time around and so if we do it thoroughly
which involves more public involvement I'm guessing it might start in the spring, with
adoption of the budget in late November.
• Levine: This is the budget that affects 2009.
• Smith: 2008 and 2009, yes.
• Levine: And we're starting it early in 2007.
• Smith: I don't know the exact date. I haven't seen a schedule but I think at least by
spring.
• Levine: That just means if we're going to do it , we need to start it or we'll be behind
the curve. All members want to bring together various entities such as CSU, PSD and
transportation board, NRAB, AQAB. Dave mentioned Brian was a de -facto member of
the sustainable transportation committee with CSU.
• Smith: I don't think they have a set membership per say. City staff are welcome to
come and he's been going. So are you saying that group too?
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 5 of 17
• Levine: I would think so. I don't know how long in the process they are. We would
hope they have something we can look at and get involved in.
• Smith: If you have a presentation from one of them next month to get a sense of what
they're doing that may get the ball rolling.
• Levine: The parking director is involved in that?
• Smith: Yes, I think he's the head of it.
• Levine: That's important. Fort Collins moves. I don't like progress not having any to
measure progress or lack of it especially since the Victoria survey mentioned real
metrics throughout and we have discarded ours. It said that Fort Collins Moves
planning department is going to develop some type of measurable metric.
• Smith: As far as I know that's a reasonable thing to put on your workplan for next year.
I don't know about the process or the timing, but I can find out by the next meeting.
• Levine: I know it was mentioned that VMT wasn't holistic enough, what ever exactly
that means in its context for. I don't mind the holistic approach but I would like
something that's measurable and quantifiable not just something that's graded in terms
of adjectives that describe progress. You can't graph adjectives. EPA doesn't use
adjectives to describe compliance with the clean air act; they use measurable metrics.
That's all of what I have. Another thing is the air quality survey, is there a budget?
• Smith: At this point I will recommend that we do a survey next year. Some things are
up in the air about the air quality program and where we'll reside and what exactly
we'll be doing next year. Based on the BFO process, I was thinking we would do an air
quality survey again in 2007. If there is one, the board, I think, would like to be
involved in that.
• Levine: We missed weighing in over the years as far as some of the questions. Just a
couple of the questions expanding a little bit would give us some more information of
not only what people think, how much they think they know, what our out reach has
been. We need the historical tracking of the questions so a lot of it needs to stay on
there.
• Smith: That's fair. The board hasn't had that opportunity to weigh in on the survey
before it goes out since the last time we overhauled it really.
• Carrico: Climate, greenhouse gas reductions and mobility management. If the city is
taking up climate in January we should do our best to weigh in on that in December.
• York: We should weigh in on things right now. The regional transportation authority is
considering a project and a list is going to be developed and they're looking for inter-
governmental agreements. We should make a recommendation to reinforce the idea of
transit.
• McMaster: That gets back to mobility management issues.
• Dietrich: Nancy, what's the timing on that? You said we'd have to weigh in soon?
• York: If any recommendation should be made, it should be done tonight. The timeline
is urgent. They're forming a coalition of people to run the campaign. The Northern
Colorado Legislative Alliance, they're the movement behind it; their plan is this month
is to have one of the members do shuttle diplomacy; going to the various city councils
and county commissioners among the 13 participating organizations. The other thing is
the budget that's going to be Nov. 11 for the 2007 modifications. On that is the
transportation maintenence fee and the reduction of dial a ride and the adding in a new
bus route on harmony, timberline and prospect. I went to the council meeting and
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 6 of 17
listened to the folks who are cut off from dial a ride. Very compelling stories from the
people who volunteer and are non -ambulatory and they will lose all that. The fee
squeaked by; but yet if you're going to have the fee, it should embrace the entire
transportation picture. Those are two issues that we could weigh in on. In both cases
we need to move towards transit. Whatever help that we can give or if we have more
wise notions on how why we should speak them out.
• Levine: I didn't know all of this was coming up; I'm surprised.
• York: The RTA final budget hearing is Nov. 7.
• Smith: It's actually November 21.
• York: Wait. November 7 the ordinance establishing the park and transportation
maintenence fee. One of our best practices in the mobility report they excused people
who didn't own a car. We're excusing other governments and schoofs. It's the influence
of that mobility management report because the administrative shake up or; to revamp
the way the administration does their transportation. The point they made in here was
that they're accustomed to building roads. I don't know if I personally feel like air
quality is pushed aside in MPO and the city of Ft. Collins. You don't feel that way
Lucinda?
• Smith: I have mixed feelings about it.
• York: I went to the transportation board last month. It was the day after the dial a ride
and all that; which is cutting and unfortunate things happening to some individuals in
the community. The transportation board covered the Poudre River Area Plan. And
they're planning on paving Willow Street and Linden Street with brick. And having a
really nice water feature adjacent to the road on Willow, some lovely plans. A new
round about on Mountain and Lincoln and Jefferson / Riverside. It seems like such an
extravagancy, on the other hand, transportation for those with no cars is dismal. So, I
personally would like to see us weigh in.
• Levine: I watched the council meeting on cable. Person after person came and told what
a problem the ending of dial a ride would be to them. But the decision makers are
probably feeling very good that they no longer have to listen to those people nagging.
It's amazing the city gets points in the county to retire and not having any viable
transportation system, no dial a ride, not having a real transfort system that's a viable
transportation system that people have as an alternative, that just really surprises me.
Southern Florida has bike lanes everywhere, but they're not used. They are wide
enough for the tricycles they have. The heat hasn't stopped them from building
elaborate modes of transportation via the bike lanes.
• York: Institutional reform is what I mean about administrative. If we were to weigh in,
it would make them more aware we have such a document and they might pay attention
to it. The MPO, they have 13 members and then they have a tech group advising them
and then over here they have a transit group; in every case transit is separated. As far as
our transportation, we know what that looks like so. One of the things that came out of
council meeting was the possibility of holding a summit. I want a summit on all
transportation and consider the cost, consider the reduction in police force if we move
away from roads as another option and bring in points on how they can save money by
not widening roads if they had other means of transportation. Is anybody else
interested, I mean should we do this?
• Levine: Are you proposing a motion? We should finish the workplan; that's fine if you
want to propose a motion after that.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 7 of 17
• York: I would like us to have one.
• Levine: Nancy think of the wording. And we'll finish the work plan round one. Just
because something isn't on the workplan doesn't mean it won't be properly addressed
by the board and weighed in on.
• Engle: My goals were pretty much stated. The top of my agenda would be to continue
broadening of communication with CSU and Poudre School District. I think we're
getting our arms around having meaningful agenda items to speak to them about.
Communication is the easiest form of leverage. It doesn't take any resource except time
and since we're already here we can get them to spend some time with us as well.
There's not a monetary cost to that and hopefully gets leveraged and the message gets
out.
• McMaster: Let me first make a general point. The existing work plan has 20 items. The
agenda items are just packed full and all had our frustrations. I'd like to ask do we want
to do a little bit of change in course by reducing the number of identified items. There's
always things coming up as Eric said so we know there's going to be additional things
that are going to need to be dealt with. With that being said, I agree with what
everybody's said so far. My top concerns are greenhouse gas emissions and mobility
management. Things like the Northern Regional Transportation Authority and the grade
separated crossings, in some ways I think the work plan structure might be better put
together if we have those two main items and within that have some sub -categories or
things that might fit in and get a little more direction towards thinking of specific goals
that we have to meet. Last I would add is the West Nile Virus; it's really not related to
the first two.
• Dietrich: I would reiterate the most important things I think we're dealing with are
climate related issues, and ozone which will probably come more into the for -front next
year. Last year we had the chronic wasting disease follow up; I'm assuming we're
pretty much done with that and the smoking ordinances too. There might be other
issues such as land being developed around the area and have stripped off all the
vegetation of the area and the particulate levels are extremely high; not too much the
inhalant levels but nuisance wise particulates still become a problem. Perhaps you
might want to add to the plan for next year. I know it's the Planning and Zoning or
somebody is supposed to watch for this, the mitigation at the construction site, but it
looks like to me, has got a little out of control the last few years; the dirt on roads,
exposed soils for long periods of time over broad areas, scrappers tear it up and it sits
for months and the strong winds blow it. Nuisance affect if not an inhalant and
particulate issue too.
• Adamy: Chronic Wasting Disease is interesting but it doesn't relate to air quality.
• Dietrich: We weren't sure of it. I think it's off the table.
• Adamy: I didn't know it was an issue of the AQAB at all.
• Smith: Yes, last year.
• Adamy: I missed the good stuff. I want to bring up diesel. If we concentrated on some
of the diesel particulate problems, seems to me by nature of that course we might we
improve some of the other issues that we're worried about. If we just concentrated on
one and went after it with as much zeal as we could I think we would improve
transportation, lower ozone, affect the climate. That goes back to the things I was going
to suggest along with Greg in changing this list in several respects. I think we should
prioritize some of the things on the list. Two ways I thought of are: 1. Important but
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 8 of 17
difficult to implement. These would be really heavy difficult things to put on an agenda
but it will take a lot of resources and time to affect a change. If we have those on a list
we can say which one is most important and the least important and get five of them.
One the other side of the scale the easy ones. There's a bunch of things I think we can
do as a board to take care of some issues; they don't have much of an impact. I was
looking at some of these and some of them look like they are outdated/solved/or taken
care of. So I think a review of some of the other things might be valuable. What I don't
like about the list is the objective of the work plan; it should have some action items. I
also object to (and) the wording of "continue to investigate or encourage" which leaves
me wondering if there's any action in that goal. I suggest some rewording so that we
have a measurable. I noticed the smoking hot-line pamphlet and asked if it was
effective. The number of calls coming in is disappointing. If we could involve the
community in the smoking vehicle hot-line we could multiple the number of the
smoking vehicles that are being noticed. It seems to me we would also impact the
climate and maybe the diesel. That would be one of those "easy to do, not terribly
effective, but have an impact" programs. As a point of reference, now that Timberline
is done and they're digging huge holes over there and there's no way you can put an
underpass there without a huge expense. South Timberline there's the Bacon school
with open space. The west side has a field with a sign for development; I do see an
underpass there before Timberline gets to be 4 or 6 lanes. I would guess and bet if that
was incorporated into the plan that it would be pennies on the dollar to build an
underpass for Bacon Elementary students to travel as opposed to trying to add one after
the fact. And if that could be included on the work plan regarding grade separated
crossings, that's what I would like to see.
• York: That would be under mobility management too wouldn't it?
• Adamy: Absoluty.
• York: I encourage you to speak to the transportation board meeting.
• Adamy: I did. They had too many issues on their agenda that night. I never did receive
any feedback.
• York: Right, you don't. You could mention it to council and P&Z board. Instead of
mentioning all, keep on that because you're right about grade separated crossings.
• Adamy: Thank you.
• McMaster: You first brought it up you were the lone crusader on it. The discussion was
to add mass to that by weighing in. To me almost all the issues fit under greenhouse gas
emissions and mobility management.
• Dietrich: Dale's point about action items is good and the grade separated crossings is a
good example. We can state in our work plan to suggest three locations where grade
separated crossings would be viable within the city; a specific action and we can use
Bacon as one and find two others and present a positive action rather than a general
concept.
• McMaster: I like that and we can add one more by truly get it into the planning process.
• Adamy: I think that's where it's going to save the money. Because other funding
sources play in and oftentimes if you ever have one built and saw the cost of the grade
separated crossing after the fact it'd be minimal.
• Levine: I'd be glad to put on the agenda sometime and have a recommendation come
out of the board but you will need to do basic cost figures and you'd need to bring that
data. We could have this as an item at one of the meetings. That's some work for you.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 9 of 17
• Smith: It could happen via the council or via getting it into the planning process; it
could work either way.
• Levine: Over and under.
AQAB discussion about transportation -related resolution
• Levine: Nancy do you have a resolution or anything?
• York: What I have right now is that whereas city council is considering the
establishment of a transportation fee we recognize the transportation fee does not
address the transportation needs of our entire community ... I don't really know where to
go with this because there's no dedicated funding for transit and point out the document
that mentions some of the issues that came out of the mobility management report. I
don't think it would do any good to expand the transportation fee. There needs to be a
reconsideration of our entire transportation future. Given the cost of it, but I don't
know. Other ideas on where we should go with it?
• Levine: I think council has made its decision for this budget cycle on some of these
items. MM is high on our agenda; and it's today and the next agenda item and we
continue to work on it. Seems to me we can lay the ground work for the next budget
cycle.
• York: I don't think we necessarily want to call for them not to pass it. It's only street
maintenance. The gas tax only pays Y4 maintenance of our streets. The street over sizing
fees can oversize streets but the street over sizing doesn't include anything for transit.
Perhaps we recommend a summit on transportation that would consider the overall
costs and benefits so that we have a transportation plan that meets the whole
community needs.
• Dietrich: This is a resolution that you're trying to present to council, is this correct?
• York: Yes, we as a board would try to come up.
• Dietrich: We would recommend to council that they establish a method to develop a
comprehensive transit plan for consideration?
• York: Transportation plan actually. As it is now transit is off on the side, and that we
have dedicated funding for transit. That's the heart of this; is the lack of dedicated
funding.
• Dietrich: I'm afraid if we say to council you have to come up with a better
transportation plan it's not going to go very far. What is your focus, transit?
• Smith: I don't want to intrude but wonder if this suggestion helps. To consider a
recommendation to council that notices they are considering a transportation
maintenence fee, and say what you want about that and if you think it doesn't go far
enough or whatever. You could highlight the mobility management report and say that
the whole concept of mobility manageni6nt is a way to lessen the burden of the
transportation maintenence fee. Because as the miles driven on the streets decrease then
all the entities that are charged for the fee have a lower fee. That would be one way to
raise the mobility management report and perhaps say that you'd like to be working on
this in the future. And make some comment about the transportation maintenence fee.
That's a little bit different than a direct recommendation on the budget. It's a way to
make a positive statement that supports mobility management and says that the city
could be doing more.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 10 of 17
• McMaster: I like that because the council has already done the dirty work with hying to
come up with this. Presumably, they would say well we have a transportation
department, we have all these people that give us input. What we're really suggesting is
we're not pleased with the direction they take; but the way to support that is like you
say, to mention this mobility management study report. I think that would be a lot more
effective.
• Levine: I think that's a good suggestion as well.
• York: I think it's great.
• Levine: I envision giving council a data filled report from the presentations that we're
going to get this year and a lot of concrete specific suggestions for council to consider
and saying this is what we agree on; here's this report; here are the concrete suggestions
even with cost figures when we can put them in.
• Engle: Be ahead of it as far as budgeting cycles.
• York: I would like us to recognize that the transportation fee doesn't address the entire
community's transportation needs.
• Adamy: To me it sounds vague and I think it would be overlooked. Would you be
inclined to suggest the things that were excluded so that they're more obvious, the
segment of society that is excluded? Rather than suggest they should be all inclusive?
• York: Well they should be all inclusive.
• Adamy: They should but that's generalistic and I think it would lose the emphasis that
you're trying to suggest. I think you should point out somebody who's excluded they
ought to be a segment of our society who utilizes transportation. I thought that's who
you wanted to emphasize.
• York: I added in my own notes of those without vehicles or are non -ambulatory.
• Adamy:Ok.
• York: We can mention the recently received mobility management best practices
report. What did you suggest Lucinda?
• Smith: That the concept that mobility management strategies can help reduce the payer
burden of the transportation maintanence fee. I think that's based on number of trips or
miles. So if those are reduced collectively on the system, then they'll be a reduction to
the payers. It's just one more reason to support mobility management (mm) strategy.
• McMaster: Then the underserved would have something done for them or give back.
• York: Is that what you're thinking to add?
• McMaster: That was a way to tie back to the fact that the current transportation fee isn't
addressing all segments of society. Maybe start with mobility management study
having a benefit of reducing...
• Levine: We've spent a lot of time on this already and we're not close to a resolution.
Does anyone here believe council will change'direction at this point in the game we're
at November already from a budgeting process.
• York: I do believe they'll read it because of the nature of the transportation fee. Where
they may blow it off.
• Smith: It could start with what Greg suggested in that the mobility management report
was received and mobility management practices can reduce payer burden from
transportation maintenence fee. You mentioned the fee not addressing a certain
segment of the community's needs especially those without vehicles.
• York: And are non -ambulatory.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 11 of 17
• Smith: I'd encourage you to focus on the air quality aspects of your comments. There
was an interest coming back to council with specific recommendations regarding
mobility management and coordinating with the t-board. I don't know if you want all
those thing in there but those were points that I heard.
• York: I personally like to say that we recognize the transportation fee doesn't address
the needs of the entire community particularly those without vehicles and that are non -
ambulatory and that mm strategies can reduce both cost and improve air quality...
• McMaster: Mobility management can do these things.
• Levine: Some of this resolution to me is sounding like a heads up to council. So why
don't we state that the transportation fee doesn't meet the entire needs of the
community. We are still in the process of reviewing the city's mobility management
study and will have concrete recommendations later to them this year.
• York: I'd rather say mobility management strategies as outlined in the mobility
management best practices report. Or maybe we can have a reference stating who it's
by and state it can reduce transportation costs, improve air quality and provide
transportation for entire community.
• Levine: I think it's important to review it and have this as a work product this year
because I'm thinking that except for a couple of nooks and crannies in that report, most
of this report is good product and will fall by the wayside unless some people like us
and the city pick it up and run with it. This is a good opportunity here.
• York: We would like to refer you to the mobility management practice report.
• Levine: I think we're going to have to come out with a report of our own with concrete
suggestions incorporating ours and really pushing promoting and with the t-board as
well.
• Dietrich: Here's some wording: Focus fixture transportation planning on an all inclusive
mobility management strategy based on the best practices report to yield a
comprehensive approach for fee assessment and reduction in payer burdens. Future
plans must fully address the transportation needs of entire community, improvements in
air quality and a couple of other things.
• McMaster: We can add to that as a heads up the air quality board will be working on
trying to...
• York: Do you have, "...recognize that the transportation fee does not address all the
transportation needs"?
• Dietrich: I said fixture plans must fully address and list as bullets the transportation
needs of the entire community. No, I didn't say who doesn't right now. That's
suggested wording.
• York: The reason why I want to recognize the transportation fee is because then they
will read it because it's on their agenda.
• Dietrich: So you could start this out..by stating recognizing that the current
transportation fee does not address the needs of the entire community future plans must,
then list your bullet items.
• Levine: Are we getting close?
• McMaster: We're so close what if we close via email. And clean it up that way.
• York: We're close now.
• McMaster: We don't want to wait because the next meeting is too late.
• York: That's exactly right. Next Council meeting is two weeks away so.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 12 of 17
McMaster: We could think on it and save it for the end of the meeting.
York: End of meeting is a good idea.
Levine: End of meeting or email if we don't have time then. We have an issue: ozone.
That's going to be before the air quality control commission regarding oil and gas. We
have Jeremy Nickols as a guest from Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action.
Agenda Item 2: Mobility Management rescheduled to accommodate Jeremy Nickols
The board decided to move up the Agenda Item on "Ozone and Related Issues" due to time
considerations for guest speaker Jeremy Nickols.
Jeremy Nickols of "Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action" presented information regarding the
upcoming Air Quality Control Commission November rule -making to address oil and gas well
emissions.
• McMaster: You were asking for support. What specifically do you need from the
board?
• Nickols: Supporting the states proposed revision to Regulation 7 that applies to the
Denver Metro area.
• McMaster: Similar to the Glen Gibson letter.
• Nickols: Yes, at which I was very surprised and happy to see that.
• Dietrich: Is the oil and gas association leading the industry thing?
• Nickols: Yes, it's primarily COGA, the driving producers.
• Dietrich: Is Weld County is backing the industry with the tax revenue?
• Nickols: Yes. If you do, I strongly urge you all to support the state wide rule as well.
It's got a lot of support. Colorado Oil and Gas Association is supporting it as well and
opposing the Denver ozone reductions.
• Dietrich: If you support the state wide rule, would the state wide rule override?
• Nickols: The two rules go hand in hand. One applies specifically to the front range
region.
• Dietrich: What if the commission would adopt the state wide rule that would apply to
the front range.
• Levine: We have the early action compact so that would supersede that.
• Nickols: We would have the rules, the 95% reduction in emissions. The statewide rule
would not apply. It would be two separate regulated regions. The Denver metro region
and then the rest of the state is how it would be divided. The main worry here is what's
going on along the front range region. There is some link between the pollution going
on in Western Colorado and what's happening here. And I totally understand if that's
beyond your reach. I would strongly urge you all to voice support for both rules.
• Levine: I guess this is in the packet. The county has weighed in support of the
division's recommendations to accept.
• York: We all have the address of the Air Quality Control Commission on Gibson's
letter.
• Levine: Speaks to Lucinda's email to weigh in on legislative policy for 2007. It was
great that it came. I high lighted all of the policies of the city already that support us
weighing in on this. I've used up a lot of yellow toner.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 13 of 17
• Dietrich: What can we do as a board? What are our options, do we have to recommend?
• Smith: I suggest that you send a recommendation to council that the city send a letter.
You could send a comment as individuals too.
• McMaster: The board itself can not send a letter?
• Smith: I don't think that's happened before. One option would be someone from the
board could make the presentation at the commission and that would carry a lot of
weight at the commission hearing. Technically the board makes its recommendations to
city council and the city's legislative committee (is made up of three council members).
It would have to happen quickly. I think it will; we have the policy in place, there's no
problem.
• McMaster: So if we wrote the letter to council recommending what's being done; they
would adopt it, I mean just put somebody's name on it?
• Smith: Yes, the mayor is the person who signs the letters.
• York: If we made a recommendation that the city support this, wouldn't they refer to
you and have you write the letter?
• Smith: Yes. In the past I've submitted letters that are somewhat detailed and they
always get made to be more simple. That's just what I've seen and that's the input of
Mark Radke the legislative coordinator.
• York: Do they edit your letters?
• Smith: Yes, it still conveys the main points but it doesn't have as many of the
supporting details. I don't know if it would happen again, but that's what happened in
the past.
• Levine: Isn't this related to the State Implementation Plan because it's the early action
compact?
• Smith: Yes, that's true; it's through the MPO though.
• Levine: Since there are a dozen policies that support this, why doesn't City staff take a
position automatically because this is the policy that Council has already decided on?
Why are they micro -managing, shouldn't the City carry out policy? That's what the
whole deal is that Council sets policy, they're elected and then the city carries that out
that policy. So policy being set in a dozen instances here, why doesn't this
automatically get carried out? My other question; what I'm suggesting is a letter
should; I don't see why this shouldn't be automatically done.
• Smith: It would have happened. I would have generated a letter and sent it to Mark
Radke and I'm sure that the mayor would have signed. I didn't realize the dead line for
written comments was November 1. There's a lot of hearings at the commission and
another option that the city had was to weigh in as a party and get more involved.
• Levine: That was my next question. When does party status cut-off date?
• Smith: It was one or two months ago that the party status deadline happened. So I guess
we can weigh in on a lot of things. It was my judgment it was good to invest time in the
mercury issue and just send a letter from the city stating all those policy reasons for the
oil and gas rule -making; so that would have happened.
• Levine: Say this board dropped this subject for now and just did the rest of the issue.
Would city still send the same letter in to the AQCC?
• Smith: Yes.
• Levine: This is set policy already and the city needs to uphold it.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 14 of 17
• Smith: I would have worked on it earlier but then this item was added to the agenda and
I really though it was important to see what the board wants to say.
• Levine: Right, and I'm not saying that I'm happy that we're out of the loop; that's not
the point I want to make.
The following motion was made by Greg McMaster and, following discussion, the board
unanimously passes.
I propose that we as a board weigh in supporting the staff s recommendation that city policy be
followed and a letter drafted supporting this.
• Levine: Proposed revisions to Reg 7?
• McMaster: Yes.
• Carrico: Is there a local part and then a state wide part? I think it's important to support
both.
• Dietrich: So you want your motion to support both the state wide issue and the front
range?
• McMaster: Yes.
• York: I'll second it.
• Smith: I got something like, to support perhaps the proposed changes to Reg 7
addressing state wide oil and gas emissions and emissions in the early ozone action
area. When you say staff recommendations is that, did you mean the health department
proposal?
• McMaster: I'm not sure.
• Smith: Maybe it would just be easier if it just said support that city policy be followed.
Okay.
• McMaster: I'm at a loss for clarification.
• Levine: I think we'll need it read back.
• Smith: Could I make a suggestion? That you take out the staff recommendation and say
that the air quality board supports that the city follow its policy by supporting the
statewide and early action compact area regulation changes
• McMaster: And do they understand that by supporting that in this case it would be a
letter?
• Smith: Oh, I see, I'm understanding more. I think the importance is to just weigh in that
the City of Fort Collins supports both those things.
• Levine: I can finesse a recommendation and send it out.
• York: So do we want to send this letter as a board?
• Adamy: I think we should craft some policy at some point.
• Dietrich: You mentioned putting that as an agenda item.
• Adamy: I think we should put that on our work plan.
• Levine: We said we were going to address transportation issues and diesel issues. This
is almost automatically included; I don't see how it can be completely excluded from
both of those.
• York: If we don't write this letter tonight then it should go on next month's agenda; we
need to communicate that.
• Levine: Let me put it on next month's agenda then because we're running out of time.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 15 of 17
• McMaster: on something like that, if we're going to address it next meeting, we all
know and support it; if you can have someway to have a draft prepared a head of time
to help focus and maybe even commit ahead of time and same time and focus.
Someone has to do it, you never suggest an idea.
• Levine: Lucinda reminded me that we had an end of meeting item. We were also
talking about doing it electronically. In the interest of scheduling I would vote that we
try to do that electronically off line.
• Smith: Even the voting?
• Levine: Yes. Or we can do it now, that's fine with me.
• Levine: Nancy's recommendation to council on the transportation funding.
• Smith: In the mean time don't forget about the board recognition and appreciation event
on Nov. 8, it starts at 5:30pm. You can RSVP up to the date and after and I encourage
you to go.
• York: And we can write our own individual letters; and it would be great if one of our
board members would actually go and represent us at the hearing.
• Smith: If any board member is really interested at speaking at that hearing about the
Reg 7, I will be happy to help you and coordinate it. And if you're not, the city's
viewpoint will be communicated but I think it would be neat if the air quality board was
there to make that.
• Adamy: Could we encourage our board president to attend?
• Smith: You can ask a council person to be a spokesperson and the air quality board
liaison would be a reasonable one to ask. That also carries a lot of weight when an
elected official comes.
• York: The consequences to the city are great, not only in terms of health.
• McMaster: And this really isn't costing the city anything to speak of, by supporting the
regulation and it gains a lot. This would be a good pay -back.
• York: Do we want to make a motion and add that to the motion?
• Smith: I think if you reach an agreement on it the chair can extend the invitation to
council or it can be done more formally as part of your amended recommendation.
• York: I think it would be good as part of the recommendation. It emphasizes the
importance.
• Levine: I was thinking of doing it two-step. Waiting for the signature on the letter and
then getting in for penny in for pound kind of thing.
• York: I guess we could recommend that an official represent the city of Ft. Collins.
The following motion was made by Nancy York and the board unanimously passes.
I move that we recommend to council that we have a council member or an official represent
Ft Collins at the hearing on November 17.
• Levine: Lucinda, because this is a party status hearing, the party status have a
framework. How do we get in on that?
• Smith: Let me check. There should be, or there might be and opportunity for spoken
public comment in the beginning and then that's it. And then the parties weigh in.
• Levine: We need to call Doug to see what scheduling is, he's the secretary for the
commission.
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 16 of 17
• McMaster: Then that actually wouldn't require an all day event for the person
attending.
• Levine: It's a couple hours at most, it's not that bad.
Continued AQAB Discussion on Transportation -Related Memo to Council
• York: When should it get in their packets?
• Smith: You'd want to get it in front of them before the November 7 meeting.
• York: We have to have it done by Wednesday night.
• Levine: Next Wednesday?
• York: Or probably Thursday morning because that's when they put things in the packet.
• Smith: Referring to the motion being written in email, it has to be incorporated
eventually in the minutes too. That's one little concern about doing it via email. It's not
totally kosher but it's been done before.
• Adamy: I would like to try it with this process as it could be useful in the future. Let's
let Nancy be the moderator of it and receive emails.
• Levine: I think that's fine and we have the one writing too.
• Adamy: That would be the starting point and have Tara submit that to all of us.
• McMaster: Should we reply to all?
• York: All.
• Adamy: Do you want it to be a word document or just in email text?
• York: I'd like it to be in email myself.
• Adamy: I think that's faster and everybody can look at it.
• Levine: We'll try it and we'll see. This may be a learning process as far as track
changes and everything re -written and how so many fine points work out.
• York: Who's going to write the original?
• Smith: Tara will send it to you all via email.
• Dietrich: I agree with you Eric. I think that's real soft. I don't know whether that has
any influence over council or not.
• Adamy: I think Nancy's point was to get it in front of council to let them know that
we're thinking about it.
• York: Final motion after continued Board discussion is
'The AQAB recommends transportation planning based on an all inclusive mobility management strategy
(see attached Fort Collins Mobility Management Report *) to yield a comprehensive approach for fee
assessment and reduction in taxpayer burdens.
Recognizing that the proposed Transportation Management Fee does not
fully address the needs of the entire community, future plans and related
fees must:
- assess the impact on meeting policy goals to improve air quality,
- recognize the transportation needs of the entire community,
- address the availability and impacts of fossil fuels,
- include actions for enhanced public transit.
Over the next year, as the AQAB continues to assess mobility management strategies and implications on
air quality, we will provide specific action items for council consideration."
*Mobility Management Best Practices City of Fort Collins
The Brendle Group, Inc.
The Victoria Transport Policy Institute
August, 2006
Air Quality Advisory Board
10/24/2006
Page 17 of 17
Motion passes unanimously: 7 — 0 — 0.
• Levine: I think we're ready to entertain a motion to adjourn. We'll continue the
mobility management next month. Meeting adjourned at 8:14pm.
Updates
• None
Committee Updates
• None
Agenda Planning
• None
Meeting adjourned 8:14 PM
Submitted by Tara McGibben
Administrative Secretary I
Approved by the Board one h 1 1 2006
Signed
N
Tara McGibben
Administrative Secretary I
Extension: 6600
/OZ-- /6 -d /1(c
Date