Shirtsleeve Meeting, 10/18/2011:
Agenda: "Presentation on Climate Action Plans"

This was the response to the council's requirement for city staff to outline requirements and options pertaining to the State of California’s requirement to produce a “Climate Action Plan” which defines the city’s plan for reducing greenhouse gases

Background:  We stopped the vote on the city developing a Climate Action Plan when it first appeared on the consent calendar several months ago.  This was done with an email debunking man-driven global warming and high turnout of folks protesting the issue at the meeting.  At that time, city council and staff thought was a “no-brainer” and were surprised.  As result, they tabled the issue, asking staff to provide state law requirements, options and history of cities resisting.  The important point is that they are now sensitized to the subject and know that there is support within the community against this insanity.

Options:
1.  Do the Climate Action Plan study and development with General Fund money ($120,000)
2.  Do the Climate Action Plan study and development with Federal grant money ($120,000)
3.  Do the plan with Federal grant money and shelve it.  City attorney pointed out that Half Moon Bay did the study then decided not incorporate $50M in infrastructure improvements.  When the state was done with them, they complied at a cost of $170M.
4.  Do not do it and see what happens.  Possible consequences:
- Be forced to comply with General Fund money via threats
- Be sued by the state and be forced to comply again with General Fund money –
city attorney speculated the total cost most likely would be well excess of $120,000.

Bottom-line is most, if not all of the city council members are against doing this (a win for us) but that the state holds all the cards.

The generally agreed upon solution is to:
1.  Use the Federal grant money
2.  Do the study
3.  Limit the plans requirements to upgrading the city’s equipment and property while leaving citizens alone
4.  Execute the plan as slowly as is legal to avoid penalties or funding problems for other needs

This item will be voted on via the content calendar for the 10/19/2011 City Council meeting

10/19/2011 City Council Meeting:

Main agenda items:

Climate Action Plan:
-  The council approved recruiting a consultant to develop a Climate Action Plan per state law.  The council reiterated that intend to execute it to a minimum level.
-  Several people spoke against the proposal and Council Member Nakanishi voted no
-  This a win for us because the council is now sensitized to the issue and are pursuing practical avoidance tactics.

Staff Surface Water Treatment Plant with City Employees:
-  Do not know quite how to describe what happened except to say the city staff presented an incomprehensible justification for using public-sector city personnel to run the new water plant.  When the city waffled on cost that the "wheels came off their case."
-  The proposal was voted down and staff was ordered restart the proposal process.
-  We can count this as a win because we still can make the case for a lower cost, high quality option.

October 25, 2011 Shirtsleeve Session [no meeting]