[2:31] Member Carny,

[2:34] committee member Newton, aye, committee member Salman.

[2:39] We're in that. Welcome, welcome. We'll take it. Vice here, Rogers. Here.

[2:48] And I am Anthony Walker, I'm here. Welcome, everybody.

[2:53] All right.

[2:54] So, so we move on to the agenda. Do you have a motion to adopt the agenda?

[3:02] All right. Do you have a second?

[3:03] I'll suck in it. Okay, so let's see, since Michelle's remote, we have to do all

[3:10] roll calls, yeah. We do. Yeah, okay, so I'll just, I'll just, I'll just see the quick version

[3:16] becker. I, uh, Courtney? I. Noonan? I. Samm. All right. Rogers? I. And I am an eye as well.

[3:28] Okay.

[3:28] Okay, so do we have any announcements?

[3:37] Well, actually I do, I want to make sure everybody knows that we've closed the cleanup on September

[3:42] 19th, followed immediately by OpenHouse at the Sierra Point Yacht Club, and it's going to be

[3:48] a great day, so please put it on calendars and cup.

[3:54] Nice.

[3:54] Bring your sunscreen.

[3:58] Okay.

[4:00] So

[4:02] then let's see, do we have any recommendations, anyone members of the public wishing

[4:07] speak anyone online? I will note for the record that we did have a letter from

[4:13] Orchard Partners, which was attached to the meeting online and sent out to the

[4:21] committee. And we do have two remote attendees. So for remote folks, if you wish to

[4:27] make a comment, please raise your hand. Okay, great. Welcome everybody.

[4:35] Okay. So in

[4:37] case.

[4:41] No hands, right? We'll move on to the approval of minutes. So do I have a motion to approve

[4:47] the minutes from our July 22nd meeting? We'll make a motion to approve the minutes of July 22nd.

[4:54] Second. All righty.

[4:58] So yeah, we'll do the roll call again.

[5:00] Becker.

[5:01] Hi.

[5:01] Carny.

[5:02] Hi.

[5:03] Newton.

[5:04] Yes.

[5:04] I.

[5:05] Simon.

[5:07] Rogers.

[5:08] Hi.

[5:08] And I'm an as well.

[5:10] All right.

[5:11] Good stuff.

[5:12] Okay.

[5:13] So now we've got right our old business.

[5:19] So discussion of the June 2026.

[5:22] Oh, sec comment letter on the Bayland's specific plan.

[5:25] F-E-I-R.

[5:28] I added this one because I think, before I walk you through a concrete example as an illustration,

[5:38] I think I want to be briefly explained why I think this matters strategically for a second.

[5:44] Now that the planning commission has advanced the bail-and-specific plan to the city council,

[5:50] I think, you know, we kind of need to reconsider the concerns that we've voiced in terms that the Council can act on directly and will respond to.

[6:02] And, you know, I think probably the best way to frame it is really compliance at this point.

[6:08] You know, does it, does it comply with measure JJ and is it consistent with the sustainability framework?

[6:15] And any other specific relevant documents that might be out there.

[6:19] And includes, you know, where possible specific remedies that the council might be able to, you know, incorporate into the final plan, right, offer, offer our thoughts and guidance on that.

[6:33] Right, so I think looking back at our comments.

[6:39] I think OSEC still has many valid concerns.

[6:44] And some have been addressed while others continue to be sort of deferred, deflected, reinterpreted in ways that I think we can the original commitments.

[6:55] So at this stage, I think, you know, we should be pragmatic about which issues we kind of choose to advance.

[7:05] And, you know, which ones we think are still important.

[7:08] So my suggestion is that we kind of revisit these concerns that we've voiced at the

[7:16] planning commission through that lens of does it comport with the guiding documents that, you

[7:24] know, were adopted by voters and the city council, and consider setting an update.

[7:30] Did letter, um, voicing a lot of the same concerns to, to the council as a, as a group.

[7:36] Um, so anyway, just anybody have any thoughts, questions about that before I.

[7:42] Yeah.

[7:42] I probably missed it, but, um, I just thought the, um, the basure freeway or basure boulevard was, uh, no.

[7:55] The, I forgot what we were calling it.

[7:58] The base formability plan and the road diet.

[8:02] Yeah, I thought that was no go.

[8:04] I didn't realize the planning commissioners approved this specific plan and it's in front of council now.

[8:15] Yeah, I wasn't aware of that.

[8:18] It's worth not entirely sure, so I don't want to say definitively.

[8:22] I think we, you, me too, should look and see what they did do because I think the recommendation

[8:30] from planners was that the city council reassess that plan.

[8:35] Okay.

[8:37] Yeah.

[8:37] They were reviewing that sort of separately in a different bucket and they're on, you know, the

[8:47] did she stuff there was a recommendation to, you know, maybe look at doing more on going, you

[8:56] know, testing and monitoring and that kind of thing, but it was, it was very, you know,

[9:03] I was put it this way. I think we as OSEC can make a much more forceful and compelling case.

[9:08] Okay, I understand. Okay, thank you. Yeah.

[9:11] May I say something? It was my understanding. I watched that planning committee. I watched

[9:15] planning commission meeting and attended the O2 and was my understanding that the planning

[9:20] commission did not approve the road diet and only marginally approved part of the

[9:28] Brisbane Mobility Plan as it related to the Bayland specific plan, so there was some recommendations

[9:38] for modifications there. I'm still also very concerned that I feel like all of the issues

[9:44] that we raised in the draft TIR where it doesn't align with the specific plan, have not been addressed

[9:51] in particularly hazards and hazardous materials such as the Lizarre fuel site, you know,

[9:59] stop for chemical site, the lead deposition from Bayshore Boulevard and the lead deposition

[10:04] from 101 from using leadic gas for decades. And where the potential placement of a school would be

[10:14] which is right in an area that I consider to be a highly toxic and probably not fully documented as to what is there.

[10:24] So I still have serious concerns about the safety of where we are putting things for the plan.

[10:32] So thank you for bringing this up. Anthony, I really appreciate it.

[10:35] Yeah, absolutely, and that's a great example, I think, you know, I think probably, it's going to be, you know, that much more effective if we can now go back to the source documents and say, okay, is there anything specifically in the language of measure JJ, is there anything specifically in the

[10:58] a sustainability framework that would preclude, you know, or speak to your concerns, right?

[11:06] I think if we can sort of frame it in that lens, it may become that much more effective.

[11:14] So anyway, to that end after

[11:20] our letter, there were, I wrote a few letters of my own as an individual.

[11:26] And I think one of them frames actually develops one of the asks that we had in our original letter.

[11:35] Further, and I think frames it in this way specifically, so I thought it might be instructive for us to kind of go over that.

[11:44] Together to, you know, so you have an example of like, this is how this could go.

[11:48] Are we on quarry or are we on bailin traffic diet or are we on this this is bailin's specific specific plan and FER not not traffic diet

[11:59] Okay, yeah, okay

[12:01] I'm not quarry. No, not quarry. Yeah

[12:05] Yeah, so okay, so this one was specifically about the energy neutrality issue and I think it's a good example because

[12:15] It was previously asked for in our letter specifically that, you know, might there not be ways to address the shortfall in energy neutrality by developing out more renewable energy in Brisbane projects in Brisbane.

[12:40] Right, and that was our initial ask in our letter, but at that time, I think we were really just approaching it sort of as a matter of policy like wouldn't it be nice if that was the way that it was solved kind of.

[12:58] You know, so we, right, we asked the city of Maxwell's on-site renewable generation, pursue

[13:04] additional local generation in Brisbane, and then ideally only use renewable electricity

[13:10] procurement from financial clean energy to fill any remaining gap.

[13:17] But so the more deeply I read the sustainability framework, the more I realize that we weren't

[13:24] proposing a new standard or asking for anything unusual.

[13:27] We were asking the city, essentially, to follow the standard

[13:32] and implementation sequence already established in JJ

[13:36] and the sustainability framework.

[13:40] So I want to take you through that quickly.

[13:43] So we have kind of a mental model here.

[13:46] So the JJ, that section of JJ specifically

[13:49] says there required specific plan for the Bayland shall include a sustainability program for the

[13:56] new development consistent with the principles of the sustainability framework for the Brisbane

[14:03] Bayland's final report accepted by the City Council on November 5, 2015 Bayland's development

[14:09] shall be designed so as to be energy neutral on an ongoing basis. And then so it's the shall

[14:17] is energy neutral on an ongoing basis, but it's name checking a specific name data document,

[14:24] which is the sustainability framework.

[14:28] So, I think this ongoing means once it's completed

[14:31] it's energy neutral, but then there may be it's going to be energy awful while they're

[14:37] constructing it. Well, it has to be it's ongoing basis, so it would have to be, you know,

[14:45] in construction and after, presumably.

[14:48] Now, so then what it says about this in the sustainability framework specifically, it repeatedly defines energy neutrality as the development producing itself.

[15:00] Own annual energy needs, right? So producing as much as it needs throughout the year. And in fact, goes further in several places is saying it, you know, would be great if it produced more than that than that went back into the community.

[15:15] But it also recognizes that a gap may remain and establishes an explicit order of acceptance, which I found interesting and I didn't didn't know when we wrote our original letter.

[15:26] And it's so a determined capacity for waste energy

[15:31] or bio gas cogeneration to fill the gap of renewable energy

[15:36] for buildings, as well as generate site-wide.

[15:39] So that's basically if there's potential for electric generation

[15:43] from bio gas, I'm assuming from the landfill,

[15:49] then use that otherwise generate as much as you can on site,

[15:53] Right. Then be determined if any additional offsite community scale renewable energy is feasible within Brisbane.

[16:02] That seems to have been completely skipped over.

[16:05] And then see consider use of community choice aggregation, CCA program to purchase renewable energy if it becomes available to the city of Brisbane.

[16:18] And the reason that that's worded that way seems to be that in 2015 PCE was still not.

[16:27] Yeah, it wasn't serving customers yet.

[16:29] So it was sort of, if this becomes available in future,

[16:32] let's explore that as sort of a last resort.

[16:35] And that sequence really matters, right?

[16:37] It's, you know, CCA procurement and civil clean energy it's listed last.

[16:40] It's a fallback after the other generation options have been exhausted.

[16:44] not as an alternative definition of energy neutrality, right?

[16:51] But, unfortunately, the consultant, yes, as attachment 5, which incidentally was submitted

[16:58] after the close of the public hearing, nevertheless treats the project that, you know, generates

[17:06] only 54% of its own electricity on site and purchases the remaining 46% as satisfying

[17:14] all of the above. And it does that mainly by claiming that the sustainability framework was only

[17:22] ever aspirational, and that the standard was actually always renewable energy and not energy

[17:29] produced meeting energy consumed,

[17:34] right? However, we worked on that. Oh, it worked on that.

[17:39] and this sustainability framework was supposed to be accepted.

[17:42] It was not aspirational.

[17:44] It was to be required.

[17:46] 100%.

[17:47] Yeah.

[17:48] And I would have said that any...

[17:51] And compliance with it is referenced in JJ.

[17:54] It's specifically referenced in JJ.

[17:56] Which means that you have aspirational, it's compliant.

[17:58] Right.

[17:58] It's compliant.

[18:01] I would have said so exactly.

[18:04] And so the other wrinkle here, which I noticed,

[18:08] is that buying renewable energy right explicitly does not eliminate the project, that energy deficit,

[18:16] it doesn't make it energy neutral, it just changes the content of the electricity,

[18:22] but

[18:23] more importantly, when I looked into it, what's, I sort of was like, okay, well, what's actually

[18:28] required of the developer here? The specific plan only requires the developer to write that purchasing

[18:36] requirement into covenants conditions and restrictions and lease agreements, meaning that

[18:44] future utility customers in the baylands, not the developer would bear the cost of filling that gap.

[18:53] Right?

[18:56] So, I'm going to just raise a point here too, also because of privacy issues,

[19:00] we would never be able to verify that that that was the case. Right. And so it is really

[19:08] get. Yeah, totally agree with that. That's, yeah. So to remedy that, are you asking that the city

[19:18] consider that the ownership of that requirement be on the developer? Well, I mean, so, I mean, I,

[19:29] I wanted like, Mary, what is, can you use your mic please, Mary? What would we go to council as

[19:37] possible solution. Yeah, right. So I think really the solution is, right, that, that, you know,

[19:47] we've measured J.J. says what it says, the sustainability framework says what it

[19:51] says. Yeah. And so, you know, the requirement was that it has to be designed so as to be

[19:58] energy neutral. Yeah. It hasn't met that standard. Okay. And so there needs to be some accountability

[20:05] there. And there's a clear, you know, order of operations, maximize on site generation first.

[20:12] I think that probably hasn't really been done, but, you know, that has to be required, right?

[20:22] And then pursue feasible additional generation within Brisbane. That's been completely skipped over in favor

[20:29] of CCA procurement to cover anything that genuinely remains, you know, so I, yeah, I mean, I think

[20:41] that is essentially what we were asking for in our original letter, but we just didn't have the

[20:59] So anyway, just wanted to give you all of that context

[21:02] and walk you through that little adventure that I've

[21:07] been on to give you an idea of the kind of thought

[21:12] process that I think we could apply to some further

[21:17] concerns in the original letter.

[21:19] Yeah, I 100% agree.

[21:21] I think at this point being kind of pragmatic.

[21:25] And I want to say, picking our bottles,

[21:27] I come back to that, but figuring out what we need to write that's on an issue and not a thousand bullet points is probably time to roll that up into a compelling argument.

[21:43] And things that might be our pet projects and are just a few bullets we can submit as our personal comments, right?

[21:49] I think that OSEC letter should, as you say, be concise and pragmatic.

[21:55] So you're tracking what we were going to get to this anyway, Michelle and I are meeting

[22:00] with Dolores and probably Adrian as part of the Dark Sky's ordinance to make a recommendation

[22:06] on what part of the Dark Sky's ordinance needs to be updated to include the baylands, because

[22:13] even though they say they're going to meet it, the town ordinance needs to get updated.

[22:18] So stuff like that can also be done separately from the OSEC letter.

[22:24] So I just want to go through that in there.

[22:26] Absolutely.

[22:31] Thank you, Anthony, for doing this and for keeping on it and working it and finding those loose poles and trying to fix it.

[22:39] Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, thanks to everybody for being on it. Keep it in your hand level.

[22:45] So, okay, so I think we, for the last letter established a subcommittee, right, so maybe it makes the most sense to throw that back to that same subcommittee or should we handle it a different way, what do you think?

[23:02] I think that makes sense you have an existing subcommittee and that would probably speed your process along.

[23:10] I don't know that the timeline is very clear yet of the dates of the bail-and-seering.

[23:17] I'm hearing that on the September 3rd meeting, they're going to talk about something.

[23:23] The schedule.

[23:24] So after they meet on the 3rd, I think we'll have more clarity around what their kind of public hearing schedule is going to be.

[23:35] And that's next week and this committee won't meet again until I don't have the date right in front of me, but late September. So it probably makes sense for you to work on it as a subcommittee and be prepared to submit a letter, you know, as those council hearings get underway.

[23:59] If the timing works out such that a draft letter can come back to Osaka for review and discussion,

[24:06] then we can do that.

[24:08] But if not, I think you would probably want to have the committees kind of go ahead today.

[24:17] I think I need to get off of that subcommittee.

[24:19] I'm sorry, my workload is not conducive for that right now.

[24:25] Okay.

[24:26] We can get to that when we do the subcommittee.

[24:30] You can go ahead and I would say go ahead and talk about it now while we're on the topic.

[24:35] To just go ahead and fill that spot while we're discussing this business.

[24:41] I think would fall under this point.

[24:44] I think it was just the two of you if I remember.

[24:46] Hannah, Hannah, yes, no. I don't think so. I think I contributed to the overall comments, but I don't think I was a part of the, oh, you know what? No, I was. Yes, yes, I think I have nothing to say.

[25:01] I'm a fan of Anthony.

[25:04] That's because I did nothing, so that's why I remember.

[25:07] I'm a little underwater too right now, I would say depends on the list.

[25:11] I'm happy to help, but I not have the time to go down.

[25:16] Additional rabbit holes for other topics, as well, besides just noise and energy.

[25:23] Can I say that I strongly agree with Representative Becker over here?

[25:29] I think that I'm here in one thing, which is the energy neutrality.

[25:32] I'm here in another from Michelle, which is the toxicity where this school

[25:35] these two things. Let's not go down any rabbit holes. These two things we feel strongly about the energy

[25:42] on going thing we feel strongly about toxicity and all the other shit the train has left the station.

[25:49] It looks like we're not in contact with how the times are changing and the time is different now.

[25:54] So I think those two things really focused in and then again, not have 24 pages of it,

[26:05] you know,

[26:07] Okay, well, I mean, am I the only one then?

[26:15] You know, I can help you.

[26:17] I just won't be able to expect a ton of time.

[26:19] But I can absolutely cross-reference, you know,

[26:23] help refine and elaborate on some areas.

[26:26] Maybe we can handle some things remotely and that.

[26:29] Okay.

[26:30] Yeah, I mean, we talk about those two big things.

[26:36] I don't think it's going to be as extensive as all the stuff we commented on, you know,

[26:41] I mean, I think it, I don't mean to minimize the work you're planning to do, but, but,

[26:46] and you could ask me to help read stuff, but I just think if we keep it focused like that,

[26:51] I think it would be better than all of the sub topics in there, you know.

[26:55] Yeah, quick question. Do we also want to consider Ice House Hill,

[27:00] the development that makes it go from kind of native and protected to being a landscape

[27:07] park, even if they're landscaping it with natives. The trails, the horses, the public,

[27:15] the cigarette butts, the potato chip bags, they're turning it into like a trail heavy hill instead

[27:24] of protecting it as habitat,

[27:29] which, and it's, you know, as Michelle tells us, it is that last

[27:33] bit of, you know, undeveloped part of the, the ridge.

[27:40] Yeah.

[27:41] Potentially.

[27:42] I sort of have the same feeling about that as, you know, a lot of the other concerns

[27:50] and it's like, is, is there anything specifically that we can point back to that says,

[27:54] like, you can't do that?

[27:56] protection of ice has held was definitely in JJ. Yeah. And so then. Yeah. So I think that's

[28:01] something we've got to do is then find that language pick it up and say, here you go, this is

[28:07] why not. Okay. Right. Right. What it or maybe, you know, we can do this on the side, but

[28:15] almost just kind of comb through JJ and find those items that we can essentially tie back because

[28:20] what I'm hearing is that we essentially need a specific piece of legislation, you know, past

[28:25] by City Council that we can uphold and show the violation or inconsistency with what's proposed

[28:32] and kind of that create the guide map and what we push back on.

[28:37] Yeah, yeah, I think that's, I do feel that that's probably going to be the most effective path

[28:42] if we can kind of concretely point to, you know, with any one of our concerns, right?

[28:48] If it sort of rises above, you know, I don't feel great about this.

[28:54] There's still a lot of that, but if we can point back to like this specifically was promised

[29:00] and this is not been kept, then I think that ends up being more effective.

[29:07] I do also really like the idea of updating ordinances and requesting that to further bolster

[29:13] just because sometimes things were equal, fall through the cracks and if we're able to kind

[29:18] to have a more public kind of opinion in how we handle that, rather than, you know, general statewide guidelines I think we can accomplish a lot with just that kind of baseline regulation on a local level.

[29:35] Yeah.

[29:38] The DSO changes can be totally separate from our letter, though, just to keep it kind of. Of course.

[29:43] Yeah, yeah. I see that as two separate almost like paths to the same goal.

[29:48] Yeah.

[29:49] We could write as many letters as you want.

[29:51] Yeah.

[29:52] I'll still write letters, but I do like this idea of keeping it focused.

[29:58] Yeah.

[29:58] I don't live the idea of...

[30:00] 26 story buildings, on pilings, on a landfill that's toxic, on top of bay mud that's corrosive

[30:06] to mental, but I can put that in my letter.

[30:10] Right. Right. Can I just ask something? And it don't want to take us too far

[30:15] a feel, but we just keep envisioning these big changes and what will happen. And

[30:19] every once in a while comes up the noticing that Brisbane is a seven day week, seven in

[30:26] morning till 10 p.m. work town. Does the council, I mean, do they want to have a look at that?

[30:32] If we're going to have pile driving and trucks rolling in and out, I mean, it's not for

[30:37] this committee necessarily, but I'm just thinking we keep saying this could be happening soon.

[30:43] And do we want to, I mean, we were asleep a little town until 1962, and then in a minute,

[30:48] but now it's like, do we want to ignore that? That it's a seven day, seven in the morning till

[30:54] 10 p.m. worked out, the kind of noise and pollution and all that stuff.

[31:02] It's not for this committee, but what does one do to say, let's maybe look at that?

[31:08] I don't know.

[31:09] I think there's a letter in there too.

[31:11] Yeah, there's another letter.

[31:16] OK.

[31:17] Well, I think it sounds like we maybe have a Marchary Movers on that one.

[31:24] subcommittee, and then bring it back to the rest of the rest of the

[31:29] rest of the Bosec, everybody look at it, and then submit.

[31:34] The third meeting, it really, really are just going to be talking about the calendar

[31:41] and that kind of thing sounds like you're in.

[31:43] My understanding is that at the September 3rd meeting, they will be talking about process.

[31:48] Okay.

[31:48] Not substance.

[31:49] I mean, that does make sense.

[31:51] So we're not in danger of them going mozzled off.

[31:54] if it's a bail-ance in one meeting.

[31:59] I mean, I would not want to comment on what will

[32:04] I won't have it, but it seems highly unlikely.

[32:10] And I guess I would just say, do you want to expect that your little

[32:15] will come back to this subcommittee?

[32:17] Or do you want to have committees approval at this point in time

[32:21] to delegate the subcommittee to go ahead and send

[32:24] the letter if timing requires?

[32:27] I wouldn't like to, what do you call, make a motion

[32:31] that you guys write the letter?

[32:33] And if timing requires, you have O6 permission to send it,

[32:37] but the preference is to see that the next meeting.

[32:40] Can I make that motion now?

[32:42] Oh, yeah.

[32:43] I was too late to second it, yeah, I'll third it.

[32:45] OK, yeah.

[32:47] I agree with that too.

[32:49] I think we'll take a roll call.

[32:50] Oh, yeah.

[32:51] and I just want to clarify. Well, go ahead and take your vote on that motion. Okay. Okay.

[32:59] So, uh, beggar. Hi, uh, Courtney. Hi. Noonan. Hi, Saman. Hi. Rogers. Hi. And I'm going to as well.

[33:07] All right. We're going to agreement then. And before we move on to our next item, I just want to clarify.

[33:12] the subcommittee is Walker and Carney no longer becker. Did I hear a noonin ability to help with the

[33:22] drafting? Sure. Okay, so the subcommittee will now be Walker, Carney, and Noonin. Rather than becker.

[33:30] Amazing. Do you have kind of an extra JJ and all the documents associated with that?

[33:36] Yeah, yeah. JJ is definitely online. Both JJ and the sustainability framework are

[33:44] Maybe we can, can we get links to that after the meeting, sent out to everybody just so.

[33:50] I mean, no.

[33:51] They're right there on the bail-ins.

[33:53] Yeah.

[33:54] Website.

[34:04] The, is the original text of JJ there?

[34:08] I can check if you'd like to move on.

[34:09] And if it's not there, I can send it up.

[34:12] That'd be great.

[34:14] I'm actually pretty positive that the original 2015 Sustainability Framework isn't.

[34:20] They've sort of rewritten it and added pictures and things, but...

[34:24] No, it's there.

[34:25] Is it?

[34:27] I'm pretty sure I referenced it on that page.

[34:31] All right.

[34:32] Let me just...

[34:34] Well, if anybody's going looking for it, don't use the one with pictures, because that's then pretty heavily rewritten.

[34:41] can

[34:44] you see that on your screens? Okay, so if you go from the city's home page,

[34:51] make sure that I mean just navigate you back from the city's home page,

[34:55] Brisbane Baleans, major documents,

[35:02] sustainability framework, and then you also

[35:05] have Measure JJ here on the left and I think that has, that's got the PDF, yeah.

[35:11] So we have the final EIR there, and for 2015, for with JJ, is that it?

[35:17] Sorry, my mouse keeps trying to jump to the other screen.

[35:21] The final EIR from 2026, the 2026 specific planned 2025 drafts.

[35:27] All of that is here on the major documents page.

[35:33] Okay, great. All in one place. We like that.

[35:36] Yes. Thank you.

[35:36] And we see the sustainability framework to make sure that it's the one that Anthony is referring to.

[35:48] Is that the one Anthony? This one has a lot of the.

[35:53] Yeah, yeah, this is the one is the original document, the 20.

[35:56] This is the original right.

[35:58] Okay.

[35:59] All right.

[36:00] Thank you.

[36:04] Excellent.

[36:05] We're ready to.

[36:06] All right.

[36:07] So she'll move on to new business.

[36:11] So discussion of the core innovation and center project.

[36:13] and notice a preparation of recirculated draft ERR.

[36:18] So do we have, we've received the notice that they're going to prepare a recirculated

[36:27] draft ERR, but we don't have one to read yet, so do we have things that anyone wants to

[36:34] discuss specifically about it before we?

[36:37] Questions? What is it mean that it is re-circulated? Does that mean it's the same document or that they will have updated it with?

[36:50] With all of the comments that we submitted or the ones that at least they think are relevant or what's going on?

[36:56] What does that mean really?

[36:58] Okay, let me see if I can give you an answer that I hope will be

[37:02] correct

[37:03] I should have been more prepared on this, so my understanding is that the applicant has submitted a project that is substantially different from the original application, which the previous EIR was based on and since it is differing by a substantial amount from that process.

[37:30] Project, they need to revise the EIR. So the notice of preparation is letting the public and relevant agencies know that they will be preparing a revised environmental impact report.

[37:46] I believe since some, obviously, some things are relevant and some things are not from the EIR that was previously circulated.

[37:56] So I don't know that it's, you know,

[37:59] they're not necessarily starting from scratch.

[38:02] But my understanding is that there would be a revised EIR.

[38:07] Some portions obviously may be the same,

[38:09] and other portions would be updated

[38:12] with the new information based on the new project scope.

[38:19] And to what extent that incorporates comments

[38:22] that were made in the prior EIR,

[38:24] it would be hard for me to say that probably varies by topic area and relevance to the new project.

[38:33] Hopefully I didn't mistate anything in there but that's that's kind of my that's helpful.

[38:39] And so since they gave us notice that they're going to prepare it. Is this the time that we would

[38:44] put in our major comments that might heavily affect the document? I like the head nods.

[38:50] So, typically with a notice of preparation, you would want to be asking for specific things

[38:58] that you want studied in the EIR, specific look at particular habitat impact or something

[39:08] along those lines.

[39:09] So if there is something that you want to make sure is studied in the EIR, this NOP is the

[39:17] opportunity to get that on their radar to be considered as part of their preparation of the revised EIR.

[39:28] And typically those comments are integrated in the respective sequence section.

[39:33] So it's actually a part of the EIR record.

[39:36] Is your relevant comment in what you would like them to highlight or analyze?

[39:42] I'm going to tip my hand here and tell you what my thing is.

[39:48] One of the comments that's in our previous comments says the DEIR says that the baseline

[39:56] to compare all development impacts against is the existing quality condition.

[40:02] All mining projects are required by Samara to have reclamation plans and a bond to offset

[40:07] the cost of reclamation. Therefore, we believe that baseline should be the Samara required

[40:15] reclaimed condition. I'm going to add that that if baseline is the, you know, already

[40:24] used land, it's on the land owner's interest to do horrible things to their land before a DE

[40:31] before an EIR because then they're always going to look better than the baseline. And I don't

[40:36] think we should let that happen, right? If they're required by another agency to reclaim the land,

[40:44] the reclaimed conditions should be the baseline for whatever Brisbane allows on that land.

[40:52] So, right, does that seem reasonable?

[40:56] Yeah, and the other danger is they make it look good without having done the proper engineering

[41:00] a background for it, so then it looks okay. And instead of knowing what this real situation is with

[41:06] the land, I think they've done a lot of that. That's my personal opinion from observing it.

[41:12] Yeah, it's almost as if they are refraining pre-project conditions to like pre-development

[41:20] conditions, because those, as you're saying, can defer greatly. Right. And we have the city of

[41:30] getting credit for something that Brisbane, you know, can't control.

[41:38] Is that, can we make does that a legitimate comment under SQA? Can we make that comment?

[41:44] You can absolutely make that comment. They essentially put it where it's most appropriate and

[41:49] kind of, they still will take what is, the kind of, this is kind of going back to like our

[41:55] comments on the EIR. It has to relate to the secret checklist question. So you try and relate the two kind of similar to what's going on with measure JJ, you try and merge your comment with what they are analyzing in those sequence questions.

[42:12] But if you do, when you can make your case, they'll totally summarize and in theory if they are doing it correctly, should be addressing it in that section as a part of the NOP comment process.

[42:29] I guess I'm curious about from a process perspective, then, what does that look like, like, who would we be submitting to and given that we don't really know the contours of the specifics of the new plan?

[42:48] Do they just kind of have to be general concerns around, you know, this or that habitat or, you know, geology or, I mean, there is some information about the project, both on the city's website and on the developers website in general terms, yeah, to reference.

[43:10] And then I think you could potentially look back as Erin's doing to your, yeah, our letter from the prior round to the prior EIR draft that was out.

[43:22] So I think you have those kind of reference points to rely on.

[43:26] That's kind of the next we're working with.

[43:28] Yeah, I would think so.

[43:31] Okay.

[43:31] Can I say something?

[43:32] Of course.

[43:33] Oh, yeah.

[43:33] Go ahead, Michelle.

[43:35] A couple of things one is I feel like I still don't have answers to a lot of the questions and concerns that we put through for the previous draft EIR.

[43:45] And then the other thing is this be very careful when you look at this because they are planning to put in a substation of PG&E type substation power station and build two 200 foot tall transmission towers to be able.

[44:00] I'm not on their property on the county property to be able to hook up to the attention power lines.

[44:07] And that is a very significant change in the environmental conditions and also into an area that

[44:16] is really high fire area and high habitat area. And we really need to make sure that they address that.

[44:27] the notice of preparation is a chance for us to say, you need to look at this, you need to look

[44:31] at that, you need to look at this, you need to look at that. And every single time that we've had

[44:36] a notice of preparation on this project, they did one during December. I think it was 2023 when

[44:43] everybody was on vacation. And the comments for 2 January 3rd. And then the next one they did was

[44:48] over 4th July, weekend. And this one's over Labor Day. So they have kind of a, and supposedly

[44:55] that isn't planned, but they have kind of this pattern of doing it when.

[45:00] People are most distracted, so we really, really need to pay attention to what things we want looked at and put those comments in the notice of preparation, so that they are addressed and not just overlooked or, oh, we already looked at that, no, you need to look at that again, because this is a very different project than the project that we looked at the first time, including this huge power substation, like 50 like gigantic megawatt

[45:29] whatever things, you know, so this is a significant change in what they're requesting.

[45:38] And the term data centers is not well-defined, so they're again, we are still very vulnerable

[45:44] in that area as well.

[45:47] Just a point of clarification. So the query, the real estate, that is still under the county, right?

[45:57] So, Brisbane has not taken that over yet. Correct? Correct. So, it has to be cleaned up before we take it over. I mean, don't we have, right?

[46:11] Brisbane is a sphere of influence and it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong Adrian.

[46:16] But it's my understanding that it is in the counties and when we have a development agreement and they begin development and it will be annexed to Brisbane.

[46:26] the part that will be developed.

[46:30] The rest that we'll remain in the county.

[46:33] So we've spent my understanding.

[46:35] So like for instance, if we did a moratorium right now,

[46:38] if we only changed the two zones that were discussed

[46:43] in yesterday's data center meeting to not

[46:49] allowing data centers in those areas,

[46:51] we would still be vulnerable for the quarry,

[46:53] because it is not yet in Brisbane.

[46:54] So we don't have the right to change the zoning on that at this time. So it's false to say that zoning is not allowed there at this point because it's not part of Brisbane yet.

[47:05] Right.

[47:07] This is still part of the county. So until the county.

[47:12] Seeds it to Brisbane to annex it.

[47:15] So we're in this like vulnerable, right, but a nebulous zone here.

[47:19] But the city should not sign on the dotted line and tell everything's when cleaned up

[47:29] satisfactorily, right?

[47:30] That I don't know. I mean, I'm sorry. I have some leverage there. Don't we?

[47:36] I don't know. I can't answer that. Mary. Okay. They have a whole legal team that needs to answer

[47:42] those kinds of questions, not me. I'm just telling you from what I know that it's not currently

[47:48] in city limits. Okay. But it is in our sphere of influence and would be annexed by Brisbane.

[47:58] So in the day, the county threatened to let daily city annex all of it, including Brock

[48:04] and Duster Park, which is how we ended up with the Northeast Ridge.

[48:12] Okay. Well, okay. The

[48:14] It looks like, right, comments should be submitted no later than 5 p.m. on September 8th.

[48:24] They're saying.

[48:26] So that's not much time.

[48:30] Right, and so there is a, a scoping meeting on September 1st.

[48:37] And remember, this is not, you're not commenting on an AR.

[48:42] your just submitting comments on what you want to be studied. So I would expect that kind of

[48:52] lift to be a little bit smaller than going through a full comment in detail.

[49:02] And if you felt something was not adequately addressed in the last draft the IR,

[49:07] This would be the place to repeat that request.

[49:11] Right.

[49:13] I also have just a quick question.

[49:15] Do we have any legislation in place creating guardrails for projects like this?

[49:23] Because I know with kind of the influx of data center projects throughout the US,

[49:29] a lot of communities have been kind of similar to like creating just ordinances.

[49:34] like you can kind of push the public for city council to adopt not necessarily or should say like

[49:41] language, not just allowing a free for all for developers. You can put in requirements where

[49:48] we don't exceed a certain noise limit or emissions limit or something like that. So it's not just

[49:54] kind of like the applicant can create an EIR make whatever kind of conclusions they want and then

[50:01] everyone goes, oh yeah, rubber stamp, good to go.

[50:04] So I'm not sure if that's something that we would ever want to consider, write a letter

[50:07] to City Council to recommend, but as this is becoming more and more popular, especially in

[50:13] the San Francisco Bay area, it might just be something to consider, kind of going back

[50:17] to our previous conversation.

[50:19] And that's what yesterday's subcommittee meeting was about and the council is working on

[50:23] it.

[50:24] And it's been requested by Madison since April that we do this, that we take this action.

[50:30] and we haven't gotten there yet.

[50:32] Okay, good to know.

[50:34] Good to know.

[50:34] Yeah.

[50:35] They're working it up, guys.

[50:37] All right.

[50:38] Yeah, really.

[50:38] It's too late.

[50:40] So I want to just couple things, yes, I was going to mention that there was a planning

[50:46] issue of subcommittee meeting on data centers yesterday that was at least the second meeting

[50:54] perhaps more that they have had as a subcommittee on that topic and the outcome of that

[51:00] meeting was that they have requested to the subcommittee ask to put that on the full Council's

[51:06] agenda for their September 17 meeting. So that is kind of the direction that that is going.

[51:16] I also want to just put on the record that the query has stated in their documentation that

[51:28] they are not proposing a data center.

[51:31] So I do want to kind of call that out and be careful that we are not conflating the two things.

[51:41] And then with regard to kind of broader noise or other kind of requirements, I mean we

[51:48] do have many different requirements in zoning, ordinance and other municipal code around

[51:55] allowable noise limits, and what is allowed to be developed in what areas, and those different kinds of things.

[52:04] So there are a lot of different mechanisms that exist besides going through this EIR process.

[52:16] Yes, I will revise not data set or query innovation center opportunity.

[52:22] Yep,

[52:28] they've been taking off this full page yet.

[52:30] Let's say no data center.

[52:31] Why didn't they in their left?

[52:33] They say no data center.

[52:35] They have to because they tried to sneak it in as an alternative use and the first DIR.

[52:41] People aren't feeling the data.

[52:42] They brought it on themselves.

[52:45] I will.

[52:46] I came up very clearly yesterday in the meeting and raised by one of the speakers from the CRCLA.

[52:53] There is no actual solid definition of what a data center is.

[52:58] And back in the day, a data center was a closet with a, I mean, we have a data center right there behind Jason in that room.

[53:05] That's a data center technically.

[53:07] Technically.

[53:08] So that just because they'd like no data centers, you can call it what you want.

[53:14] But it doesn't change what they might do.

[53:18] So just be careful about using that term.

[53:23] Yeah, yeah.

[53:24] Yeah.

[53:24] We've got to, they had to define that.

[53:26] And hopefully that's what that subcommittee is going to have.

[53:30] That was certainly part of the discussion.

[53:33] And Adrian, thank you for representing sustainability.

[53:35] Yesterday you did a great job.

[53:37] Thank you.

[53:42] Okay.

[53:43] Well, so what do we want to, sorry?

[53:46] Before I make a motion, can I make a suggestion?

[53:48] There's almost no time.

[53:49] In my brain, I see two routes forward.

[53:52] One is we make a subcommittee that acts very quickly

[53:55] and sediments a letter straight to in response to this.

[53:59] The second one is that we all pick our pet projects

[54:02] and make our own personal letters

[54:05] and hope that nothing here gets left or lost,

[54:09] but at least we've asked for the things that we think are the most important.

[54:13] And some of those things were probably going to get asked for twice.

[54:17] Either one of those in my mind is fine, because this is only the notice of preparation, it's not the new DEIR.

[54:25] Is that fair?

[54:27] I don't care which one, honestly.

[54:31] We could do a letter as an OSEC body, and then they would have to consider all comments in that letter for the NOP,

[54:38] and then maybe as private citizens, we can take our passion topic and comment where we think is appropriate.

[54:46] Yeah, I would just say that you'll have to designate a subcommittee to do that letter and submit on the committees behalf without the full committee saying it because that deadline is before the committee will meet again.

[55:00] You're right. It's like really soon. It's like two weeks or three.

[55:04] I think I can either do that, or the earlier subcommittee with Mr. JJ is kind of where I'm

[55:13] that, personally, just a heads up, but the core is one of my pet slash pet pre-project.

[55:19] So I would be on a subcommittee, or I would write a really good letter on my own.

[55:22] You guys can decide whether you want what you want to do.

[55:27] There is a whole section here on greenhouse gas, that's anything.

[55:31] I mean, I think we have a lot to work with because we have that previous letter. I guess what I'm

[55:37] wrestling with though is like the next thing I'd have to wrap my head around is how much has changed

[55:44] and how and how does that then change what we want to say? Well, the nice thing is that this is just

[55:50] that you're just telling them the stuff you want them to look at differently or better or however. So

[55:56] I don't think you have to wrap your head around too much. Okay. So anything that wasn't buttoned up there

[56:01] there's probably still fair game.

[56:05] Well, it might not be that heavy a lift, then,

[56:09] if we before kind of just retooling the letter

[56:12] that we've already got.

[56:14] Yeah, and effectively the same deal is, right?

[56:17] Like make it a little more concise, a little more

[56:19] pragmatic.

[56:20] Like these are these are the issues that we caught

[56:22] in the previous one and need more study

[56:25] in the next one.

[56:27] You're saying you would have the bandwidth to do that letter

[56:30] in a subcommittee format, or you think, or for your pet project there, and I don't

[56:39] don't push.

[56:40] Yeah, so the thing is probably the most of this work I'm going to end up doing in the

[56:43] Friday before Labor Day, which doesn't leave me a lot of time on a subcommittee, but.

[56:50] No, I mean, if you want to make a subcommittee that's, I would join you with that if you

[56:57] and I'd stay on the other one that I said I would do too. So if you wanted to do that that way.

[57:05] Either it's fine. Is there anyone else that would like to join?

[57:12] I suppose I could do that one too. If it'll help.

[57:17] And both of these would be, we'd be able to do it remote

[57:21] Right, is it not did they just be ad hoc?

[57:23] Yeah.

[57:24] Okay.

[57:24] Can we have consolidated comments from the last EIR?

[57:28] That you can from the quarry?

[57:30] They were provided to you.

[57:32] Oh, yes.

[57:33] That's right.

[57:33] I'm sorry.

[57:36] So definitely use that reference document.

[57:42] Okay.

[57:43] So I'm hearing subcommittee of.

[57:45] I can help on the quarry.

[57:46] I can do it for help you.

[57:48] We'll try.

[57:49] Maximum of three.

[57:50] So you guys decide who's.

[57:52] who's your three but wait wait I think I need to get off of them actually if I know

[57:57] because I've got to do the DSO this this weekend so that I would do the

[58:03] quarry the next weekend so I think by that time it's so close to the deadline

[58:08] that there's not time to do some committee work because Monday's a holiday and

[58:14] then Tuesday the comments are due I will say you do not need staff you can you can

[58:20] I mean, as your ad hoc subcommittees on these letters without and then submit them without

[58:26] staff.

[58:27] I mean, I think in the recent past we've just had, I mean, Anthony was on the subcommittee

[58:34] and is the chair of OSEC.

[58:38] But yeah, that he submitted the letter on OSEC's behalf.

[58:42] If he's not on the subcommittee, whoever is the kind of point person on the subcommittee

[58:47] would be the one submitting so that we don't add another person and have a brown act violation

[58:53] by having a fourth person involved outside of your public meetings.

[58:58] You have the same understanding that we would it would be nice to tell the whole committee here

[59:02] but if not the subcommittee. For this one we know for sure there is there is not time to come back

[59:07] because your comment deadline for the NOP for the NOP only is September 8th.

[59:15] So it will, the subcommittee would be designated to meet as an ad hoc. Without staff, so you can plan

[59:23] evenings weekends, whatever works for you guys to meet or just via email, put your letter together.

[59:34] Google Doc or something like that start passing it around. As long as it stays within just your subcommittee.

[59:39] I believe you have the ability to.

[59:47] Sounds like I'm nominating. We set up subcommittee and we submit and then people can submit their own private letters.

[59:55] If you're not on the subcommittee and you wish to weigh in on the NOP, you should do so.

[1:00:00] Individual. And, you know, when we get to the actual draft EIR, then, you know, we'll presumably have more time to review and the draft EIR, I don't know what the timeline is on the draft EIR. I'm sorry. I don't know if they had been the estimate of that.

[1:00:27] So, are you making a motion that we set up a subcommittee to provide OSEC input to the notice of preparation for the recirculated draft EIR?

[1:00:40] Second.

[1:00:42] Okay.

[1:00:45] Right.

[1:00:47] So,

[1:00:51] I think we know you're answered but better.

[1:00:53] Aye.

[1:00:54] All right.

[1:00:55] Cardi.

[1:00:56] Aye.

[1:01:00] Let's see.

[1:01:01] Saman.

[1:01:01] Aye.

[1:01:03] All righty.

[1:01:05] And then we've got Newton, and I'm also an I.

[1:01:14] And can we clarify who the subcommittee members are?

[1:01:18] I think that got a little stumbled in there.

[1:01:21] We didn't settle.

[1:01:22] It could be this review or two of you and one of me.

[1:01:26] I'm fine with either.

[1:01:27] I'm going to submit either way.

[1:01:28] How many of you are there?

[1:01:36] I think I have Mary, Jason, Anthony.

[1:01:41] I was going to help with JJ and Mary, maybe it was going to help with it.

[1:01:46] Okay.

[1:01:47] So we'll have Thacker Walker and Rogers.

[1:01:52] Okay.

[1:01:54] Michelle, you've been quiet.

[1:01:56] Because I don't want to commit right now.

[1:01:58] and be coming from, you know,

[1:02:00] not every place in surgery and it's really,

[1:02:06] you know,

[1:02:07] call me an aspect question if you like,

[1:02:09] and I'll try not to.

[1:02:10] No, don't do that, Michelle.

[1:02:11] Don't do that.

[1:02:12] Right.

[1:02:12] Don't do that.

[1:02:14] Okay.

[1:02:17] Sorry.

[1:02:18] You're either on the subcommittee or you're not.

[1:02:19] Either way is fine.

[1:02:20] I just wanted to make sure you had your opportunity.

[1:02:23] Thank you.

[1:02:25] I'm sorry.

[1:02:25] It's a small project.

[1:02:27] Okay. Yeah. Okay. We have a plan.

[1:02:32] All right. Good stuff. All right.

[1:02:34] Actually, I have a question.

[1:02:36] I submitted a public letter and my sister, who's a hydro.

[1:02:41] What is she?

[1:02:42] I just know.

[1:02:46] Geochem is a hydrologist and environmental planning manager.

[1:02:51] She submitted comments attached to my personal letter.

[1:02:53] Can we include those?

[1:02:57] I mean, the stuff that she suggested.

[1:02:59] Can we say, oh, yeah, there's no, I mean, there's no reason limited to our initial comments.

[1:03:07] No, you're asking them to study something if there's something else that has come up,

[1:03:12] you know, especially if it's in the public record, but you could recommend study of, I mean,

[1:03:17] I don't know if I can guarantee that everything you recommend gets actually studied,

[1:03:21] but absolutely can make sure.

[1:03:25] Make a recommendation based on other people's comments.

[1:03:29] So,

[1:03:32] can we get her to forward that to us then the point is that the right public document?

[1:03:38] That's that's right.

[1:03:39] I think as you can send you a website, which I think makes it okay.

[1:03:43] Yeah.

[1:03:44] Yeah, I mean, if whoever's on the subcommittee, you can send whatever you need to within the subcommittee.

[1:03:49] Like, as long as it's just within the subcommittee.

[1:03:52] Didn't we just say that you're not on the subcommittee though, Aaron?

[1:03:56] Oh, I am on the subcommittee.

[1:03:56] Oh, it's Mary, you and I.

[1:03:59] Oh, and not, okay.

[1:04:01] Okay, Jason's Jason's on Baylands, not on court.

[1:04:05] I'm very confused.

[1:04:07] We've got it straight.

[1:04:09] We've got it straight.

[1:04:09] You were both on first.

[1:04:14] Okay, ready to move on.

[1:04:16] Yes, let's move on.

[1:04:18] Okay, step up dates.

[1:04:19] Do you want to go first, Dolores?

[1:04:21] Sure.

[1:04:22] So we had our annual reporting to the state for our benchmarking.

[1:04:27] We are currently at 97% compliance, which is really great news.

[1:04:33] We just have four outstanding buildings, which we hope to get wrapped up by the next reporting deadline, which is in November.

[1:04:42] There is another complex giveaway tomorrow that's been posted in the blast, and it will be online.

[1:04:47] So look out for that.

[1:04:51] Lastly, and maybe I should wait for the events up committee, but it relates to zero waste day in the park updates.

[1:04:59] I'll wait until this up committee goes for that one.

[1:05:02] Okay, I just have a couple.

[1:05:05] So the cities got an RFP out for dark sky ordinance compliance plan on city facilities.

[1:05:16] So response deadline is, I believe September 4th is what I put on that, so hopefully we'll

[1:05:25] have some good proposals to help us confirm the plan and priorities to get all of our city

[1:05:36] buildings and streetlights into compliance. I am also working on RFP for EV charging at the

[1:05:45] operation yard for our fleet and rip in replace at the Brisbane Village

[1:05:52] fast charger over there. Following those two, we'll be moving on to the

[1:05:57] three management RFP. So lots of big RFPs on my to-do list. And then

[1:06:06] following up on a couple of requests from last month, there was one question

[1:06:10] about the frog habitat. Unfortunately, I don't have much

[1:06:14] to report. So what I heard was that the city sent a proposed plan

[1:06:18] to the property owner a few months ago and has yet to hear back.

[1:06:24] But Council Member Lens is following up. And then there was also a

[1:06:28] question about the invasive species letters to nurseries.

[1:06:31] It looks like it was April 2024 when we last sent those. We had been doing them

[1:06:38] other year in the spring. We did miss this spring due to some of that staffing shuffle. So

[1:06:45] the question I think to the committee is do you want us to go ahead and work on sending those out?

[1:06:51] Now with the, they'll be kind of timing for nurseries in the fall, or would you prefer to wait

[1:06:59] until kind of that early spring timeline in 2021? Sure.

[1:07:03] And Shana said they actually put their orders in way before spring, so it doesn't make sense, I think, to, to not wait until spring, but I'm not exactly sure when the right time is.

[1:07:18] So, usually a season ahead, and then also though if you're planting like woody perennials, that's usually what you do during the fall and winter.

[1:07:26] So sometimes waiting till spring is not always,

[1:07:28] Okay, a lot.

[1:07:30] So I would say as soon as you have some bandwidth after all those awesome RFPs you just presented on. And also, I feel like maybe maybe not, it's worth mentioning to the city somehow that this, I mean, the citizens that the city is also, you know, putting the effort to be dark skies compliant, right? Like it feels really like, hey, we have to do work too.

[1:08:01] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We actually had that discussion come up this morning. So obviously have something in a blast or something soon.

[1:08:13] So we have, I believe we still have an ad hoc invasive species subcommittee. So I think with regard to the letters will just dig up the prior letter, the prior list of nurseries.

[1:08:27] We might want some help from the subcommittee in vetting, but you know, if we get that process started now, I know you guys have a lot on your plates and so do we so I think not the most urgent priority if we go ahead and kind of get it started now and have some time is, you know, not a huge lift, but we can kind of get that process started to get those out and then just a quick FYI I will be out.

[1:08:57] briefly again in September, but I expect this to be a short duration. So just patience with me as I continue to try to get caught up on all the things.

[1:09:10] I see the question. Yep.

[1:09:13] We usually send out a letter annually about purchasing acres properties.

[1:09:21] Do we have any plans to do that?

[1:09:23] You know, that is actually I think it was taken,

[1:09:31] um, I

[1:09:31] Want to say city manager may have done that the last time around so I'll have to check on what when that was done and

[1:09:39] When the kind of next round

[1:09:42] I'm going to go out so I sign the letter so it's been over here

[1:09:46] Okay, I will check in with them make a check in with them about one will do that again

[1:09:52] Okay. Thank you.

[1:10:02] That's I think all we had. Okay, great. Thank you for that. So on the subcommittees,

[1:10:09] do we have any reports from anybody and any stuff that he's meeting and do stuff?

[1:10:15] Events? I'm looking forward to the Laura's comment on the zero waste at the day in the park.

[1:10:22] Yes, well, after your guys' meeting, I went ahead and created a graphic for the vendors kind of promoting zero waste with food and craft vendors at day in the park.

[1:10:35] So we're doing a full push. It's now, I believe it's now live. The Parks and Rec day in the park page, if not, should be shortly.

[1:10:43] Um, and Adrian and I are working with Caroline to get some, um, water bottles and reusable

[1:10:52] mugs and things like that on to Betsy, cool, so that'll be fun for, for day and the

[1:10:57] park.

[1:11:00] Do one of the subcommittee members want to talk about the broader plan for Osex Booth at

[1:11:06] day and the parker?

[1:11:07] Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, we thought we would leave that part to you guys.

[1:11:13] Well, we're talking about, you know, having South San Francisco scavengers, Osec, and Mountain

[1:11:21] Lodge, kind of in a row, like we have in the past. And we met the Theresa Montgomery, and we're

[1:11:28] all excited about the possibility of like having a, well, we're going to have a garbage sorting

[1:11:32] area. So people can come and learn how to actually recycle and we're hoping to make it kind of

[1:11:42] they have two big raccoon costumes that they may have. Some people run around in. But in the

[1:11:49] mean while you guys I didn't really talk to you about this except to Mary. I had this idea and

[1:11:57] he hasn't arrived yet but I ordered a vintage raccoon puppet and there's several on eBay and I think

[1:12:08] that we should all wear raccoon puppets and have trash talk with the raccades.

[1:12:15] So I'm I'm

[1:12:16] I'll be there with my puppet. So I just think I'd be really fun and eBay has a lot of them and

[1:12:24] there's even went from date and in company and you know they're all vintage and I just think it'd be

[1:12:28] really have a lot of fun at our base. So that's yeah yeah we also we also talked about moving the

[1:12:38] booth so that the south city scavenger would kind of be the last booth closest to the food trucks

[1:12:50] and have tote bins there. So we move away from the trash police language thank you and it's

[1:12:56] now trash talkers and in a slight recoon theme because that matches their their their wording.

[1:13:04] We also talked about putting signs up at each food truck vendor, with the types of packaging

[1:13:15] that they have, and which bin it goes into.

[1:13:18] So really helping people, you know, this thing says it's a combustible fork, it still goes

[1:13:24] in the trash.

[1:13:25] This thing looks like paper, but it's got a plastic line or it still goes in the trash.

[1:13:30] Oh look, this aluminum can, it really does go in the recycling, so just a helpful signage.

[1:13:36] It's going to require some effort on us. It's set up, but that's really smart to use their materials and kind of pre-create almost like a guide diagram they can do.

[1:13:48] I like that a lot.

[1:13:49] Yeah. So if I get a couple extra rackets, we'll people use them.

[1:13:55] Just asking.

[1:13:59] Sure.

[1:14:01] Okay.

[1:14:02] Yeah. Sounds like one.

[1:14:09] I'm going to have fun.

[1:14:15] What day is day in the park? Is it Sunday October 3rd?

[1:14:19] It's only the first Saturday of October.

[1:14:22] I think it's the third.

[1:14:24] is the very, yes, Saturn X over there.

[1:14:30] And hopefully I'll be mobile by then.

[1:14:36] And once we get a little bit more of the plan fleshed out,

[1:14:41] will be sending out something to sign up for shifts.

[1:14:48] Hopefully everybody can take a turn helping out at the booth.

[1:14:54] I think we'll probably also be working with

[1:14:58] There's been cares.

[1:15:00] To try to recruit additional trash talker volunteers.

[1:15:05] Excellent.

[1:15:10] Great.

[1:15:12] Do we have any, any other reports?

[1:15:16] Out of.

[1:15:17] Oh, go ahead, Michelle.

[1:15:18] That's the Mary. Talk about trees.

[1:15:22] Oh, oh.

[1:15:24] Three issues.

[1:15:25] So the committee met.

[1:15:28] Keegan has provided a comprehensive list of the type of trees we may want to consider for

[1:15:37] planting on city sites, as well as possible residential sites.

[1:15:44] So I think our next meeting will probably dive into that detail, but it was a pretty good

[1:15:50] And there's a lot of different, you know, there's a lot of different characteristics such

[1:15:57] as are they native, are they drought resistant, are they utility friendly, et cetera, et cetera.

[1:16:06] So a lot of that data was provided as well, it's a pretty good list.

[1:16:10] So I don't know when the next meeting is, but we will provide our comments at that point.

[1:16:17] I thought there was already a list.

[1:16:21] I thought that OSEC, previous OSEC tree committee,

[1:16:25] made a list of good trees to plant.

[1:16:27] And it might have been before Shana,

[1:16:30] and she might have put input on it.

[1:16:32] I know that Barbara had something to do with it.

[1:16:35] Does that list exist anywhere?

[1:16:37] I believe Keegan had that list.

[1:16:42] Did they get cross checked?

[1:16:48] So he took list from San Francisco, because they have a lot of trees that we would, that would be good for Bruce Dane, South San Francisco, and then the comprehensive list that I think.

[1:17:03] Oh, we already provided that we already had.

[1:17:06] And so he combined all of those.

[1:17:09] Did he add things to it or did we only subtract from it?

[1:17:12] Yeah, because there is like four different tabs in this file.

[1:17:17] So there's a lot more to choose from.

[1:17:20] Yeah, because he even has the width of city sidewalk.

[1:17:25] How much can this tree be planted with X number of feet?

[1:17:31] So we have that and that was not provided before.

[1:17:34] There's a lot more data in this list that Kagan pulled together.

[1:17:42] There's no nice way to say this, this is a not invented, you're fallacy, but it feels

[1:17:49] like someone not on OSEC possibly just added a bunch of trees to the list that OSEC had.

[1:17:55] And so I just want to make sure that someone is kind of thinking about that and doing that

[1:18:00] check, you know, did he just add a tree that he didn't know is actually not fit for Brisbane?

[1:18:08] but it's fit to be a city tree in some other city in California.

[1:18:14] I will say in case folks here didn't know,

[1:18:17] Tegan has received his Arborist certification.

[1:18:19] Oh, that helps.

[1:18:21] He does know a bit about it.

[1:18:24] And then I think also the intention was for the list to kind of be reviewed by OSEC and for the subcommittee to be able to provide comment on whether there are any trees on that list that

[1:18:38] But we don't want to see on that list or if there's something that we feel is missing

[1:18:44] that we'd like added.

[1:18:46] Perfect.

[1:18:46] I just, I misunderstood, but I just heard a ballooning list and was worried about what was

[1:18:52] making it.

[1:18:52] No, I think I think really it was, he was trying to keep, there's, we discussed in the subcommittee

[1:18:59] meeting, there's ultimately going to be two lists, there's going to be a straight

[1:19:05] list. And there's going to be a separate, like, OSEC tree list that we can recommend for private

[1:19:12] properties. Awesome. Okay. So that we, we kind of, the list of trees that's suitable for street

[1:19:20] trees is a much smaller subset than what might be recommended on a private property.

[1:19:26] Thank you. And I also had taken the data before it was consolidated by Kigan. I took the

[1:19:35] and I took San Francisco's list, and I was able to cross-check.

[1:19:43] So yeah, thank you.

[1:19:46] Now we're trying to get a really broad-based comprehensive list to be able to respond to a variety of

[1:19:53] microhabitats and needs.

[1:19:57] And so we don't want to be limited to only these or only that.

[1:20:01] but we want to be able to recommend the right tree for the right spot for the right timeline.

[1:20:08] And it's pretty comprehensive because we have a lot of microquimates in Brisbane.

[1:20:13] And the work that Keegan did, the groundwork that Keegan did, and that Mary had did is amazing.

[1:20:19] And then Mary and I are going to be spending some time really going over that list and

[1:20:24] and prospecting in about, you know, things we might know about a certain tree or that type of thing.

[1:20:29] Excellent. Thank you. Yeah. I feel good about it.

[1:20:38] Great. Okay. I just wanted to say the next

[1:20:43] library display is going to be an October. So maybe we can meet the next one sometime

[1:20:50] else and not an email. Sounds good. Okay, thanks. Okay. In that case, do we want to do any kind of

[1:21:02] going to note that dark skies is meeting next week, I think Erin had mentioned that earlier

[1:21:08] and then Mary, did you have any updates? I think the beautification committee met.

[1:21:15] So I don't say something other. The beautification committee met last week, I think on the 20th.

[1:21:23] And staff presented some information on a pilot program for adopt a spot.

[1:21:35] So the adopt spot is will be consisted of around three to five different locations within the city.

[1:21:44] and would require three to five, excuse me, around five to seven volunteers, the logistics

[1:21:52] behind the process are still being worked out. I think what will end up happening is the

[1:21:58] stake of Jeremy was saying we just got to do it, right, and just put a stake in the ground

[1:22:02] and try and fine tune it as we go. But I can tell you that the committee reviewed the list

[1:22:11] of site locations, which includes Cory Road Trailhead, so but right by the community garden,

[1:22:18] which a lot of plants were planted as part of the Cory cleanup.

[1:22:26] Lassen street steps and apparently it's called.

[1:22:30] They're really called the bicentennial street steps. And I'm not sure if I have the location correct on that, but is that up on Klamath and as you walk down the stairs to Solano.

[1:22:46] So originally last and was from the corner of Solano and Mendocino all the way up through Sierra Point and up to.

[1:22:54] Okay. Okay. So now the lower part is the bicentennial walkway from Solano and Mendocino up to the corner of Sierra Point and Clameth. And then it's my understanding that the from Sierra Point up to Humboldt is still considered last and but I'm not sure. Okay.

[1:23:15] So, that's an area that people can sign up for, then there's the Alvarado to San

[1:23:25] Baneta, the New Spheres, which needs some regular maintenance.

[1:23:32] First park was called out, a certain part of the first park.

[1:23:36] And then there's the park behind the old community center by the old library, that's up

[1:23:43] and then last is the Brisbane Freshman's Park along Lagoon Road.

[1:23:51] So they are going to pull together some communication and some forms that folks will have to complete

[1:24:02] to get this project going.

[1:24:07] Did they consider the stretch of staircases from, oh my goodness, from Clameth up to Alvarado?

[1:24:15] You know, there's the ones that kind of curve a little bit when you hit the new artist walkway.

[1:24:21] Those on the either side, one is like semi-landscaped by residents.

[1:24:26] But on the other side, the city will come through maybe twice a year in Weedwack,

[1:24:32] But it's it's ugly. I personally have tried to plant roses there to make it look a little pretty, but if they're, if that was added to the list, that also is an area.

[1:24:44] Yeah, so part of the communication process will be asking folks, do you want to, do you have a spot you would like to adopt there we go need to go through city approval, because they're trying to keep the areas small and manageable.

[1:25:01] And not, I had suggested, you know, around the skate park, that whole corner there.

[1:25:10] But it's too big to handle for, you know, five volunteers.

[1:25:15] So the city needs to manage that.

[1:25:18] But they're trying to keep the spots small.

[1:25:22] So if you think it's small, I would say.

[1:25:25] Yeah, I would read that.

[1:25:26] I think it's ideal.

[1:25:27] I would say it's smaller than the artist walkway stretch, but yeah, but yeah, maybe if that list is available in put I can toss that in.

[1:25:37] Yeah, but a lot of ideas and just we just have to get the project off the ground and get it going.

[1:25:49] Can I can I.

[1:25:51] To our horn about the Corey cleanup.

[1:25:55] Yeah, right, that was a big deal.

[1:25:57] And so we had a lot of folks, I think we had around 35, 40 folks around there maybe.

[1:26:04] Yeah, a lot of families, a lot of plants in at the beginning of Cory Road.

[1:26:10] A lot of native plants, there's a lot of kids.

[1:26:12] And there's probably around 12 to 14 adults that took on removing IV from the trees.

[1:26:18] So we, at the end of the day, I think we had around 27 tarps that were filled with ivy and leaves and such and weeds.

[1:26:29] Since then,

[1:26:32] I worked with Tony and we worked on some of the trees we're going to get all the ivy off of.

[1:26:39] And so we filled up another seven tarps and I got 10 more and we already have four full.

[1:26:45] So, we have two or three trees that are completely IV-free, which, and they look beautiful.

[1:26:53] So, we work on it a little bit now, and then I'll go down, you know, SNAP SNAP and Tony's picking up the stuff as well.

[1:27:02] So, that looks pretty good.

[1:27:06] You know, if there's a time, you know, a little bit in advance, but you're going to go do some IV removal on trees.

[1:27:15] we should see if we can coordinate with our communications video staff to create, we talked about

[1:27:26] with the Theresa of Committee creating a video of how to, which I don't know if we mentioned that

[1:27:35] aspect, but we've got some work happening with kind of launching that fine management volunteer

[1:27:46] or work or app that Bob created in the tree hub.

[1:27:51] Yes, I'm glad you said that because Tony, he goes, Mary, we need to come out here like,

[1:27:58] we need to round 10 people once a month to get through all of this, you know, by the time

[1:28:02] you're done, you're starting to roll over again, right?

[1:28:05] So I said, let me bring it up at the OSEC meeting.

[1:28:08] So yes, if we could, I could schedule a Saturday morning or something and

[1:28:15] I don't know. I'm talking about scheduling a time where we can make the video.

[1:28:19] Oh, the video. Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. So we would probably not want it to be on a Saturday

[1:28:24] because communication staff would probably prefer not to come into work on a

[1:28:28] do that. If there's a time where you're going to be or could be going out during the

[1:28:35] When we can try to line that up so we can do a little video of here's how you do it with

[1:28:41] you or Tony or whoever else wants to be the person in the video demonstrating, we can try to

[1:28:49] line that up because we did talk about wanting to have a quick video that we can include with that.

[1:28:57] And then once we have those materials, we can do a big push.

[1:29:02] I think we were planning to do a big push in the October star.

[1:29:09] I think Michelle, I sent you the Vine article that we did in the star maybe four years ago.

[1:29:19] I think it was or something like that.

[1:29:22] If we wanted to revise that and then be able to kind of

[1:29:26] want that volunteer opportunity that's kind of an independent volunteer opportunity, but Molly runs the Brisbane CARES program.

[1:29:36] So we can send it out to that listserv and then have it go out in the blast in the star, whatever.

[1:29:46] Okay.

[1:29:46] I might have missed, I think I saw that go by, but I've been a little distracted, so I'll get it all get it right.

[1:29:51] I understand if it doesn't work out timing wise, I know the next couple of weeks we've got a bit of a crunch so we can push it back.

[1:30:00] But I want to say is Caroline's deadline for the star of the 10th now?

[1:30:07] Yeah. So September 10th for October star? Yeah. Okay.

[1:30:14] So if we, and we don't have to have the video, the video obviously won't go in the star.

[1:30:18] So we don't have to have the video ready on that same timeframe. But if we can have the other pieces ready, we could have it in the October star.

[1:30:25] But if it slips a month, it's not the end of the world.

[1:30:29] Now, but it'd be good to have it sooner rather than later, so people can start.

[1:30:34] Yeah, absolutely.

[1:30:34] We need it in November, because that's when we do that clean up day.

[1:30:41] Okay.

[1:30:42] All right.

[1:30:44] Sorry, the deadline is the 7th of each.

[1:30:48] 7th of the 10th.

[1:30:50] Okay.

[1:30:56] All right.

[1:30:56] I think that was the end of subcommittees, unless anybody had anything else.

[1:31:00] We don't need to do any reshuffling or anything.

[1:31:03] I think we've already done the reshuffling needed

[1:31:06] for the items in progress today.

[1:31:10] So I think we're good.

[1:31:12] So onto Caler and Drydoms,

[1:31:18] then anything specific

[1:31:19] that anybody wants to call out?

[1:31:21] Thanks for calling out the Coastal Cleanup

[1:31:22] earlier in the show.

[1:31:24] We had it in here under Calender items as well.

[1:31:27] So that's on the 19th of September.

[1:31:30] and then day in the park on October 3rd, compost give away tomorrow and we'll have another

[1:31:42] again before the end of the year. We are planning to have a more comprehensive report on building

[1:31:51] efficiency program in the next couple of months. Dolores and I are going to be working with Bob

[1:31:56] stage or GIS manager to get some of the data from the last couple of years that hasn't

[1:32:04] made it onto the public transparency map up so we'll probably come share that with you guys

[1:32:11] once we have it ready. And then I am hearing that there is a push to try to get work plans

[1:32:21] drafted before the end of the year so that they can be going to council early in the calendar year.

[1:32:31] I think in the past it's kind of slipped into a couple months into the year so we are

[1:32:37] proposing that when we have a November December combo meeting that we usually do that we'll talk

[1:32:43] about work plan then. It's probably a little too early but we will probably start next month

[1:32:51] to talk to everybody about schedules for those holiday meetings, and I don't know if you've

[1:33:00] noticed, but I know everybody else has been through this before our meetings being on the

[1:33:05] fourth Wednesday of the month, or not great timing with Thanksgiving and Christmas typically,

[1:33:11] so in the past we have generally canceled our regular meetings for November and December and

[1:33:17] found one date to do during the holiday months.

[1:33:22] So we'll try to look at schedules maybe next month, Jason.

[1:33:27] I know we Michelle mentioned a little bit.

[1:33:30] I go about the letters to the landowners

[1:33:33] and the norm.

[1:33:34] That used to be on here.

[1:33:35] Could we put it back just so we can watch it and not forget.

[1:33:39] Even if we put it in the wrong month,

[1:33:40] I thought it was September, but if we just set it back in there,

[1:33:45] just so we could stare at it and see it go by or not go by, you know, because if Michelle thinks

[1:33:51] it's been more than a year than maybe it has been more than a year. Yeah. So thank you, Jason.

[1:33:58] I think that's a great idea. And can we, for next meeting, start the next year's, like,

[1:34:07] but start putting the dates in for next year's and getting them in here. Sure. Okay.

[1:34:16] Okay.

[1:34:17] great.

[1:34:19] So chair and committee member matters. I did want to bring up one thing. The

[1:34:25] Peninsula and South Bay Greenhouse tours happening again in October. That's not an us thing,

[1:34:34] but it's an annual, you know, electrified home tour that Aktera puts on. So that's Saturday,

[1:34:42] October 10th, so if there are any folks locally that are interested in learning more about

[1:34:48] electrification, any folks that have a fully or partially electrified home, you can sign up for

[1:34:56] the tour and become a host. They're always trying to get clusters. I think the last time that we

[1:35:12] books that come all the way up this far, this far up the peninsula, for just two homes.

[1:35:18] So they're always looking for more folks.

[1:35:20] So if there is anybody that's interested, Aktera hosts that every year in October.

[1:35:27] Do you, can you send me that info and I can see if we can put that in a blast next week or something?

[1:35:38] Absolutely.

[1:35:39] I'll send that along.

[1:35:40] I do have one question.

[1:35:44] We're still a member down.

[1:35:47] Any update on filling that slot?

[1:35:51] You know Michelle, I thought about it about half an hour before our meeting

[1:35:55] and sent a note to Ingrid, but she was probably already gone for the day

[1:36:00] when it was after 6pm when I sent her an email.

[1:36:03] So I don't have an update right now, but I will hopefully get one.

[1:36:09] Tomorrow morning.

[1:36:12] Well, sooner is better because obviously we have a full agenda. Yeah, yeah,

[1:36:25] all righty.

[1:36:25] Hey, Adrian, we're really glad you're back. Thanks a lot.

[1:36:31] And Dolores, you did a fantastic job holding everything together.

[1:36:38] Alrighty, so our next meeting is September 23rd. Thank you, everybody. And I have a lovely evening.

[1:36:44] This meeting is a dream.

Open Space and Ecology Committee Meeting

Agenda

Transcript