Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-10-2020 Climate Action CommissionIowa City Climate Action Commission Agenda Monday, February 10, 2020, 3:30— 5:00 p.m. Iowa City Public Library 123 s. Linn St. Meeting Room A Meeting Agenda: 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of January 6,2020 minutes 4. Public Comment of items not on the Agenda 5. Old Business: a. Request from Council for Commission to research and advise the Council on the carbon footprint of buildings of varying density and scale 6. New Business: a. Addressing scheduling issues b. Update and discussion about the Transit Study c. Election of Chair and Vice -Chair d. Discussion of draft list of non -economic co -benefits for climate actions e. Commission feedback of the 100-Day Report, "Accelerating Iowa City's Climate Actions' i. Buildings ii. Transportation iii. Waste iv. Adaptation v. Sustainable Lifestyle f. Update on working groups i. Buildings (Krieger, Karr, Soglin) ii. Transportation (Leckband, Giannakouros) iii. Outreach (Krieger, Fraser, Holbrook, Bradley) iv. Equity/Adaptation (Tate, Hutchinson) v. Waste (Bradley, Sarsfield) 7. Staff/Commission Announcements 8. Adjourn NOTE: This meeting will be held on the second (rather than the first) Monday of the month due to the conflict with the Presidential Caucus date on February 3. If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Brenda Nations, Sustainability Coordinator, at 319-356-6161 or at brenda-nations()iowa-citv.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to meet your access needs. MINUTES PRELIMINARY IOWA CITY CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION JANUARY 6, 2020 —3:30 PM— FORMAL MEETING IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, MEETING ROOM A MEMBERS PRESENT: Madeleine Bradley, John Fraser (via phone), Stratis Giannakouros, Kasey Hutchinson, GT Karr, Matt Krieger, Jesse Leckband, Katie Sarsfield, Becky Soglin, Eric Tate MEMBERS ABSENT: Grace Holbrook STAFF PRESENT: Sue Dulek, Ashley Monroe, Brenda Nations OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Falk, Ben Grimm, Paul Pomrehn RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None CALL TO ORDER: Krieger called the meeting to order. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 2, 2019 MINUTES: Karr moved to approve the minutes of December 2, 2019 with revisions that will be send to Nations. Leckband seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 10-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Ben Grimm (representative Iowa City Community School District) noted that in December they got a summary report on the carbon footprint of the City schools. Grimm reminded everyone that the Iowa City Schools are actually in five different cities and the report represents the entire school district. According to the report, if they stay on course and continue with the projects they have planned and facilities master plan version one, they will actually exceed the expectations the City has set out for objectives for reducing their carbon footprint. Grimm added they're going to actually go back in history and see what their school district looked like before they started this process. In the school district all but four schools that have geothermal so that is where a lot of their carbon footprint went down when converted to geothermal, so he believes they have four sites left that still need to be converted. And as they work forward into facilities master plan 2.0, they're going to look at other ways that they can reduce that and get as close to zero as possible. The two big ticket items for the school district are energy for the building and to have the bus fleets all on diesel. So those are the two big things that they're going to be looking at the next few years. Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 2 of 12 REQUEST FROM COUNCIL FOR COMMISSION TO RESEARCH AND ADVISE COUNCIL ON THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF BUILDINGS OF VARYING DENSITY AND SCALE: Krieger noted this item will continued to be deferred to future meetings as it has a longer timeline than some of the other items, they are discussing with the 100-day report. This was assigned to the buildings working group to address so that's something to look at an upcoming meetings and discussion. REQUEST FOR COMMISSION TO GET PUBLIC INPUT ON 100-DAY REPORT: Krieger suggested to roll this into item six B, which is more detailed feedback and review of the report. BASICS OF OPEN MEETINGS AND OPEN RECORD LAWS: Sue Dulek (Assistant City Attorney) presented to the Commission some basics of open meetings, open records, meeting agendas and why there might be something on the agenda and doesn't really make sense, and to answer any questions. Dulek noted she can always come back to another meeting for a refresher or to answer questions, or feel free to call or email her directly if there are questions. Regarding open meetings, there must be 24 hours' notice, so for example, if everybody thought it was a good idea to meet tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock it can't be done absent an emergency. An example of an emergency would be City Council meeting immediately because the landfill caught on fire or something like that. For all meetings the agendas are posted on the internet and given out to the media. That is why public comment on items not on the agenda is on every agenda, it's for the public to comment, it's not for the Commission to comment, it's not for staff to comment. If there needs to be discussion from something that is bought up in public comment, it can be put on the next agenda and then staff, and Commissioners can have those discussions. It is an open meeting with a quorum anytime there are six commission members talking about a climate matter. While it's unlikely that six members would all find themselves at the Java House or something like that, but if so, the last thing you want to do is have all six of you sit down at the table and start talking about the climate. There will be times when six or more of you will be at public event, those things do happen, they happen with City Council as well, but just be conscious to not talk about something like the 100-day report while you're all together. Dulek also noted the Commission might get something from Nations and see a response that will say do not reply all, that's because it can actually be a simultaneous meeting if everybody's going back and forth on the internet and that would be a meeting and the public hasn't been notified nor can participate. Regarding agenda items, such as when there are commission member reports, it is just a time for a report on what was done but not a time to have a substantive discussion because specific Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 3 of 12 matters are not on the agenda. It would be a time to suggest putting the item on a future agenda for a substantive discussion. Dulek next talked about open records. 99% of the things that happen at the City is public, personnel records are not but almost everything else is. As an example, if the City got an open records request about something having to do with climate action and there were two projects and some folks wanted to do project A and some want to do project B and they were both great projects and it's kind of split evenly. The IT department could search Nation's emails coming and going for project A and project B, however it can't with the Commission because you use your own computers. Therefore, the Commission would get an email from Dulek saying she needs all the emails having to deal with project A and project B, just because it's on a home computer, or a work -related computer, if it's City business, its City business. That's is also a reminder about making comments that you wouldn't want read by the public. Dulek also talked about their charge as a Commission and about conflicts that may be of interest. The resolution that City Council set up the Commission sets forth the duties and responsibilities. There may be some point in time where a member of either the public or a member of the group wanting to do something, and the topic will come back to is that within the charge and within the duties and responsibilities. Dulek noted it's always good to review the resolution because this is what Council charged the Commission with. Council can change or amend the resolution per your requests. Lastly Dulek discussed conflicts of interest, noting it probably won't happen very often but again, for example there were those two proposals and one of the proposals you were going to advocate to Council to purchase something from a business and your spouse was employed by that business, that should be disclosed to Nations who would have a conversation with Dulek. A lot of times they are not legal conflicts just more kind of comfort or appearances of conflicts to the public. There are times when a Commission member will recuse himself or herself from the discussion. Krieger asked about the working documents the Commission is producing, likely those are often in draft form as we're working on them so do we just want to need to make sure that we're labeling all of those documents. Dulek stated that's the easiest way, but draft documents are not public, they can be held back. Krieger asked what's considered a draft document versus a non -draft? Dulek responded a draft document would be something when you're prepared to have that discussion, but if you've got some working groups or smaller groups and are just kind of going back and forth and haven't brought it to the Commission yet, it would be considered a draft. When a document is ready for action, as opposed to something that's floating around internally, then it becomes a public document. Soglin asked if the Commission is able to use a Google Drive for working draft documents. Dulek confirmed they can as long as staff has access as well. Fraser asked about working groups, if there are only two members of the Commission on a working group and eight other people, does that meeting has the same requirements to be public because there are more than six or are there only two. Dulek stated if six members of the Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 4 of 12 Commission are present and discussing a topic then it must be an open meeting. Working groups don't have to be public, meetings do not have to be published, and there doesn't have to be minutes. Additionally, you don't have to allow members the public to sit in and they don't have to be notified 24 hours in advance right. Fraser asked if in the end the outreach working group comes to a huge document and want to introduce that document to the entire Commission, or more than six people on the Commission, at that point, everything that's discussed regarding the work of the working group is now public. Dulek confirmed that was correct. REQUEST FROM COUNCIL FOR THE COMMISSION REVIEW AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK OF THE 100-DAY REPORT, "ACCELERATING IOWA CITY'S CLIMATE ACTIONS": Krieger noted during the last meeting they had charged the working groups with reviewing and providing feedback on the actions within the report. He would like to go group by group and provide what were the recommendations and discussions from those. Soglin stated she was a little uncomfortable making recommendations when they don't yet have public comments if that's considered an important part of what we're supposed to deliver, to making recommendations without that in her mind is just preliminary discussion. Krieger agreed and noted the discussion last time was that if we wanted to try to provide recommendations rather quickly this feedback would be recommendations and feedback directly from the members of the Commission and not the public. This is an attempt to make sure it's clear to the Council we're not ignoring them. Buildings: Krieger noted the buildings working group wasn't able to schedule an in -person meeting since the last meeting, but they did request feedback from the people that were interested in being on that group. The six individuals who provided feedback were Krieger, Soglin, Jeff Falk, Ben Grimm, Karr and Martha Norbeck. Each of them individually reviewed it and provided some feedback and that feedback was different per person. Sometimes it was priorities or recommendations, other times it was just discussion questions or things to consider so it's kind of hard to provide an overall summary but what he did was took the feedback each person provided around the actions that were identified and there were five that kind of floated to the top that people prioritized similarly. Those items were: education item number one, which is promoting energy efficiency and performance tips to the public; education item number two, which was partner with stakeholders promote green building; rehab incentive number one, which was operating free home energy assessments through Green Iowa AmeriCorps; regulation number one, creating more robust energy code inspection program; and regulation number two, incorporating stricter energy standards into tax increment financing policies. Soglin stated since the buildings group didn't have a chance to talk about it amongst themselves and although there's some clear things that are coming to the top with some discussion there may be some shifts. Karr noted he and Norbeck spoke this afternoon about this and approached it as it's great to get all the ideas out there but to frame it as what are the top three achievable goals that they can Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 5 of 12 get off the ground, get done, and then move to a second and third priority. He noted with regards to the public input the people that are giving us input now have had opportunities to give input many times. He would personally love to see them partner with somebody do something, get something checked off, and then continue to get public input. Soglin wanted to clarify that what she is asking is that at least the six of them just get on the same page, some of the recommendations just broadly could be a quick win but they were asked also for a long-term recommendation. Also, they were concerned about equity and connecting with programs and efforts already underway. Perhaps with a little more discussion they will be ready to share something. Krieger suggests the goal of the meeting today is to just kind of flushed out and whittle it down a little bit and then put together more of a formal draft document for the Commission to vote on and to send to the Council as recommendations. Transportation: Leckband noted they had a meeting on December 19, a conference call, to discuss this and their charge sheet. They haven't really distilled what their discussions were yet but noted the committee is just Giannakouros, Leckband and Nations right now so if anyone else would like to join please let him know Leckand noted their discussion was on the education components and the outreach campaigns, if that's going to happen this year it would be nice to get a little bit more information about that. Most of the transportation goals in the near term are City actions so it might be helpful to get Public Works representation for green initiatives, idle policies and things like that, what those tracking metrics mean, etc. Giannakouros noted the discussion was about sharing fleet information, they discussed the transit study as something we would have called for if it wasn't happening right now, in order to understand some of the key things. When looking through the 100-day Action Plan the action items did depend upon a robust amount of data to understand what the needs of the citizens are. The other thing they discussed was that there's a clear link between equity and achieving transportation goals. For example, if you are a lower income household, you spend a disproportionately high amount of your income just in transportation. This is not to say that we should target communities that are lower income in our city but that, in fact, is a way to achieve our climate goals. Lower incomes are going to drive generally higher polluting cars, they're generally people that need public transit, and that can be incentivized. So the free fare thing that is listed in here is a wasted target unless we make sure that the transit study and our efforts link up to understanding what the needs of those communities are. Giannakouros noted that's where the outreach piece comes in, they have to find a way to get the people to say if they are in a certain community in the city and in a certain demographic, socially strategically challenged status, such as young people that are grade school age, or people in the community, that would be a primary target for better transportation, that's going to reduce emissions. It is hard to make an appeal to someone who already is going to go to buy a new EV or a Prius, they have the money and the ability to transition fast with new technology. If you're poor and you have a very old car, and that car is undependable, those are the people we want to make sure are really heard in this.The link between the equity group and transportation has to be made more Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 6 of 12 profound, to understand how our transportation policies affect people who are economically disadvantaged. Nations added is that the transportation section goals are dependent on what is found in the in the transit study and the EV readiness plan. There will be more clear path one those are doing and we will be waiting to get those done to see recommendations. Giannakouros noted in planning, in general, the thing that's going to change is how people move themselves and how we think about mobility. Complete Streets is a policy that exists, but people don't understand how comprehensive if done correctly, we don't have to invent the wheel on that we just have to make sure that Complete Streets is implemented properly. It's not just saying "hey it would be nice if more people used like their bikes", that's not realistic. It's saying that people should be able to get from point A to point B in a way that's low carbon and that enhances quality of neighborhoods. All these things that can come together to disproportionately impact low income residents. When the City plans neighborhoods, plans roads and access, having a policy like Complete Streets that's enforced is going to get us 90% of the way there without having to think too hard about what transit means. An absence of planning is planning of a different sort. Not to pick on certain subdivisions or areas of Iowa City that are that are sort of low density and spread out and haven't thought about this, but once those go into place on the back end, trying to figure out how to build everything in is really challenging. Therefore if over the next 20 or 30 years, we're serious about decarbonizing our transit structure there has to be an emphasis from the City to think about planning in a more robust and proactive way that targets low economic social communities and also make sure that the planning that's going on is structured for EV charging stations, for public transit, for access otherwise, but there's not a lot that you can do on the back end to fix that. Nations added they are budgeting for a transportation data analysis. Monroe stated they are arranging for when the consultant comes back to hold a public announcement of the transit study results, and they will encourage people from all neighborhoods and community to come to the meeting and they'll be sending transit into the neighborhoods to get those people to and from the meeting. Krieger asked what is the timing of the transit study completion and do some of the issues that Giannakouros is bringing up need to be incorporated into the study to make sure they are reaching the communities that we want to have incorporated and included in the feedback. Giannakouros stated they discussed that in their group, how to get everyone take the transit survey. Nations said the transit study should be done in summer 2020. Monroe added the consultants got rider feedback by riding on the buses and collected close to 1300 individual responses from people who are already riding busses. Then they also have the survey that went out, they'll probably announce more about those results at this upcoming meeting. Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 7 of 12 Sarsfield noted she sent the survey link to her work HR department and asked if they need to have their contractor services at the next transit meeting because they do talk at work sometimes about how it'd be nice if there was a bus route that went to certain areas, etc. Sarsfield suggested they need to have the transit study consultants reach out to employers, like HyVee, because they know a lot of people take the bus to get groceries, and reach out to people who would have people come in to their places from transit if it was more accessible. Monroe noted at this upcoming public meeting the consultants will have coordinated all the data from the survey and compile it to have three different looks at what the system could look like and then keeping gathering feedback on that. Giannakouros noted an urban planning class did a study, it didn't have a huge end use data set, but for Iowa students at least some of the reasons why they wouldn't use transit or be leery of it aren't things that are directly related to efficiency of time. So, for people of color or females in particular, one of the things that came up repeatedly was feeling safe. So, it may not be a question of is there a bus available, it is a question of is it a well -lit spot. Planners need to think about how to get people within a three-mile radius, for sure two-mile or one -mile radius of their cars to take the bus every day to work. He added while it is more efficient to use the there's a huge learning curve. Krieger asked if through their interactions with this work do they have an understanding of how important the co -benefits are for the decision making here versus the straight direct costs versus revenues. Giannakouros stated that based on just reading the actions, it's hard to understand exactly what all surrounds those to be able to make a recommendation. What is the potential impact from a metric standpoint, are there are other factors, how much is it going to cost, what are the other benefits that would make you want to recommend that action? Some of that research was done into the original 35 actions, more broad actions that were incorporated within the overall action plan. Giannakouros asked if the Commission is able to have any influence on the direction of the transit study or the actions based on what we come up with as recommendations related to transportation. Or are these completely separately moving. Soglin stated she had to apply an equity lens to what they're doing and hopes they all agree that they should run each working group, buildings, transportation, waste and adaptation, and outreach through an equity lens, equity meaning separate. Tate noted he studies natural disasters and there's place after place and planning processes in cities, they have comprehensive plans and then they have hazard planning, and they never talked to each other. So, he wants to know are the things that they're doing is going to intersect with these other actions that are happening? Nations stated the goal in the City is to have climate action be institutionalized within all of their things as well as equity. That's the goal, it's something that the City Manager supports, to have Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 8 of 12 equity be part of everything the City does, as well as climate. She added the person that's in charge of running the transit study went to a meeting in Oregon with her and the whole meeting was about equity and co -benefits around transit. The whole goal with all the City's plans is to have them merge, so climate action is part of the transit study. Sarsfield asked how practically speaking how does that look. Are the Commission's inputs going to be acknowledged at the January 27 transit study meeting, or should the consultant be invited to a Commission meeting. Nations agrees to inviting the Transit staff to a Commission meeting but encourages the Commission also to go to the Transit study meeting. Giannakouros stated he bracketed his comments as sort of isolated in the transit discussion but noted throughout all discussions if the City's going to spend money on climate action it needs to be primarily targeted towards groups that are disadvantaged, it's a chance to rectify those constraints and those problems, and it also is a smart way to spend the dollars. That's transportation, it's buildings, everything they do. So, the co -benefits are huge when they're spent in the right segments. Nations agrees noting everything shows that when you help the people that need it the most you actually help everybody. Soglin acknowledged she agrees with Giannakouros however should consider there could be a project or one of the action steps that the immediate benefit is not potentially to lower income or disadvantage of by doing that actually then frees up other money somewhere and has a major impact overall. Fraser stated he is struck by the ethical lapses and that all the subcommittees need to work on equity, but there needs to be somebody that's making sure that all the subcommittee ethical ideas are put together in one chunk, someone who follows through on it with legislation, because without legislation or some sort of guidance or punitive message, people will fall back into misbehavior. Nations noted when presented with the 100 Day report, one Council member said if we do all these things, even if we weren't looking at climate, it will just make our City better. We'd have cleaner air, people walking more, people being healthier. We would support people who need it most. Fraser agreed but noted it's the unintended consequences of do gooders that sometimes cause a lot of problems so what we're really looking at is how do we prevent unintended consequences as we're doing good. Waste: Nations noted she was invited to go to Friday night meeting by the people that were putting on the LENA Project and that is a woman and some university students who originally came to the City Council about reducing straws in restaurants downtown. This group is really interested in talking about waste and climate. They seem like very dedicated people from all different places, restaurant owners and recycling people, etc. so she thought that it would be a perfect group to be a waste working group because they were knowledgeable and wanting to Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 9 of 12 really make positive changes as far as waste citywide and composting and they had different backgrounds. Bradley stated she attended that meeting as well and would be willing to be the Commission member that would be in charge of the waste working group and engage the members of the LENA Project. She said she found the meeting really interesting, because we've been talking about how much of an impact buildings and transportation have kind of the disconnect that people have with how important waste is. But as a working group it could be a good way to get more people involved in the environmental discussion. Nations noted an interesting article that talked about what actions people will have the biggest impact on climate and everybody thinks recycling is the biggest thing but it's not however, it's the gateway drug. Recycling is the gateway drug to and even though we didn't think about having a waste group because it's only 2% of our all of our emissions, as far as the City portion goes, we have a goal to reduce what's going into landfill by 50%. Bradley agreed to be the liaison and the group would be composed of private interest groups and individuals within the community expressed an interest in talking about these issues. Giannakouros asked if City staff can sit on the working groups. Krieger noted the idea was as the groups identify what expertise for the tasks that their dealing with move to invite staff for feedback, but they would not have to be a permanent member of the working group Monroe stated if staff can offer those connections to the working groups, even if they're not a formal member of the group, please reach out to them. It could be a conversation with a staff member on certain issues or a presentation at a meeting, that is how they want to help. The waste group can also discuss sustainable lifestyle because it seems like that group is very interested in sustainable lifestyle and it speaks to things like food and waste compost. Sarsfield made a motion to form a Waste Working Group led by Bradley, Krieger seconded the motion, a vote was taken, and the motion passed 10-0. Sarsfield suggested moving from equity the waste group because she works at manufacturing plant and represents three plants in town. She agreed to also be on the waste working group. Adaptation: Tate noted they haven't met yet, they are scheduled to meet on Thursday. They will be discussing individual takeaways from the 100-day report and trying to identify low hanging fruit things they should prioritize early. Tate did question how all the working groups will work as a whole to handle these cross -cutting issues, so the cross -cutting things aren't subsumed and lost. Soglin noted she has seen presented at conferences, definitely an equity lens, which she thought the City had a version of it at one point, it's a list and used as a check. Perhaps a few other concepts could be added to that and then we all use it for our groups. Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 10 of 12 Nations stated the City does have and equity toolkit, the people that were on the original steering committee had that as part of their documents. She will email it to everybody. Soglin stated she would be happy to edit it and add the topic intersections that they might want to be thinking about beyond intersection. Nations will work with Soglin to come up with a checklist for non -economic co -benefits and it will be on the agenda for the next meeting so the Commission can discuss. There was discussion on non -economic benefits as all benefits have economic benefits. Tate noted that because this is Iowa City, because this is a public entity, they serve all citizens and have to be aware the systems set up don't unintentionally disenfranchised people in a way that impoverishes them or causes economic insecurity. But it really is about using this as an opportunity to give people access to the system. If they're more integrated, they have a say, they're at the table, and they're benefiting in ways that make their life better. Yes, you can quantify all of that eventually, but that's indirectly, and also contributes to a better democracy. Fraser stressed the importance of making sure all parts of the City are equally maintained when it comes to things like tree planting as to benefit everyone. Nations noted the City has a tree canopy map, and there is a grant that the City got where they're going to be planting trees where they are lacking in the neighborhoods that don't have them and cross referencing that with census tract. Karr asked if there is a way to take the expertise that they have, come up with three or four priorities before they recommend and give themselves time to almost take care of it in the working groups rather than just brainstorming here. Tate questioned the group adaptation and equity and with the 100-day Report it's a more concrete sort of formulation of adaptation actions, and this is what equity means versus whatever the first report was from two years ago. He feels there is limited overlap between these two, they can certainly push forward and address both but also seems like they're a bit different too. Sarsfield noted it just keeps coming back to equity overarching over all of the groups. Maybe equity should be the whole Commission and forget the sub business. Fraser feels that is dangerous because they don't have representation on this group to be smart enough to catch all the inequities that might come out of the wonderful ideas. Tate states they are smart enough to figure out where to get the information when they are trying to answer questions. Outreach: Krieger noted they have met twice since the last meeting because it feeds into almost everything else with education components and awareness components. The top four items that were discussed were having the realtors agreeing on the MLS was an important one because that impacts multiple things at the same time, the green business program, and then educating and coordinating with local agencies on health impacts, because health is a potential, Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 11 of 12 another gateway to reach people, other populations that don't normally want to think about climate change. UPDATE ON WORKING GROUPS: Krieger noted they need to continue having some more input with the working group level to feed back into the discussion next time. The working groups will need their reports ready to go out in the next agenda packet, so they are due to Nations by January 27 to get in the next agenda. UPDATE ON CLIMATE FESTIVAL SEPTEMBER 18-20, 2020: Nations sent out an email requesting if there any other Commission members interested in serving on the Climate Festival Planning Committee. STAFF/COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: Krieger noted at the next meeting as part of the agenda they will have the election of the Chair and Vice Chair. Being Chair was temporary for him and they have to do these elections at the beginning of each year. Krieger also stated one of the other things they will put on the agenda is to address meeting times and potential scheduling issues. For instance, because the meetings are Mondays at 3:30 there is a potential conflict for people who are students or teachers because it's during the day and they're not going be able to make it. We can discuss if we want to think about shifting the date or the time of these recurring meetings to evening or trying to be more accommodating. Soglin questioned if they wanted to discuss the next meeting, it is the same day as the caucus, so she suggests they be prepared to really wrap up at 5:OOpm to get to the caucus. Soglin moved to change the February meeting to Monday, February 10 at 3:30pm. Giannakouros seconded the motion, a vote was taken, and the motion passed 10-0. ADJOURNMENT: Krieger made a motion to adjourn. Giannakouros seconded the motion. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 10-0. Meeting adjourned 5:06pm. Climate Action Commission January 6, 2020 Page 12 of 12 CLIMATE ACTION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2019-2020 (Meeting Date) NAME TERM EXP. O N 01 O O Madeleine Bradley 12/31/22 -- -- X X John Fraser 12/31/20 X X X X Stratis Giannakouros UI Rep X X X X Grace Holbrook 12/31/21 X X X O/E Kasey Hutchinson 12/31/22 -- -- X X GT Karr 12/31/20 X X X X Matt Krieger 12/31/20 X X X X Jesse Leckband MidAmerican Rep X X X X KatieSarsfeld 12/31/20 X X O/E X Becky So lin 12/31/22 -- -- X X Eric Tate 12/31 /21 X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting -- -- = Not a Member