►
Description
Additional information at
https://lims.minneapolismn.gov
B
Awesome
thanks
kelly,
okay,
I
will
kick
it
off
hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
tonight's
community
environmental
advisory
committee
meeting.
As
you
know,
these
meetings
are
public
and
are
subject
to
the
state's
open
meeting
law
under
the
state's
open
meeting
law.
All
votes
during
an
online
meeting
must
be
taken
by
roll
call.
B
This
rule
this
will
require
each
member
to
activate
their
microphone
to
give
their
vote
and
then
turn
their
mic
back
off
before
we
officially
begin
tonight's
meeting,
I'd
like
to
first
announce
that
the
city
will
be
recording
this
evening's
meeting
and
the
video
will
be
posted
to
the
city's
youtube
channel
as
a
means
of
increasing
public
access
and
transparency,
and
we
have
started
the
recording
meeting
recording
good
evening
everyone.
My
name
is
anna
johnson
and
I
am
the
vice
chair
of
seac,
thanks
all
for
joining
tonight,
for
this
community
environmental
advisory
committee.
B
I'd
like
to
start
by
noting
that
this
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota's
statute,
section
13d
.021
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic.
Please
always
keep
yourself
muted.
When
you
are
not
speaking
and
to
keep
the
meeting
on
schedule,
please
wait
your
turn
to
speak
and
hold
questions
until
the
end
of
each
speaker's
presentation.
B
And
finally,
if
at
any
time
during
this
meeting,
you
require
technical
assistance,
please
contact
staff
for
help
luke
at
luke.holla
luke.hollandcamp
at
minneapolismn.gov.
B
If
that's
all
right,
awesome
thanks
luke,
and
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
kelly
and
or
luke
to
call
a
role
so
that
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum
council
members
when
your
name
is
called
please
say
present,
but
also
introduce
yourself
briefly
with
your
organization
or
affiliation
as
applicable
for
any
community
members
on
the
call
will
provide
an
opportunity
for
you
to
introduce
yourself
after
the
roll
call
is
complete.
C
Here,
ward,
one.
A
A
E
A
A
A
A
H
Here
I
am
an
architect
at
miller,
dunwoody,
architects,.
A
A
A
A
A
A
J
Here
I'm
president
of
ward
7
and
another
professional
expert
member.
A
K
A
And
I'll
go
back
marin
marin
joined
divine.
A
D
A
B
Great,
thank
you
kelly
thanks,
everyone
for
being
here,
I'm
just
pulling
up
the
script,
I'd
like
to
give
an
opportunity
for
community
members
or
others
who
have
joined
us
today
to
unmute
themselves
and
briefly,
introduce
yourself
with
your
name
and
organization
or
affiliation
as
applicable.
L
M
B
Awesome
thanks
lee
welcome
any
of
anyone.
I
missed.
B
B
B
Thanks
barbara,
before
we
get
a
second,
are
there
any
changes?
Anyone
wants
to
add
to
either
the
minute
or
agenda.
E
B
Awesome
thanks
tess
and
thanks
julia.
Let's
see
any
discussion
on
the
motion
I'll
ask
kelly
to
take
the
role
on
the
motion
and
when
you
hear
your
name,
please
say
yay
or
nay
to
indicate
your
stance.
G
F
B
Great
thanks
kelly.
Our
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
a
reading
of
our
land
acknowledgement
as
we
meet
here
today.
We
are
reminded
that
minneapolis
is
situated
on
the
homelands
of
the
dakota
people,
an
area
that
is
steeped
in
rich
indigenous
history.
It
is
home
to
indigenous
people
from
more
than
30
different
nations.
B
As
a
city,
we
have
a
responsibility
to
care
for
the
land
on
which
we
live
and
work
in
all
its
natural
surroundings.
This
stewardship
is
an
integral
part
of
our
involvement
in
this
commission
and
we
honor
it
as
we
begin.
As
we
begin
our
meeting,
we
now
open
this
space
to
discuss
ways
in
which
we
can
support
indigenous
people
in
our
community.
E
What
is
a
so-called
native
american
heritage
month?
There's
a
couple
things
that
I
wanted
to
bring
up.
Anyone
with
an
excuse
me
with
an
email
address
probably
knows
that
tomorrow
is
give
to
the
max
day
and
I'll
just
highlight
one
great
organization
we
have
in
minneapolis
as
mcgeezy,
which
supports
indigenous
youth
with
training
and
other
programming.
E
They
have
also
a
capital
campaign
going
on
right
now
to
replace
their
building
that
was
destroyed
last
june
june
of
last
year
and
so
I'll
drop
in
a
link
for
that
you
can
support
them
on
give
to
the
max
website
too.
Next
thursday
is
the
50th
annual
national
day
of
mourning
in
plymouth
massachusetts,
and
this
year
it
will
be
live
streamed,
and
so
you
can
join
that
and
I
can
share
a
link
for
that
and
then
I
was
gonna
say
this
one,
but
I
was
thinking
when
my
family
gets
together.
E
It's
not
always
easy
to
watch,
but
it's
a
very,
very
well
made
film,
so
I
would
really
recommend
watching
that
if
you
have
access
to
netflix
and
recommending
it
to
others,
especially
with
the
increased
awareness
that
many
of
us
have
had
in
the
last
few
months
of
the
history
of
the
boarding
schools
on
both
sides
of
the
border,
it's
a
really
timely
and
well
done
film.
That's
called
indian
horse.
D
Thanks
for
sharing,
I
also
have
a
couple
things
to
share.
Let's
turn,
my
video
on
the
american
indian
center
in
dakota
are
having
a
chili
a
fall,
chili
feast
next
wednesday,
outside
the
american
indian
center
on
franklin
and
it's
from
11
30
to
2.
their
free
food.
They
have
music
presentations
by
hope,
flanagan
and
dakota
is
going
to
introduce.
D
Dakota
is
going
to
introduce
some
jobs
and
trainings
that
they
have
available
and
there's
also
going
to
be
drawings
for
some
free
swag
and
then
I'm
a
founder
of
a
bipod
queer
trans
by
group,
and
we
do
things
from
direct
action,
environmental
stewardship,
medicine
making
and
we're
going
to
be
passing
out
food
and
socks
and
herbal
care
kits
indigenous
folks
on
next
thursday.
So
I
can
drop
a
link
on
how
to
support
that
and
also
drop
the
link
for
the
fall
fest
for
the
american
indian
center
in
dakota.
D
B
All
right
sounds
good.
Well,
thanks.
Everyone
moving
to
the
next
item
on
our
agenda.
Our
first
presentation
today
will
be
from
stephen.
I
don't
know
how
to
say
your
last
name,
so
I'm
going
to
let
you
say
it
from
the
city's
intergovernmental
relations
department,
good.
C
Yeah,
thank
you
for
having
me
I'm
steve,
huser,
I'm
with
the
city
of
minneapolis's
intergovernmental
relations
team.
I
just
started
in
january,
but
I've
been
working
with
the
city
through
my
previous
job
at
metro
cities
for
about
six
years,
so
I
know
the
igr
team
very
well
and
I've
gotten
to
know
the
folks
at
sustainability
pretty
well
over
the
last
10
months
as
well.
C
So
I've
been
asked
to
give
a
quick
overview
of
some
of
the
highlights
at
very
high
level
of
the
recent
federal
legislation
that
was
passed,
the
infrastructure
and
jobs
bill.
So
I
will
I'll
do
my
best
to
to
give
you
what
information
I've
got
to
be
honest.
C
We
are
still
trying
to
sort
out
exactly
what
the
city
may
be
getting,
what
the
state
might
be
getting
and,
as
I
have
that
information
I'm
going
to,
I
will
share
with
this
group
and
I'll
also
work
with
the
sustainability
staff
to
try
and
get
this
this
committee
as
much
information
as
we
get
it
as
it's
relevant
to
the
work
that
you
all
do
so
I'll
just
kind
of
dive
in.
I
don't
have
a
visual
and
I
apologize
for
that
right
now,
but
I
will
go
over
just
very
high.
C
Some
high
level
numbers
I'm
going
to
read
off
some
notes.
So
if
I
start
to
look
like
I'm
gloss
glazing
over
it's
just
because
I'm
reading
off
my
screen,
so
please
feel
free
to
interrupt
me.
If
you
have
a
question
that
won't
be
any
problem
at
all,
but
just
be
just
talk
to
me
because
I
won't
be
able
to
see
you
so
thank
you.
C
So
the
the
recent
legislation
you
know
was
passed.
It's
a
1.2
trillion
dollar
infrastructure
bill.
Most
of
the
funding
is
over
either
eight
or
five
years.
A
lot
of
it
is
over
five
years
the
bulk
of
the
the
funding
will
be
for
transit,
roads,
bridges
and
other
in
the
mid
state
case
of
minnesota
statewide
infrastructure
investments.
C
Some
of
the
highlights
for
the
state
specific
we're
estimated
to
receive
4.5
billion
dollars
for
highway
needs,
818
million
for
public
transportation,
618
million
over
five
years
to
improve
water
infrastructure,
302
million
for
bridge
replacement
and
repairs,
and
then
100
million
is
for
broadband
funding.
C
Some
of
the
highlights.
So
there
are,
my
numbers
are
broken
down
into
some
some
kind
of
broad
pots
of
money
I'll
skip
over
this
all
of
the
different
transportation
pots.
But
some
of
the
highlights
from
the
transportation
are
the
highways
will
receive
273.2
billion
a
state
of
good
repair
grants
program.
So
this
is
to
work
on
older,
rail
and
bus
systems.
These
numbers
now
are,
I'm
sorry,
are
overall
nationwide
for
the
whole
bill,
not
minnesota
specific.
C
So
the
state
of
good
repair
grants
program
will
receive
18.4
billion
dollars.
Bus
and
facility
formula
grants
will
receive
3.16
billion
dollars,
low
or
zero
emission
bus
grants
will
receive
2.34
billion
dollars
and
improvements
for
transit
services
for
seniors
and
individuals
with
disabilities
on
both
in
the
urbanized
and
rural
areas
will
receive
1.94
billion
dollars.
C
Climate
change
and
alternative
vehicles-
energy-
there
was
there's
quite
a
bit
of
funding
included
in
this
bill.
Some
of
the
highlights
for
this
are
the
protect
program,
so
promoting
resilient
operations
for
transformative,
efficient
and
cost-saving
transportation
program
is
8.7
billion
dollars.
C
Electric
vehicle
charging
stations
and
alternative
fuel
infrastructure
grants
will
receive
2.5
billion,
and
I
have
received
some
information
that
these
there's
the
potential
for
local
grants.
Through
that
program,
the
healthy
streets
program
was
allocated,
500
million
dollars,
metropolitan
congestion
reduction
program,
250
million
dollars
and
siphia.
I
believe
I
sang
that
acronym
right,
carbon
dioxide
transportation,
infrastructure,
finance
and
innovation
program
and
other
some
carbon
capture
programs
have
received
2.1
billion
dollars,
so
these
are.
C
Another
highlight
from
this
program
is
that
epa
rebates
to
replace
school
buses
with
zero
emission
buses
and
that
will
receive
five
billion
dollars.
Some
of
that,
and
so
there
is
some
energy
and
cyber
security
funding
included.
One
that
I
found
interesting
was
cyber
threats,
prevention
and
response
grants,
and
that's
for
250
million
dollars.
C
C
I
also
wanted
to
just
let
you
know:
we've
heard
from
our
federal
contract
lobbyists
that
some
of
these
new
programs,
especially
the
the
federal
agencies
that
are
working
on
them
and
have
been
tasked
with
the
distribution
of
these
funds,
are
literally
writing
the
rules
and
the
guidance
now
or
or
have
not
begun
that
work,
and
so
I
just
think
it's
good
to
keep
in
mind
that
well
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
money
that
has
been
put
into
this
legislation.
C
There's
still
a
lot
of
detail,
work
that
will
have
to
be
done
at
the
federal
agencies
to
figure
out
things
like
how
the
grant
programs
will
work,
what
the
qualifications
will
be,
who
will
qualify?
So
those
sorts
of
details
will
for
in
some
of
these
programs
will
definitely
still
need
to
be
worked
out
over
the
next
six
months
to
even
over
a
year.
C
I
think
I'll
just
pause
there.
I
think
I
just
threw
a
lot
of
numbers
at
you,
so
I'll
wait
and
try
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have.
B
C
Yeah
thanks
for
that
question,
we
are
still
kind
of
working
through
some
of
those
details.
It's
going
to
be
yes,
and
so
we
are
looking
for
opportunities
where
there
is
up
like
direct
grants
to
cities
and
local
governments,
so
that
the
city
can
position
itself
to
be
competitive
for
that
funding.
C
But,
like
you
said,
I
think
there
will
be
a
lot
of
money
that
does
come
directly
to
the
state
in
some
cases,
depending
on
how
the
legislation
or
federal
guidance
is
crafted,
the
agencies
may
have
the
ability
to
distribute
that
funding.
I
have
heard,
though,
from
especially
the
senate
leadership
that
they
are
definitely
interested
in
having
a
say
in
how
these
funds
are
spent,
wherever
the
legislature
can
have
a
say
in
it.
C
So
I
expect
that
there
will
be
next,
this
next
coming
session
and
probably
in
subsequent
sessions
after
that,
quite
a
bit
of
discussion
about
making
sure
that
the
legislature
has
their
fingerprints
on
state
funding
as
it
goes
out,
there
will
be
another.
I
expect
this.
I
don't
know
this,
but
I
anticipate
that
in
those
cases
where
the
state
is
distributing
those
funds,
some
of
that
will
potentially
be
directly
to
local
governments
and
and
could
be
like
competitive
grants.
C
B
Awesome,
I
do
have
one
one
more
question
before
you
log
off
just
in
terms
of
like
this
is
just
a
huge
like
gigantic
investment
and
all
these
things
in
terms
of
yeah
just
scale.
So
I'm
curious
if
and
you
know,
creating
a
ton
of
jobs
locally
and
if
you
know
money
is
coming
from
either
directly
from
the
federal
government
or
through
the
state
to
the
city.
B
C
Sure
so
the
the
short
answer
is,
I
don't
know
those
specifics.
Yet
that
does
not
mean
that
the
federal
guidance
will
not
include
those
types
of
guidelines
same
with
the
state.
I
will
say
if
it
if
it
is
left
to
the
current
legislature.
I
would
be
surprised
if
those
were
those
types
of
guidelines
were
included,
but
that
is
just
that
isn't
to
say
that
it
won't
happen,
and
you
know
the
state
agencies
can
also
have
some
of
those
parameters
as
well.
I
don't
know
at
this
time,
though,.
C
I'm
going
to
plead
a
little
bit
of
the
new
guy.
I
don't
know
the
specifics
of
that,
but
I
can
definitely
get
back
to
the
to
this
group
with
that
and
maybe
kelly
kelly
do
you
happen
to
know.
A
I
don't
I
don't
know
the
specifics.
I
believe
that
over
purchases
over
175
000
do
have
to
demonstrate
whether
they
have
opened
the
opportunity
to
women,
minority-owned
businesses
and
the
city
does
track
how
much
of
our
spending
goes
to
women.
Minority-Owned
businesses,
but
purchases
under
175
000
do
not
fall
under
that
requirement
and
there's
probably
a
lot
more
details
that
I'm
not
aware
of.
B
E
Yeah
I
was
wanting
to
ask
a
little
more
about
the
funding
for
carbon
capture
and
storage
and
carbon
transport
infrastructure.
Those
are
not
that's,
not
really
something
that
I
think
of
along
with
the
other
things
that
state
and
local
government
would
typically
be
funding
and
leading
on.
E
So
I'm
just
curious
if
you
know
anything
about
how
that
would
fit
in,
would
it
be?
Actually
you
know
governments
undertaking
those
projects
or
providing
funding
for
industry
to
undertake
those
projects,
anything
that
you
know
about
it.
Thanks.
C
Let
me
really
quick.
I
have
one
document
that
I
got
recently
I'm
going
to
see
if
I
can
pull
up
the
specifics
for
that
program
or
not,
I
have
some
of
it.
C
Yeah,
I
don't
have
that
one.
I've
got
this
a
little
bit
of
the
sophia
one
down,
but
I
don't
have
some
of
the
others.
I
can
tell
you
that,
like
based
on
past
experience,
these
are
going
to
most
likely
be
incentive
type
programs
for
private
business
or
other
entities.
I
don't
know
this.
I
don't
know
that
for
sure
though-
and
I
can-
we
will
definitely
be
watching
more
for
that,
as
we
get
more
of
that
guidance
in
those
specifics.
B
I
didn't
have
a
sorry
one
more
question,
maybe
it's
hard
to
answer
just
in
terms
of
like
city
readiness
to
like
accept
all
these
funds.
I
know
over
five
years.
It
really
helps
because
there's
not
a
you
know
a
one
year
urgency
to
to
spend
it
as
quickly
as
possible,
but
maybe
even
it's
just
a
vibe
thing
like
on
the
city
side
like
how.
How
prepared
do
folks
feel
to
utilize
this
opportunity
and
spend
it
in
in
a
way?
That's
intentional.
C
Thanks
for
that
question,
I
you
know,
I
think
we
would
be
lying
to
ourselves.
If
we
didn't
say
it's
gonna,
be
a
challenge
to
try
and
get
a
handle
on
this
size
of
investment.
I
think
we're
we're
gonna.
You
know
this
is
something
that
we
haven't
been
able
to
see
in
recent
memory.
You
know
this.
C
This
type
of
investment
and-
and
the
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind-
is
that
there's
the
potential
for
another
for
the
buildback
better
bill
that
is
still
continuing
to
beat
to
move
in
congress
to
come
in
right
behind
it
with
a
very
large
if
it,
if
it's
successful
another,
very
large
investment
in
infrastructure
and
other
programs.
So
yes,
it
is,
it
will
be
a
challenge.
It's
I
think
it's
one,
that
we
are
happy,
it's
a
good
challenge,
but
yeah,
I
think
part
of
the.
C
The
challenge
will
be
just
not
having
the
details
of
what
we
would
be
potentially
getting
directly
what
we
need
to
compete
for
what
is
going
to
the
state
that
we
would
potentially
have
an
opportunity
at
and
and
so
on,
and
so
yes,
I
think
that
we
don't
know
for
sure.
Yet
we
know
it
will
be
a
challenge,
but
we're
happy
that
we
it's
a
good
problem
to
have.
B
I'll
give
just
a
couple
more
beats
for
folks
to
put
their
hands
up
or
chime
in.
If
there
are
any
questions
for
steven.
B
M
B
B
All
right,
the
next
presentation
will
be
by
nick
minderman
on
science-based
greenhouse
gas
targets.
Working
group.
J
What
do
you
think
fellow
commissioners
luke
is
presenting
here
so
I'll
be
giving
him
cues?
There
were
a
number
of
folks
may
may
recall
back
in
august.
I
think
that
there
was
a
request
for
members
to
join
a
smaller
working
group
to
look
at
the
guidance
on
science-based
targets
for
greenhouse
gas
emission
reduction
and
work
through
some
of
the
intricate
details
of
what
the
the
city
needs
to
do,
as
it
looks
toward
updating
the
climate
action
plan
and
other
policies.
J
So
this
is
more
or
less
a
report
out
from
what
that
group
has
done
so
far,
and
hopefully
we'll
have
a
chance
to
spur
a
little
bit
of
discussion
and
see
what
folks
think
about
it
and
for
the
folks
who
did
participate
in
one
or
both
of
the
working
group
meetings
feel
free
to
chime
in
and
wherever
is
wherever
you
see
an
opportunity
to
add
in
color.
J
So
there
were
to
my
account:
there
were
six
members
who
volunteered
to
participate
in
the
effort
and
we
had
two
meetings.
The
first
one
was
an
introduction
and
some
high-level
feedback
on
what
we,
as
commissioners
advising
city
policy
believe
was
most
important
for
the
sustainability
team
to
consider
when
looking
at
how
to
apply
a
science-based
targets
framework.
A
science-based
targets
framework
is
somewhat
prescriptive,
so
we
weren't
necessarily
creating
something
entirely
new,
but
rather
guiding
interpretations.
J
Based
on
the
conversation
that
we
had
with
city
staff,
which
was
mostly
luke
and
kim
through
the
through
the
first
meeting,
then
our
second
meeting,
the
sustainability
team,
came
with
a
draft
of
what
that
reduction
process
or
that
target
process
would
look
like,
and
then
we
had
some
deep
detailed
discussions
about
four
specific
topics
that
they
weren't
defined
like
this
up
front.
But
this
is
how
I
summarize
the
main
points
that
we
spent
most
of
our
time.
Talking
about.
J
J
Second
was
how
do
we
deal
with
the
fact
that
emissions
are
weather
dependent-
and
I
know
luke
presented
information
on
carbon
emission
reduction
progress
a
number
of
months
ago,
so
most
probably
recall
that
there
were
a
lot
of
hills
and
valleys
in
that
data
and
that
largely
ties
to
whether
we
had
a
cold
winter
or
warm
summer
for
spikes
and
vice
versa.
For
any
dips.
In
that
in
that
line,
then
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
how
a
science-based
target
changes.
J
Yes,
the
main
thing
was
how
to
deal
with
the
setting
the
first
year
of
the
targets
so
as
you'll
see
on
one
of
the
future
slides
it's
it's
an
s
curve
is
the
the
shape
of
the
science
based
target
approach,
and
so
you
just
need
to
choose
where
you
start
and
that
sets
how
high
you
are
and
how
compressed
your
time
period
is
between
when
you
start
and
when
you
have
to
get
to
that
really
low
dem
and
basically
de
minimis
amount
of
emissions.
J
J
J
Naturally,
to
begin
with,
and
based
on
the
complexity,
the
small
amount
of
total
greenhouse
gas
potential
that
comes
from
them
in
aggregate,
even
though
they're
very
potent
greenhouse
gases
by
themselves
led
us
to
recommend
that
the
sustainability
team
focus
on
tracking
and
setting
targets
and
ultimately
having
climate
actions
focused
on
the
three
main
ones.
Just
carbon
dioxide,
methane
and
nitrous
oxide.
J
E
Yeah
I'd
be
interested
to
hear
a
little
bit
more
about
the
decision
to
pick
the
three
year
average
centering
in
2019.
My
sort
of
gut
reaction
would
be
that
you
wouldn't
want
to
include
2020
at
all,
because
I'm
just
assuming
that
it's
going
to
be
such
an
outlier.
I
don't
know
how
much
data
we
have
on
that.
But
then,
if
assuming
also
that
we
had
reductions
in
2020,
then
that
would
mean
we
have
to
cut
even
further
if
we're,
including
2020,
so
that
sort
of
sets
a
higher
bar
just
curious.
J
L
J
Rebound,
but
we
also
don't
want
to
ignore
2020,
because
that
effect
of
reducing
the
basically
pushing
the
curve
down
and
accelerating
emissions
just
is
is
important
in
buying
time
for
later
year,
emissions
I'll
get
to
what
I
mean
by
that
a
little
bit
more,
but
more
or
less
you
you
captured
most
of
it.
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
on
the
on
the
working
group
wants
to
comment
on
that
as
well.
N
Nick
yeah,
just
from
a
staff
perspective,
I
think
that's
all
correct
and
one
thing
we'll
see
in
a
subsequent
slide
here
when
we
show
what
the
size
curve
looks
like
is
that
the
setting
of
a
baseline
year
becomes
less
and
less
important
as
the
years
go
on,
because
eventually
the
s-curve
gets
to
100
reduction
or
net
zero.
N
J
So
then,
the
next
thing
that
we
discussed
was
how
to
handle
that
variation.
Due
to
weather.
We
looked
at
three
different
approaches:
one
was
weather
normalization,
which
means
you
take
the
amount
of
heating
and
cooling
that
was
needed.
You
know
looking
at
what
the
temperature
was
in
that
year
and
you
compare
it
to
an
average
weather
here.
J
The
second
is
a
three-year
moving
average,
so
you
average
the
last
three
years
worth
of
emissions
and
report
that,
as
as
a
trench
number
and
then
the
third
one
is
looking
at
what
the
historical
variation
due
to
weather
has
been
and
setting
up.
I
think
luke
uses
the
term
a
compliance
sleeve,
so
basically
saying
that
you
know
you
have
your
curve
and
then
an
upper
and
a
lower
line,
and
as
long
as
you
don't
cross
the
upper
and
lower
boundary
you're
within
the
tolerance
of
of
meeting
your
target.
J
To
the
point
where
you
know,
we
probably
would
reporting
the
actuals
and
then
separately
reporting
our
tracking
toward
meeting
the
goals
and
if,
instead,
we
can
just
report
the
boundaries
and
report
the
actual
numbers.
It
simplifies
that
process
and
makes
it
more
directly
visible
whether
we're
meeting
our
goal
or
not.
L
F
Yeah
thanks
nick,
so
I
I
was
not
in
the
second
work
group
meeting
I
wish
I
would
have
been,
but
I
I
agree
with
the
approach
that
was
selected.
F
I
I
think
a
more
scientific
approach
would
be
to
normalize,
but
I
you
know
based
on
weather,
but
I
I
would
agree
that
it
reduces
the
transparency
it
makes
it
maybe
somewhat
less
understandable
to
many
of
our
stakeholders,
and
you
know,
I
think
the
the
upper
and
lower
bound
approach
makes
sense
to
me.
J
Yeah
another
we
spent
more
time
talking
about
weather
normalizing,
because
I
think
that
was
the
second
most
attractive
approach.
I
think
we
pretty
quickly
decided
that
the
three
year
moving
average
didn't
work.
I
I
think
that
there
were
a
couple
of
concerns.
If
I
recall
correctly
on
weather
normalizing
one
was
around
the
math
and
the
other
one.
Is
it
bakes?
F
N
Yeah
sure
I
can
describe
this
one,
so
this
is,
and
actually
I'm
going
to
zoom
in
maybe
a
little
bit
more
here.
So
it's
clear
on
focus
screen
so
on
upper
left,
those
individual
blue
dots,
those
are
actual
historic
emissions
and
just
to
kind
of
give
you
an
idea
of
what
they.
What
the
trend
looks
like
I've
got
two
trend
lines
in
here.
One
is
a
three
year
rolling
average.
Again,
that's
not
what
we're
using
going
forward,
but
it
just
kind
of
smooths
out
those
ups
and
downs
based
on
yearly
weather.
N
So
you
can
see
that
it.
You
can
see,
even
with
three-year
rolling
average,
that
we
have
a
downward
trajectory
in
emissions
since
our
baseline
year
2006,
and
you
can
also
then
just
in
excel.
You
can
do
a
linear,
a
linear
curve
that
shows
your
trajectory
as
well.
That's
going
down
as
well
and
actually
has
a
pretty
good
fit
based
on
the
equation.
It
gives
you,
so
we
just
see
a
few
things.
Emissions
are
going
down
and
that
there's
a
trend
to
it.
K
N
The
last
server
missions
now
I
did-
I
showed
the
last
year
of
admissions
here
as
2019,
just
because
2020
is
kind
of
so
so
abnormal
that,
for
the
simplicity
of
showing
it
here,
I'm
just
showing
it
pair
with
2019,
but
the
black
dotted
line
represents
the
s-curve
and
the
s-curve
is
called
a
steep
decline
s-curve
because
of
what
minneapolis
represents
a
city,
as
nick
said,
were
high
emissions
and
they
say
high
wealth
community
and
for
communities
and
nations
across
the
world
that
meet
those
criteria
as
well.
N
The
fair
share
part
of
the
target
is
that
we
need
to
become
begin
declines
in
a
reductions
in
gc
missions
in
the
very
near
future.
We've
got
kind
of
a
few
years
to
get
our
act
together
and
then
quickly.
The
s-curve
shows
a
rapid
reduction
in
gsu
emissions,
and
then
you
spend
you
know
really
a
few
decades
or
let's
say
15
years,
then
trying
to
get
the
remaining
smaller
portion
of
emissions
out
of
your
community.
N
There
are
three
other
s-curves
for
different
types
of
communities
that
are
either
low
wealth
or
low,
historically
emitting,
and
those
show
that
reductions
happen
over
majority
of
reductions.
Hope
happen
over
a
longer
period
of
time,
so
the
fair
share
component
is
that
we
need
to
begin
emissions
reductions
in
the
very
near
term
and,
as
nick
mentioned,
we
created
this
sleeve
this
upper
and
lower
weather
variation,
and
you
can
see
that
the
historical
variation
from
26
from
2006
to
2020
kind
of
that
wiggling
is
within
the
bounds
of
the
sleeve
going
forward.
N
So
again,
the
idea
is
in
any
given
year
when
we
compare
any
given
year
in
the
future
against
the
s-curve,
we're
kind
of
allowing
ourselves
a
little
wiggle
room
before
we
make
a
definitive
decision
on
whether
we're
on
target
or
off
target,
knowing
that
in
any
given
year,
we
may
have
abnormal
abnormal
temperatures
in
the
winter
or
the
summer.
So
that's
what
those
sleeves
are
and
for
practical
purposes.
N
The
most
important
part
of
the
sleeve
is
that
red
upper
end
that
if
you
have
a
year
that
has
emissions
outside
of
that
red
upper
end
or
above
that
red
upper
end,
no
matter
what
the
weather
is.
That's
really
telling
that
emissions
are
not
on
track,
so
that
that
red
operand
is
red.
It's
caution!
It's
it's
a!
N
It's
a
red
siren
that
we
are
off
target
anything
around
the
black
line
says
we're
probably
pretty
near
where
we
need
to
be,
and
you
know,
if
you
go
if
we're
able
to
get
below
the
blue
dotted
line,
we
have
a
really
high
level
of
confidence
that,
at
least
in
that,
given
year,
we
are
very
much
lower
than
the
emissions
target
that
we
had
set
and
you
could
see
even
with
that
sleeve
it.
N
You
know
we
have
to
hit
net
zero
in
2050
and
then
continue
on
that
zero
after
that
and
a
few
other
things
to
just
kind
of
notice
note
is
that
it
this
trajectory
at
that
linear
trajectory
we
created
if
we
were
to
follow
that
trend
and
follow
that
dotted
blue
line
to
where
it
crosses
the
dashed
black
line,
that's
about
20
23,
so
it
says
at
about
2023
the
progress
we're
making
right
now
isn't
good
enough
anymore,
but
if
you
account
for
weather
variation
and
kind
of
uncertainty
really
by
2025,
where
the
red
dotted
line
red
dash
line
crosses
the
blue
dotted
line.
N
That's
when
we
for
sure
know
that
we
cannot
that
we
cannot
be
in
our
business
as
usual
trajectory.
We
will
then
definitely
be
off
of
our
s
curve,
so
maybe
nick
and
I
will
start
well
nick.
Do
you
have
anything
you
want
to
add
to
that.
J
J
N
Sure
it's
landing
I
can
follow
up
later
on
in
the
meeting,
because
I
have
a
hard
time
coming
and
coming
to
mind
what
it
is.
I
think
it's.
L
N
3.6
or
3.7
million
metric
tons,
so
it's
right
about
where
this
blue
line
or
sorry
right
about
where
the
green
line
is
so
again.
It
kind
of
it
rides
that
sleeve,
which
kind
of
indicates
like
hey.
That
was
a
good
year,
but
it's
nothing
to
get
too
excited
about,
because
it's
within
that
kind
of
weather
sleeve
that
we've
created,
although
in
the
in
the
case
of
2020
it
wasn't
the
weather.
That
was
the
predominant
impact.
It
was
the
hopefully
once
in
a
lifetime
shock
of
the
pandemic
and
particularly
vehicle
miles.
N
Traveled
were
down
20
percent
and
that
had
a
big
impact
on
reducing
our
emissions
and
we've
already
seen
vehicle
miles.
Traveled
go
almost
back
up
to
normal
again
in
2021.
I
M
J
Most
of
the
action
is
going
to
have
to
occur
within
the
next
10
years
in
order
to
shift
momentum,
it's
not
necessary
that
there's
no
action
required
after
2030,
but
there's
so
much
inertia
in
that
business
as
usual
case.
That
requires
basically,
and
for
those
who
love
physics,
you
have
to
add
a
lot
of
force
to
change
that
path,
that
glide
path
and-
and
so
that's
definitely
one
thing
that
has
to
be
communicated
and
then
the
other
piece
is
we.
J
Basically
saying
here's
our
budget
of
how
many
carbon
emissions
we
have
through
2050
and
if
you
don't
take
action
you
draw
out
of
that
bank
faster,
which
means
in
order
to
make
sure
you
don't
over,
withdraw
by
the
end
of
2050.
You
have
to
make
more
radical
actions
later
on,
and
so
there
is
an
incentive
to
act
sooner,
because
you
can
rely
on
on
having
a
little
bit
of
time
from
taking
low
hanging
fruit
actions
earlier
to
buy
you
time
for
the
things
that
may
not
be
economically
or
politically
or
or
socially
desirable.
J
J
Then
the
last
topic
was
what
are
the
issues
that
we
see
emerging
from
adopting
a
science-based
target,
knowing
that
it's
going
to
drive
conversations
about
some
radical
reductions
in
carbon
emissions
which,
to
some
extent
will
require
people
to
change
behaviors,
and
we
saw
equity
control
and
disruption
of
lifestyle
as
some
of
the
stressors
that
people
will
react
to
or
that
we
will
need
to
consider
I'll
actually
go
from
the
bottom
up.
Equity
is
the
most
important
consideration,
but
I
think
the
other
two
lead
into
it
in
terms
of
how
we
discuss
it.
J
J
J
J
Like
land
use,
planning
and
controls
the
water
utility
and
solid
waste
collection,
and
but
not
solid
waste
disposal,
for
example,
and
the
emissions
that
are
in
buildings,
the
city
has
limited
control
over
because
the
energy
code
is
dictated
at
the
state
level
and
the
state
has
preempted
cities
from
making
changes
to
it.
And
things
like
that.
J
So
that's
definitely
going
to
be
an
area
of
tension
where
the
city
has
to
really
dig
in
on
understanding
where
the
levers
are
and
find
ways
for
citizens.
Not
just
those
of
us
who
are
on
the
commission,
but
broader
citizens
can
take
actions
to
align
with
the
goal
without
necessarily
being
required
to
participate
and
then
the
last
one
on
equity,
first
and
and
foremost
just
looking
at
total
emissions
from
lifestyle.
J
There
are
more
emission
reductions
to
gain
from
areas
of
concentrated
affluence
and
that's
the
the
technical
term.
Now
that
the
metropolitan
council
uses
to
describe
areas
where
there's
a
significant
population
with
above
average
wealth
but
the
so.
Those
are
areas
that
are
mapped
and
are
known
to
the
city
and
those
areas
provide
a
really
important
opportunity.
J
But
we
can't
focus
on
that
to
the
point
of
ignoring
other
areas,
for
for
two
reasons.
One
was
point,
as
was
pointed
out
in
the
discussion
there
is,
there
are
still
consumption
habits
in
areas
of
concentrated
poverty
and
there
is
potential
overlapping
value
in
finding
ways
to
get
emissions.
Reductions
that
also
result
in
lifestyle
or
economic
improvements
for
people
who
reside
in
areas
of
concentrated
poverty
and
passing
those
areas
over
entirely
would
only
reinforce
past
actions
that
have
created
those
historical
inequities.
N
N
In
that
you
know,
if
you're
a
wealthy
city
that
can
do
a
lot
and
have
polluted
a
lot
you're
expected
to
make
rapid
reductions,
you
have
less
emissions
still
that
you
would
be
allowed
to
emit,
and
if
you
are
a
low
wealth,
historically
low
emitting
city,
then
you
actually
can
increase
your
emissions
for
the
next.
I
think
decade,
decade
and
a
half,
and
then
you
need
to
start
ramping
down
to
zero.
You
know
so
the
the
membership
of
the
c40
cities
covered
all
four
of
those
different
types
of
trajectories.
N
So
that's
how
they
created
this
curve,
there's
a
lot
of
other
kind
of
statistical
analysis
that
went
into
it
that
I'm
not,
I
don't
recall
all
the
details
of,
but
that's
essentially
where
this
came
from
and
in
this
drive
of
race
to
zero,
which
I
think
we've
heard
about
before
at
sea.
N
I
can
talk
a
little
bit
about
for
cities
to
sign
on
to
doing
their
part,
particularly
in
the
lead
up
to
the
cop
26
conference
cities
that
were
that
agreed
to
adopt
the
race
to
zero
plans,
which
is
basically
getting
to
net
zero
by
2050
at
the
latest
also
were
requested
that,
if
not
immediately
in
the
very
near
future,
they
adopt
one
of
the
fair
share,
science-based
target
trajectories,
one
of
those
four
trajectories
and
one
of
the
ways
to
do
that
was
to
follow
the
methodology
of
the
c40
cities.
J
N
J
N
N
They
were
over
3.5
million,
so
in
every
year,
we'll
subtract
out
that
year's
emissions,
and
so
we
know
at
this
point
in
time
for
2021
and
beyond.
We
have
34
million
metric
tons
remaining,
and
then
we
can
kind
of
provide
some
details
on
how
long
that's
going
to
last
us.
Then
you
know:
what's
our
burn
rate
of
this
budget?
N
Well,
if
we
were
to
so
going
back
to
the
graph,
let's
say
we
were
to
keep
emitting
at
20
19
levels
right
where
this
s-curve
starts.
If
we
just
continue
to
meeting
at
2019
levels
straight
across
by
2030,
we
will
have
emitted
as
much
in
those
nine
years
as
we
are
allowed
to
admit
over
the
next
three
decades
and
that's
where
we
get
the
year
2029
from.
N
So
it'll
give
us
an
idea
of
you
know.
Are
we
on
a
safe
trajectory
to
get
to
net
zero
or
not?
I
think
the
way
you
could
think
about
this,
probably
most
accurately
right
now
is
you
know
it's
probably
a
safe
bet
to
say
we'll,
probably
continue
to
see
this
kind
of
linear
downward
trend.
There's
a
lot
of
nuance
in
that,
but
at
least
in
the
near
the
next
decade
I
think
that's
a
safe
trend,
as
we
continuously
decarbonize
electricity
in
particular.
N
Well,
by
2030
that
what
basically
by
2025,
that's
no
longer
fast
enough
or
outside
the
curve,
and
if
we
then
stay
outside
the
curve
for
2025
and
2030,
we'll
have
blown
our
entire
budget
and
there's
kind
of
like
no
going
back
to
that
point.
You
know
we
can
still
get
to
net
zero
eventually,
but
we'll
have
used
more
emissions.
N
We
will
have
emitted
more
into
the
atmosphere
than
what
we
should
have,
and
that
means,
if
you
know,
if
we,
if
every
other
city
in
the
world
and
country
the
world
is
like
us
and
does
the
same
thing
emits
more
than
their
budget,
we
don't
get
to
one
and
a
half
degrees
warming.
You
know
we're
looking
at
two
two
and
a
half
three
degrees
warming.
J
I
see
barbara's
comment
in
the
chat
about
this
means
a
lot
of
windmills
unless
he
is
nuclear
matthew.
You've
got
a
comment.
G
G
And
I
was
just
curious
like
who,
who
you
think
the
target
is
for
this
communication,
like
obviously
city
policy,
but
are
we
trying
to?
Who
all
are
we
trying
to
like
reach
with
this?
Because
I
think
it
does
send
a
pretty
powerful
message
of
urgency
but
yeah?
I
was
curious.
J
This
is
okay,
our
fair
share
target
is
blah,
and
now
the
hard
work
starts
from
the
bottom
up
of
figuring
out.
What
types
of
activities
can
you
use
to
chip
away
at
those
emissions?
That
would
happen
under
the
business
as
usual
scenario,
to
try
to
push
that.
So
we
can
then
say
that
we're
pushing
that
2029
and
2030
out
farther.
G
Cool
yeah.
That
makes
sense,
I
think,
like
this,
like
you
said
this
is
the
really
high
level
view
and
all
of
the
the
details
are
below
it.
So,
thanks.
J
I'm
kind
of
acting
as
chair
here,
even
though
I'm
not
anna,
are
you
next
or
is
there
somebody
else
in
there.
B
B
I
also
appreciate
your
question
about
like
who,
who
is
the
audience,
because
I
I
agree
that
the
bank
situation
is
really
helpful
and
also
having
that
trajectory
and
having
that
sort
of
like
2025
as
a
year
at
which
it
becomes
really
clear
whether
or
not
we're
on
track,
and
it
seems
like
city
council
is
probably
a
great
audience
for
this
message
and
I'm
curious
with
especially
with
the
transition
of
several
city
council
members,
what
the
what
the
process
is
for,
like
onboarding
them
and
getting
them
up
to
speed
with
sustainability
efforts
and
at
what
point
you
know,
they'll
get
to
to
hear
about
this,
about
science-based
targets
and
and
yeah.
N
Good
questions,
anna
so
in
january,
early
january,
is
when
the
all
council
members
are
sworn
in,
the
ones
that
are
continuing
on
and
the
new
ones,
and
then
they
begin
the
process
of
making
committees,
and
then
they
make
committee
assignments
and
then
chairs
and
and
vice
chairs
of
those
committees
and
that'll
happen.
In
mid-january,
there
will
be
a.
N
N
What
we
do
climate
work.
All
of
this
you
know
like
provided
there's
a
recommendation
by
siac.
Then
we
would
say
this
is
a
recommendation
by
c
that's
on
the
table
for
consideration
by
council
with
an
update
to
the
climate
action
plan.
N
N
We
don't
honestly,
we
don't
know
what
level
of
sophistication
a
lot
of
our
what
a
lot
of
council
members
are
going
to
have
on
climate,
and
we
just
that
goes
with
any
new
council
that
we
get
so
we
kind
of
have
to
play
that
by
ear,
but
there
will
be
some
level
of
really
getting
people
up
to
speed
on
this.
N
Yeah
exactly
now
we,
you
know
we
we're
not
getting
a
new
mayor
up
to
speed,
so
you
know
that
will
be
so.
We
won't
be
spending
effort
on
that.
Obviously,
we'll
just
be
keeping
the
mayor
up.
Just
you
know,
keeping
the
mayor
up
to
speed
on
what
we've
been
talking
about
so
it'll,
be
mostly
on
the
council
side
and
and
watching
all
that
play
out
in
in
early
mid
january.
L
E
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
follow
up
on
that
and
good
thanks
for
raising
that
anna
about
you
know
bringing
in
the
new
council-
and
I
understand
that,
if
we're
talking
just
in
the
context
of
the
climate
action
plan,
maybe
it
would
only
be
the
sustainability
committee
who
need
to
know
the
ins
and
outs
of
that,
but
it
seems
to
me
like
this.
I
mean
this
is
the
sort
of
information
that
we
want
the
whole
city
to
know
about.
You
know
what
do
we
need
to
accomplish
and
where?
E
Where
are
we
at
with
our
reductions?
And
that
seems
like
something
that
the
whole
council
should
be
up
to
date
on?
Maybe,
as
the
climate
action
plan
goes
through,
the
process
they'll
learn
more
about
that.
But
it
seems
like
it's
something
that.
D
E
You
know
a
lot
of
their
decision
making
that
might
not
be
directly
relevant
and
I
wonder
if
it
would
be
useful
to
do
some
sort
of
you
know.
Basic
introduction
for
the
whole
council.
E
J
L
N
F
F
Some
projection
of
what
that,
what
it's
going
to
take
to
get
there
in
terms
of
investment
in
terms
of
maybe
big
policy
changes
that
sort
of
thing-
and
I
I
you
know,
we
don't
know
all
the
answers
for
sure
you
know
technologies,
hopefully,
will
evolve
over
the
next
five
years
or
more.
Maybe
prices
will
come
down
to
some
extent,
but
I
mean
we
don't
have
much
time.
You
know.
So
I
think
we're
gonna
have
to
get
started
on
that
immediately
and
to
be
able
to
make
sure
we
can
communicate
what
that's
going
to
mean.
N
We
do
have,
I
think,
a
framework
for
what
we
need
to
do
to
get
there,
and
I
think
that
we
need
to
addre
to
lay
out
in
an
easy
to
understand
manner
what
that
framework
is,
and
also
acknowledge,
that
and
be
very
humble
that
or
show
some
humility
in
the
recognition
that
to
achieve
this
net
zero
target
by
2050
and
even
to
stay
under
this
curve.
Until
then
is
not
entirely
within
the
power
of
the
city.
N
You
know
there
are
many
decisions.
Being
made
by
the
utilities
by
the
state,
by
federal
government
by
consumers
that
the
city
doesn't
doesn't
have
direct
levers
on,
so
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
show
that
if
the
city
just
did
these
policies
we'll
get
to
zero,
we're
going
to
say
what
those
big
policies
are
and
what
the
frameworks
are
and
what
help
we
need
from
a
whole
of
society
approach.
N
So
I
think
that's
that's
what
we'll
end
up
having
in
the
climate
action
plan,
and
I
think
you
can
also
see
different
eras.
Emerging
too,
like
you
know,
20
20
to
2025
is
that
we
need
to
have
to
start
shifting
gears
in
these
next.
Well
now,
you
know
less
than
four
years
and
that
from
2025
to
2030
we
really
have
to
be
making
a
lot
of
incredible
change
fast
and
then
kind
of
in
the
2030s.
N
You've
left
the
hardest
stuff
for
last
and
and
we
can
identify
what
those
hard
things
we
think
are
and
that
we
maybe
don't
know
how
to
particularly
get
all
of
that
decarbonized.
N
K
K
K
Using
this
this
approach
and
a
little
tidbit
too,
I
was
just
looking
at
some
of
the
goals
for
the
major
utilities,
at
least
for
excel
and
center
point,
and
both
both
of
them
have
pretty
significant
goals
too
for
2030
and
2050,
which
would
feed
into
some
of
this.
K
So
from
this
group.
What's
the
plan
for
and
when
do
you
need
something
from
this
group
saying?
Yes,
we
think
you
should
change
your
your
climate
action
plan
to
include
something
like
this
or
is
that
what
you're
looking
to
get
today.
N
N
So
that's
it
would
be
a
replacement
of
our
existing
emissions
reduction
goals,
and
the
way
I
could
see
this
plane
out
is,
if
seak
wanted
to
make
a
recommendation
to
adopt
what
nick
has
presented
here
today
early
in
the
next
term
of
the
council.
We
can
present
this
recommendation,
the
council
and
say-
and
this
is
recommended-
I
think
we
probably
a
staff
lupin's
evac
too,
which
is
energy
vision,
advisory
committee
and
venus
energy
is
a
large
component
of
meeting
these
goals
and
they
would
maybe
provide
some
sort
of
formal
recommendation
as
well.
N
We
then
would
would
do
some
education
of
our
new
home
committee
at
council
and
could
present
this
to
them
at
that
time.
They
may
formally
adopt
these
goals
and
say
then
go
forth
and
then
update
the
climate
action
plan
with
these
newly
adopted
goals
and
then
modify
the
plan
to
address
how
we
envision
get
achieving
those
goals.
N
So
I
think
the
first
step
is
potentially
then
seek
acting
and
making
recommendations
on
this,
and
I
might
add
to
it.
I
just
noticed
barbara.
I
know
you're
putting
a
lot
of
comments
in
the
chat
again.
We
want
to
try
to
avoid
comments
in
the
chat,
especially
for
those
that
aren't
able
to
view
the
chat
that
are
calling
in
so
maybe
just
a
reminder
to
everybody.
If,
if
you
have
some
comments
or
questions
to
make,
please
raise
your
hand,
so
you
can
be
recognized
and
speak
them
verbally
thanks.
J
And
luke,
I
just
want
to
add
one
additional
comment
on
top
and
of
yours
in
response
to
suzanne,
and
that
is
the
specific
motivation
for
me.
J
Presenting
is
to
ensure
that
the
larger
group
feels
comfortable
with
the
recommendations
of
the
working
group
and
not
representing
this
as
my
work,
but
rather
I
am
the
representative
of
that
group
that
put
their
heads
together
and
provided
the
sustainability
team
with
thoughts,
and
so
now,
I
think,
is
an
important
time
to
make
sure
that
if
people
have
questions
about
how
this
science-based
target
was
applied
for
the
validity
of
a
science-based
target,
we
should
raise
that.
At
this
point,.
I
Mtc02E
will
just
be
gibberish.
I
think
that
the
only
way
to
communicate
it
would
be
to
say
say
that
well,
here's
a
plan
of
how
this
could
be
met.
Now
you
may
be
able
to
improve
the
plan,
but
this
is
here
are
some
things
we
would
say
to
do
and
then,
when
they
say
no
fossil
fuels,
no
electricity
if
to
really
be
zero
or
completely
re,
do
first
place
triple
the
electricity
and
then
get
it
from
completely
different
sources.
I
They'll
just
stop
hearing
you,
but
but
it's
pointless
to
produ,
to
publish
this
without
some
telling
them.
What
really
what
it
means.
N
I
mean
your
comment:
yes,
I'm
representing
some
of
this
in
a
more
tactical
format
than
it
would
go
to
the
public,
so
anything
that
goes
to
the
public,
of
course,
will
have
to
be
more
accessible.
N
N
So
what
we
need
to
do
is,
I
think,
provide
a
vision
of
what
that
future
actually
looks
like
and
how
not
only
does
it
save
the
planet
that
we
live
on
and
rely
on,
but
also
it's
going
to
improve
other
aspects
of
people's
lives
and
that,
I
think,
will
be
a
very
important
element
of
the
climate
action
plan
is
to
illustrate
what
that
promising
future
can
look
like,
and
you
know
one
of
the
things
we're
being
driven
by
during
this
conversation
is
the
fact
that
I
guess
in
some
way
you
could
say
setting
that
zero
by
2050
goal
is
optional,
but
the
alternative
is
a
very,
very
different
world
than
what
we
live
in
today,
so
we're
being
driven
by
not
what
we
have
exactly
planned
out.
N
But
what
we
need
to
do
to
to
maintain
some
semblance
of
what
our
society
currently
looks
like
and
make
sure
that
we
additionally
don't
hurt
even
more
those
that
are,
you
know
underprivileged,
which
is
what
a
what
a
rapidly
warming
climate
would
do,
is
hurt
the
most
vulnerable
amongst
us,
so
we're
kind
of
being
driven
by
the
end
goal
and
that
need
and
we'll
have
to
provide
that
vision.
G
G
It's
like
every
year,
we'll
know
where
we're
at,
and
I
also
just
think
the
vision
piece
is
really
exciting
and
important,
like
if
part
of
we
say,
like
you
know,
by
2025,
this
many
homes
and
buildings
in
minneapolis
would
be
powered
by
renewable
energy
or
like
putting
it
into
more
understandable
terms,
I
think,
would
be
a
call
to
action
to
those
who
are
inspired
to
to
help
you
know.
Building
owners,
property
managers
who
are
who
want.
M
G
K
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
the
science-based
targets
are
the
way
that
all
of
us
need
to
go.
So
I'm
glad
to
see
that
this
you
did
this
work
on
incorporating
that
into
this
this
draft
plan-
and
I
do
think
that
this
is
something
that
that
the
minneapolis
should
adopt
for
an
update
to
the
climate
action
plan.
This
is
the
the
most
recent
science
that
tells
us
as
a
society.
Everybody
needs
to
get
to
to
net
zero
by
2050.
So
let's
come
up
with
a
plan
to
get
there.
K
B
Cool
nick,
thank
you
so
much
for
stopping
and
facilitating
that
conversation
I
think
yeah.
I
just
really
appreciate
that
you
did
a
great
job.
That's
a
great
question!
Suzanne!
I
don't
know
if
we're,
if
we're
ready
for
a
a
recommendation
or
not,
we
don't
have
a
ton
of
time
left.
So
I
might
defer
or
nick
do
you
wanna
weigh
in.
N
J
Yeah,
so
there's
there's
two
paths
we
can
take
one
is
we
decide
we're
ready
and
I
think
the
best
way
to
do
that
is
for
somebody
to
propose
a
motion
to
forsake
to
adopt
science-based
targets
as
a
recommendation
to
sustainability
and
ultimately
the
city
council,
for
the
update
to
the
climate
action
plan.
I
think
it's
a
pretty
simple
resolution
for
us
to
adopt-
or
the
other
is
for
us
to
put
this
on
the
agenda
for
the
next
meeting
and
we
work
in
between
now
and
then
to
write
out
the
resolution.
N
One
of
the
agenda
items
is
by
the
way
clean
entrepreneurship
is
the
city
of
minneapolis,
excel
energy
7.00
one
of
the
agenda
items
is
kim,
is
going
to
give
a
30
000
foot
overview
of
what
the
climate
action
plan
update
in
2022
will
look
like,
and
then
I'm
going
to
provide
an
update
on
the
conversation
that's
being
had
by
ciac
on
this
topic.
Basically
introducing
to
that
board
a.
N
An
explanation
of
what
science
based
fair
share
targets
are,
and
then
I
will
also
then
mention
any
action
that
cia
takes
or
doesn't
take
at
that
meeting.
So
if
you
are
to
adopt
a
recommendation
today,
I'd
be
then
telling
all
those
let's
see
it's
the
mayor,
three
council
members
and
then
two
representatives
from
excel
and
two
representatives
from
center
point
I'd
be
telling
them
you've
made
a
recommendation
to
what
it
is.
N
B
Thanks
luke,
that's
a
great
context.
Any
discussion
about
those
two
options
either
adopting
a
recommendation
today
or
deferring
to
next
week
or
leaving
sort
of
the
balance
of
the
time
to
just
further
discuss
the
targets.
Yeah
barbara.
I
I
think
in
any
recommendation,
whether
we
decide
tonight
or
later,
we
should
give
a
little
more
background
like
to
say
to
me
the
recommendation
of
not
letting
the
earth
warm
more
than
one
and
a
half
degrees
centigrade.
We
recommend
the
targets
to
to
change
the
sustainability
plan.
In
other
words,
why
are
we
doing
this?
What
these
targets
or
what
was
they
based
on
and,
I
think
to
say,
I'm
sorry,
I
used
tread
damage,
but
what
I
suggested
was
to
meet
the
recommendation
of
not
letting
the
earth
warm
more
than
wanting
to
be
disintegrated.
H
B
B
F
Yeah,
so
I
first
of
all
I
I
agree,
I
think
we
should
adopt
my
biggest
concern
is
understanding.
You
know
what
this
is
likely
gonna
take
to
get
there.
I'm
not
saying
it's
not
what
we
have
to
do,
but
I
think,
having
some
way
to
convey
what
we
anticipate.
This
is
going
to
mean
in
terms
of
actions
in
terms
of
of
cost,
I
think
would
be
would
be
helpful.
F
I
I
know
that
is
going
to
take
time
and
luke.
You
talked
to
the
things
that
I
was
thinking
about.
You
know
that
were
what
we're
going
to
need
to
do
a
lot
of
the
uncertainty.
You
know.
A
lot
of
the
things
that
are
outside
are
direct
control,
but
I
think
there
are
some
things
we
can
do
to
help
describe
what
those
kinds
of
actions
are
in
general,
and
you
know
there's
several
ways
to
do
that.
We,
you
know
there
could
be
some
scenarios
developed,
as
you
know,
potential
ways
to
get
to
these
these
targets.
F
You
know,
I
think
we
all
know
there.
It's
going
to
take
a
a
broad
brush
approach.
We're
going
to
have
to
you
know
quickly,
adopt
electric
vehicles,
you
know
improve
mass
transit,
you
know,
weatherize
existing
structures,
electrify
gas,
space,
heating
and
processes
expand
the
use
of
renewable
energy
and
biofuels
and
green
fuels,
and
I
think
there
are
ways
you
know
we
can
help
quantify
that
we
can
benchmark
helsinki
and
other
much
more
efficient
cities
and
similar
climate
zones.
F
F
F
B
Thanks
mark
yeah,
I
guess
I'm
hearing
yeah
getting
a
little
bit
more
granular,
which
I
I'm
I'm
concerned
about,
slowing
us
down.
If
we
wanted
to
pass
something
tonight,
so
I
wonder
if
there's
a
way
to
separate
them
out
or
and
or
utilize
the
climate
action
plan
as
a
kind
of
a
tool
and
a
lever
to
get
into
some
of
the
details,
and
maybe
the
our
recommendation
could
be
that
our
science-based
targets
inform
the
climate
action
plan.
B
If
we
wanted
to
kind
of
keep
it
high
level
tonight
but
see
several
hands
up
so
not
saying
we
should
or
shouldn't
do
that,
just
putting
that
out
there
suzanne.
K
I
think
you
have
a
climate
action
plan
already,
which
does
address
some
of
those
issues
of
how
we're
planning
to
get
to
at
least
what
was
an
80
reduction
by
2050.
This
just
changes
the
goals
in
that,
so
I
don't
think
we
need
to
do
a.
I
mean
we
need
to
do
a
little
bit
more
on
that
and
it
does
move
the
the
targets
quicker,
but
the
basis
basis
of
that
is
already
in
the
climate
action
plan.
B
Right
yeah,
thanks
for
that
nick,
I
think
you
were
next.
J
I
know
I
believe
lauren
was
in
before
me.
Oh
thanks.
H
Lauren,
oh,
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
think,
like
what
what
mark
just
described
as
sort
of
the
visioning
that
you
know
we
had
talked
about
before
so
maybe
now
that
we've
sort
of
set
like
what
the
targets
are,
then
we
can
follow
up
in
the
future
with
the
visioning
process,
and
so
that
might
be
the
path
forward
to
not
slow
ourselves
down.
B
J
J
J
B
Nice
yeah,
that
makes
sense
tess,
is
saying
in
the
chat
she
agrees
with
what
mark
ended
with
and
suzanne,
and
I
mentioned
that
yeah
can
be
brought
up
in
the
updated
climate
action
plan
and
she
said
good
point.
Nick
luke.
N
Yeah,
just
wanna
offer
a
friendly
suggestion,
then,
for
a
recommendation.
If
this
is
kind
of
what
I'm
hearing
is
that's
kind
of
a
at
least
two-part
recommendation,
one.
The
city
updates
jesus
or
replace
its
ghg
emission
reduction
targets.
It's
existing
targets
with
science-based
fair
share
targets.
N
Two
is
to
update
the
climate
action
plan
accordingly,
with
those
new
targets
and
to
meet
those
new
targets,
and
then
three
you
might
want
to
add
in
and
something
lines
up
and
cx.
Cx
stands
ready
as
a
partner
to
advise
throughout.
L
N
Those
three
elements,
I
think,
would
then
be
useful
things
that
I
think
that
I
kelly
kim
everybody
in
the
stimulus
office
could
bring
to
council
early
next
year
and
say:
here's
where
we
are
with
the
climate
goals
and
climate
action
plan.
Here's
where
we
need
to
begin
it's
kind
of
a
definitive
statement
from
seak
in
that
regards.
B
J
B
I
can
drop
in
the
chat.
I
try
to
jot
down
what
luke
just
said
too,
if
that's
helpful,.
B
N
Yes,
I
would
love
to
let
me
put
in
a
I'm
just
gonna
put
in
a
link
here,
so
the
city,
I
think,
as
you're
aware,
has
a
time
of
rent
ordinance.
It's
now
gone
into
effect
for
any
rental
property,
that's
five
or
more
units
for
one
to
four
unit
properties.
N
We
have
hit
a
snag
because
the
public
utilities
commission
has
some
policies
on
the
books
that
make
it
difficult
to
share
data
for
smaller
buildings,
so
the
city
has
partnered,
with
excel
in
center
point
to
petition
the
puc
to
consider
a
a
new
novel
way
of
sharing
energy
cost
data
with
two
property
owners
that
they
would
then
share
with
prospective
renters.
N
So
what
I
put
into
the
chat
is
the
link
to
that
utility
filing
by
the
two
utilities,
which
also
includes
the
city
of
letter
support.
It
includes
many
details
on
what
this
actually
looks
like.
N
N
So
confidence
interval
being
the
two
key
terms
there
that
that
will
convey
to
prospective
tenants
that
an
average
monthly
cost
is
somewhere
within
that
interval
and
the
wider
the
interval,
the
more
variation
there
is
month
to
month,
the
smaller
the
interval
the
less
variation
there's
month
to
month,
and
that
you
could
then
compare
these
intervals,
which
are
unique
to
each
property
against
each
other
in
hopes
of
finding
a
property
that
it
will
be
less
costly
in
energy
respects,
for
you
as
a
perspective
renter,
and
that
go
there's
much
more
detail
on
what
that
means
and
what
that
could
look
like
in
the
in
that
link
to
those
utility
filings.
N
N
If
approval
comes,
what
is
the
best
way
to
convey
this
information
to
the
public,
because
it
is
very
difficult
to
figure
out
how
to
convey
energy
data.
Particular
energy
cost
data
to
the
public
in
a
way,
that's
useful
and
can
in
no
way
be
misleading,
so
we're
trying
to
find
a
balance
there
and
we'd
be
happy
to
talk
tess
a
question
tess
asks
what
is
the
pc
timeline?
N
Let's
see
that
is
mid-november.
Let's
see
sorry
early
december
is
when
the
piece
so
the
utilities
filed
in
on
october
29th
their
petition
and
the
city's
lair
support
went
in
with
a
petition.
So
it's
october
29th,
the
pc
just
responded
that
they're
having
an
open
comment
period
from
present
through
early
december
and
then
from
early
december
early
january.
N
There
will
be
a
reply
comment
period
and
then,
after
that
period
closes
in
early
january,
then
they'll
do
consideration
and
hopefully
approval
of
the
petition
so
we're
a
little
bit
just
kind
of
waiting
now
through
early
next
year
for
a
decision,
but
the
conversation
on
what
what
is
the
way
we
could
convey.
Energy
information
to
the
public
is
probably
timely
because
we
don't
necessarily
want
to
wait
around
we'd
like
to
have
something
somewhat
ready
to
hit
the
ground
running
if
we
get
that
approval.
E
Yeah,
I
missed
if
you
said
whether
the
current
time
of
rent
disclosure
policy
is
already
being
shared
in
any
ways.
What
would
come
to
mind
for
me
in
both
cases
is
through
the
ncr
neighborhood
organizations.
E
N
B
Thanks
luke
yeah,
we
can
talk
about
making
that
a
longer
agenda
item
and,
if
folks
have
thoughts
about
that
feel
free
to
email
in
the
meantime,
looking
at
the
clock,
so
it's
gonna
try
to
pivot
back
and
see
if
we
can
get
this
resolution
adopted
in
the
last
few
minutes,
nick
how's,
the
typing
coming
along.
J
E
J
N
Sorry,
I
think
I
was
just
gonna
follow
on
and
say
what
you
could
do
is
thinking
what
anna
put
in
at
651
could
be.
The
recommendation
that
you
formally
agreed
to
and
then
and
in
that
format-
and
I
know
nick
you
put
in
all
the
whereases
to
make
it
kind
of
a
resolution
you
could
leave
it
at.
You
know
the
chairs
discretion.
N
To
then
add
you
know
the
red,
the,
whereas
parts,
since
those
are
a
little
bit,
probably
less
important
than
the
actual
recommendation
part,
but
that
could
be
a
way
of
kind
of
splitting
up
the
work
if
you'd
like
well.
J
I
N
A
friendly
suggestion
is,
I
would
maybe
make
the
time
period.
I
don't
know
2020
through
2025,
just
to
make
it
an
even
three
decades
realizing
we're
a
year
and
a
half
into
that.
But,
as
we
saw
in
the
science-based
targets,
there's
actually
not
much.
That
happens
in
the
s-curve
the
first
few
years.
B
B
E
Yeah
I'll
move
that
we
adopt
the
resolution
as
written
by
nick
with
final
decision
to
aaron.
B
Nope
excellent
and
I
like
it
kelly
or
luke,
would
you
be
willing
to
take
the
role.
A
M
F
G
A
A
L
J
L
B
Thank
you
kelly,
we'll
try
to
wrap
this
up
really
quick
here.
Thank
you
so
much
to
kelly
and
luke
for
being
here
for
nick
in
the
working
group
for
for
doing
all
that
great
work
and
presenting
it
really
appreciate
it,
and
if
anyone
had,
I
think
there
are
updates
and
old
stuff
that
we
didn't
get
to.
So,
if
folks
have
updates,
they
want
to
share.
B
Please
email
it
out
to
the
group,
and
yes,
I
think
I
think
that's
all,
but
I
don't
want
to
cut
it
off
if
anyone
wants
to
jump
in
and
say
anything
last
minute.
N
B
Thanks
luke
yeah
definitely
should
have
mentioned
that,
thanks
for
the
awesome
conversation
and
attentiveness
and
just
thoughtfulness
from
the
whole
group
appreciate
it
all
right.
So
do
council,
members
and
staff
have
been
in
their
matters
they
wish
to
bring
before
the
council
before
we
adjourn.
B
Is
the
script
all
right
with
that
we've
completed
all
the
items
on
the
agenda
for
this
meeting,
thanks
to
everyone,
council,
members
and
community
members
for
joining
us
tonight
and
participating
in
our
discussion,
you
can
always
reach
us
at
sustainability
at
minneapolis.mn.gov
and,
if
not
and
without
objection,
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
Our
next
year
meeting
will
be
on
december
15
2021
at
5
pm
and
will
be
held
as
a
virtual
online
meeting.
Thank
you.
Everybody.