HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 08/13/2013 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center
Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Gino Campana, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4
Ross Cunniff, District 5 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Nelson, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
WORK SESSION
August 13, 2013
6 p.m.
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Climate Action Planning – Science, 2012 Progress and Proposed Next Steps. (staff:
Lucinda Smith, Bruce Hendee; Dr. Scott Denning, Atmospheric Science Professor,
Colorado State University; 1 hour discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to provide City Council with an update on climate
change science (presented by Dr. Scott Denning, Atmospheric Science Professor, CSU),
summarize community greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction efforts, and seek City Council’s
direction regarding future efforts to re-evaluate the community GHG goals and update
the Climate Action Plan.
In June 2008, City Council adopted goals to reduce Fort Collins’ community greenhouse
gas emissions 20% below 2005 by 2020 and 80% by 2050. In November 2008, City
Council adopted a strategic Climate Action Plan (CAP) for meeting the goals. Progress as
of 2012 showed that community greenhouse gas emissions were 8.7% below the 2005
baseline emissions. However, since the GHG goal and CAP were both adopted in 2008,
scientific findings have advanced significantly and new opportunities have emerged that
warrant a fresh look at the community GHG goals and reduction strategies.
1 of 74
August 13, 2013
3. Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options. (staff: Beth Sowder, Carol Thomas; 1 hour
discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to discuss options for expansion of the City of Fort
Collins Smoking Ordinance.
City of Fort Collins Neighborhood Services and Transfort received guidance on public
health trends and best practices from Larimer County Department of Health and
Environment in late 2012 and early 2013 to develop potential options for expansion of
the Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance, including smoke-free outdoor dining areas, bar
patios, and Transfort’s public transit facilities. This work session discussion will focus
on data and community feedback regarding potential options as well as information about
the health impacts related to secondhand smoke.
4. Other Business.
5. Adjournment.
2 of 74
DATE: August 13, 2013
STAFF: Lucinda Smith
Bruce Hendee
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Dr. Scott Denning, Atmospheric Science Professor, Colorado State University, will be present
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Climate Action Planning – Science, 2012 Progress and Proposed Next Steps.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to provide City Council with an update on climate change
science (presented by Dr. Scott Denning, Atmospheric Science Professor, CSU), summarize
community greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction efforts, and seek City Council’s direction
regarding future efforts to re-evaluate the community GHG goals and update the Climate
Action Plan.
In June 2008, City Council adopted goals to reduce Fort Collins’ community greenhouse gas
emissions 20% below 2005 by 2020 and 80% by 2050. In November 2008, City Council adopted
a strategic Climate Action Plan (CAP) for meeting the goals. Progress as of 2012 showed that
community greenhouse gas emissions were 8.7% below the 2005 baseline emissions. However,
since the GHG goal and CAP were both adopted in 2008, scientific findings have advanced
significantly and new opportunities have emerged that warrant a fresh look at the community GHG
goals and reduction strategies.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does City Council concur with the approach to evaluate GHG goals first followed by
Climate Action Plan update?
2. Does City Council have suggestions for stakeholder and expert involvement in the process?
3. What approach for board and commission involvement does City Council want?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Over fifteen years ago, Fort Collins was among the first wave of communities in the nation to
commit to reducing local greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adopted its first climate action plan
in 1999. The Climate Action Plan, updated in 2008, identifies carbon reduction goals for the Fort
Collins community:
• Reduce communitywide emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020
• Reduce communitywide emissions 80% below 2005 levels by 2050
(See fcgov.com/climateprotection)
3 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 2
Fort Collins’ 2012 Status Update
City staff report progress on the community GHG goals annually. Progress on the goal is
determined though annual changes in the GHG inventory. Through community engagement in
energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, green building, and waste and transportation
reduction efforts outlined in the 2008 Climate Action Plan, community emissions are now 8.7 %
below 2005, despite a population growth of 13.6 % and an increase in City Sales and Use Tax
Revenue of 21% between 2005 and 2012. See fcgov.com/climateprotection for the full 2012
Climate Status Report.
Programs that deliver GHG reductions are also quantified in the annual Climate Status Report.
Attachment 1 provides more context for community GHG emissions and reductions.
In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, climate mitigation actions provide other benefits,
summarized below.
Public Health Benefits
2012 GHG reduction actions also reduced air pollution in Fort Collins:
• 237 tons nitrogen oxides avoided (a precursor for ground level ozone)
• 194 tons sulfur oxides avoided
• 28 tons of carbon monoxide avoided
Economic Benefits
• Energy Policy programs saved $20 million annual benefit (2012)
• ClimateWise partners saved $14 million in 2012 alone, and over $73 million since the
program began in 2000
• The FortZED initiative serves to test and demonstrate new technologies, support innovative
businesses, and secure outside grant funding.
While Fort Collins is making good progress in reducing GHG emissions, key challenges lie ahead
to continuing progress at the recent rate including rapidly increasing construction activity,
predominantly coal-based electricity, inadequate funding to build out Fort Collins Transportation
Master Plan and to implement major waste reduction projects.
Reasons to Evaluate the GHG Goals and Update CAP in 2013/2014
Resolution 2008-051, which established Fort Collins community GHG goals, recognizes that new
information and opportunities may emerge over time and City Council may wish to update the
community GHG goals.
Section 7. That the City Council hereby recognizes that new data, scientific
findings, mitigation technologies, and quantification methodologies may emerge over
time and that future Councils may choose to update the community greenhouse gas
goal to take into account evolving science, technology or other opportunities.
4 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 3
Similarly, Resolution 2008-122 that adopted the 2008 Climate Action Plan states:
Section 3. That the City Council hereby recognizes that new data, scientific findings,
mitigation technologies, and quantification methodologies may emerge over time and
that future Councils may choose to eliminate, modify or add specific action items
contained in the 2008 Fort Collins Climate Action Plan to take into account evolving
science, technology or other opportunities.
City staff believe that 2013/2014 is an optimal time to evaluate the GHG goals and update the CAP
for the three reasons listed below. In addition, the Fort Collins Energy Board made a
recommendation to City Council in February 2013 to conduct this work. It has also been discussed
at the May 2013 City Council planning retreat where “Energy Policy and GHG Goal Review” was
listed as a Key Initiative in the Environmental Health result area.
1. Scientific Findings Since 2008 (Attachment 2)
Attachment 2 contains several recent findings about the changing climate and its public health and
economic impacts.
2. New Opportunities Since 2008
A number of advances have occurred at the local and national level that can be leveraged in an
updated CAP, including:
• installation of Advance Meter Fort Collins,
• FortZED Steering Committee is developing significant new proposals to advance progress
towards net zero,
• the cost for photovoltaics (PV) has been dropping over time and may reach parity with local
electricity rates in 2020 to 2025,
• advancements are occurring in vehicle fuels and waste to clean energy technologies, and
• in June 2013, the White House released The President’s Climate Action Plan, calling for
reduction in U.S. carbon pollution and directing the Environmental Protection Agency to
complete carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants.
3. Energy Policy Is Being Updated
In 2011, City Council authorized a new Energy Board to advise City Council on the development
and implementation of the City’s Energy Policy, as well as on policies that address energy
conservation, efficiency, and carbon reduction. During 2013, the Energy Board is working with
Utilities staff to recommend updates to the City’s 2009 Energy Policy. Because the Energy Policy
and GHG reduction goals and Climate Action Plan are so closely linked, it is important that they be
discussed in the same timeframe.
[NOTE: The ordinance authorizing the Energy Board defines “energy” as
“encompassing any source of usable power”. Using that definition, the Energy
Policy could become the GHG goal policy. However, staff recommends that Energy
Policy not become the same as the GHG goal policy because the Energy Policy
update also will address issues such as reliability.]
5 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 4
Approach for GHG Goal Evaluation and CAP Update
Attachment 3 identifies the traditional 5 steps, or milestones, of climate mitigation planning and
action. Fort Collins’ has been reporting the community GHG inventory for years (Step 1) and
currently follows the new 2012 ICLEI protocol for community inventory. Fort Collins has been
implementing the 2008 CAP and reporting progress annually (Steps 4 and 5). However, for the
three reasons identified above, staff believes that it is important to revisit the community GHG goal
now (Step 2), followed by an update to the Climate Action Plan in 2014 (Step 3).
Re-evaluate Community GHG Goal
• Timeframe: July through December 2013
• Objective: Evaluate alternative GHG goals and sketch out pathways for meeting them
Several major planning initiatives are underway in Fort Collins that will offer information about
pathways to advance local GHG reductions, including updates to the 2007 Roadmap for Green
Building and the 2009 Energy Policy, and completion of a new Road to Zero Waste Plan. Staff plans
to incorporate this relevant work and conduct additional analysis to enable City Council to evaluate
the pros and cons of alternative GHG goal scenarios by the end of 2013.
Update Strategic Climate Action Plan
• Timeframe: January – May 2014
• Objective: Update the 2008 Climate Action Plan to reflect Council preferred GHG goals
Work to evaluate the GHG goals will provide important underlying analyses to support an update
to the CAP. However, a thorough update to the CAP would entail more in-depth analyses of relevant
national and international best practices and assessment of costs and benefits of various strategy
scenarios designed to achieve the Council-preferred GHG goals. This level of CAP update is not
currently funded. Funding will be sought in the 2014 mid-cycle budget process.
Stakeholder Involvement
Staff proposes a stakeholder involvement process that could include formation of a stakeholder
Task Force, Board and Commission involvement, as well as community involvement through
avenues such as open houses, presentations, listening logs, Web site, etc.
Board and Commission Roles
Historically, several boards and commissions have been involved in discussing the GHG goals and
plans. Staff recommends that several boards remain involved, including the Air Quality Advisory
Board, Economic Advisory Commission, Energy Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, and
Transportation Board.
Timeline
The review of GHG goals should be conducted in close concert with the Energy Policy update
(2013), Green Building roadmap update (2013) and Road to Zero Waste planning (2013). The
6 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 5
GHG goal review can begin in the summer 2013. A work session has been scheduled on December
10, 2013 for City Council to provide guidance on the preferred direction for the GHG goals.
Following that direction, the CAP can be updated to define targets and strategies to achieve the
Council preferred goals, contingent upon adequate funding. City Council could consider action on
an updated CAP in late spring 2014. This timing would allow priority CAP strategies to be
considered in the 2015/2016 BFO process.
Planning Initiative 2013
Q1
2013
Q2
2013
Q3
2013
Q4
2014
Q1
2014
Q2
Energy Policy Update
Road to Zero Waste WS -11/26,
CC-12/17
Green Building Roadmap WS-10/22
GHG Goal Evaluation WS-12/10
CAP Update
WS = Work Session; CC = City Council meeting
ATTACHMENTS
1. Community GHG Progress in Context
2. Climate Change-Related Findings Since 2008
3. Five Milestones of Climate Action Planning
4. Energy Board recommendation
5. Powerpoint presentation
7 of 74
1
Attachment 1 - Community Progress In Context
I. CHANGE IN EMISSIONS COMPARED TO OTHER INDICATORS
Figure 1 below illustrates that Fort Collins’ community GHG emissions have dropped 8.7% while
population grew by 13.6% and Sales and Use Tax Revenue has grown by 21% since 2005.
Figure 1. Reported GHG Emissions vs. Population and Sales and Use Tax
Figure 2 shows the annual progress in emissions reduction, as measured by the community
GHG inventory, compared to a hypothetical straight line trajectory from 2005 baseline to the
goal of 20% below 2005 in 2020. According to this trajectory, Fort Collins is slightly behind
schedule. The 2008 CAP does not contain a plan or commitment to follow a straight line
trajectory to the 2020 goal; this information is provide for context.
Figure 2. Reported GHG Emissions vs. Emissions on a Linear Path from 2005 to 2020 Goal
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
% Change from 2005
Fort Collins Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
Sales & Use Tax, and Population
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Population
Fort Collins Sales & Use Tax*
* Does not include the Keep Fort Collins Great tax increase
Year
Linear
Projection
(MTCO2e)
Reported
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2005 2,440,757 2,440,757
2006 2,408,214 2,448,141
2007 2,375,670 2,458,248
2008 2,343,127 2,323,547
2009 2,310,583 2,350,380
2010 2,278,040 2,200,302
2011 2,245,496 2,115,852
2012 2,212,953 2,229,527
2013 2,180,410
2014 2,147,866
2015 2,115,323
2016 2,082,779
2017 2,050,236
2018 2,017,692
2019 1,985,149
2020 1,952,606
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
2005
2
II. CHANGE IN EMISSIONS COMPARED TO OTHER COMMUNITIES
Table 1 identifies greenhouse gas reductions reported by various communities.
Table 1. Reported Greenhouse gas Reductions
Community GHG Reduction
Seattle, WA Reduced 7% below 1990 by 2008
Portland/Multnomah County, OR reduced 6% below 1990 by 2010
Santa Cruz, CA reduced 11% below1996 by 2008
Aspen, CO reduced 8% below 2004 by 2007
New York City, NY reduced 13% below 2005 by 2009
Fort Collins, CO reduced 9% below 2005 by 2012
Minneapolis, MN reduced 7% below 2007 by 2009
Boulder, CO reduced 26% below 2008 by 2011
III. REPORTED REDUCTIONS COMPARED TO ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS
Table 2 below shows that the GHG reductions reported for the year 2012 exceed the level of
GHG reduction projected by measures in the CAP for 2012.1
Table 2. Total Anticipated vs. Reported CAP Reductions for 2012
2012 Anticipated GHG
Reductions in CAP
Reported
Reductions in 2012
(Short Tons
CO2e)
(Metric Tons
CO2e)
(Metric Tons
CO2e)
TOTAL 378,000 342,922 424,894
Table 3 and Figure 3 below compare the anticipated vs. reported reductions for specific CAP
measures.
Table 3. Select Measures in CAP: Anticipated vs. Reported Reductions for 2012
2012 Anticipated GHG
Reductions in CAP
(MTCO2e)
Reported Reductions
in 2012 (Metric Tons
CO2e)
ClimateWise 118,843 163,663
Recycling 149,789 183,935
Energy (incl Natural Gas) 95,445 161,634
Transportation 12,355 2,886
TOTAL* 317,010* 424,894*
(* After double‐counting removed)
1 The 2008 CAP does not contain a complete set of measures to achieve the 2020 goal. If the CAP
measures were fully implemented, it would bring Fort Collins to 90% of the 2020 goal. The original draft
2008 CAP included a large measure to obtain Renewable Energy Certificates that was rejected by City
Council and other alternative measures were not approved.
9 of 74
3
Figure 3. Select Measures in CAP: Anticipated vs. Reported Reductions for 2012
IV. GROWTH IN REDUCTIONS OVER TIME
Figure 4 shows that steady growth I the amount of avoided GHG emissions from major
initiatives that are tracked and reported in annual CAP status reports.
Figure 4. Growth in Avoided GHG from Key Programs (2008 to 2012)
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
ClimateWise Recycling Energy
MTCO2e
Anticipated vs. Reported 2012
GHG Reductons
Anticipated
Actual
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
MTCOe2 Avoided
Growth of Programs' Benefits
Recycling
ClimateWise
Energy Programs
10 of 74
ATTACHMENT 2
Post 2008 Climate Change Findings and Predictions
Findings - Environment
The International Energy Agency reported that 2012 global CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel
combustion reached a record high of 31.6 billion tons, representing a 1.4% increase over 2011
levels. (2012 CO2 emissions in the U.S. fell 3.8% compared to 2011 levels, while China’s grew
3.8%.)1
On May 9,2013, measured concentrations of carbon dioxide at the Mauna Loa Observatory
surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time since record-keeping began there several
decades ago. Before the Industrial Revolution, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations were
approximately 280 ppm.2
2012 was the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States. The average temperature
was 55.3°F, 3.2°F above the 20th century average, and 1.0°F above 1998, the previous warmest
year. July 2012 was hottest month ever observed for the contiguous U.S. and 2012 was the
second most (climate) extreme year on record for the nation.3
2012 also ranks as the warmest calendar year in the 124 year record for the Fort Collins, CO
weather station on CSU campus.
In 2012, more than 40,000 daily heat records were broken nationwide, compared to 25,000 daily
records broken in June of 2011.4
Findings – Public Health
One third of the nation’s population experienced 10 or more days of summer temps above 100°F.
in 2012.2
Findings – Economic Impacts
The health costs associated with six climate change–related events that struck the United States
between 2000 and 2009 exceeded $14 billion, with 95 percent due to the value of lives lost
prematurely. Actual health care costs were an estimated $740 million.5 The future health costs
associated with predicted climate change–related events such as hurricanes, heat waves, and
floods are projected to be enormous.
Correlations and Predictions
For the first time recently, scientific studies have been able to make strong statistical links
between climate change and certain extreme weather events. For example, The UK’s Guardian
reported on July 10, 2012, that the 2011 record warm November in the UK, the second hottest
1 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/global-carbon-dioxide-emissions_n_3414139.html
2 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/05/130510-earth-co2-milestone-400-ppm/
3 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/
4 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12781
5 http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/11/2167.abstract
11 of 74
2
since records began in 1659, was at least 60 times more likely to happen because of climate
change than owing to natural variations in the earth's weather systems.6
A special report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in
November 2011 predicted that global warming will cause more dangerous and “unprecedented
extreme weather” in the future.7
A 2012 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council indicates that rising temperatures
driven by unabated climate change will increase the number of life-threatening excessive heat
events, resulting in thousands of additional heat-related premature deaths each year, with a
cumulative toll of approximately 33,000 additional heat-related deaths by mid-century in these
cities, and more than 150,000 additional heat-related deaths by the century’s end.8
The draft National Climate Assessment Report was released in January 2013. Key findings include:
Human-induced increases in atmospheric levels of heat-trapping gases are the main cause of
observed climate change over the past 50 years. The “fingerprints” of human-induced change also
have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat
content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice.
Past emissions of heat-trapping gases have already committed the world to a certain amount of
future climate change. How much more the climate will change depends on future emissions and
the sensitivity of the climate system to those emissions.
The “Letter to the American People”, drafted by members of the National Climate Assessment
and Development Advisory Committee to accompany the draft report states:,
“Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly
into the present. This report of the National Climate Assessment and
Development Advisory Committee concludes that the evidence for a changing
climate has strengthened considerably since the last National Climate
Assessment report, written in 2009. Many more impacts of human-caused climate
change have now been observed.9
The world could avoid much of the damaging effects of climate change this century if
greenhouse gas emissions are curbed more sharply, according to a study published in 2012 in
Nature Climate Change.10
Limiting climate change to target levels will become much more difficult to achieve, and more
expensive, if action is not taken soon, according to a new analysis from IIASA, ETH Zurich, and
NCAR. The paper, published in Nature Climate Change, explores technological, policy, and
6 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/10/extreme-weather-manmade-climate-change
7 http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/docs/srex/srex_press_release.pdf
8 http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/killer-heat/files/killer-summer-heat-report.pdf
9 http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-letter.pdf
10 Arnell N.W., et. al., A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change. 2013. Nature Climate Change.
doi:10.1038/nclimate1793 (See http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1793.html for abstract and
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/13/us-emissions-climate-idUSBRE90C0E120130113 for summary)
12 of 74
3
social changes that would need to take place in the near term in order to keep global average
temperature from rising above 2°C, a target supported by more than 190 countries as a global
limit to avoid dangerous climate change.11
11 Rogelj, J., D.L. McCollum, B.C. O'Neill, and K. Riahi. 2012. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2
deg C. Nature Climate Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1758 (See http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-12/iifa-
ncc121312.php for summary.)
13 of 74
The table
action pla
This app
A
e below refle
anning and t
roach suppo
Attachment
ects a traditio
that the City
orts the cont
3 – Five Mi
onal five mile
y of Fort Coll
Condu
reflect
compli
Protoc
Set a g
action
Integra
Establi
are rel
commu
Identif
the eco
Identif
resilien
change
Levera
commu
Enhanc
Seek fu
Establi
Establi
enable
and co
tinual improv
ilestones of
estone proce
ins has follo
ct an inve
s scope o
ies with n
ol)
goal that f
and atten
ates City o
sh increm
Fort City of CoLLins
MEMORANDUM
Utilities — Energy Board
700 Wood St.
P0 Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6702
970.416.2208 - fax
fcgov.com
TO:
FROM:
CC:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Weitkunat and Councilmembers
Greg Behm, Chair, Energy Board
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Brian Janonis, Utilities Director
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
Steve Catanach, Light and Power Operations Manager
February 7,2013
Recommendation to Review Fort Collins’ Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals
The state of scientific knowledge and discourse has advanced significantly since 2008 when City
Council adopted its greenhouse gas reduction goals and Climate Action Plan. These findings
increase the urgency of taking action and make the case that acting sooner will be significantly
more cost effective. Several of these key findings are outlined in Attachment A. The Energy
Board recommends that City Council initiate a review of the conmiunity’s greenhouse gas
reduction goals and supporting plans in 2013, with the intent of moving toward more aggressive
goals. Doing so will:
• proactively work to engender a more economically efficient, successful, and resilient
community,
• renew our commitment to reduce the impact of the Fort Collins community on global
climate change, and
• optimize the discussions regarding the Energy Policy review and associated carbon goals.
The Energy Board is prepared to take up this question as part of its 2013 work plan (see
Attachment B). We recommend that other Boards and Commissions, staff members, and the
larger community also be engaged in this process. Please contact me if you have any questions
or want additional detail on the recommendation. Thank you for the opportunity to provide
input.
Fo Collins Energy Board
Greg Behm, Chair
ATTACHMENT 4
15 of 74
2
Attachment A - Post 2008 Climate Change Findings and Predictions
The Energy Information Administration reported that 2011 global CO2 emissions from fossil-
fuel combustion reached a record high of 31.6 gigatonnes (Gt), representing a 3.2% increase over
2010 levels. (However, 2011 CO2 emissions in the U.S. fell by 92 Mt, or 1.7% compared to 2010
levels.)1
2012 was the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States. The average temperature
was 55.3 °F, 3.2°F above the 20th century average, and 1.0°F above 1998, the previous warmest
year. July 2012 was hottest month ever observed for the contiguous U.S. and 2012 was the
second most (climate) extreme year on record for the nation.2
One third of the nation’s population experienced 10 or more days of summer temps above 100°F.
in 2012.2
In 2012, more than 40,000 daily heat records were broken nationwide, compared to 25,000 daily
records broken in June of 2011.3
For the first time recently, scientific studies have been able to make strong statistical links
between climate change and certain extreme weather events. For example, The UK’s Guardian
reported on July 10, 2012, that last year's record warm November in the UK, the second hottest
since records began in 1659, was at least 60 times more likely to happen because of climate
change than owing to natural variations in the earth's weather systems.4
A special report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in
November 2011 predicted that global warming will cause more dangerous and “unprecedented
extreme weather” in the future.5
A 2012 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council indicates that rising temperatures
driven by unabated climate change will increase the number of life-threatening excessive heat
events, resulting in thousands of additional heat-related premature deaths each year, with a
cumulative toll of approximately 33,000 additional heat-related deaths by mid-century in these
cities, and more than 150,000 additional heat-related deaths by the century’s end.6
The health costs associated with six climate change–related events that struck the United States
between 2000 and 2009 exceeded $14 billion, with 95 percent due to the value of lives lost
prematurely. Actual health care costs were an estimated $740 million.7 The future health costs
associated with predicted climate change–related events such as hurricanes, heat waves, and
floods are projected to be enormous.
1 http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/news/2012/may/name,27216,en.html
2 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/
3 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12781
4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/10/extreme-weather-manmade-climate-change
5 http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/docs/srex/srex_press_release.pdf
6 http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/killer-heat/files/killer-summer-heat-report.pdf
7 http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/11/2167.abstract
16 of 74
3
The draft National Climate Assessment Report was released in January 2013. Key findings include:
Human-induced increases in atmospheric levels of heat-trapping gases are the main cause of
observed climate change over the past 50 years. The “fingerprints” of human-induced change
also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in
ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice.
Past emissions of heat-trapping gases have already committed the world to a certain amount
of future climate change. How much more the climate will change depends on future
emissions and the sensitivity of the climate system to those emissions.
The “Letter to the American People”, drafted by members of the National Climate
Assessment and Development Advisory Committee to accompany the draft report states:,
“Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly
into the present. This report of the National Climate Assessment and
Development Advisory Committee concludes that the evidence for a changing
climate has strengthened considerably since the last National Climate Assessment
report, written in 2009. Many more impacts of human-caused climate change
have now been observed.8
President Obama, in his inaugural address on January 21, 2013 said,
“We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves,
but to all posterity. We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the
failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. Some may still deny
the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of
raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms. The path towards
sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But American cannot
resist this transition. We must lead it.”9
The world could avoid much of the damaging effects of climate change this century if
greenhouse gas emissions are curbed more sharply, according to a study published in 2012 in
Nature Climate Change.10
Limiting climate change to target levels will become much more difficult to achieve, and more
expensive, if action is not taken soon, according to a new analysis from IIASA, ETH Zurich, and
NCAR. The paper, published in Nature Climate Change, explores technological, policy, and
social changes that would need to take place in the near term in order to keep global average
8 http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-letter.pdf
9 Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/president-obamas-second-inaugural-address-
transcript/2013/01/21/f148d234-63d6-11e2-85f5-a8a9228e55e7_story_2.html
10 Arnell N.W., et. al., A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change. 2013. Nature
Climate Change. doi:10.1038/nclimate1793 (See
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1793.html for abstract and
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/13/us-emissions-climate-idUSBRE90C0E120130113 for summary)
17 of 74
4
temperature from rising above 2°C, a target supported by more than 190 countries as a global
limit to avoid dangerous climate change.11
A number of leading communities and countries have elected to set long term (i.e. 2050) goals to
achieve carbon neutrality, often along with interim short and mid-term goals and source- specific
goals to guide their way. Seattle, WA, Davis, CA, Norway and Costa Rica are among the
entities that have established carbon neutral goals. The entire European Union has set a goal to
reduce emission 85-90% below 1990 levels by 2050, in light of scientific consensus that at least
that level of reduction is now needed to avoid the worst catastrophic impact of climate change.
11 Rogelj, J., D.L. McCollum, B.C. O'Neill, and K. Riahi. 2012. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to
below 2 deg C. Nature Climate Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1758 (See
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-12/iifa-ncc121312.php for summary.)
18 of 74
5
Attachment B - Energy Board Rationale For Action
The Fort Collins Energy Board’s direction based on Energy Board Ordinance No. 098, 2011
recognizes the Energy Board’s role towards advising City Council on the development and
implementation of the City’s Energy Policy as well as on policies that address energy
conservation and efficiency and carbon reduction. Specifically:
Council needs visionary and innovation advice regarding the community’s energy future as it
relates to:
City Plan [ Fort Collins goals for a sustainable community (2011) ]
Fort Collins Climate Action Plan (2008)
Energy Policy (2009)
Green Building Program (2011)
During 2013, the Energy Board intends to work with City staff to recommend updates to the
City’s 2009 Energy Policy, per our 2013 Work Plan. Because the Energy Policy and Climate
Action Plan (CAP) are so closely linked, the Energy Board has a great interest in the
community’s carbon goals and CAP as well.
Resolution 2008-051that established Fort Collins community carbon goals states:
Section 7. That the City Council hereby recognizes that new data, scientific findings,
mitigation technologies, and quantification methodologies may emerge over time and
that future Councils may choose to update the community greenhouse gas goal to take
into account evolving science, technology or other opportunities.
As with the State of Colorado’s carbon goals, Fort Collins’ community 2050 carbon goal was
established based on scientific assessments about the level of reduction necessary to avert the
worst impacts of climate change, while the 2020 goal was based on a potentially achievable
objective. The state of scientific knowledge and discourse has advanced significantly since
2008 when City Council adopted the community carbon goals and CAP. These findings increase
the urgency of taking action and make the case that acting sooner will be significantly more cost
effective.
19 of 74
1
Climate Action Planning:
Science, 2012 Progress,
And Next Steps
City Council Work Session
August 13, 2013
ATTACHMENT 5
20 of 74
2
Work Session Objectives
• Provide an update on climate change science by
Dr. Scott Denning, Atmospheric Science Professor,
CSU (invited guest)
• Summarize community greenhouse gas (GHG)
progress
• Seek Council direction on plans to re-evaluate the
community GHG goals and update the Climate
Action Plan
21 of 74
3
WHEREAS, there is widespread consensus that
human emissions of greenhouse gases are
impacting the earth’s climate system, causing the
potential for unprecedented large-scale adverse
health, social, economic and ecological effects; and
WHEREAS, climate disruption is likely to cause,
and may already be causing, damage to the
environmental and economic health of Colorado
communities…..
Resolution 2008-051
Resolution 2008-122
22 of 74
4
• 20% reduction below 2005 levels, by 2020
• 80% reduction below 2005 levels, by 2050
Fort Collins GHG Reduction Goals
23 of 74
5
Green Building
Increase Recycling
Save Energy/ Clean Energy
Transportation Efficiency
Community Involvement
Land Use
Fort Collins Climate Action Plan
December 2008
24 of 74
6
25 of 74
7
Fort Collins Progress
8.7% Reduction Below 2005 Baseline
2.23M
2.44M
26 of 74
8
Fort Collins Progress
8.7% Reduction below 2005 baseline
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
% Change from 2005
Fort Collins Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
Sales & Use Tax, and Population
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Population
Fort Collins Sales & Use Tax*
* Does not include the Keep Fort Collins Great tax increase
27 of 74
9
Fort Collins Progress
----------- Trend Line
28 of 74
10
2012 Reported and Anticipated
GHG Reductions
Measure
Reported Reductions
in 2012 (Metric Tons
CO2e)
ClimateWise 163,663
Recycling 183,935
Energy (incl Natural Gas) 161,634
Transportation 2,886
TOTAL* 424,894*
2012 Anticipated GHG
Reductions in CAP
(MTCO2e)
118,843
149,789
95,445
12,355
317,010*
29 of 74
11
2012 Positive Indicators
• Per capita GHG emissions dropped 22% from 2005
• Renewable energy comprised 5.2% of total electricity
purchases
• Energy efficiency programs avoided 1.5% of
electricity use
• ClimateWise partners avoided 163,000 MTCO2
e
• Community “Non-Industrial” waste diversion was 42%
• Total Community Waste Diversion was 58%
• Transfort ridership grew 53% from 2005.
30 of 74
12
Triple Bottom Line -
Economic Benefits
• Energy Policy programs saved $20M annual
benefit (2012)
• ClimateWise partners saved $14 million in 2012
alone, over $73 million since the program began
in 2000
• FortZED - testing and demonstrating new
technologies, supporting innovative businesses,
and securing outside grant funding
31 of 74
13
Triple Bottom Line –
Social Benefits
Pollutant
Avoided in 2012
from GHG
Reduction Actions
Nitrogen Oxides* 273 tons
Sulfur Oxides* 194 tons
Carbon Monoxide** 58 tons
Particulates** 7.4 tons
32 of 74
14
Economic/Health Benefits for Cities
that Take Climate Protection Action
• Actions to increase efficiencies ->$40M in
savings/year (sum of 9 cities)
• Promotion of active modes of transportation –>
direct and indirect health benefits
• 71% report climate change actions support
development of new businesses
Source: “Wealthier, Healthier Cities”, based on responses from 110 global cities;
https://www.cdproject.net/CDPResults/CDP-Cities-2013-Global-Report.pdf
33 of 74
15
GHG Goal and Plan Review
- Why Now?
Resolution 2008-051
“…that future Councils may choose to update the
community greenhouse gas goal to take into account
evolving science, technology or other opportunities.”
1. Scientific findings increase need for urgent action
2. Advancing technology and opportunities
3. Fort Collins Energy Policy Update in 2013
34 of 74
16
Science Findings (2012)
• Global GHG emissions from fossil fuels reach
record high in 2012, a 1.4% increase from 2011
(IEA)
• China, largest emitter, up 3.8%
• U.S. dropped 3.8% (primarily due to
reduced coal power generation)
• 2012 – hottest year on record (contiguous U.S.
and in Fort Collins) (ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/)
35 of 74
17
Public Health Impacts/Costs
• One third of the nation’s population experienced 10
or more days of summer temps above 100°F
(ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/)
• Extreme Heat Events in Denver predicted to
increase from 9 to 88 by 2050 (NRDC)
• Health care costs associated with extreme weather
events in the US between 2006 and 2009 exceeded
$14 Billion. (NOAA)
• In the U.S., 2012 alone saw eleven weather
disasters that cost a billion dollars or more. (NOAA)
36 of 74
18
Advancing Technology & Opportunities
• Advanced Meter Fort Collins
• Renewables pricing dropping
• Advancements in Waste-to-Clean Energy
technologies
• Vehicle electrification initiatives
37 of 74
19
Energy Policy Update
and Other Planning Initiatives
• Energy Policy Update (2013)
• Green Building Roadmap (Oct 22 Work session)
• Road to Zero Waste (Nov 26 Work Session)
38 of 74
20
5 Milestones of Climate Mitigation
(Plan-Do-Check-Act Model)
GHG Action Planning
(Climate Action Plan)
GHG Inventory
Monitor and Report
GHG Goal Setting
Implementation
39 of 74
21
Climate Action Planning
- Proposed Approach
GHG Goal Evaluation
Timeframe: July through December 2013
Objective: Evaluate alternative GHG goals and
sketch out pathways for meeting them
Climate Action Plan Update
Timeframe: January – May 2014
Objective: Update the 2008 Climate Action Plan to
reflect Council preferred GHG goals
Funding: Not currently funded
40 of 74
22
Anticipated Next Steps
• Energy Policy Update (2013)
• GHG Goal Review (2013)
• Dec 10 Work Session - GHG Goal Review
• Climate Action Plan Update (2014)
(Contingent on funding)
• Community Sustainability Plan (2014)
41 of 74
23
General Direction Sought
• Does City Council concur with the approach to
evaluate community GHG goals first followed
by an update to the 2008 Climate Action Plan?
• Does City Council have suggestions for
stakeholder and expert involvement in the
process?
• What approach for Board and Commission
involvement does City Council want?
42 of 74
DATE: August 13, 2013
STAFF: Beth Sowder
Carol Thomas
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Smoking Ordinance Expansion Options.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to discuss options for expansion of the City of Fort Collins
Smoking Ordinance.
City of Fort Collins Neighborhood Services and Transfort received guidance on public health trends
and best practices from Larimer County Department of Health and Environment in late 2012 and
early 2013 to develop potential options for expansion of the Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance,
including smoke-free outdoor dining areas, bar patios, and Transfort’s public transit facilities. This
work session discussion will focus on data and community feedback regarding potential options as
well as information about the health impacts related to secondhand smoke.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council wish to move forward with any of the options to expand the Fort Collins
Smoking Ordinance?
2. Are there areas of concern staff has not addressed or is additional outreach needed?
3. Is this item ready for formal Council consideration? If so, what timeline would Council
prefer?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In 2003, Fort Collins was one of the first communities in Colorado to designate bars, restaurants and
workplaces as smoke-free. In 2006, the Fort Collins’ Smoking Ordinance was amended to conform
to the Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act. The City of Fort Collins has a history of working with the
Larimer County Department of Health and Environment and Tobacco Free Larimer County. They
worked together closely in 2003 when the City adopted the Smoking Ordinance prohibiting smoking
in all indoor public places. Examples of prior collaborative work include:
• Community education about Smoke-Free Fort Collins and the Colorado Clean Indoor Air
Act
• Training for Code Compliance staff about the details of these laws
43 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 2
• Neighborhood Services Code Compliance staff educated businesses, restaurants, and bars
using materials and signage developed by Tobacco Free Larimer County and the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment
• Neighborhood Services Code Compliance staff provided enforcement data regarding
citations, warnings, and educational efforts about the Smoking Ordinance
• Shared evidence-based public health information about smoke-free housing policies in
Landlord Training provided by Neighborhood Services
• Continuously receive ongoing education and information about tobacco and secondhand
smoke policies.
In response to enforcement issues and citizen feedback regarding the current Smoking Ordinance,
staff is interested in the possibility of strengthening/expanding the Ordinance. There has been some
confusion in the community regarding whether there is already a ban on smoking in outdoor eating
areas/patios. Additionally, in 2012, Larimer County Department of Health and Environment had
staff and resources available to work collaboratively with Neighborhood Services and Transfort to
research, survey, and develop potential options regarding smoking in outdoor public places. Larimer
County received the Tobacco Education, Prevention, and Cessation Grant from the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment in order to help support some of the work and
research involved in this collaborative work. If Council chooses to move forward with any of the
options to expand the smoking ordinance, the grant money will help fund signage to businesses for
their patios as well as Transfort signage.
Health Impacts (Attachment 2)
Secondhand smoke (SHS) has been designated as a human cancer-causing agent by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and several other national and state agencies. Various
Surgeon General’s reports advise that “there is no safe level of secondhand smoke”. Research
conducted in 2010 concludes that even short term exposure to tobacco smoke has an immediate
effect on the systems of the body. New methods of measurement show poisonous particulates from
tobacco smoke in outdoor areas near buildings, covered areas, and restaurant and bar patios or
service lines are significant, especially when in close proximity to others. Both national and local
studies (done in Greeley and Pueblo) show communities with indoor smoke-free laws generally have
fewer overall hospitalizations for heart attacks and respiratory emergencies.
The impacts are significant, and it is known that exposure to secondhand smoke causes lung cancer,
increased risks for other cancers, and respiratory illnesses. The Center for Disease Control
recommends designating smoke-free areas as a proven practice to improve health. Additionally,
chronic diseases such as asthma, heart disease, and lung disease get worse upon secondhand smoke
exposure. Drifting tobacco smoke can trigger asthmatic attacks, bronchial infections, and other
serious health problems in nonsmokers. Expanding smoke-free areas offers more protection for the
health of the community.
More specifically, measurements of secondhand smoke conducted in a variety of outdoor locations
by the California Air Resources Board found that in many settings, especially next to buildings,
concentrations of secondhand smoke are comparable to indoor concentrations where smoking is
permitted. The EPA uses the air quality index (AQI) with rating levels from 0-500. It is helpful to
know that corresponding health advisory categories range from good (AQI of 50 or below) to very
hazardous (AQI rating above 400). Recent studies at outdoor restaurants/bars where smoking was
44 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 3
allowed measured an AQI of above 150 which corresponds to a health advisory indicating that the
air is unhealthy for everyone. (Attachment 3)
National and Local Trends (Attachment 2)
There are growing trends, both nationally and locally, toward having outdoor smoke-free
environments. Nationally, 104 municipalities have smoke-free outdoor dining and bar patios, and
277 municipalities have smoke-free outdoor transit areas. There are even more states, cities, or
counties that restrict smoking in other outdoor areas, including parks, beaches, stadiums,
entertainment venues, etc. In Colorado, seven municipalities have adopted smoke-free outdoor
dining areas and bar patios since 2002, and five municipalities have smoke-free outdoor transit areas
since 2006.
According to a 2013 national Gallup survey, almost 60% of respondents supported no smoking
laws/rules in public places. This is up from 30% in 2003. Additionally, 53% of respondents in the
Health District of Northern Colorado 2010 Community Health Survey said it was not acceptable to
smoke in public.
Fort Collins is known as a healthy community. The rate of cigarette use among residents continues
to drop and is currently at 11.3%, according to the Health District of Northern Colorado 2010
Survey. This puts Fort Collins ahead of most communities in reaching the Healthy People 2010 goal
for reducing use to below 12%. Smoke-free areas are a proven public health strategy to help reduce
use. The City’s Smoking Ordinance (adopted in 2003) is likely a contributing factor for the
significant 3% drop in cigarette use from 2001 to 2004. Additionally, tobacco rates are considered
when overall health ratings of a community are determined, and Fort Collins has received various
healthy community designations which lend visibility to the community and provide economic
appeal.
In late 2012, the City of Fort Collins conducted outreach and informal surveys to gather local input
about the possibility of expanding the local Smoking Ordinance. The following input was received:
Fort Collins Survey – General Public (1,358 respondents)
Do you support smoke-free outdoor dining area/bar patios?
• strongly support 61.1%
• somewhat support 6.8%
• somewhat oppose 7.9%
• strongly oppose 22.5%
• don’t know 1.7%
Even though 68% of respondents support expanding the smoking ordinance to include outdoor
dining areas and bar patios, only 16% indicate that exposure to secondhand smoke in these outdoor
areas is currently a problem. This could be because Fort Collins is ahead of most communities by
seeing a reducing amount of cigarette use among residents which is down to 11.3%.
45 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 4
Fort Collins Survey – Restaurant/Bar Managers (14 respondents – focused on businesses that
currently allow smoking on their outdoor patios)
Has existing indoor smoke-free laws affected business?
• No impact/neutral 42.9%
• Positive impact 35.7%
• Negative impact 14.3%
• Don’t know 7.1%
57% of respondents allow smoking in their outdoor dining area or bar patio
57% do not support an expansion of the smoking ordinance
Impact
To determine the impact of an expansion to the smoking ordinance, staff researched how many
restaurants, bars and coffee shops exist in Fort Collins; how many have outdoor seating areas; and
how many currently allow smoking in their outdoor seating area. The following information is
approximate:
• 466 restaurants/bars/coffee shops in Fort Collins
• 107 have outdoor seating areas
• 16 admitted to allowing smoking in their outdoor areas
Staff also interviewed Transfort riders and conducted an online survey to try to understand the level
of support for implementing a smoke-free transit area and a 20 foot perimeter from bus shelters and
benches. The data collected includes:
Transfort Riders Interviews
• 115 riders interviewed
• 60% support smoke-free policies
• 33% oppose smoke-free policies
Transfort Online Surveys
• 41 respondents
• 88% support smoke-free policies
• 12% oppose smoke-free policies
Current Smoking Ordinance (Attachment 1)
Currently, the City of Fort Collins’ Smoking Ordinance prohibits smoking in the following places:
• Places of employment
• Public buildings
• Businesses used by the public (including bowling alleys and bingo parlors)
• Indoor restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, and bars
• Common areas (lobbies, hallways, clubhouses, etc.) of multi-family residences
46 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 5
• 20 feet from all entryways of places of employment, public buildings, and
businesses.
The current penalty is a criminal misdemeanor, with fines up to $1,000 and/or up to 180 days in jail.
Enforcement is done by Code Compliance by responding to complaints and doing some proactive
patrols downtown.
Overall compliance with the current Smoking Ordinance has been very successful, with relatively
few complaints received and little enforcement action needed. Since 2003, Code Compliance has
received approximately 350 complaints, issued 7 citations, and gained voluntary compliance in most
cases. Usually, a discussion with the business owner regarding a potential smoking violation is
enough to resolve the problem. Occasionally, enforcement action must occur. Most of the
complaints and inquiries occurred in the first couple years after the ordinance was adopted.
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Number of
Complaints/
Inquiries
254 62 0 1 11 17 5 2 1 3 0
Number of
Citations
Issued
2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0
Options for Expanding Smoking Ordinance (Attachment 1)
Based on public support, code compliance experience, departmental input from Neighborhood
Services and Transfort, and emerging research on public health regarding secondhand smoke,
recommendations for expanding the smoking ordinance include the following areas:
• Outdoor dining areas and bar patios
• 20 feet from outdoor dining areas and bar patios
• Public transit facilities, with exception of a designated smoking area that is 20 feet from
building entrances, bus shelters and benches
• 20 feet from bus stop shelters and benches
• MAX platforms
Additionally, staff recommends enhancing education efforts to impacted restaurants and bars and
transit areas. This enhanced effort will include in-person visits to restaurant and bar owners and
managers, information provided to the general public, educational campaigns at transit stations and
on busses, provide improved signage to restaurants and bars, and add new signs at transit facilities.
Fort Collins Police Services agreed to partner with Code Compliance to assist with downtown
smoking enforcement as they are able. This will greatly assist with the initial process to ensure
compliance is occurring early on, and continued enforcement will be the responsibility of Code
Compliance.
Enforcement efforts of smoking regulations at/on transit facilities will be facilitated by transit
security.
47 of 74
August 13, 2013 Page 6
Additional options to strengthen tobacco ordinances for the added protection of public health and
the environment could be:
• Include Electronic cigarettes (currently allowed indoors)
• Designate 100% smoke-free indoor motels/hotels (25% of rooms are currently allowed to
have smoking)
• Eliminate sampling at tobacco retail stores
• Designate smoke-free high-use pedestrian areas such as Old Town
• Designate smoke-free City parks and trails
• Designate smoke-free public events and festivals
It is important to note that any of these additional considerations would need extensive public
outreach to determine whether the community supports them, and enforcement resources would
need to be identified.
ATTACHMENTS
1. City of Fort Collins Smoking Ordinance Info Sheet
2. Expanding the Smoking Ordinance – Why?
3. Is Tobacco Smoke Safe to Breathe Outdoors?
4. PowerPoint presentation
48 of 74
49 of 74
50 of 74
51 of 74
Attachment 3
Is Tobacco Smoke Safe to Breathe Outdoors?
Introduction
Knowledge about the dangerous chemicals contained in tobacco smoke, along with their deadly consequences for
smokers, has been well established for decades. We also know that the tobacco smoke breathed by non-smokers
(secondhand smoke) contains essentially the same chemicals, metals and gases – and it therefore also very
unhealthy to breathe. Some of the components in the smoke include lead, arsenic, benzene and carbon monoxide,
to name just a few.
The volume of scientific evidence showing that secondhand smoke causes serious illness and death in adults and
children has grown to a level where in 2006, the U.S. Surgeon General called it massive, conclusive and
indisputable. As a result, more and more people in the United States (and throughout the world) are taking action
to eliminate people’s exposure to secondhand smoke, in order to protect everyone’s health. Most of these actions
have been through the elimination of indoor smoking in homes, cars, worksites and other public places. To a
lesser degree, smoking restrictions are being adopted for outdoor settings.
Background
What does the scientific evidence say about breathing secondhand smoke outdoors? While the amount of
research conducted on secondhand smoke in outdoor settings is not as great as that completed in indoor
environments, the research findings are showing similarities.
The California Air Resources Board (1) measured secondhand smoke concentrations in a variety of outdoor
locations at airports, colleges, government centers, office complexes and amusement parks. They found that
when smoking occurs in these settings, people could be exposed to levels of secondhand smoke that are
comparable to indoor concentrations where smoking is permitted. In another study (2), where measurements were
conducted when active smoking was taking place at outdoor patios, sidewalks, and parks, similar results were
observed. One of the researchers stated that this type of outdoor tobacco exposure should not be dismissed as
trivial.
Measuring Tobacco Smoke
A common measure of air quality in detecting tobacco smoke pollution is particulate matter (PM). PM 2.5 is air
particles that have a diameter of smaller than 2.5 microns. Particulates of this size are easily inhaled deep into the
lungs. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set air quality index levels and corresponding
health advisory descriptors, based on PM 2.5 measurements.
PM 2.5 AQI Break Points
(microns/cubic meter)
Air Quality Index
(AQI)
Health Advisory Descriptor
0.0 – 15.4 0-50 Good
15.5 – 40.4 51-100 Moderate
40.5 – 65.4 101-150 Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups
65.5 – 150.4 151-200 Unhealthy for Everyone
150.5 – 250.4 201-300 Very Unhealthy
250.5 – 350.4 301-400 Hazardous
350.5 – 500.4 401-500 Very Hazardous
A Canadian study (3) measured secondhand smoke levels on outdoor hospitality patios (restaurants/bars).
Measurements were taken at three different locations, with some variation in dimensions and structure. The most
52 of 74
significant difference was the number of smoking customers. The location with the greatest number of smokers
resulted in average PM 2.5 levels of 102 (unhealthy for everyone) and peak levels of 660 (very hazardous+).
A study conducted at one of the University of Maryland campuses (4) measured the distance from the source of
tobacco smoke in which PM 2.5 can be detected. Previous studies found that odor detection can occur at 1
micron/cubic meter and irritation begins at 4 meters (13 feet). The study also found that anyone positioned
downwind from an outdoor source of tobacco smoke is going to be exposed to secondhand smoke, even at
significant distances from the source. People who are positioned upwind should be at least 25 feet from any
outdoor source, in order to minimize the risk of breathing the unhealthy chemicals found in tobacco smoke.
A study conducted in Finland (5) in outdoor cafes and on city streets found the air pollution levels in the cafes
with many smokers were 5-20 times higher than on the sidewalks of busy streets polluted by bus, truck and auto
traffic. Measurements in various smoking permitted outdoor areas on a Caribbean cruise ship (6) showed triple
the level of secondhand smoke carcinogen exposure, when compared to indoor and outdoor areas of the ship
where smoking was allowed. Moreover, the levels measured were nearly the same as that in the ships smoking
permitted casino.
Conclusions
These studies should begin to question the common perception that outdoor tobacco smoke immediately
dissipates into the air and therefore, does not pose a health risk. Tobacco smoke smells bad because it is bad. The
dangerous composition of chemicals in smoke is essentially the same – indoors and outdoors. As stated in the
2006 Surgeon General’s report, “There is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke”. Secondhand
smoke is harmful. It doesn’t take much and it doesn’t take long to cause harm.
Action Steps
We are beginning to see more and more rules and policies established to protect people from secondhand smoke
exposure at outdoor settings, as has occurred previously in indoor settings. Restrictions are beginning to be
placed on smoking in such places as:
- Parks - Building Entrances - Amusement Parks
- Tails - Ball Fields - Fair Grounds
- Playgrounds - Skate Parks - Water Parks
- Beaches - Bus Stops - Stadiums
- Zoos - Street Dances - Rodeo Arenas
- Patios - Festivals - Picnic Shelters
By eliminating smoking at these types of outdoor settings, people are receiving protection from the health
consequences of secondhand smoke exposure, just as they have become more accustomed to receiving this type of
protection indoors.
References
(1) CalEPA (2006) California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, State of California Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Containment As Approved
by the Scientific Review Panel on June 24 2005.
(2) Real-Time Measurements of Outdoor Tobacco Smoke Particles. Klepeis N., Ott W., Switzer P. Journal of Air & Waste Management
Association Vol. 57 May 2007
(3) Tobacco Smoke Pollution in Outdoor Hospitality Settings. Kennedy RD, Sendzik T., Elton-Marshall T., Hammond D., Fong G.
University of Waterloo, Canada Presented at the 13
th
World Conference on Tobacco OR Health 2006
(4) Measurements of Outdoor Air Pollution from Secondhand Smoke on the UMBC Campus Repace, J. 2005 www.repace.com
(5) Outdoor Air Pollution from Secondhand Smoke. Repace, JL and Rupprecht, AA. Presented at the 13
th
World Conference on Tobacco
OR Health 2006
(6) Indoor and Outdoor Carcinogen Pollution on a Cruise Ship in the Presence and Absence of Tobacco Smoking. Repace, JL. Presented
at the 14
th
Annual Conference of the International Society of Exposure Analysis 2005
Dakota County Public Health Department July 2008
53 of 74
1
Smoking Ordinance Expansion
Options
City Council Work Session
August 13, 2013
Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager
Carol Thomas, Transfort Safety, Security, Training
Manager
ATTACHMENT 4
54 of 74
2
Purpose
• Options for Expansion of City Smoking
Ordinance
• Based on:
– Public Health Trends and Best Practices
–Data
– Public Feedback
– Health Impacts
55 of 74
3
Direction Sought
1. Does Council wish to move forward with
any of the options to expand the Fort
Collins Smoking Ordinance?
2. Are there areas of concern staff has not
addressed or is additional outreach
needed?
3. Is this item ready for formal Council
consideration? If so, what timeline would
Council prefer?
56 of 74
4
Background Information
• 2003 – Fort Collins designated all bars,
restaurants, and workplaces as smoke-
free
• 2006 – Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act
• Collaboration with Larimer County
Department of Health & Environment and
Tobacco Free Larimer County
57 of 74
5
Background Info Con’t.
• Citizen Feedback
• Enforcement Issues
• Collaboration with Larimer County
• Grant Funding
58 of 74
6
Health Impacts
• Secondhand Smoke is a cancer-causing agent
• “There is no safe level of secondhand smoke”
• New research regarding outdoor smoke
– Poisonous particulates especially near
buildings, covered areas, and restaurant/bar
patios
• Smoke-free areas proven practice to improve
health
• Chronic diseases get worse upon exposure
59 of 74
7
Specific Measurements/Data
• Environmental Protection Agency – Air
Quality Index (AQI) ratings from 0 – 500
• Health Advisory Categories
– AQI of 50 or below – Good
– AQI above 400 – Very Hazardous
• Outdoor dining areas/patios – AQI of 150 –
unhealthy for everyone
60 of 74
8
National Trends
• 104 municipalities have smoke-free outdoor
dining and bar patios
• 277 municipalities have smoke-free outdoor
transit areas
• 2,311 smoking restrictions within states, cities, or
counties in the following outdoor areas:
– Parks, trails, beaches
– Stadiums and entertainment venues
– Near entrances of enclosed places
61 of 74
9
Local Trends
In Colorado:
– 7 municipalities have smoke-free dining
and bar patios
– 2 stadiums have smoke-free seating
– 1 City has a smoke-free downtown area
– 5 jurisdictions have smoke-free outdoor
transit areas
62 of 74
10
2013 National Survey
2013 Gallup Poll: smoking should be illegal in all
public places
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2003 2005 2007 2013
percent of
respondents
63 of 74
11
Fort Collins
• Healthy Community
• Cigarette use continues to drop – 11.3%
• Healthy People 2010 Goal
• Smoke-free areas – proven public health
strategy
• Tobacco rates are considered for overall
health ratings
64 of 74
12
Support Smoke-Free Outdoor
Dining?
22% 61%
8%
Strongly Support 7% 2%
Strongly Oppose
Somewhat
Oppose
Somewhat
Support
Don't Know
65 of 74
13
Impact of Existing Smoke-Free
Laws?
43%
36%
14%
None/Neutral 7%
Positive
Negative
Don't Know
66 of 74
14
Impact
• 466 restaurants/bars/coffee shops
• 107 have outdoor seating areas
• 16 admitted to allowing smoking in
their outdoor seating areas
67 of 74
15
Transfort Riders
Interviews Online
33% 60%
7%
Support
Oppose
Don't Know
88%
12%
Support
Oppose
68 of 74
16
Current Smoking Ordinance
Smoking is prohibited in:
• Places of employment
• Public buildings
• Businesses used by the public
• Indoor restaurants, cafes, coffee shops,
and bars
• Common areas of multi-family residences
• 20 feet from all entryways of public
buildings and businesses
69 of 74
17
Enforcement Data & Penalties
• Criminal misdemeanor – fines up to
$1,000
• Enforcement done by Code Compliance
• Overall compliance is successful
• Since 2003:
– Approx. 350 complaints
– 7 citations
– Voluntary compliance in most cases
70 of 74
18
Options to Expand Ordinance
• Outdoor dining areas and bar patios
• 20 feet from outdoor dining areas and
bar patios
• Public transit facilities
• 20 feet from bus stop shelters and
benches
• MAX platforms
71 of 74
19
Education and Enforcement
• Enhanced education efforts
– In person visits
– Information to general public
– Educational campaigns at transit stations and
on busses
– Provide improved signage to restaurants/bars
– Add new signs at transit facilities
• Enforcement Assistance from Police
• Transit Security
72 of 74
20
Additional Options
• Include Electronic cigarettes
• Designate 100% smoke-free indoor
motels/hotels
• Eliminate sampling at tobacco retail stores
• Designate smoke-free high-use pedestrian
areas
• Designate smoke-free City parks and trails
• Designate smoke-free public events and
festivals
73 of 74
21
Direction Sought
1. Does Council wish to move forward with
any of the options to expand the Fort
Collins Smoking Ordinance?
2. Are there areas of concern that staff has
not addressed or is additional outreach
needed?
3. Is this item ready for formal Council
consideration? If so, what timeline would
Council prefer?
74 of 74
evant and
unity
fy strateg
onomy an
fy strateg
nce and p
e
ge strate
unity part
ce innova
unding to
sh and ex
sh, track
e timely e
ontinual im
vement proc
f Climate M
ess followed
owed in the p
entory of
of GHG go
new ICLEI
focuses c
ntion
operation
mental re
d motivat
ies that p
nd comm
ies that a
preparedn
egies in co
tners
ation
o impleme
xpand pa
and repo
valuation
mprovem
cess of Plan-
Mitigation
d by many c
past.
f GHG em
oal (City c
Commun
ommunit
ns and pr
duction t
ting to en
provide co
munity
also incre
ness for c
ommon w
ent strate
rtnership
ort metric
n, course
ment.
-Do-Check-A
ities in clima
missions th
currently
nity
ty and Cit
rograms
targets th
ntire
o‐benefit
ase
climate
with
egies
ps
cs that
correctio
Act.
ate
hat
ty
hat
ts to
on
ATTACHMENT 3
14 of 74
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
MTCO2e
Emissions vs. Linear Path to 2020
Linear Projection
Actual Emissions
ATTACHMENT 1
8 of 74