Santa Cruz City Council 1/18/22

– Hey, it looks like we are good to go. Everybody is here. Okay, I will go ahead and begin. Good afternoon. Welcome to our four o'clock
PM, January 18th, 2022 study session of the City Council. I have a few announcements and then we will move on to our meeting. Today's meeting is being broadcast live on Community Television, Channel 25, and streaming on the city's
website, cityofsantacruz.com. If you wish to comment
on an agenda item today, call in at the beginning of the item using the instructions on your screen.

Please mute your television
or streaming device once you call in and
listen through the phone. Please also note there
is a delay in streaming. So if you continue to
listen on your television or streaming device, you may miss your opportunity to speak. When it is your time for public comment, press *9 on your phone to raise your hand when it is your time. And I would like to ask
the clerk to call roll. – (indistinct) Council
member Kalantari-Johnson? – Present. – (indistinct) Cummings. – Here. – Brown? – Here. – Meyers? – Here. – Vice Mayor Watkins? – Here. – Mayor Brunner? – Present. Okay, our only agenda item
today is a study session on the Climate Action Plan 2030 Target Setting Study Session.

For members of the public who
are streaming this meeting, if this is an item you want to comment on, now is the time, call in using the
instructions on your screen. First, the order will be a presentation of the item by staff,
followed by questions from City Council. We will then take any public comment and then return to council
for further feedback. And with that, I'd like to introduce the Wise-West Sustainability and Climate Action
manager for presentation. Hi, welcome.
– Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Mayor. Good afternoon council members.

I'm Tiffany, Wise-West Sustainability and Climate Action Manager, out of the City Manager's office. I do also have here today to assist with any questions that you might have that are
maybe beyond what I can answer, members of our core
consultant team (audio cuts) and that would be
Camilla and Brian Gardner are also, you can see them on the line. And I'm gonna go ahead
then and share my screen. Okay, I believe you can see
my screen at this point, yes? I'm seeing heads nod, yes. Wonderful. Okay, just gonna start off with important land acknowledgement. I, as many of you are
likely working from lands of the Awaswas-speaking tribe, and those lands are now being (audio cuts) by the Amah Mutsun Land Trust. Okay, before we jump into things, I just wanted to review
goal of the overarching Climate Action Plan development process, which is called Resilient Together.

You can see our logo in the
upper right-hand corner. And that is number one, to prepare CEQA qualified
CAP state targets, and we're gonna talk a lot more about what that means just later on. And also determining the year and the most equitable
path to carbon neutrality. I should say that equity
is of paramount value to this planning process and
the outcomes that result, and you're gonna hear more about that. The objectives of this
specific study session today, I'd like to provide to you, first of all, updates on the plan development progress and so forth that we have conducted. And then I'll take a short break to see if you have any
questions on that process before we dive into the real
meat of this study session, which is to discuss considerations of various potential
emissions production target for the plan itself.

Before I get started on the process that we have embarked upon thus far, I do want to take a moment to really emphasize and regroup us on the reason why we
are really undertaking this very important process. And that is because carbon
dioxide is at an all time high, climate change and global
warming is about 1.2 Celsius, or two degrees Fahrenheit to date. And should we surpass 1.5 degrees Celsius, which is projected to occur
between 2030 and 2040, there will be irreversible
tipping points in our climate and cities will be at the front of this.

We know this (indistinct)
from carbon dioxide, from fossil fuel combustion
in methane or natural gas. That is an important level, natural gas. As you have acknowledged previous resolutions that you've adopted. Number one, declaring a climate emergency, number two, supporting the
Paris Climate Agreement, number three, supporting a green new deal. We know that it's very important to adopt aggressive
targets that we can manage. But as you'll learn
today, there are realities of this massive community-wide
change management that we must undertake that will require many
hundreds millions of dollars. Oh, one other thing on this
before I move on from this, one thing to keep in context is to talk about (indistinct) require is actually the social cost (audio cuts) coming more and more included
into climate planning.

For the amount of positions that we as a city
community-wide each year, we are experiencing 14
and 25 billion dollars in impact for our community (audio cuts). These are impacts through (audio cuts), construction of property, increase food prices and more. So this is the economic
harm from those impacts. And that's something to keep in mind, talk about the cost it will take for us to meet our share of
emissions production necessary. So to start out here, our Climate Action Plan process
really can be simplified down to these core components
of values and vision, goals and targets, measures, which are the high-level
types of activities that need to take place in order to reach our goals and target, the actions which are
the policies, programs, the infrastructure that
will need to take place, and all of that then
wraps Climate Action Plan, which will include a funding
and implementation plan, both municipally and community-wise. Now, this is the simplified. I'm also gonna share kind
of a bigger flow chart here that really shows us what we're gonna be
focusing on here today, which is the emissions targets through the Emissions Reduction Action.

But before we move on that, I do wanna orientate you to where we are in the process. Started this April, last year. We had two major community
engagements since then, that have helped us
establish value (audio cuts) for this Climate Action Plan. We have been iterative process
over the past several weeks in determining our emissions target as well as community goals. You will learn that there are other areas that are community value
around climate restoration and climate economy that fall outside people
qualified Climate Action Plans, emission reduction measures, and action.

So, in addition to the goals
and targets, as I mentioned, we have high-level measures, both emissions reduction, climate economy, which will revolve around things that are, a lot of things that are under less operational
control by the city. Those relate to (audio cuts) jobs, the embedded carbon consumption, online ordering, those kinds of things, and diet, as well as climate
preservation measures, which include things
like carbon sequestration of regenerative landscapes
and urban forests. We also have been iteratively
developing an equity screening that we've applied to the
measures and to the actions. Again, which is specific policy program. And you can see, we have
a little loop going on. This is an iterative process. As I mentioned, all of this will bundle into the Climate Action Plan, including funding and implementation plan. But for today, we really are focusing on the emissions reduction targets, the emissions reduction measures, and we'll be touching
briefly on the act as well. So our engagement so far
started in April of last year. We've had two major engagements around visioning and goal setting where we had a variety of different ways, both virtual and live, that both could engage in this process.

We have been conducting small group themes with (audio cuts) agencies, unsheltered folks, (indistinct) folks, as well as a number of other groups to ground truth what we're hearing in our broader engagement. And through these two engagements, we really have begun to establish an initial community
value and set of values, and really relatively, what
we've heard from our community is that they really are
seeking an aspirational, and equitable climate
that's grounded in science. That's gonna be a very important point that I'm gonna continue to return to. And so just, I really don't
wanna read things off, but I think the vision is
important enough to do so. Our community vision, rapidly
enact climate solutions that support and enhance
an equitable community with robust active and
public transportation, plentiful housing that's
affordable, sustainable, and resilient, and regenerative landscape.

And the values really revolve from equity, people-centric transportation, efficient and low to no carbon
buildings, energy and water, the protection and enhancement of natural resources in urban parks, and the elimination of waste, and supporting local (audio cuts). We also have been developing
this equity screening tool over these past few months. The screening areas you can see in the yellow box on the left-hand side, they really span a wide range
of considerations for equity. And you can see also on the screen, a couple different exercises
that we have utilized to help us to provide some
equity or evaluation of equity with respect to developing
the values and vision as well as our measures.

And we did that through our
climate action task force, and our equity advisors. We have about a dozen folks from different historically
underrepresented to underserved groups that
come in and out of our project. And we have compiled some
equity considerations for various measures. And then we've gone into the community with the small focus groups I mentioned, that's unsheltered folks,
and (indistinct), youth, to really ground-proof
what we are hearing. That was for the values,
and vision, and measures. But then, and this is what we learned, is that there are a number
of equity considerations around our major emissions
reduction areas or measures that really revolve around
affordability and accessibility. And I'm not gonna read it, and we can certainly come back to them. But these were the initial
set of equity considerations that came out of those
exercises I just showed you. From there, we refined
this equity screening tool that we have just applied to
our action, the (audio cuts), infrastructure that (indistinct) emissions reduction measures and targets. And what our equity
screening tool looks like, is that across all different
screening areas I showed you, accessibility, affordability, (indistinct), and so forth, we had a series of
questions, 22 questions.

And we asked, is the action, according to these
different screening areas, beneficial, neutral, or harmful? Frontline, low-income communities or communities of color. And if an action in this scoring process, each action has about 22 questions
that we ask and we score, plus, zero, minus. And one of our guiding principles is if any action does cause
harm or gets a negative score, it must be revised, or must complimentary action
that mitigates that harm. Meaning we will not accept any negative. And so just to give
you an example of that, for example, if we call for, say building electric (audio cuts), that we know comes at a cost that gets passed on to the homeowner, that gave a negative score, because it could have a
negative impact on equity. A complimentary action would be ensuring that there are
rebates or incentives for low-income folks. That would transition that negative score to a zero or to a plus. So that's an example of how an action that would have a complimentary action or be written to include that incentive.

We just went through with our task force and our equity advisors, applying the equity screening
tool to all of our actions, there are about (audio cuts) of them, and have made initial revisions. So this is where we're going
with our engagement process (audio cuts). From the values that I
just shared with you, we're gonna be launching
a public dialogue platform on our draft (audio cuts). You can see a public screenshot, it's actually from Santa Barbara county using the same platform right now. And this will allow our city to have really robust
dialogue on the reactions, and indicate the level of
agreement (audio cuts). We will take, this will be open, through the month of February, it will launch the last week of January. It will be open for about five weeks. Close that up, come back, we will take what we learned
today at the study session, what we learned from
public dialogue platform, we will refine the goals and targets that we talk about today, we will refine the actions,
we will add in work that our consultants are producing on the funding and
implementation planning, as well as some internal work we're doing with our various teams, we will conduct more focus groups over the month of February, including with both folks
from the business community, bikers and others, and then we're going to be
coming back to City Council with another study session in March with recommendation for
the goals and target, the actions themselves, and the draft.

We will then have a webinar (audio cuts). We tend to have this spring
entire plan to Council the first meeting in August for adoption. So we really are rounding the corner here and moving towards
completion of this project. Really important project. I just wanna pause there. Is there any questions on the process, before we dig into the target setting? Does anybody have anything. I'm trying to scan, I'm not seeing any. Okay, very good. I'll go ahead and go on, I just wanted to leave
some space for that. We're gonna be shifting gears here. Okay. All right, so our focus
for the rest of the time that I'll (audio cuts) today is really on specifically emissions
reduction target setting. And I don't know why
there's two ones here, it should be a one and a two, but there are two ways to think about it.

There is the CEQA qualified
Climate Action Plan target, and there is the potential or aspirational or stretch target. The CEQA qualified target
can be adopted as mass, or community-wide target amid 280,000 emissions here, and we're trying to get the (indistinct). Or (audio cuts), which divides that overall
target by our (audio cuts). We are recommending
both per capita target, qualified CAP targets, although we're gonna
discuss what that target is because the per capita allows
for growth, population growth. Council member, Cummings, I see that you have your hand raised. Do you want me to take
your question right now? – I just wanted to ask for
clarification for the community. When we talk about emissions reductions, are we talking about the city, like in terms of city
governments emission reductions, are we talking about the
entire community as a whole individuals reductions along
with the city's reductions? I just wanna make sure it's clear when we're talking about
Climate Action Plan.

– Absolutely, thank you for that. And I think the next slide
will definitely clarify that, but it's community-wide. So that does include every
individual's emissions, every business emissions, all of our municipal operations. So we're talking about community-wide. And with respect to these two
different types of targets, we can adopt one, or we can adopt both. We do, we have however,
committed to adopting a target, producing a CEQA qualified
Climate Action Plan, and let me talk a little bit about that before we talk about
aspirational or stretch targets. So, the CEQA qualified Climate Action Plan allows us to produce thresholds. Five, develop need to
design their project, design and build their project, and is really one of the
strongest levers we have (audio cuts) can develop. It also allows streamline
the CEQA requirements for those developments that
can meet those thresholds.

In order to develop a CEQA
qualified Climate Action Plan, we must conduct an emissions inventory for areas under local influence, which we've done for 2019, you can see on the right-hand side, our community-wide inventory. We also need to identify reduction target that's consistent with CEQA. We're gonna talk about that next. And then, we need to monitor our progress of reaching those CEQA.

If you look on the right-hand
side of the (audio cuts), the 2019 community-wide
emissions inventory. This includes the different sectors, transportation,
residential-commercial energy, solid wastewater, that are included in what's
called the state scope. And so the CEQA qualified CAP must only include the measures, sectors, rather, that are included in the state scoping plan. So you can see this does not include carbon sequestrations, for
example, of urban forests. The state is considering adding
that to the scoping plan, but that has not happened yet. And what you see on the screen here is that 69% of our emissions
come from transportation. And that is a revision from
what was presented to you late last summer in our
2020 closeout report. We realized that
inventory produced by ABAG did not include vehicle miles traveled for half trips started and ended, started outside of the
city, ended within the city, and those that started within the city and ended outside of the city.

Adding those additional BMPs bumped our transportation-related
emissions from 43% to 69%. It's a massive, massive area where we need to reduce emission. Another 26% is in residential
and commercial energy, and industrial energy by the way, is bundled up with commercial energy. 7% is solid waste, and a little less than 1% comes
from wastewater emissions. About 3% of our community-wide emissions are from municipal operations. So actually, a very small
portion of emissions come from our municipal operations, and that is operation of
various city facilities, our fleet, for example. – Tiffany, I just wanted to chime in and ask that going forward, any acronym spelled out the first time.

I think it would be
helpful for (audio cuts). – Sure, so why don't I take the two that are on the screen here? One is CEQA, which is the California
Environmental Quality Act, and that is the
environmental review process that is specified for development. And then GHG is greenhouse gas. And I'm trying to consistently
use the term emissions and not reference GHG.

But thank you for that. And I will strive to
clarify any other acronyms as we go forward. – Thank you. – You're welcome. Okay, so let's talk about
what are our (audio cuts). What are our potential
emissions reduction targets. As I shared with you from the beginning, there's the potential
CEQA qualified target that needs to be legally defensible. So we need to have a set of actions that are reasonable and sensible. And there are aspirational
or stretch targets or visions that are voluntary. So two separate targets, we can adopt one or we can adopt both. So, starting with the
CEQA qualified targets, the potential targets that
we might (indistinct). Let's start with Assembly
Bill 32, that's AB 32. An 80% reduction by 2050, from 1990 level. This is from 2006. It was adopted in our
2020 Climate Action Plan. But since that time, the state has adopted
through Senate Bill, SB 32, a 40% reduction by 2030 from 1990 levels.

So an interim kind of target. We have incidentally
reduced emissions by 9% between 1990 and 2020, we as a community. This SB 32 targets highlight it, because it is the minimum
required for CEQA, for us to adopt CEQA qualified CAP. It also, as you'll see in future charts, puts us on the path to
carbon neutrality by 2045. We can also adopt, in addition to, or as
a replacement to SB 32, something that we're calling SB 32+. We can go beyond the
40%, so greater than 40%, if we can demonstrate and
attain feasible actions. So we have a couple (indistinct) for the CEQA qualified CAP. The SB 32 minimum, at a 40% reduction, or SB 32+, at greater than 40%. And I'm going to give you
a lot of considerations from the next two slides.

As far as the aspirational or the stretch targets is concerned, which again, we don't have to adopt an aspirational or stretch target… (dog squeaking) We have some dogs (indistinct). The aspirational or stretch
target are not legal, they're not a legal target,
and they are voluntary. One can be the state
carbon neutrality goal, which is set by executive order. And right now, that's at 2045. I should mention that the
state is considering revising the carbon neutrality target to 2035, although that has (audio cuts). We can also adopt the
science based target, which our science based target
says that we need to reduce by about 61% emissions
between 2019 and 2030.

So much more aggressive than the SB 32. We are not recommending
the science based target because the science based target is computed on a national level and it does not account for
the emissions reductions that we in the state of California, and we as the City of Santa Cruz have already been very
aggressive in making. And then lastly, there is the possibility of
other aspirational targets of carbon neutrality by
2035, or as early as 2030. And I will give you some
considerations around that as we go forward. So two different kinds of targets, and different (audio cuts).

Council Member Meyers, I see your hand up. – I have a quick question,
all these (audio cuts). How does someone (audio cuts) enter into our emissions (indistinct). – Sure, so thank you for that question. Anything that's related to urban forests, as I said, it's outside
of CEQA qualified targets. So that would not be
(indistinct) or against us for that target. Unless we would revise our, and the state would
revise the scoping plan to include those emissions causes. So something like that, we know the state is accounting for those types of emissions, that is something that
we could bring into, hey, as an event like that happens, do we wanna count that towards our aspirational
or stretch targets.

But right now, it's not
being accounted for. – Thank you. – You're welcome. Okay, so let's continue on. Let's take a look at what our
forecast is like full time. So the blue line that is on this chart represents the business as
usual, or a BAU forecast. That is, it's nothing at all. What would our (audio cuts). And what you see is an
increase towards 2025, and a bit of a reduction,
and then some more increase.

And we have this wonky bump because of central post community energy, and the shift they've made in how they're (audio cuts) electricity. And I'm not gonna get
into the minutia details of that right now, but that's what causes this bump at 2025, as ramping down by (indistinct), we have 100% renewable energy, which they have committed to do. Which incidentally is not
the same as carbon neutral. Okay, there are still emissions associated with 100% renewable energy. So this is our business as usual, starting over here on
the far left-hand side. And all of emissions are quantified here on the Y-axis, in terms of metric tons of
carbon dioxide equipment, that's MTC02E, per person.

So that's at per capita
that we're looking at. And carbon dioxide is (audio cuts) for all greenhouse gas
(audio cuts) one common unit, carbon dioxide equivalent. And so you can see we go
up, go down a little bit, and then we go up a little bit more. The orange line is our adjusted
business as usual forecast. That takes into account state
legislation and regulation. Things like renewable portfolio, the energy code, and building codes, and shows us what kind
of reductions do we get from simply the state
legislation and regulation alone. We do get quite a bit of a reduction. And then we wanna look at what would that minimum required target, CEQA qualified CAP, and that's where the star is, right here. That's the SB 32, Senate Bill 32. A 40% reduction from 2030 by 1990. So you see right at
2030 where the star is. And then if you continue
in a linear fashion, you see that we reach
carbon neutrality by 2045.

So SB 32 puts us on a
path to carbon neutrality by (audio cuts). Now how would (audio
cuts) that SB 32 minimum, that 40% reduction from 2030 from 1990. Well, we have a very
Climate Action Plan measure. So these are the high-level
measures, not the actions, they're not the specific
(audio cuts) programs, but they're the high-level
measures we'll take for us to reach those targets. And as you can see, they revolve
our active transportation, electric vehicles and public transit, electric buildings and renewable energy, water really comes down
to energy (audio cuts), and waste reduction. And we are showing carbon sequestration on the upper right-hand corner, even though it is outside
of the CEQA qualified CAP, (indistinct) under
consideration by the state, bring it in state
buildings and (audio cuts). So it's something that we're quantifying, putting actions around. So, when we were refining
what these measures look like, share what that looks like, we held working meetings
with department heads, different divisions within the city, other stakeholder groups, like
our transportation agencies, that are responsible for
these measures and actions and their implementation because we wanted to understand, what is ambitious but possible in terms of needing different
areas like (audio cuts).

We developed a suite
of actions and measures that exceed the state minimum, I'm gonna show you that in just a moment. And let me assure you that these are aggressive yet feasible, implementable, and defensible. And it's very important to remember that implementable actions are a key requirement
for a CEQA qualified CAP. So let's get into those. Let's start building
energy reduction measures. So this is where we utilize
(audio cuts) that we have, dial in what needs to happen in order to reach that SB 32 minimum. So we're just talking about the minimum. We're gonna get to those (indistinct). So this is where we have to, this is 26% of our emissions,
just as a reminder, in the building energy. In order to reach the SB 32 minimum, we've determined that we need
to reduce natural gas usage by 33% residential buildings,
by 30% commercial buildings, and that we will have to do
so at time of replacement.

So when a water heater burns
out, we would have that, that would replace with
an electric water heater. And we do assume there's
some noncompliance associated with that. We know that not everyone comes to get a permit like (audio cuts) for these different appliances. In terms of the cost to do this, we are looking at about
120 million dollars in total for our community to reach this 33%
reduction in residential, and 30% in commercial. What does that mean per
dwelling unit or per home? Depends on the home type,
and what systems they have, but that could range
between 5,000 and $30,000 for dwelling units. And that's without keeping, I think it's important to know
that we have existing rebates from Central Coast Community Energy and we will continue to need those rebates at increased levels in
order to make this happen, particularly in equitable fashion.

One other thing I wanna mention on this is that we also have, right
now, a project that is happening concurrent to the Climate
Action Plan development project to develop a roadmap
for what (audio cuts), could look like in the city, what policies we need to adopt, what investments do we need to make. And that is being done as part of a Rock Mountain
Institute project. We have the NAACP as our equity partner, and that will also be complete by July. Council Member Golder, I
see you have your hand up. – Hi, thank you. So I just have a question
when looking at this through an equity lens, I'm thinking how much more expensive it is to run an electrical appliance
versus a gas appliance in terms of like a
dryer or a water heater.

And then there's actually some appliances that just don't come
in electric models yet. And so has there been any talk statewide, in your energy circles about
how to address those issues? – Yes. Yes, absolutely. The state does not allow any
quote unquote (audio cuts) go beyond the building
code to come into effect that are not considered cost-effective. So cost-effective has demonstrated in order for us to adopt anything. And that is obviously some
of these rebates come in, but also we get energy (indistinct). And that is something that we're studying as part of this project
that we have going on parallel to the Climate Action Plan. And I don't have answers for exactly how that will
unfold at this moment, but that is all (audio cuts). Thank you for that question. Okay. So what kinda actions
then do we need to take to reach these reductions
in building energy? Well, you all know that in
2020, our prior state council, some of you were on the council, adopted a natural gas
prohibition in new buildings.

So that's already in place. We will need to continue
enforcement of that ordinance. But we will also need the pass an existing building
electrification ordinance prohibiting new gas
equipment in the city by 2024 in order to reach these reductions. And this would only be for appliances for which there are readily available electrical alternatives. So obviously require
that those exist already. We will need more staff
to enforce compliance with both of the ordinances, and we will need to co-develop a tariffed on-bill finance program with Central Coast Community Energy in order for folks to
be able to finance this, as well as to access rebates
that will be available in order to make this transition happen.

So this really prohibits
any new gas appliances from being sold. Many jurisdictions are looking at this, but this has not been done yet. But this is what will
likely need to happen. So let's move on to
transportation, give you a feel. And again, we're looking
at what is it gonna take to meet the SB 32 minimum. And we will be slightly (indistinct). You will see that we need to bump up our active transportation mode share so that biking and
pedestrian, or walking rather, from 19.5% to 25%. We expect (audio cuts) feasibly increase mode share on public transportation
by 1% from seven to 8%. And that's assuming no rail through 2030. That's an area I would
love to see coordination and cooperation where that could increase, but that's (audio cuts) feasible. We also need to increase from
a little less 5% mode share for electric vehicles to
35% of passenger vehicles, and 25% of commercial vehicles. And on the commercial vehicles side, we really need to focus
in on commercial fleet like car sharing or not car sharing, things like Uber Lyft, things like U-Haul, our own (audio cuts).

That is where there are a lot of persons. And we also need to focus
on medium and heavy, which put out more emissions than lighter duty commercial vehicles. We also will need to decarbonize or electrify 50% of
our off-road equipment. And that is things that are, that includes things like
landscaping equipment, construction equipment, and so forth. Now, recently there was a
state regulation adopted that will require only
electric (indistinct) in 2024. So that's gonna help us to
achieve that 50% reduction. In terms of cost, I think you all know that the city, bolstered by grants, really bears the most of active transportation
infrastructure cost, public transit, general car
pack (audio cuts) investment. And we've estimated, all of
(audio cuts), by the way, are high-level order
of magnitude estimates.

We are gonna be coming back with our funding and implementation plan with more refined estimates. But community-wide in terms
of electric fiscal adopters and the surging infrastructure investment that we're looking at is
over half a billion dollars. And again, this is to
meet the SB 32 minimum. We know that for residential
electric vehicles, depending on whether they're used or new, we're looking at between five
and $30,000 in investment, which by the way, are
already (indistinct), and in fact have tier income rebates or tier rebates based on income. And those will need to
continue and be increased. And we know that commercial EV investments can exceed a $100,000 depending
on what this vehicle is. If it's a medium duty truck, it could be around a hundred thousand, but as you know, electric refuse trucks, or heavy duty are on the
order of almost a $1,000,000. So big investment in
transportation sector, which again represents 69% of our overall. So what does that look
like from the actions. Again the specific
policy program structure.

It's about 1200 new EV chargers, we currently have about 16 public chargers that the city owns, and then a number across private sector. That has to ramp up (indistinct). We also will need to
require residential rental, and commercial building owners
to install working chargers, 20% of parking spaces. We will need right now,
require electric-ready, and (audio cuts), I'm not sure offhand,
but it's, we can jump. We also are going to need to
reduce the number of vehicles in high traffic zones or on
other transit options available, potentially implementing
a congestion charge that applies to passenger
cars, car sharing services, obviously with exceptions
for differently abled drivers and residents of those areas. We also will need to significantly
focus on teleworking, and evaluate land use to make sure that we have
end available in zone to keep people working in town. And that gets at that
additional 26% of emissions that result from trips that start or end in the city or go outside as well.

In terms of waste and
wastewater reduction measures. Again, this is 8% of
our overall emissions. We will need to reduce our
organic waste, 85% by 2030. Your council just approved
the plan for SB 1383, which is the food waste program, which will get us (audio
cuts) reduction organic waste. But we will need to go further, this case likely regional solution to get at that other (audio cuts) by 2030. We need a 35% reduction
in inorganic waste, and we're showing zero reduction wastewater treatment
plant process emissions because we recognize that
the unit treatment process water treatment plant are tens of millions of dollars, cumulatively, hundreds
of millions of dollars that are very difficult to change out. And if we implement the measure reductions that I've showed you, we can get to SB 32 without much wastewater process emission.

So, I think that I hit all of that. And so some of the key actions then is to implement an
organic waste solution beyond the food waste program, and heavy education, getting to people's choices
and the ways that they produce. So in sum, SB 32 minimum
for a CEQA qualified CAP requires a reduction for
the per capita emission from 4.2 to 3.7 metric
tons per person by 2030, it requires a 750 million
investment, about, (audio cuts) community-wide by 2030, and will require ramped
up municipal staffing and investment by 2030, which we estimate to exceed
50 million dollars for us.

So if we implement those measures at the percentages that I just described, that's the thread right
here that I'm showing. The green line is the SB 32
target where the star is, and you can see that the red
line is below the green line, which means that what I've just laid out would exceed the SB 32 minimum
emissions reduction target that we need for CEQA qualified CAP. However, can we be more aggressive? This is what we're calling SB 32+. And yes, we can be more aggressive, but this would require
even more aggressive taxes. And here's some samples of
what that might look like. We might require replacement
of natural gas appliances before the end of their useful life through mandatory ordinance. And it's important to
remember that the city itself has just made investments
in really efficient, but non-the less natural
gas infrastructure and equipment at the city that is (audio cuts) and some of this equipment
could extend out 2035, or 2040. We would also need to increase the cost of driving single
occupancy gas vehicles through taxes and parking fees.

We would need to institute other zero-emission
vehicle areas in the city and ban cars in traffic zones to increase public and
active transportation, public and active transportation. We would need to set a date for natural gas shutoff citywide. The thing to remember though
is adoption of SB 32+ target, we must be able to achieve real reductions to be legally defensible. And other things to think about with this is that the city, as a municipality, has (audio cuts) some of our
(indistinct) moving to that is that we lack operational
control over places, about (indistinct). We can make the infrastructure, we can put the policies themselves, or rather the policies themselves have to come from us. And there also equity impacts accelerating all the
numbers that I showed you. They will increase if we pursue an SB 32 as a CEQA qualified target. And by squeezing all of
that to a 20, 30, years, it's possible that we're not gonna be able to provide the incentives that are needed to make this transition
possible for lower income folks, folks that are historically
underrepresented or underserved.

And we really need that financial support. So SB 32+ is possible. There are some real
considerations with that for a CEQA qualified CAP. Let's look at what some
of these other targets might look like. So what we have again on the screen here the blue line as business as usual, the orange line is the business
as usual adjusted forecast for California regulation, the gray line is that SB 32
minimum that we just looked at. We also show a linear
reduction through 2045, that's a straight line linear reduction, that's the dark blue line, right? And that could be something that could be a potential (indistinct). It is the state target
for carbon neutrality. We also looked at the
science based target, which is this green line, the science based target ends at 2030. However, as I mentioned previously, that is not California specific. Do not recommend adopting
that as the target, as a stretch target. And then lastly, we show,
and the orange line to 2035, that would great reduction
to carbon neutrality by 2035.

And we could show that same thing to 2030, which is the aspiration of
the climate (audio cuts). So let's talk about this a little more. As you can see, there's a big differential between 2045 and 2025, when we're talking about an
aspirational target there or an aspirational goal. And the ways that we can reach that are progress around factors
like building energy, transportation, and so forth. Having sequestration, because
it's the stretch target (indistinct) CEQA
qualified CAP (audio cuts), we can start to think
about carbon sequestration, climate economy, that's
where some of these things around diet and food
choices come into play, and then future carbon capture technology that maybe doesn't exist right now, or isn't on the market right now.

So those would be the ways that, the things that lever to get to an earlier stretch targets, again, need to be voluntary. We could not adopt a CEQA qualified CAP with a 2035, 2030 carbon neutrality goal because there is no, it's infeasible to demonstrate how to get. So, our possible stretch target approaches are to adopt a linear
reduction to carbon neutrality by 2045, or establish a visionary
or aspirational target carbon neutrality by 2035 or 2030 with a strong focus on equity, where we're leaning
into climate restoration and economy measures, which again, are outside
the CEQA qualified CAP. We focus our acceleration on municipally, under the areas of
control that we do have, and also we would ask
council to facilitate or enable us to innovate and pursue new technologies
and opportunities.

And we would have the need
to adjust to address equity as they arise. We also, not coming with
the recommendations, this is what is up for discussion, but we are recommending that we go from updating the Climate
Action Plan every 10 years to every five, to account
for new opportunities, new technology, new legislation that would put us on the
same frequency or cycle as our climate (indistinct), which gets updated every five years. And by the way, beginning by next year. And in fact, in our next cycle, integrate it together
as common (indistinct), in the field of study. One other thing I wanna
mention on carbon sequestration as a point of caution, however, is that we did take a look at, from our recent tree plan
and resource analysis that we conducted, adopted last year, we looked at our urban forests. And even if we doubled our
urban forests that we have, we would get a very minimal reduction in the per capita metric tons there of carbon dioxide that we want.

It's on the order of 0.01 metric tons. Remember I said, we
need to from 4.2 to 3.7, for the CEQA qualified CAP, which excludes sequestration. So if you bring sequestration into that, thinking about a stretch target, there isn't a ton of potential with existing sequestration
in our urban space. So what are other jurisdictions doing, and we're almost finished here and almost ready to discuss all of these. So, other jurisdictions have taken a number of
different approaches. Many of them have adopted
the SB 32 minimum target of 40% below 1990 by 2030, and either said that
they would make progress towards carbon neutrality
by 2045 or earlier, or in fact as I talk, stretch
target or stretch goal. That is around 2045, 2035, or 2030. Some jurisdictions have a
legal target that exceeds us. So that would be the SB 32+. But those are jurisdictions that had already made significant progress on the SB 32 target prior to, for example, Watsonville adopted their legal target as 80% below 1990 by 2030. However, they have achieved a
40% reduction already by 2020. And remember, we've only
achieved a 9% reduction. So there are a bunch of
different flavors here. Some have not adopted CEQA qualified CAP. We have determined that
we would like to adopt CEQA qualified CAP and are
working in that direction.

Finally, I wanna talk about, I mentioned Watsonville and I wanna talk about that but, all of this is going to
really require (audio cuts) across our (indistinct). And in fact, we, climate practitioners, are already doing that, we're working very closely with the county who is developing their
Climate Action Plan, they're just starting it right now. Watsonville has finished
and adopted their plan. And we're all working together right now on building electrification, regional workforce development initiative that we are pursuing federal funding. You can see here, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has unprecedented funding coming across all of our major reduction sectors. And this is gonna be
incredibly important for us to be able to unlock
this funding as a region.

And that acknowledging, we will be able to compete as a region more so than if we go
individually, as (audio cuts). I do wanna say, the last thing on the
stretch target is that, I've shown you a lot of limitations today, but the stretch target does allow us to explore carbon neutrality earlier than the state target at 2045 in anticipation of the state
potentially ramping it up. It could also open up
funding opportunities for us, and it provides more conservative approach to keep global warming below
that 1.5 degrees Celsius. Although, as we know, we
need global collective work on that as well. And I just wanna say it is okay to have technical CEQA legal target, and an aspirational target. Although there is potential
confusion with that, but a lot of jurisdictions have done that, just recognizing that our
clear funding limitations to achieving an aspirational target. With that, I wanna
conclude by just sharing that we are recruiting a Climate Action Task Force right now. I encourage people to visit cityofsantacruz.com/climateactionplan
to apply.

That's a one year term that (audio cuts). And it works the city to develop and implement
the Climate Action Plan. And I think very much, our climate, our current and our past
Climate Action Task Force, they've been involved in projects revolving in the RFP preparation. And I have on the screen here, the upcoming things that are happening. I should say that the March study session has not been determined exactly
when that's gonna be yet, but it's gonna be somewhere around the second or third week of March.

But we have a lot of stuff
happening before that. I've mentioned that our
community engagement platform and more focus groups are gonna be happening
through January and February, about our task force
recruitment ending in February, and in March, (indistinct) study session on our refined approach to all of this, as well as implement funding. With that, thank you so much. I know this is a lot of (indistinct). And if there any questions
that you might have, any comments that you might have, this is really meant to
be the discussion portion of (audio cuts).

– Thank you so much. The portion where I will bring it out to the council members
for any further questions. – I see… I'm sorry, Mayor, please go ahead. – Council Member Meyers and Council Member Golder and Brown. – Thank you, Tiffany, for
such a great presentation. Pretty sobering, to say the least. So I guess my first question is, you mentioned sort of, in the past, sometimes (audio cuts) federal and state funds, right? There is success and I'm trying to weigh some of (audio cuts) against other needs, like some of the other big
infrastructure (audio cuts). But based on the funding and, how competitive (audio cuts), and is there any thought
about (audio cuts) building, for example, regional charging facilities like that, where you're not having
every single business have to build charging (audio cuts). Any way to (audio cuts) urban benefit so that you think more
collectively around, 'cause our county is so compressed. We have one transportation corridor, we have, and so I'm just curious, think that way with
this kind of objective, or do you really have to one
municipality (audio cuts).

(Meyers laughing) – Yes, thank you Council Member Meyers. It is clear. The City of Santa Cruz, does very well on the state
level and on the federal level, particularly with respect
to transportation. But we know that that's gonna become more and more competitive with
this new funding coming out. And as I mentioned it then, regional collaboration and cooperation will be essential for us to compete for the magnitude of dollars that we need in order to implement these plans. I will say that Watsonville,
City of Santa Cruz, the county, our (indistinct) all have, we all have building energy,
transportation, and waste, how we do so is maybe
a little bit different, but we are looking for those
synergies across the region.

I can't speak necessarily to
regional parking facilities, but of course, with
respect to transportation, waste, and building energy, there's ongoing (audio cuts) right now, which I do think will
make us more competitive for these larger possible
need (indistinct). As you saw, we're talking about a minimum 750 million dollars likely to be able to implement this plan. And we're gonna have to
be thinking differently about how we access funding. And it's not all gonna
come from grants either. And you recognize the great point that I failed to mention is that we already have a couple hundred
million in deferred capital that we can't fund right
through our general fund.

So that is another very
important consideration is how does this work stack up, and some of that's overlapping, but some of it is different. And those are the difficult choices, that we're gonna need
to make going forward. – And my only other question, thank you. Yeah, I was thinking like regional, like places where people pull in, there's more of a regional
charging facility, not so much like you're
gonna park there all day, but like moving back and
forth across the county is…

So I guess my other question is, I think about, of our development pattern and the Downtown from the sense pattern that we know is (indistinct) over the next years, over the next decade, which is really that focus
quite a lot of focus on housing (audio cuts). I would imagine if someone's, so how do you calculate if
someone looking Downtown, where they are now, how do you make those assumptions about where they may
travel to work or school or other (audio cuts)? I mean, is there kind of
calculation that's developed? So I'm just curious, like maybe a family, a couple families who
are living in Live Oak or other places up and down, whatever, they're able to get into
one of these, whether it's, whatever level of affordability, or market rate, or what
have you, move Downtown. City, or they work
county, or what have you, how do you measure that, how does that get done? – Yeah, thank you for that question.

So, vehicle miles are modeled through a number of different inputs including transit we're in a development, like you just mentioned
down central housing. And so it all gets plugged into our model, and then that fits out
miles traveled (audio cuts). Obviously black box that I'm saying. But theoretically, seeing what I just
presented to you in 2019, in 2030, our BMT should look different because of that transit
we're gonna develop and what that model states. So that's how we go about quantifying, and there's obviously whole
back end of calculations that go into that. But from a simplified perspective, that's how we would understand if what we're doing is working.

– Those are my questions. – Council member Golder. – Thank you, Rosemary, your presentation was so informative and really inspirational for
what we can look forward to in the years moving forward. I guess my question is the
same one that I brought up like on my first council meeting is that, we have those, the natural
gas, power plant Moss Landing, that supplies a lot of
power to our region. And so for me, I'm still confused how converting it from
natural gas to electricity is more carbon neutral than just using it as
natural gas appliances, such as dryers, water heaters, et cetera. Like, how does that weight? – Yes. So you're asking the kind of, why our strategy changes around building (indistinct), right? And that is because
electricity that we procure will be 100% renewable by 2030. Natural gas is not renewable. And one thing to think about is, you can think about the grid
as almost like the swimming, and all of the power
that's being provided is, like the water is nicked
together (audio cuts).

And now what we pull from, yes, (indistinct) to us, but it also could be electrons that come from somewhere else. And there's really no way
to necessarily trace that, but I kind of digress. So, really the state understands, the state's objective is also to try to get away from natural gas emission natural gas power plants, and to get everything into electricity. And then for us, that's 100% renewable electricity. Now, PG&E, the default provider, although they are let on as
aggressive as a trajectory to bring on renewable energy, they still have lots of
renewable energy assets that make electricity
cleaner than natural gas.

The other thing related to natural gas, aside from the high emissions potential of converting to electricity is that natural gas has
serious safety issues. There has been a lot
of deferred maintenance on natural gas equipment
and infrastructure where we see things like the
San Bruno explosion happening. And we know that the investor
own utilities like PG&E stood up, supported natural
gas prohibitions like ours, because they recognize the need to get rid of the natural
gas infrastructure. And then finally, I wanna point to indoor air
quality and indoor safety.

So those are some of the reasons why converting to electricity, is the way that the state
and all of us are going and putting climate action strategy. Thank you for the opportunity, for allowing me to explain that because I kind of jumped into that with just the assumption
that everyone knew that. So thank you. – No, I appreciate that. I didn't know, thank you. – Okay. Council member Brown. – Thank you, Mayor. And thank you so much
Tiffany for the presentation and chatting with me last week as well to get a little bit more background and understand this as best I can. And so I just, I think this is great. I wanna highlight a couple of things. One, the incorporation of transportation and vehicle miles traveled
into the equation there to get us a more accurate sense of what it's gonna take and
where the real challenge is. I think that certainly that's an area that we are doing a lot of good work and we have a lot of challenges as well at the regional level around what our transportation
infrastructure build out is gonna look like.

And so I just appreciate that bit. I have a couple of questions, so one is related to this. But before I do that,
I just wanted to say, I also really, really
appreciate the focus on equity and really trying to think
about disproportionate impact of making some of these shifts, either with respect to residential commercial infrastructure, building electrification,
but also transport as we know the cost, of the ability for people to
move around in our community is constrained. And so having that as a lens through which we make our decisions is, like I'm just thrilled
that it's happening. I'll leave it there. So with respect to the
question around transportation, I know that the city
has done very, very well promoting active transportation, developing infrastructure,
bike pad infrastructure. I wish we were doing better
on protected bike lanes and some of the other things I think will make bicycling
more attractive to people and obviously a lot of other things. But I wanted to ask specifically about our own vehicle fleet. This is something that, and
this is really a question kind of more broadly I'm
(audio cuts) this question.

But I have been, since
I've been on the council, really tried to advocate for, and bring up at appropriate times the need for transitioning our own. And have had a lot of pushback. I'll just say I've had pushback from the staff and among my colleagues. And so I'm just wondering if you can talk about the challenges, or if someone from staff, I don't know, Matt you're here (audio cuts). Why is it so hard for us to really start moving in that direction and make a real dent in our (audio cuts)? What are the challenges
associated with that? What do you, and then
maybe back to (audio cuts), and Matt as well, if you have thought on what we ca do to get more aggressive about that. I think that is fundamental
principle and set of actions that we can take, and the sooner the better. But I also understand, I mean,
the pushback I've received, when I say that, I mean, that's based on the realities and the constraints we're operating in.

So I'd just like to hear more about that. I think it's an area we can do better. I also get the… And I'm talking about now our, all of our (audio cuts), and I know that public work
kind of has some domain over those (audio cuts),
that's why I'm asking? – Sure, if I can handle that one. I'm Matt Machado,
director of Public Works. That's a great question.

And one of the things
that we'd all love to have is an all-electric fleet. It does take some effort to get there. First of all, let's talk about the steps that we've already done. Most of our pool cars are all
leased leafs and electric, and we've done that probably, we're on the third
generation of vehicles now. So we've been doing
this for multiple years, and we encourage people
to use the full cars and reduce our fleet.

Actually, that's the best,
we have less vehicles. The second thing is having the charging
infrastructure in place, and we've gone ahead and we have charging at our
poll for those vehicles. We also have charging in our courtyard, so we're ready to bring in vehicles, electric vehicles when they are available. And that's the third thing. You can't go and buy an
electric truck right now, which is the majority of our fleet. You can't go to Ford and
pick out a (audio cuts), advertisements on television. You can put in a reservation
if they're still taking those. And they're way out they're months out, 'cause they haven't produced yet. We're going to start seeing
those in the next year. They should start hitting the street, but to ramp up their production, you have all the cities and counties and commercial looking to
purchase these vehicles. They're just currently not available. So what have we done? We've
got our infrastructure, our charging infrastructure in place. So when they are available
we'll bring them. We're also, we've
ordered one refuse truck, and we have grants that
covered the additional 400,000, probably 600,000 total
difference in cost of vehicles between a diesel or a natural gas truck and an electric truck.

And that's just, they're
not making the volume that they (audio cuts). And battery technology is
getting more efficient. The prices are coming down. And we're gonna learn
on this first generation electric refuse truck, just like we learned on
the hybrid refuse trucks that we ordered and they have problems. First generation always has problems just 'cause they haven't
worked out all the details yet, and we'll help them figure those out. But it's a transition process. So I wish we could go to the store and purchase those electric vehicles. They're not there right now. They are less. We're very excited to get those vehicles. There's a lot less moving parts, a lot less things to repair. If a motor goes out, you swap it out. It's not a major deal that
you have with a diesel engine and that type (audio cuts). So I think the technology is coming, the hype may be here before
the actual boots on the ground and we get our hands on the vehicles. But I will tell you, as soon as we get that
electric refuse truck, we will be driving that
around and highlighting that and hope that, April or
May is my understanding it should be here.

So we're very excited about that. So I hope that answers your question. It's availability of
vehicles, and it's cost. Those additional costs. We go after the grant, we're having the infrastructure in place so we can charge those
vehicles when we do get them. – Yeah. And just to add to what
Matt's saying is that, I think in the past two years we have just made substantial
progress in this area. There's also a front loader
and some other medium and heavy duty equipment
that we're getting.

As Mark said, we are stacking incentives. There's very real cost for charging when we have to replace
major transformers, it's not as easy as just, you know, putting an electric vehicle charger in. So yeah, I think that we are making substantial progress in this regard, we just finished the study last summer to understand what else is possible. So we need to test and
innovate, and (audio cuts). – Thank you. So it sounds like then
we are well positioned to take advantage of new technologies and opportunities as
they become available. And I guess I'll just kind
of harken back to your point about the incorporation of social costs to our cost analysis. And I mean, if we're serious about addressing our
climate impact internally, I think that thinking about, maybe it is gonna cost a little, it's gonna cost more money, and I know it's not just
a little more money now, but over time that that goes
in to our prioritization to make those kinds of decisions.

And I don't know if, it sounds like that's happening, and I also think that council thinking about how we, what our priorities, what
that means for (audio cuts). So, I'll just put that one aside. So many things I'd love to say. Also the police fleet,
right? The police vehicles. I mean, we hear that well you can get 'em,
or they can customize, but then they send me
information all the time saying yes they can. So, I agree that there is some hype that kind of gets out in front, but then at the same time, how are we positioning ourselves? So, glad to hear it and hope
(audio cuts) doing more. My other question is… I guess it's really more of a comment, but sort of a question related to the equity component of this, and how it is that people who are low-income
community members, people who are struggling can
access the kind of assistance, one for new appliances
to electrify their homes, but also, I think as member Golder's point about the cost, or the monthly costs for using electric utilities and even when they're very efficient, your electric bill a lot higher.

So I'm just, and that rebates
are gonna be really important for the infrastructure,
and kind of equipment side, but also the ongoing cost. I'm just wondering where is
Central Coast Energy Services and part of this conversation
and collaboration. I figured as much, but I just wanted to, because I know that they do
a lot of really great work, home weatherization and
direct ability assistant, but other work as well. So (audio cuts). – Yes, thank you for that question.

So like you, I've been hearing
from these focus groups that, "Hey, we didn't know there was income here incentives for electric vehicles. Hey, we didn't know about." So number one, engagement is
gonna be so critical on this. Number two, Central Coast Energy Services is already in the low-income
home doing weatherization. They can help us connect that, they're part of the federal
infrastructure grant that we are pursuing with
Watsonville for just that program. And then secondly, or the third, rather, we also need to look at folks who are on the care and the farer rates, which are the rates for low income folks, and look at how can we, is there something else that we can do to make sure that when
they are electro fitted that their energy burden
is not being increased. And that is a primary goal of our existing building
electrification study that we have going on right now. So yes, you touched on all the right areas that we should be looking at. And again, I can't emphasize
enough the engagement piece. One thing I didn't mention, but I know I've talked
to each of you about is end of this project, we will be launching a
community activation platform that will help link people into this like, "Hey, come on, be part of this process." (indistinct) and gamification to bring people in to
understand how this collectively we can reach these goals, but also the connect to those rebates incentives that are out there.

And nonprofit partner (audio cuts), who hopefully are gonna help us on that engagement piece to connect well. So thank you for raising that issue. – Thank you. And I'm finished for now. – Thank you for those questions. Council member Cummings. – Thank you. Thanks for that presentation, Tiffany. And it's been, you know, great to be able to follow
this process for a long time, being on the Climate Action Task Force, and appreciate all your hard work and all the hard work of all the members of the
community (audio cuts).

One question that I think
comes up pretty often is, how are carbon emissions measured in terms of what cities are producing, and how are they measured it over time? I think a lot of people
have been curious about, I know vehicle miles traveled is one, but are there other ways that
carbon emission are measured? – Yes, and I would refer folks back to our 2020 Climate
Action Plan closeout report, which gives the specific
metrics that we track to measure emissions. Energy usage is another of those, and that data are readily available. Vehicle miles traveled is
the other for transportation, for waste it is the
volume of waste disposed, and for wastewater treatment
is process emissions, which there are specific calculations for.

Now, we know that those are
state coping plan areas, but there are other areas
where there is embodied carbon. For example, as I mentioned before in online purchasing and delivery, diet, carbon sequestration. Right now, except for
carbon sequestration, there are not good measurement techniques. They would require
consumption-based inventories that are complex and cost. And we do not, and nor do many
jurisdictions in California have that kind of (audio cuts). – Okay. Next question, I'll
try to make this quick, because I know we have some
other items we need to get to, I imagine there's public
who wanna ask questions. So you mentioned that Watsonville, that they're like 40% reduction
in their carbon emissions while we had nine. I'm wondering if there's any lessons that we can learn from
Watsonville or any takeaways that can help us improve
meeting our emission goals.

– Yeah, that isn't a
matter necessarily of, one or the other doing better. Watsonville does not include the emissions associated the vehicle miles traveled that end or start within
and/or outside of the city, and we do. And as I said, we originally
thought we met our 2030, our 2020 goal of a 30% reduction. So we thought we had
(audio cuts) reduction until we added in vehicle miles traveled, which bumped up our emissions
by 23 additional percentage. And so, they have, Watsonville has a different
situation than we do. They have (indistinct) for sequestration, which they are going to rely on to meet their carbon
neutrality aspirational target. I do think that Watsonville
has done a really great job of engaging their community, especially obviously their
Spanish-speaking community that we can take lessons from.

They are innovating outside of the box on things like biochar and
other kind of technologies that we're not necessarily
talking about here right now. So I'm not sure it's an
apples to apples comparison, but as I said, we are certainly
learning from one another. We talk every week,
and we are coordinating on a lot of CEQA priorities that we have. Really, are what I shared today. – Thanks. I think it would be good to, as you all are having
those kinda conversations around regional approach, it'd be good to like get a sense or see if there's any opportunity for us to be able to set
for the jurisdictions skills set with their metrics So that, for example, if we're comparing
ourselves to Watsonville and Watsonville is at 40%,
Santa Cruz is meeting nine, if there's different metrics, it's gonna be really hard
for people in the community to understand why we're not meeting the goals that other
communities are meeting.

So maybe even just showing those as like two different options, like under this scenario with vehicle miles traveled taken out, how other people measure
carbon emissions in the region, we have a 30% reduction, but adding this factor brings us down. And I know that you've
explained that to us today, but I'm just trying to
think if there's ways that we can try to streamline
this across the region, it would really, I think, be helpful for people throughout the region to understand how well we're doing. – Now, absolutely, you
raise a great point. And there has been a lot of discussion around preparing regional
Climate Action Plan. You know, that ABAG's very interested in something like that. So there's a lot of discussion
'cause it is confusing. Even when I showed you all the different targets that both have, they're all different and
include different things. Some are CEQA qualified, some aren't.

It can be really confusing. And I really discourage people from comparing apples to
apples across jurisdiction because of those nuances. But thank you for that comment, and hopefully more to
come on the (indistinct) collaboration around
the potential targets, metrics (indistinct), and climate action. – Thanks. And then my last question. So, you've given us a
number of options today. I guess, the first part of the, I guess I'll ask my first question. Do we need to adopt one of
these goals today? We don't. Okay, great. Then I guess my second question is, you've provided us with a number
of different options today as examples of how we can
kind of set our goals. I guess the first part of the question is, is there any consequence to
not meeting those targets? And I asked that because
I think, you know, climate change is probably
one of the biggest, threats to public health and threats to communities
across the globe.

And I think that in our community, many people wanna see us set
really high ambitious targets. And so I feel like if there's
not negative consequence, to setting an ambitious goal. Why don't we just go for that knowing that that's our goal
for setting the bar high. We might not make it, but
we're gonna do our best.

And so just wondering if we could maybe speak to that a little, because it sounded like trying to have a really ambitious goal could have a negative impact on how we try to meet the goal. So speak to that a little. – Yeah. Yes, thank you for that question. So there is a consequence to not meeting CEQA qualified CAP targets. And that is that we can be sued.

So that is important to remember that we are trying to go
for a CEQA qualified CAP. We are going for a CEQA CAP because it is the strongest driver for us to reduce emissions
in new development, and it gives that
streamlines CEQA approach. However, you can adopt both
the CEQA qualified CAP target, and a voluntary aspirational target, where if you do not meet the
voluntary aspirational target that is outside of the CEQA qualified CAP, there is not legal consequence to that. – Great. That's yeah, those were my questions. And I guess comment. And I think as we move forward, I know that many community members have expressed this one as
take an aggressive approach.

So my hope is that you can adopt a target that seems reasonable and feasible, but then also, as you've mentioned, have an aspirational
kind of voluntary target that we're willing to try to meet as well. So we can kind of have a win-win situation for everyone in our (audio cuts). Thanks. – Thank you for that feedback. – Thank you, Council Member Cummings. Let's see, Council
Member Kalantari-Johnson, and then Council Member Watkins. – Thank you, Mayor. And thank you so much, Tiffany, for the presentation and all the work. I have a couple of
questions and some comments. I had a similar question
as Council Member Cummings but sort of the flip side is, are we more competitive
for funding opportunities if we do commit to the aspirational
more aggressive targets? – Potentially. If we're aligned with the
state carbon neutrality target that bodes well for us on the state level, there is some private sector funding that wants to see a 2030
aspirational target adopted that we may or may not be competitive for.

So potentially. – Okay, that's great. So something for us to consider. And then, in terms of thinking
about regional metrics, where, and I don't know if
know the answer to this, or how we can think about it, but how do the four cities
fit within the county targets as the county is going
through that process? I know you said that we're communicating with each jurisdictions and
we're talking to the county, but is there, and you said there isn't apples to apples, but how do the four cities
fit within the county target? – That is CBB. The county has started their process, and they have been incredibly inclusive and thoughtful in their process so far, had number of streets already as a city but I dunno how that's
gonna play out so far in their existing climate action strategy. We did not, there was not any
kind of crosswalk like that, but they do see also that they don't need to reinvent the wheel on a lot of the work that we've done, whether it comes to the equity-based work, community engagement, the
building electrification.

So again, this is really to say, because they've just started the process, they're copying right now, very early for them. – Okay, great. And then just a couple comments. I know you mentioned that
you were working very closely with each of the departments, but as we heard weeks ago
around the state housing bills, and that we will be engaging on advising our housing
element and our general plan, it's a really great opportunity to look at the intersection
of our climate action efforts, transportation, and housing, and how we wanna move
forward with housing.

So that's a great opportunity there. And then I was also really
pleased to hear and see about the equity screening tool and the community engagement efforts that you have put into place. And I know that you've already reached out and done focus groups with the youth, but we've now formalized our relationship with
the Youth Action Network, and their youth steering committee. So hopefully we can continue to engage at least that youth group if not others as we continue this work. – Absolutely. I welcome, I talk with anybody, I like to talk about this stuff, but particularly youth and
currently underrepresented folks. We're seeking to (audio cuts). – Great. Thank you so
much for all the work.

– Thank you. – Thank you Kalantari-Johnson. Council Member Watkins. – Hi. Well, I'll just echo
my colleagues' comments in appreciation of the plan and the work that has gotten us this far. I think the majority
actually of my questions have been asked and answered
in regards to the fleet, and the challenges associated with that. I guess I was curious about the penalty, or sort of the accountability
of the legislation.

And I know you got into it a little bit with the potential of being sued. I just, I'm thinking about how far along the City of Santa Cruz is in terms of our
prioritizing climate action, and mitigations, and adaptability, and in comparison to other jurisdictions with more urban sprawl, or less of an in doing so. Where does that fall in
terms of state legislation in terms of accountability with how we move forward in terms of operationalizing
the legislation and the plans? – Yeah, thank you for that
question Council Member Watkins. The accountability on the resilience work is not tied to the emissions work that we're doing right now, that is through separate legislation. In terms of the accountability on the Climate Action Plan itself, it comes down to thresholds that we're developing for
development comes through. And if we cannot demonstrate the progress that we said we needed to make, which I outlined for you
today as the SB 32 minimum, if we cannot show that
we made that progress, that sets up for legal risk and could invalidate
some of the developments that came through on
streamlined environmental.

And so that's, I have to say though, I am not CEQA expert, but that is from a high-level (indistinct) and the risk to be in
terms of accountability. Now, with that said, part of our implementation plan will include accountability mechanism to ensure that we are
making sufficient progress towards whatever our CEQA
qualified target will be. And so that will be an important part, is that whole accountability mechanism allowing us, of course,
if we're not on track, because we do need to, you know, we will need to make
those emissions reductions to adopt CEQA qualified CAP. – And in terms of like how that
relates to other locations, like with urban sprawl and such like that, how do you, I mean, just generally, how do you anticipate them, adapting to this new legislation and goal? – Well, if they choose to
pursue a CEQA qualified CAP, they will have to develop
their own threshold that they will be held to, that their Climate
Action Plan demonstrates. The city itself is gonna
make these reductions and these developments then get this streamlined review process, but also have lower
emissions (audio cuts).

Other cities that have
a CEQA qualified CAP will be under the same type
of scenario that (audio cuts). They have to have some accountability, otherwise they'll be in (indistinct). – Okay. No, I appreciate that. And then in terms of the, I know you mentioned
it in your presentation about a five-year update, and I think that makes a lot of sense, especially, 'cause I feel like, from the meta level,
the state of California is really setting this
aspirational target kind of goal with technology hopefully kind of, hopefully keeping up and then
innovating to the next level.

So having those checkpoints and earlier kind of update potential to
really adapt that would be, I think really benefit us to our community and our (indistinct) in general. Okay, thank you, Tiffany. – Absolutely. Thank you so much council members. – Thank you. And I'll just chime in quickly. Thank you for all the questions. All of my questions regarding
the equity screening tool (audio cuts). And I just have to emphasize,
I appreciate the focus on, looking at affordability
and accessibility, and I have two questions.

What is biochar, and what are next steps between now and March? – Well, biochar is not
something I know a lot about, but it's basically converting
(audio cuts) facility into a (audio cuts). But from what we understand, that's a very, very early
kinda new technology. – You had mentioned that
in context to Watsonville so I was curious. Okay. – Yeah, there (indistinct). – And between now and March,
in the next study session, what do you see as those next steps? – We will be having focus groups, we'll have the online engagement
platform on the actions, and we will be developing our
draft implementation funding. So those are the three key things that we'll doing in preparation for that. – Wonderful. Thank you so much. This the part where I take
it out public comment, and then we'll return to council
for any further feedback.

So let go to the attendee list. If you're interested in commenting on this Climate Action Plan 2030 Target Setting Study Session, press *9 on your phone to raise your hand, and when it's your turn to speak, you will hear an announcement that you've been unmuted, and the timer will be set for two minutes. So it looks like our
first telephone number ends in 4839. Hello, press *6 to unmute. – [Megan] Hello, I think
I've just been unmuted.

– You have, go ahead.
– Thank you so much for having this council session because climate change is on
my mind everyday, every moment. My name is Megan Clemens,
I've been working, I've been volunteering for the last few, last month, I think, with the
Climate Action Task Force. And I just appreciate you all for being able to look
climate change in the face. It's not an easy thing to do. And you guys are our heroes for my children and our grandchildren that are gonna be raised
in this town, hopefully.

And we just really want to minimize the risk of climate change and you guys have the power to do it. So I really appreciate you Tiffany so much for bringing everything
you know to this point. And I hope that all you council members will support Tiffany, 'cause I think she's super smart and she's including so many
people to help create this plan.

And I just wanna say I
vote for the aspiration, to include the aspirational goals. I think it builds hope in our community, and it shows that we really
wanna do as much as we can. And thank you very much, that's it. – [Mayor] Thank you so much, Megan. The next caller is Pauline Skills. Pauline, press *6. – [Pauline] I'm on Zoom, can you hear me?
– Okay. I can hear you. – [Pauline] Thank you. Thanks Tiffany, this was great. I've been on the Climate Action
Task Force for few years, and represent Santa Cruz's
Climate Action Network. There was a lot of good stuff in this. One of the things we have to keep in mind is that the ultimate inequity, disequity, is not dealing adequately with climate.

'Cause the poor people
will be hurt the most, people who live in Beach
Flats, for example, people who work outside,
people who work in fields, et cetera, et cetera. I'm very happy that equity
parts are being considered. I want to really urge council to strongly consider
these aspirational goal. I'm old enough that I was
around when Kennedy said, "Gonna put a man on the moon." Now, that was an aspirational goal. NASA had no clue about the detail, but they knew they had
a lot of good people. And in that case, what was lacking was the money,
technology was not there. We have the opposite situation. The technologies we need are here. It's just difficult to apply them without, but the state budget is good. There will be more money in the future. Please go for the aspirational goal. Thank you. – [Mayor] Thank you, Pauline Skills. The next caller, I Am Watching You. – [Man] Yes you are, and plan on spending
a lot of public money, and plan to overregulate
people's lives and choice under the guise of one of the
greatest scams in history, namely the CO2 climate
change can save the planet, fast hysteria scam.

I missed any slide where Tiffany indicated a certain change to the Earth's climate as a result of proposed
actions (audio cuts) caused, and are only discussing this in terms of government mandates in place that have no predictive
value as the climate. It's based on fear, not
unlike the COVID response, which is the other fear-based
current mass abuse of freedom. Based on assumptions with no
real scientific certainty, the recent volcano near Tonga probably had more climate effect than anything factories could ever do. The EU, which is a globalist
control (indistinct), and generally has embraced
the climate change hysteria, has now declared gas
and nuclear power green because they realize there is currently no reliable energy alternatives to generate the power we need to turn an inhospitable planet
into a hospitable planet. My gas bill is peak, and natural gas is the
cleanest possible fuel essentially to water molecules and one CO2 'cause byproducts wouldn't burn.

Plants love CO2, and the
earth is very resilient. I won't get into the
unresolved science to this, but it is quite unresolved. Consider we cannot predict a control, even short-term future, whether doing any extent,
let alone climate. We need to embrace the idea, we're in a 300 year warming trend in a longer 20,000 year
warming trend with no clue as to what really comes next, perhaps even another Ice Age. No one knows. Opinion largely follows the money, and it cannot be viable solution. I applaud the density per
minute of climate buzzwords that (indistinct) out. He's aggressively advocating the maximum competitive
changes on people's lives with no proof of value. Climate change is all about
money, all about power, and to quote George Carlin, "I have certain rules to
live by, and the first, I don't believe anything
the government does." I'm not giving up my gas water heater, or my gas fireplace up.

(watch beeping) – [Mayor] Thank you I Am Watching You. Next caller is Peter Bichier. – [Peter] Hello, City Council,
this is Peter Bichier. Get rid of this. Can you now me now? Good, thanks. And I just wanna let you
know that I've done some, well, again, this is Peter Bichier, community liaison for
the City of Santa Cruz. I've done several surveys for Tiffany, and especially in Lower
Ocean and Beach Flat, the underrepresented areas. And just over there throughout, the community is always
asking the question. First of all, they say that always, that they're worried
about getting electrified, mostly because as it is
in their neighborhoods, the electricity goes off many times, and when it comes back,
it ruins their appliances. So there were the more and
more we can get off the grid that this is gonna happen in the future.

And then another major
question they always have. Yeah, I don't expect you to answer it, but just throughout your
communications in the future, is also with the lower income
people and underrepresented, is also, where is all this
energy gonna come from? Kind of like the overall bigger question of where the power and the grid, or the capability of the grid to change all our economy
and all appliances and our vehicles to an electrical system that's maybe beyond the city, but still something to think
about as a big picture. – [Mayor] Thank you so
much, Peter, for that input. Next caller, Alan (indistinct). – [Alan] Hi, can you hear me? – [Mayor] Yes, we can hear you. Thank you. – [Alan] Great. Well first, great huge thanks
to Tiffany and her whole team for the work that went
into this presentation and the ongoing work with the task force, which I'm hoping to finally get to go in.

There was a lot to unpack. It is a huge challenge, notwithstanding the two
speakers ago viewpoints. I think the scientists, 99.7% of them agree that we have a serious problem that's human caused. What I was gonna address is
your point about engagement and getting more people kind
of riled up (indistinct), both in low-income, moderate
income, and affluent, just across the board,
getting people really engaged. And one way to do that is this
coolcity.earth organization that I've been working with.

I'm trying to get the city to be interested in working with them. It's about working with
people block by block, and there's a pretty big amount of work involved in getting the
application together. But we can take a look at (indistinct) which pulled it off for Irvine. Believe it or not, the city of LA. So they've all won award
for this past year, and I would love for Santa Cruz to win the award for this year, and I would love to work
closely with Tiffany to make that happen. It's a moonshot, similar to
the Apollo Program in a way, trying to engage people at each level of
excitement and enthusiasm. And it comes down to
building relationships, and really well organized employment. So hopefully you'll hear more
from me over the coming weeks. That's all. – [Mayor] Thank you, Alan. Next caller, Lani Faulkner. – [Faulkner] Hi, thank you
Santa Cruz City Council.

And I only came on very shortly recently when I was asked to come on, and I'm glad that I did. Tiffany, I will definitely
be reaching out to you. I'm the director of Equity Transit, a local organization here bringing the awareness
around transit inequity and environmental
justice to our community. I definitely wanna look and listen to Tiffany's presentation, I understand these are
recorded, so that's wonderful. I appreciate Justin's comment
and agree with Pauline. We'd love to see the reach
for those aspirational goals. I think that's really essential given the critical nature
of our environment. I just wanna make a note that listening to recent
global summits in Glasgow, and number of top environmental leaders, Global Environmental Scientists realm, that we really need to be thinking about getting away from any
sort of highway widening because the long term investment of that takes away from our focus,
which is public transportation.

We know that robust public
transportation systems serve both equity and the environment. And that really is where our
razor focus should be leading. And let's see, there was
something else I wanted to. Yes, around E-vehicles. I have a really great presentation I'd love to offer to the
Climate Action Task Force. That talks really about how, even though E-vehicles
are a great step for us, they really aren't the solution. They're part of the solution, but they have their own degree of mining that goes into them, and toxic rubber retires,
and all sorts of things that we have to think about, the batteries, and chemicals
that go into those.

So we really think of long term solutions, which means that we're talking about building systems that last long-term, reduce our overall impact. Thank you so much. Can I add one more thing, and that is February 4th is
National (indistinct) Day, and would really want to
spread the information to invite the city and
everyone to join us for that. And we'll have more information
on equitytransit.org. Thank you so much. – [Mayor] Thank you Lani Faulkner. The next caller is phone number ending in 4227. You're on your phone, press
*6 to unmute yourself. – [Beverly] I believe I've unmuted, yes? – Yes. Hello, welcome.
– Thank you. Yes, hi, thank you. This is Beverly Deschaux, I'm with the Electric Auto Association, as well as I've been
on Tiffany's task force and Tiffany and the team have really done a great deal of work. Oh, it's very impressive,
the presentation, I had a couple of things
that I wanted to clarify that I think got tossed around, but didn't really
completely get clarified.

And that's having to do with
switching from electric, switching, excuse me, from
fossil fuels to electric, which of course could be
fueled by fossil fuel, but we're looking for renewable energy. So the argument is for, the argument hasn't
actually been clarified. The argument is for
electrification because, number one it's renewable, which I think Tiffany did mention. We can have it renewable, whereas the natural gas is not renewable. But secondly, they're way more efficient. So in my almost 15 years of doing educational events
for electric vehicles, what we have learned and told people is that when you switch
to an electric vehicle, you immediately reduce your
emissions by approximately 75% because of the efficiency of the vehicle compared to burning gas.

And that's true also of heat pumps, which that word was not mentioned. So what you switch from when you switch from your
heating unit for air heating, and also for water heating is a heat pump. And what I've read is that they can be up to three
times more efficient than their counterpart in natural gas. I've also read that they're
not quite that much. So I'm not really sure
entirely what that involves, really, what the…

Is that cutting me off, that noise? – Yes.
– Is that telling me to shut up?
– Time is two minutes. – Okay, just one more quick thing, and that is that there, that we have looked for the future of having a lot of used electric vehicles that will allow for there to be equity because they can be bought for- – [Mayor] Beverly, I have to cut you off. – [Woman] Okay. Bye, thank you. – [Mayor] Thank you. Anybody is welcome to
email us (audio cuts), especially if you're on the taskforce.

Further input that was not able to be said in this part of comment. Wanting to be mindful of other callers. The next caller is Kirsten Liske. – [Kirsten] Council members and Tiffany. Thank you for wonderful presentation. Can you hear me? – [Mayor] Yes. – [Kirsten] Great. A lot of wonderful
information, I just wanna… I'm Kirsten Liske, the vice president of Community
Programs at Ecology Action. And I just wanna
acknowledge the great work that Tiffany has done, and done a great job of
including our taskforce feedback. And she is leading our region in figuring out real ways
to center equity throughout, procedurally and involving people. And it's been an honor and a privilege and a lesson to be part of that process. And just a couple things that I wanna just share from my perspective, is I really like the direction that it seems like this is heading where adopting real practicable goals, and then aspirational goals.

What that'll do is if we move the needle on those practicable goals and get those advanced, but
have the aspirational goal, as new technologies, and opportunities, and funding sources emerge, we will have already done what we can and be ready for those
next step opportunities. So we're strongly in favor, in part, of just being really real about that. If we don't move toward
these aspirational targets, we're gonna have more fires, we're gonna have more flooding, we're gonna have more emergencies, we're gonna have more health crises. And it's gonna become more unmanageable than it already feels like it is. So while climate change feels expensive, it's a root cause of a lot of these things that are causing our
community a lot of distress.

And it offers the promise of coming up with some real
dramatic and fabulous solutions like increased community connectivity and a lot of the transportation
and housing solutions that Tiffany mentioned
could really strengthen and create a really exciting new future for human beings on the
planet and here in Santa Cruz. So that's great. The couple things I
wanted to mention as well is while we're waiting
to get the plan adopted, figure out the funding and adopt budgets, there's emerging needs right now, one of which is the
regional project development that Tiffany has mentioned. We're partnering actively as
(timer drowns out speaker). We need funding to support
project development in the city for externally. So I'd really recommend
you to consider that and I'll drop a quick email to the council to let them know where that's
at in the next week or so as we firm up where that's headed. Thank you. – Thank you so much, Kirsten. And let's see, are there any other callers that would like to call
in for a public comment on Climate Action Plan 2030 strategy, Target Setting Study Session? Okay. Then we will return to the council for further feedback and comment.

Any council members? We have Council Member Brown. – Thank you, Mayor. I'll just say very quickly. Thank you again. And since I didn't say it
before in my comment/questions, I absolutely agree. I really appreciate the way that organized and laid out the possibilities. And I think we must, just
absolutely must incumbent on us to adopt those aspirational goals and to do everything we
possibly can to meet them. There's just, no, there's
no question in my mind. And I imagine that that's
the case for my colleagues. Most of the folks here
who've attended this meeting. So I just really appreciate all of the work that you've done, the knowledge that you have, and your ability to connect across the region with different partners, to really, really focus in and really, really intentional about engaging with community members whose voices aren't often heard.

And just keep going, carry on. And looking forward to
revisiting this in March, as we enter implementation
(audio cuts) various arenas. So let's do it. – Council Member Brown. Are there any other council members that would like to comment? All right. Well, if that is the case, then we will return that seventh for our special meeting
advisory body interviews. And this meeting will now be adjourned. Thank you so much. – I think we are just
about ready to begin. Looks like we are missing
one council member, but we will go ahead and begin. Good evening, everyone. Welcome to our seven
o'clock, January 18th, 2022 special meeting of the
Santa Cruz City Council. I have a few announcements, and then we will move
into our regular meeting. Tonight's meeting is being broadcast live on Community Television channel 25, and streaming on the city's website, cityofSantaCruz.com.

If you wish to comment
on tonight's agenda item, now is the time to call in using the instructions on your screen. Please mute your television
or streaming device once you call in, and
listen through the phone. Please note, there can
be a delay in streaming, so if you continue to
listen on your television or streaming device, you may miss your opportunity to speak. When it is time for public comment, press *9 on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to
speak during public comment, you'll hear an announcement
that it's your turn to speak, and you will need to press
*6 to unmute yourself if you are on your phone. The timer will then be set to two minutes. You may hang up once you
have made your comment. And I would like to ask the city clerk, to please call role. – [Clerk] Mayor. Council Member Kalantari-Johnson. – [Johnson] Present. – Golder. – Here. – Here. (clerk indistinct) – Here.

(clerk indistinct) – Here. (clerk indistinct) – Present. Thank you. Before we get started, I would also like to announce that this is a special meeting. Our topic this evening is
to hear from applicants who have applied to various
City Council advisory bodies. No oral communications or
discussions on other items will be heard at this meeting. I'll now open it up for public comment for anyone, other than applicant. Are there any members of the public who wish to comment on the
advisory body interviews? If you are interested in commenting, press *9 on your phone to raise your hand. When it is your time to speak, you will hear an announcement
that you can unmute yourself by pressing *6.

The timer will then be set. Let me look at our attendees and see if anybody has their hand raised. I don't see anyone with their
hand raised at (audio cuts). Okay. Well, then now onto our interviews. The way I'd like to approach
the flow of this meeting is to call on applicants by commission, and then alphabetically by last name.

Due to the number of attendees, each applicant will have
an opportunity to speak one time each, and will be called upon to speak on their first
choice advisory body. And if anybody applied for
more than one advisory body, you may use this time to
speak to those as well. When I announce it's your turn to speak, you will be invited to
turn on your cameras, to unmute yourself, and
to speak to Council. If you do not hear the announcement that you have been unmuted, please press *9 to raise your hand, and I'll allow three minutes person to speak about your experience for each of the advisory
bodies you have applied to. This time is a time for you to personally introduce yourselves, to amplify your qualifications
and relevant backgrounds.

Additionally, the meeting
is mostly informal to allow the Council to get to know you. Council members have received and reviewed all the applications. And now I will ask the clerk
for any additional updates and/or information. – Yes, sorry. We did have a (audio cuts). – Okay.
– So. Rebecca Roham. (clerk indistinct) – Great, thank you. Does that conclude the additional, any additional information? Okay, so let's jump right in. Thank you all for being here this evening.

I will begin with the Arts Commission. Please prepare yourself
to be ready to speak. I have the order of applicant that have applied alphabetically is Elizabeth Birnbaum,
Robert Blitzer, Mary Pop, Everett O Cillin, Vivian Vargas, and Brant Ripple. First up, Elizabeth Birnbaum is seeking reappointment
to the Arts Commission. Elizabeth, you will be
promoted to panelist if you are in attendance, and then you'll be able to unmute yourself and turn on your camera.

I do see you here. – [Elizabeth] Yeah. – Welcome. – [Elizabeth] Yeah, I'm not
sure how to turn on my camera, but I would love to. (Elizabeth laughing) – Do you see an icon? Are you on a device or a computer? – [Elizabeth] I'm on a computer and there's a microphone
setting in the your setting. That's okay. If you can hear me, I don't mind. It just, I'll be super quick. So I know I'm the first
one we can get moving.

– Thank you. – [Elizabeth] Yeah, of course. So hi everybody. I'm Liz Birnbaum, been on the Arts
Commission for four years, and most recently serving
as the vice chair. Been thinking back a lot
to my very first meeting, four years ago, when we sat in, in actually kind of like
an additional session and talked about equity, and inclusivity, and environmental justice, and I'm really passionate
about making sure that those topics stay on our radar, and I'm really proud of
the work that I have done over the last four years
we feel yet a lot to come. And also our last meeting
was about the card program, the arts recovery program. And just listening to all the
amazing work that's being done and has potential to be done made me feel even more
excited, just attend and say, I would love to be a part
of making all of that happen in the coming year and
years on the Art Commission, because I was like emotional and like screenshotting all these things and making notes and texting folks about how amazing it all
was going to come together. So I would just love to
continue to participate.

Thank you for listening to me. – Thank you, Elizabeth. Okay, next is Robert Blitzer. And I will look to see. Not sure if Robert
Blitzer is in attendance. But if you are, is your
number ending in 2316? Press *9 to raise your hand if it is, you are Robert Blitzer. If you're not, I will move on
the next name alphabetically, in the Art Commission. And that would be Mary Pop. I don't see Mary Pop in attendance. If your name is not showing
you have a phone number and I do call your name,
you can raise your hand by pressing *9. So I'll move to Everett O Cillin. Welcome. I saw you. I don't. (static) wonderful, thank you. – Oh, okay, I guess that's working. Can you hear me okay? – Yep, thank you. – Okay. Sorry, I realize this
room has a lot of echo. My name is Everett O Cillin, my pronouns are they/them.

And I am here tonight to introduce myself and talk a little bit about my interest in joining Arts Council. I recognize a lot of faces here, it's really brilliant to see everyone. This is my first time
applying for this position, and I currently am the acting manager of exhibitions and special projects with the Santa Cruz Museum
Department of History. I'm actually currently
in the gallery right now where we're in process of
installing an exhibition for the Rydell Fellowship
for 2020 and 2021. All very exciting. My background, in terms of
working within public arts, I received my Master's in Museum Studies with a focus in contemporary art and working with public art and also in community collaborations.

My favorite thing about what I get the opportunity
to do here at the MAH is work with a range of different
artists and communities. And so it's just really been such a joy and a pleasure to do that, and I would like to continue doing that through working with the Arts Council. (electric buzzing) (woman indistinct) – I was a middle school teacher for over 15 years here in the county. And I also was the assistant principal at two elementary schools
here in the county. And I coordinated the after school program and parent outreach programs. When I retired, I volunteered
to help out the census 2020, and I chose an art contest as one way of reaching the community.

This was the children and youth
in the Beach Flats community and the Lower Ocean communities. These were areas that
in the previous census were under-counted. To help me with this contest, I contacted Latinx
businesses owners, employees, and this is taquerías,
mercados, the produce stands, all of these people to help me distribute the art prime
materials for this contest, information about the contest, and also flyers on the
importance of the census. I was also, from 2011 to 2015, the Latino Affairs Commissioner
for the City of Santa Cruz. And last year I founded Writers
of Color Santa Cruz County, and we are working to
bring our stories forward. I am interested, I wanna
be on this Arts Commission, because I believe in the power of art to make our lives better. I feel that what I bring to the table is the ability to listen,
to learn, and to also… Also I have years of experiences. So I wanna thank you for
giving me this opportunity to present myself, and thank you for considering my application for the Arts Commission. – Thank you, Vivian for that introduction.

– Vice Mayor Watkins, I
think we lost Mayor Brunner. Oh, she's coming back. (Watkins indistinct) Nevermind. – I had check it wasn't me. – Okay, I would like to invite our last Arts Commissioner applicant Brant Ripple. Brant, you will be promoted to panelist if you are in attendance, and you will then be
able to unmute yourself. See. If you are on a telephone, you can press *9 to raise your hand.

And I do not see Brant in attendance. So that will conclude the
Arts Commission applicant. We will now hear from applicants who chose the Commission for the Prevention
of Violence Against Women as their first choice of advisory body. As I call your name, please prepare yourself
and be ready to speak. We have Deborah Christi,
Rachel Kippen, Emma Latina, and Samantha Rose Lee that have applied. And if I start in alphabetical order, Deborah Christi will be first.

And I don't see Deborah Christi, so I will move on to Rachel Kippen. And Rachel Kippen, if you are here, we'll just take a moment. I believe you will be promoted,
there we go, to panelist. Wonderful, technology is working. – Hi, thank you. Thanks so much for the
opportunity to introduce myself and share a little bit
more about my application. My name is Rachel Kippen, my
pronouns are she/her/hers. And I know you've seen my application, but just to kind of reiterate
some of the experience I have that makes this position
feel like a good fit. I've lived in this town for a decade, working primarily in sustainability,
climate, waste issues, environmental education,
and ocean conservation.

There's a lot of arising
issues in all of those fields. I have formal academic experience and understanding women's
issues and women's rights through graduate studies, social ecology, and environmental justice education. Unfortunately, like most women, I have personal lived experience. I don't think that needs
to be a requirement, but lived experience does
count in casual daily sexism, systemic misogyny, and gender violence, in my places of work and study. And I've written about these issues in my twice (audio cuts) Santa Cruz. I'm currently on the
Commission on the Environment for the County of Santa Cruz, where I've helped an ad hoc (audio cuts) of diversity,
equity, justice, environmental justice,
understanding the nuances and bias. And I didn't mention
this in my application, but I was a Grant Award winner in 2018 as an (indistinct) scholar for my work in sustainability
and intersection with feminism and my
native Hawaiian heritage. And that was under the subtopic
of environmental justice.

It's only genuine if it (audio cuts). I think I'd be a good
fit for this position. I understand that there's
a wealth of experience people who have careers, domestic violence prevention, and women's shelter and housing, job force development,
healthcare, reproductive rights. But I also understand the ramifications of (indistinct) for
the betterment of women must stand far beyond the traditional
understanding in our society. Sexism, and then violence against women is commonplace in science, in fieldwork, and research,
and in ocean careers. And that happens (audio cuts). I would hope to help
create strengthen bridges into those sectors and enhance any work that is already done on the commission in that area specifically. I've led training and initiatives related to equity, women's rights, and most recently received a grant for a former organization, an LGBTQ training program. I'm amongst multiple environmental
education organizations (indistinct) specifically, yet there are a lot of shared (indistinct) of violence against women
and gender violence.

I guess, ultimately, I just keep coming back to the fact that we're
really supporting women in STEM, and science, and education, and sustainability fields, and then ultimately leading them to places that are unsafe (indistinct). School that they attend, or
the workplaces that they're in. There's so much opportunity
to shift that culture. And I feel like (audio cuts). (clock ringing) Be great. Thank you. (Rachel laughing) – Thank you so much for
introducing yourself, Rachel. Thank you for your application. Next, I have Emma Ledvina. Emma, your hand is raised. We go. You are on a phone, you can press *6 to unmute yourself or (audio cuts) here as a panelist. Wonderful. Hello, welcome. – Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for having me. Also that last person was great. Well done, Rachel. As you can see, from my application, I have both professional
and lived experience that qualify me for this position. I have a master's degree in Social Work from Columbia University. While I was in school there, I worked in a revolutionary safe house for women in children at Manhattan, and I also worked as a
therapist and advocate for women and children in a safe house when I lived in Colorado.

I also have a decade of experience working with child welfare services in three different states,
including recently, most recently I spent six years at Santa Cruz County
Child Welfare Services. Obviously in child welfare, many of my clients were women and children who had experienced
violence in their homes. In that role, I often was able to work with local law enforcement, victim advocates, and
both Monarch Services and Monarch Health Women's Center. And I built solid working relationships around the city and the county. I now currently work as a
therapist at the Parent Center where I work with parents
who are currently involved with the child welfare system. So again, many of my clients have experienced violence in their homes, and have navigated all of the systems and programs associated with that. So I have both an intimate
and professional understanding of the needs of women and
children experiencing violence.

I've experienced engaging them in their own advocacy and healing. And I know what we do well in this city, and where the opportunities for growth. I have a deep commitment for creating safe spaces
for women and children and ensuring the supports that they need to create those spaces for themselves. That's all I'm gonna say for now, thank you so much for
considering me for this role. – Thank you very much
Emma for your application. Thank you. We have one more applicant,
Samantha Rose Lee. See if Samantha is here. Samantha, if you are here and
you are on a telephone device, you can raise your hand by pressing *9. Okay, I will move on. Let's move on then to the next category. Thank you for the Commission for the Prevention of
Violence Against Women. And now the next category will
be the Downtown Commission. We will now hear from applicants who chose the Downtown Commission as their first choice of advisory bodies. As I call your name,
please prepare yourself.

Be ready to speak. Caroline S. Kelly, Geneli
Golan, Savannah Hartwell, Barb Radar, and Rapha Sonanfelt. First up is Caroline S. Kelly. Caroline, you'll be promoted to panelist, and then you'll be able to unmute yourself and turn on your camera. I see Caroline here and great. Welcome Caroline. – Hi, thanks for having me. My name is Caroline Kelly. Thank you for having me here today. This is my first commission
position I am applying for. I have a lot to learn and
appreciate the opportunity to learn from other commissioners
and from the community. I'm a mother of (indistinct). I've had the opportunity to
travel and live in many places.

As a resident owner, visitor
to the Downtown area, I hope to have a meaningful impact as well as by the bylaws
of the Downtown Commission, I do own property Downtown. Thank you for your consideration. – Thank you so much, Caroline,
for introducing yourself. Next I have Geneli Golan. Geneli, you are here. Okay. There you go. Okay, welcome Geneli. – Hello? Hello, I miss you out there. Oh, hi. – Hi, welcome. – Thank you. Thank you guys for having me. I am honored to be here
tonight with you guys. So I would love to be on
this Downtown Commission as a member for a variety of reasons. And what is Downtown, and
my love and passion for it. But just to kinda start with
the background of history.

I have been a founding board member of Children's Museum of Discovery, as well as the chair of the Children's
Advisory Council for that. I co-founded and helped launch and enhance the Camp for Children with Cancer, going through their
journey and their families. But more notable for the
Downtown and my impact there, well I'm a single mom of
three little amazing girls, and I own two businesses Downtown, Yoso Wellness Spa, and Yoso the Annex, and I have been in business
nine and a half years, but happily located three and
a half in the Downtown area, as well as Yoso the Annex, I opened during COVID in the pandemic.

As other businesses were
unfortunately closing, I was so honored to be able
to open a second business in the heart of our community and still continue to thrive as a personal service business in a retail location in Downtown, which has been such an
honor to be in that space. I have also been a member of the Alliance of Women
Entrepreneurs Downtown. I have a variety of
different impacts I make in volunteering and
supporting our Downtown… Well, I'll go again and say like the heart of what is Santa Cruz. I am also, for the last three years, been a member of the Downtown Association, and I'm currently, for the last year, the chair of the Marketing Committee for Downtown Commission. And I have worked, spent some time doing some work and sponsoring, supporting
the Downtown Streets team, doing events with them.

I participate in a variety of different beautification projects, and sponsorships, and activities within our community, and really believe in the longevity and the vibrancy that the
Downtown currently has and has to come in our future, and would love to be a part
in helping that process along. I've also, within our Downtown area, started with what we
called Bridging the Gap, and that was to do a river for the San Lorenzo River
restoration and beautification. And we have picked up our
first time we did that, we got over 500 pounds of trash cleaned. We've received awards from the county for Be the Difference Award from that, and we've helped two of those, and we are actually coming
up with our third one coming, we've paused due to COVID. So my heart is very much
dedicated and committed into this Downtown space for my business, for my own enjoyment, for our community at large's enjoyment, children and their future enjoyment.

And so I'm here to provide what I can, support that process, and I would love to considered (clock ringing drowns out speaker). Thanks. Good timing. – Thank you so much Geneli. Next, we have, I would like
to invite Savannah Hartwell. Let me see if Savannah is here. I don't see Savannah. If you have a phone number, you can press *9 to raise your hand. Okay, I will move on. Next in alphabetical order, this is for the Downtown
Commission Applicant, Barb Radar. Barb, if you are here. Okay, I will move on. I do see Rapha Sonanfelt. This is the final applicant
for the Downtown Commission.

You'll be promoted to panelist. There you are. Welcome Rapha. We'll have three minutes. – Thank you for having me. Good evening, my name is Rapha Sonanfelt, speak now on behalf of my candidacy for an open seat on the
Downtown Commission. Serving on the
council-appointed advisory body, which I had the honor to do in 2019 when I served on the
Community Advisory Committee on Homelessness, requires resourcefulness and a dedication to open communication, as well as being able to synthesize community feedback and creativity when it comes to identifying solutions that work for multiple stakeholders with competing interests. These are all qualities and experience that I will bring to this role. Having capable leaders, experienced in developing public policies is critical to the success
and vitality of our Downtown. I'm committed to bringing
in evidence-based approach open-mindedness and responsiveness
to help guide our city through some of the more
vexing challenges we face, whether they be balancing
the transportation and parking needs of Downtown workers, shoppers, visitors, and residents, or helping our Downtown businesses, not just recover from the
pandemic economic challenges, but thrive heading into the future, or meeting the needs of all of our members of our community Downtown with access to adequate hygiene facilities and solutions to security
and safety challenges.

Proud to say that during my
time, serving on the CACH, many of the policies I helped develop have been adopted by the city and become official
city policy or programs. Serving in that role,
as well as in others, as a community organizer and
resident of Downtown Santa Cruz I've had the opportunity to
work closely and effectively with city leaders, elective
leaders, planning staff, department heads, including
those from our Libraries, Parks and Rec, police and
Public Works departments. I also have experience being a part of our working
professional Downtown community. Having recently worked for the county, managing the COVID 19
Expansion Shelter Program at the Vets Hall. Working with some of the most vulnerable members of our community, and being responsive to
neighboring businesses' needs, are two qualities that
I've had in that role. I've also been invited to attend meetings of Downtown Forward, and form relationships with many advocates and leaders for the prosperity
of our Downtown community. In summary, I'll be a
forward thinking commissioner who hit the ground running with an understanding of
the challenges we face today while having the experience,
dedication, resourcefulness, and commitment to help our community, both Downtown and at large, prosper and thrive for years to come.

Thank you very much. – Thank you so much, Rapha. That concludes our Downtown
Commission applicants. We will now move on to, it looks like the Historic
Preservation Commission. I will go in alphabetical order. We had two applicants in this category. Don Lauren and Joe Mikala. As I call your name, please prepare yourself, be ready to speak. Don, you will be first
alphabetically by last name. And I do see you Don Lauren. You will be promoted to a panelist, and you will have three minutes. Welcome. – [Don] Thank you, Mayor,
members of the council. I would like to be reappointed to the City Historic Commission, I've served on it the last four years.

Whereas a second choice to be appointed to the
City Planning Commission. I've been the chair of
the Historic Commission for the last year, and I'm a retired city planner with a master's degree in urban planning, and almost have almost 40
years experience in planning. Been a local resident since 1992, and I'm very interested
in the City of Santa Cruz and the county of Santa Cruz, having good planning and historic.

I concentrated in urban design
and historic preservation during my work City of Santa
Cruz Planning Department, from 1994 to (indistinct). I was the department's principal staff to the city Historic
Commission at that time for about 10 years. In that position, I was in
charge of production and hearings for the volume three Historic Building Survey document, 2013, and also for associated
ordinance amendments to make historic related permit
requirements (indistinct). During that time, I handled permit review for numerous historic buildings, including the Tallest
Canary on River Street, La Bahia building on Beach Street, and the reconstruction
of the St. George Hotel and Del Mar Theater on Pacific. I also process numerous design permits for construction of large
buildings on Pacific Avenue, including the mixed-use buildings at the former Bookshop Santa Cruz site, at the Pacific and Soquel corner where Forever 21 is now located, and at the North Pacific
River Street (audio cuts).

I served on the Friends of Cowell Lime
Works Historic part at UCSC, and Museum of Art and History
Landmarks Commission minister, the museum's historic
(indistinct) program. As you can tell, I'm very interested in
historic preservation. I thank you for your
attention to (indistinct). – Wonderful. Thank you so much, Don, for taking the time to introduce yourself. Next, I will call Joe Mikala, and invite him to speak. welcome, Joe, you will have three minutes. Looks like… There you go.
– Can you hear me? – Yes. – [Joe] Good evening Mayor Brunner, and fellow council members. My name's Joe Mikala, and I've served on the
Preservation Commission for the last four years, serving as chair for two years, and as commissioner for the last half.

My focus on the HPC has
been public engagement, and education and training. And with public engagement, I believe it's important
for our community, really give them a greater
context support preservation, really develop their consciousness about observing neighborhood character, develop sense of place, and looking at all the
significant elements that help build community. In terms of education and training, as you probably are aware, the learning curve, the HPC is steep. You not only have to understand
CEQA, the ordinances, you have to understand how the technical interior standards are applied locally and
throughout the country.

So I focused on a considerable
amount of training to understand legal
implications of preservation, as well as architecture, public policy and areas of that nature. So that's what I have to say. And I would think if you
do or do not appoint me to the commission again, I would just like to point out that my colleagues on the commission are very helpful, very
talented and capable people, and I appreciated
certainly working with them for the last four years. Thank you. – Thank you very much, Joe. – [Joe] Thank you. – We will now hear from applicants who chose the Parks and
Recreation Commission as their first choice of advisory bodies. As I call your name,
please prepare yourself, be ready to speak. In alphabetical order,
we have Bradley Angel, Jorge Leonardo Cruz, Jane Mio,
Dino Pola and Jacob Caleb. First up is Bradley Angel. Bradley, are you in attendance? If you are on a device
you can (audio cuts) nine, raise your hand.

Okay, I will move
forward to the next name. Alphabetically Jorge Leonardo Cruz. Are you here? I don't see Jorge. Okay. Next I have Jane Mio, and I do see Jane here. So Jane, you will be promoted to panelist, and then you'll be able to unmute yourself and turn on your camera. (Jane chuckling) Hi, welcome. – Welcome everybody. Greetings, Mayor Brunner and
all your City Council members. So I wanna thank you for
reading my application, and the opportunity to give
you my nutshell version of why I would love to be reelected to the position of Park
and Rec Commissioner. So frankly, every fiber in me realizes that the Park and Rec Department
adds a huge improvement, tremendous rich experiences to
our community's (indistinct), as has been shown during
the COVID situation.

The city and park open spaces are a wide array of diverse environments that allow for inclusive, different recreational activities. And also, the city staff build, the recreational city staff
builds community spirit with its class and event. So I view the park in open spaces as a city community treasure cared for by the entire,
entire Park and Rec staff. And it ensures that they
make the impossible possible. Truly, they do. And so as a commissioner, it was really a huge privilege
to be part of that team, and striving for win-win situations for any of the issues that would come up. And I would be so honored to
keep working on what I love, the community treasure,
our park open spaces. And I thank you for all that
you do for the (audio cuts).

Namaste. – Thank you so much, Jane. Thank you for introducing yourself to us and for your application. I will move and invite the next applicant. Dino Pola. Let me see if Dino is here? No Dino, okay. Jacob Caleb. I do see Jacob. Jacob will be the final applicant for the Parks and Recreation Commission. Welcome Jacob. – Okay, let's see. I got myself unmuted, get me on video.

See me? – Yes. – Wonderful. Hello, I'm Dr. Jacob Caleb. I'm a father and a research ecologist, and have been a member of
the Santa Cruz community since 1988. I got my BA at the UCSC
Environmental Studies Department. I also got a PhD there through
the Environmental Studies and the Biology Department. I've been studying ecology and enjoying this outdoor
natural areas in Santa Cruz for many, many years.

As a conservation
biologist and a naturalist, I have knowledge and
appreciation of the outdoor world that will be a strong asset in helping advise the Park's (indistinct). Also, as a father of twins, my family and I have used
and enjoyed the park, the features, the open space,
the pools, fall fields, biking and hiking areas and classes. These services have literally
helped me raise my kids to be compassionate, caring people. Parks and Rec does a wonderful work, and helps make Santa Cruz a wonderful place to raise for kids, and improves our
collective quality of life. I hope to work toward maintaining and improving all of these services. At this point, I have some time and would like to give
back to the community that it's helped raise my family so well. The Parks and Rec Department
is probably the department I am most familiar with, and most qualified to advise. As an active community member, I have served on numerous nonprofit and educational advisory
committees and boards.

I've worked as an outdoor
recreation leader, little lead coach, volunteer ranger, and a volunteer naturally. I've helped teach in the schools here, served on hiring committees, and interfaced with teachers and parents As a member of site. I am clear, thorough, and
independent in my (indistinct). I listen well to others, I'm able to come up with
independent opinions and fair compromise. My goals for this commission are mainly to help keep
Parks and Rec Department running smoothly,
ensuring equitable access, and encouraging more people to use the wonderful facilities
and open spaces we got. I would also like to
ensure the restoration and conservation for the
enjoyment of future generations. Thanks for listening,
thanks for hearing me. I'm available if you wish to talk to me, or call me and talk to me, ask more detailed questions, et cetera. Okay. So much looking forward to your decision. – Wonderful, thank you so much, Jacob. Nice to meet you. That concludes our Parks and Recreation
Commission applicants. We will now hear from applicants who chose the Planning Commission as their first choice of advisory bodies. As I call your name, please prepare yourself
to be ready to speak.

I think this commission
had the most applicants. Alphabetically, we have
Elizabeth Conlan, Candace Eliot, Pete Kennedy, Kenneth
Matlin, John Maclevie, Philip Marcus, Mark
Mesiti-Miller, Daniel Nelson, Ron Comoran, Charles Prograce, William Schultz, Sarah
Wickle, and Sean Williams. First up will be
alphabetically by last name, Elizabeth Conlan. Elizabeth, I see you here. You will be promoted to panelist, and then you will be able to speak. Welcome. You'll have three minutes. – Hello. Evening, Mayor, and members of council. I'm Elizabeth Conlan, and hoping for the opportunity to serve Santa Cruz by joining
the Planning Commission.

Many of you know me through my involvement in local power housing
group, Santa Cruz E&V. I understand that serving
on Planning Commission differs significantly from
being a community activist. If appointed, I will be objective, and seek to work with
fellow commissioners, provide Council with the
best possible recommendations on issues related to city land use policy. I believe that my activism reflects how much I care
about our community, particularly housing affordability. And it has also given me familiarity with many local regulations and state laws that will be relevant items
for Planning Commission. Apart from my interest in
housing and land use policy, I work as an agricultural researcher, and have a Master's in
Horticultural Sciences. As a scientist, I've experienced plunging into unfamiliar topics, and I'm ready to read up on new topics and show up to commission meetings prepared with relevant follow up questions for staff, applicants, and others. I hope to have the opportunity to serve, and also to advance land
use and building policies that align with your priorities, including affordable housing, equity, and climate resiliency.

Thank you for your consideration. – Wonderful. Thank you so much, Elizabeth. Next, I have applicant Candace Eliot. I'd like to invite. See Candace. Wonderful. Welcome, Candace. – [Candace] I just wanna
thank you all for having me, and start out by saying what a wonderful group of candidates that you have to choose from. My family has participated
in planning and construction in Central California for
close to a hundred years. My grandfather was the
mayor of his hometown, and we continue to provide 30
units of affordable housing to farm workers. My father is a construction
project manager and owners rep, and has been building in the coastal zone for more than 20 years.

So I've grown up with
planning and construction as a part of our dinner and
table conversations forever. I am a mother and I rent a
home in Downtown Santa Cruz and have been living in the
county for about 10 years. My involvement in local
issues began in 2013 with my position as the HR manager for the Glass Jar Restaurant Group. I started attending City Council, RTC and supervisor meetings on issues which affected my staff, including housing and transportation, specifically advocating for affordable and market-rate housing
development at Transit Hubs, and enhancing transportation options between north and south county. I've been interested in serving
on the Planning Commission for many years, but I wanted to spend some time working with local organizations, and understanding issues before applying. So, I worked on Measure H, the affordable housing bond measure, I've been on the boards of directors for Pajaro Valley Loaves and Fishes, the Homeless Garden project, the Santa Cruz Downtown Association, the Santa Cruz County Business Council, and the Santa Cruz County
Workforce Development Board. I was also the co-chair of the Community Advisory
Committee on Homelessness, And I worked for the city in the Economic Development Department on a variety of issues affecting Downtown, including the Property-Based
Improvement District Project.

I'm currently a small
business owner and consultant, and I work with hundreds of local, small businesses and
nonprofit organizations on human resources, systems development. That's what my Master's degree is in, it's in Human Resources. I understand that the Planning Commission will be reviewing and
making recommendations on issues that will impact the development of our
community for decades to come, and I believe in increasing
density in already dense areas, preserving open space and farm lands, and improving infrastructure that supports everyone who lives here.

And I hope that I represent the direction that you would like to lead, or the direction that
you would like to head. And thank you for
considering my application. – Thank you very much, Candace. Thank you for your application. I will now call on to
Pete Kennedy to speak. Pete, I see you with your hand raised. You'll be promoted to panelist, and then you will be able to speak. Welcome. You have three minutes. Press *6 to unmute yourself, I hope. – [Pete] All right, is that better? – Yes, I can hear you. – [Pete] Sorry about that. Yeah, thanks for taking
the time to interview me. I've served on Planning
Commission for eight years, and was turned out for two.

I'm really interested in getting back to the wonderful work that we did. We had a really good commission, built a lot of housing. Hard to say what I'm most proud of, I think it was our work
on the EDUs that we did. Where we revised those three
times over eight years, and each time the state
came back and said, "Do more, do more, do more, do more." So that's what I'm really
looking forward to doing if I were reappointed
as doing that good work, building housing for our town. The last thing I wanna point out is I do work in green
building clean energy, and I just really wanna continue to focus on taking the amazing things we're doing on the scale of buildings, doing them in the
neighborhoods bigger and bigger as a way to solve this climate crisis. We are not getting out of
this burning natural gas and single family homes,
I'll tell you that, as I sit here in my single
family home (indistinct).

So I just see planning
and the climate planning coming together here, both
city planning and (indistinct). And so thanks again for your time. Feel free to reach out if
you have any questions, and I promise I'll get
better at work soon. – Thank you so much, Pete. Now I invite Kenneth Matlin. Kenneth, you will be promoted
to panelist if you are here. I'm trying to see if I can find you. If you are on a device, you can press *9 to raise your hand. Kenneth, I do not see you. I will move on. It looks like I will now
call on John Maclevie for Planning Commission. John, are you in attendance? (indistinct) anybody.

I don't see John. Next up, we have Philip
Marcus, who I do see. Philip, you will now be
promoted to panelist. So you will be able to
introduce yourself and speak. You will have three minutes to speak. – Good evening, Mayor. Thanks for having me
and for considering me. Just wanna say that
I'm interested in this, I think really because I've grown up here, and I'm part of the generation
to (indistinct) here, continue to live here. I have the opportunity to employ lots of people from the area, as well as throughout county to enable them (indistinct)
part of their lives as they continue to (indistinct). And I'd like to be able to see them stay, and continue to be a
part of this community. I am a homeowner here, interested in preserving
character of the city, as well as just (audio cuts). Enjoy listening, objective,
learning, liberating, coming to conclusions, and really just working for common good. If I have the opportunity
to be a part of this, I'm excited to see what we can do, what we can accomplish to enable all Santa Cruzans to continue to be Santa Cruzans.

Really just best city opportunity
for (indistinct) here. Ends up living here, hopefully stay here. That's about all I have, and just thank you for
considering my application. – Wonderful, thank you so much Philip. Thank you for your time. I now invite Mark Mesiti-Miller. Mark. You are here, wonderful. You'll be promoted to panelist. Be able to speak to your application for Planning Commission. Welcome Mark. – Now you can see me? – Yes.
– Greetings, Mayor Brunner, and fellow council members. First, I just want to say
thank you for your service. I am well aware of the incredible sacrifices
you make to lead our city. I'm deeply grateful. I'm also grateful for
the opportunity I've had to serve as a Planning
Commissioner in the past, serving two terms, twice
being elected as chair. I'm also grateful for the opportunity to serve as a member of the
Water Supply Advisory Committee. As a 39-year resident of
the City of Santa Cruz, I know one thing, Santa Cruz is going to change. But not changing is not an option, that this change will involve growth. Growth can be a powerful
tool if properly managed for shaping Santa Cruz into a better, more
sustainable, more equitable, more prosperous community that we all want Santa Cruz to become.

I am a big fan of workable,
livable communities, active transportation, housing, especially affordable housing,
transit oriented development, and quality design in
the built environment. I promise to give you, the City Council, the best recommendations and advice based on thorough review,
rigorous analysis, and deep understanding of the issues brought before the Planning Commission. Thank you for considering my application. I would welcome the opportunity
to serve the city again.

Goodnight. – Thank you, Mark. Have a wonderful evening. – Thank you. – I will now call on Daniel Nelson. Daniel's here. I see, yes. Daniel, welcome. You will now be promoted to a panelist, I'm getting the hang of this. Hello, Daniel. You will have three minutes to
speak and introduce yourself. – [Daniel] I'm meeting, hi. – [Mayor] Hello. – [Daniel] Hi. Good evening, Mayor Brunner and Council. Thank you for considering my application. I'm currently serving on
the Downtown Commission, and have enjoyed the work. The last year reflected in
(indistinct) for the first time, responded to changing landscapes
of the COVID pandemic, piloted a popular park program
for a Downtown restaurant.

I also enjoy learning about new projects coming on the Downtown area. It's really an exciting time as we're looking to expand
Downtown to South Laurel, options for new and
improved Warriors stadium, building a new library, building a (indistinct). I'm applying for the Planning Commission because I wanna serve the community during this dynamic time of growth, work closely with council
staff and the community to create a Santa Cruz
that we are all proud of. That works for all of us. I'm excited to see what
emerges from these projects, how the city evolves over the next decade.

And I look forward to working all you to create a Santa Cruz that we all want. Thank you, good evening. – Thank you very much, Daniel. Next, we have Ron Comoran. Ron is the next applicant
in alphabetical order. (indistinct) If you are on a device, you can press *9 to raise your hand. I don't see Ron present. Next, I will invite
Charles Prograce to speak. I see Charles here. Welcome Charles. Take a minute, and then you will be
able to unmute yourself, and we'll have three minutes. Hello? – [Charles] Are you ready? – Yes, we're ready.
– Here we go. Hi, I'm Charlie Prograce. Thank you, Mayor and members of council. I appreciate your efforts that you guys are doing
tonight and always. I'm honored to have your consideration to serve on the Planning Commission. I have a Bachelor's of Science degree in Architectural Engineering, and I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of California,
I work with Texas.

I'm the principal engineer
at R3 Consulting Engineers, a local engineering company, specializes in structural
engineering (indistinct). My office is located Downtown at the corner of Pacific
Avenue in Logan Street. We provide service to a multitude of local
businesses and homeowners on commercial and residential projects. This experience has also taught me to be an effective listener, communicator, a critical thinker, and collaborator with both clients and staff. In my personal life, I'm
the father of two children, both of which were born and raised here. They're presently in
college or will be in fall. And I've spent a lot of time volunteering over their childhood. During that time, I served
on a number of boards, and coach baseball at San
Lorenzo Valley High School.

I learned a lot about what
it means to be a mentor, and also understanding what it means to be part of this community. And it's important to me, to be part of the fabric of our community, and also contribute to that. That's what brings me to wanting
to be part of (audio cuts). So in summary, my experience with, the experience of design
and planning of buildings, understanding of building codes, understanding of the process of what it takes to construct buildings, a passion for architecture that was with me since
I was in high school, coupled with my volunteer efforts, I believe, make me uniquely
qualified for the position.

It would be my privilege to serve on the Planning Commission, and rest assured that I'll leverage every bit of my intellect
and my experience on your behalf. Truly would be a privilege. Thank you. – Thank you very much Charlie. (Charles indistinct) – I will now call on William Schultz. Let's see if William is here. And William, if you are
on a telephone device, you can press *9 to raise your hand. I don't see William, but I do see the next
applicant, Sarah Wickle. I will now invite Sarah to speak for the Planning
Commission position. Welcome. – Thank you, Mayor
Brunner, council members, can you hear me? Perfect. Thank you so much for
having me this evening.

My name's Sarah Wickle, I'm a 25-year-old resident of Santa Cruz. I currently serve as an associate planner with the city of Watsonville, and I've had the privilege of living here for about the last five years. I originally came to Santa Cruz to major in community
studies at UC Santa Cruz. My background, prior to transferring, I was a board member for a
affordable housing nonprofit that served at Risk Youth Sonoma County. And that really exposed me to the affordable housing
issues flagging our region, and encouraged me to kind
of look for a degree program that would allow me to explore economic health justice related issues that community studies does. And through that program, I actually worked with No
Place Like Home project for two years, and I did background research that was funded to work on a
community GIS mapping project for community resources
throughout the county.

I had the fortune of
attending a couple of seminars at UC Santa Cruz, one of one of was which with… Excuse me, sorry. Professor, who used to be at UC Berkeley, she's now at the University of Toronto, her name's Karen Chappell. And she kind of blew my mind
with thinking innovatively about the affordable housing crisis. And I was like, "Oh my gosh planning. That's like, what I wanna
do, that's my passion!" So once I graduated from UC Santa Cruz, I moved to the city of Tracy,
which is a very weird move. My parents, as most young
college students do, I moved back in with my parents, and they relocated to the
San Joaquin county area because they got priced
out of the Bay Area due to high cost of housing. And so I had the privilege of interning with their planning department. They're dealing with
thousand unit subdivisions, which is vastly different than the planning in Santa Cruz county, but it played the groundwork for me to come back to the county where I, I reside in the City of Santa Cruz, and I get to work with
the city of Watsonville.

And I think what makes me uniquely qualified for this position is I am actually the person who presents to Planning Commissions and city councils on
zoning code and state law. And I understand all that information in excruciating detail, sometimes it makes me
wanna pull my hair out, but ultimately, it would
be an honor and a privilege to serve the City Council
in a advisory capacity. I do understand the difference
that I am not staff for you, and I am serving in a political position, and I am very excited
to take that next step and really try to bring a
municipal planning perspective to the Planning Commission, and look at projects from
an equity perspective as I also did some organizing
work as a college student with the Students United with Renters, and worked a little bit
on the Measure M Campaign.

So I, again, am excited to be considered for this appointment, and thank you again for your time, I really appreciate it. – Thank you very much, Sarah. Very nice. The last applicant will be Sean Williams. We would like to invite
Sean Williams to speak. I see Sean. Sean is present. Welcome Sean. You will have three minutes to speak. – Hey. – Hello. – Hello, here I am. You see me, okay. Wow, what a great group of applicants. This is amazing to hear
all these applicants speak. Thank you for taking the
time to hear my story also. My name is Sean Williams, I've been part of the Santa Cruz community for over 50 years, and the majority of those years working and living in
the City of Santa Cruz. I have experienced incredible changes in the City of Santa Cruz during my time, including rebuilding of Santa
Cruz after the 89 quake.

Throughout the years, I've seen firsthand, the important role Planning
Commission has played in advising the City Council on developing and implementing strategic and responsible plan to maintain the integrity community and while providing support to the City of Santa
Cruz's diverse citizens. I can bring valuable knowledge
to the Planning Commission as a construction project manager. (Sean coughing) Excuse me. I was a project manager… As a project manager, I was
able to revitalize Downtown, including the renovation at Del Mar, and help implement sensible
mixed-use development. I understand urban development and zoning, and the impact they have on community. As a community member, I would bring valuable experience
to the Planning Commission and help City of Santa
Cruz continue to develop, implement strategic and
responsible general plan, urban development
standards, and area plan. Thank you for your time. – Thank you for your time, Sean. That concludes our applicants
for the Planning Commission. Thank you all for speaking
and introducing yourselves. We will now hear from applicants who chose the Sister Cities Committee as their first choice of advisory bodies. I will again go
alphabetically by last name. As I call your name, please prepare yourself
to be ready to speak.

We have two applicants in this category. Andre Kickoff, and Thomas Kelling. Andre, I see you, wonderful. Welcome. Like you will be promoted, there we go. And- – [Andre] Ah yes, can you hear me? – Yes. – Unfortunately I seem to
be having the same thing with the start video button missing, maybe something to do with
new machine or something, I don't know. So I guess I'll just be
talking like (indistinct). – Okay. Now you're muted again. – [Andre] Oh yeah, I'm on push-to-talk. So yes, hello, my name is Andre. I am for reappointment Sister Cities. I mainly deal with Lustelle, though I kind of help out with other committees where necessary. Again, not gonna waste
too much of your time. Again, obviously, as you are aware with the COVID situation, and especially with the
political situation, certainly things have
been very interesting. I was involved with Sister
Cities since high school. I went on tours, I actually had the pleasure
of visiting on an exchange with the Jazz Ambassadors.

I do I play music a little bit, though that's not my priority. But so yes, I would like the opportunity to continue our efforts to keep this relationship
alive and hopefully grow it. Thank you for your time and consideration. – Wonderful, thank you, Andre. Next, we have Thomas Kelling. I'd like to invite Thomas Kelling who is also seeking reappointment. See if Thomas is here. Thomas, and if you are on your device, you can press *9 to raise your hand. I don't see Thomas. Okay. That concludes our applicants
for Sister Cities Committee. I will continue on to
the Water Commission. Let's see, as I call your name, please prepare yourself
to be ready to speak.

Alphabetically by last name,
we have four applicants, Ross Albert, Diana Alfaro, James Marcus, and Garrett Roffe. I will invite first Ross Albert. Ross, see if you're here. I don't see Ross. I will move on to the
second name, Diana Alfaro. Diana, are you with us? I don't see you either. Okay, James Marcus. I see Jim Marcus. Jim. Welcome. There you go. Hello. – Hi. Good evening, Mayor and Council. James Marcus here, or Jim. I come with decades of water interest, plus WASK Committee participation, and four years previously
on the Water Commission. So I understand the work. You have my technical background info. I'll add that I'm a
resident, I was born here, and I'm also on a University
Advisory Board for Cal Poly.

Let me start by saying that
Director Rosemary Menard and the Water Department
staff I've worked with are outstanding. Santa Cruz is one of only
a few California cities with a water (audio cuts). That's because we have more
complex water challenges than most other cities. Our per capita water usage is now among the lowest in the state, yet because our supply is
limited and very peaky, we regularly experience drought. Climate change will likely make it worse, not to mention wildfire risk. So, additional water will
come from technical solution. Like the ASR system, where pilot testing
for additional stories. Our Water Commission was created to provide independent
citizen input and oversight, particularly of long-range planning.

It should not be dominated
by water industry people. After all, you wouldn't
want PG&E friends and family overseeing their activities
on the California PUC. You do want an independent. I understand technology,
including water tech. I've engineered new technology, both mechanical and digital. And I'm good at explaining the benefit to the non-tech people. I have provided independent
fact-based input and oversight. Council sees this, water
financial report portal. It's a good example of
improving understanding. A small work group selected
more meaningful data, here are Ryan, Linda Wilshusen and myself, but to improve transparency for commissioners, council, and public. I encouraged replacing a
dense 12 column spreadsheet with visual graphs to
provide clear perspective and key trends across four years. Why? Because our water's so variable. It's an example of improved transparency that's been well received. In Santa Cruz, we need a resilient
and reliable water supply for our children, for our grandchildren. And that's my focus. So I ask that you please appoint me. Thank you very much.

– Thank you very much, Jim. Next, I will invite our final
Water Commission applicant, Garrett Roffe. Garrett, you will be promoted to panelist. I see you here, great. And then as soon as you are here, you will be able to
unmute yourself and speak. You have three minutes. Hello? – Good evening. Thank you Mayor Brunner
and council members. My name is Garrett Roe. I'm a licensed professional engineer. I grew up in Ben Lomond, and graduated from San
Lorenzo Valley High School and Cabrillo College. After graduating from Cabrillo, I transferred to Cal
Poly San Louis Obispo, and obtained a Bachelor's
of Science degree in Civil Engineering in 2008. I was hired by Mesiti-Miller Engineering in September of 2008, and have worked on hundreds of projects for the past 13 years. Some for the city, some for the county, some for private owners. Some of the projects I've worked on include Jack O'Neill seawall
at the end of 38th Av, postal rail trail, we are providing structural design for this different segment, Segment 7/Phase one has won the 2021 Caltrans Excellence
and Transportation Award for Inter-Modal Transportation, which is kind of cool. I've worked on the 2020
Pipelines Replacement Project for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District.

I was the construction manager for a 1.3 million dollar project. We filed the notice of completion with the county in September, 2021. Current project I'm working on include the Lompico
Tanks Replacement Project where I was construction manager. It's a 2.4 million dollar contract. We're still getting close out submittals from the contractor, so hopefully that'll be recorded
at the county very soon. I'm working with Caltrans on California Highway 9
Ridge Replacement Project, I'm working for the city on
the West Cliff Drive at Chico Storm Damage Repair Project. We're actually gonna have our big construction meeting tomorrow with the general contractor. And I'm starting to get some submittals on the Quail Hollow
Pipeline Replacement Project where I will be construction manager for that project as well. The field of civil engineering has provided the opportunity
to support my family and help the community by
improving public infrastructure. When I heard about the
tsunami on Saturday, I immediately contacted my supervisor to see how we could
help the Port District.

Even though the 49ers
were playing on Sunday, I went to the harbor
with two of my coworkers, performed a damage assessment for the Port District of the docks, to try and get the
docks open to the public as soon as possible. I look forward to participating
on the Water Commission, and I promise to review stock proposals with a critical mind, and ask questions for the
benefit of the community, and provide a technical point of view to the Water Commission,
as I'm a licensed engineer. Thank you. – Thank you so much Garrett. Thanks for introducing yourself to us. – Thank you. – And thank you, that concludes our
applicants for this evening. I would like to give a very big thank you to all the applicants who
have expressed their interest in serving on a city advisory body board. I understand not everyone was
able to be here this evening. Thank you to those that
did share with us tonight.

Council members may reach out to you if there are any additional questions before our meeting next Tuesday. I see Bonnie Bush city
clerk with her hand up. Do you have a question?
– Yeah, thank you. No, I don't have a question, but I just wanted to, I got the information
that I didn't have earlier for Rebecca Roham, her application. She applied for the Arts Commission, for Historic Preservation,
Art and Planning. So those are the four commissions you would remove her application.

– Great. Thank you for that update. Let's see. To the applicants, if there are any follow up
questions from council members, we will be reaching out to you this week. And if not, otherwise, our clerk office will be in touch with
all of our applicants following appointments
on Tuesday, January 25th. Thank you again, and
have a wonderful evening. This meeting is now adjourned..

As found on YouTube

PEOPLE – SERVICES – IMPACT