Thanks for being here for the February meeting. I had a. Okay. Thanks for being here. I had a quick
addition to the agenda that I would like considered. So we'd need to have a motion and a second and
a vote to amend the agenda, but it would be.
or the sponsorship letter for the EcoHeroes donation request that we're making that we send out to different
businesses and organizations in our town. But it is a letter that we would send out, and so we need
to have all of y'all's approval before we get that out to the world. Rachel, were you able to add that
to an updated packet or shall I? I was able, I added it to an updated packet, so I will share my screen
shortly, and so it'll be up there.
It is on the packet online as one of the packet addendums. I did see Adam's comment that he is having
trouble hearing, harder trouble hearing than what he thought he would. Would there be a volunteer first
being a secretary tonight? You can give it a shot. Yes, other Adam. Other Adam can do it. Okay. Sorry
to interrupt your introduction, Kerry. No, that's perfect.
Okay, so the idea is that we would vote on if this letter is suitable to send out to the world. So you
just need to motion and basically where you want to put it. I don't know if that's new business and
because you have to actually put it on the agenda center. Sounds good. So I would say I'd like to put
it on the agenda under the eco heroes section of old business. So while we're doing the updates on everything
else that we would vote for the sponsorship letter at that point. Second. Okay.
and I heard Carrie motion at first and then Matt. All right, so we'll do the role for that. So Carrie
Albright. Yes. Heidi Brown. Yes. Nadia Cain. Yes. Matt Caldy. Yes. Adam Fudeker. I have to stop. What
are we voting on? We're voting to consider voting on this sponsorship letter. Yes.
Adam to the agenda. Adam Martinez? Yes. Mitchell Owens? Yes, speaker. Perfect. Motion passes to modify
the agenda. Staines can touch. To the agenda. All right. Okay, well then, now that we've got that out
of the way, we can go ahead and go through our roll call and get things moving. Okay. Heidi Brown? Here.
Nadia Cain?
Here. Matt Caldy. Here. Adam Futiker. Here. Shannon Geich is absent. Adam Martinez. Here. Mitchell Owens.
There. And Carrie Albright. I'm here. Okay. And I'm Rachel Johnson. Perfect. Thank you all for being
here. I know the weather is getting a little scary out there, so thanks for making the trek in so that
we can have a monthly meeting.
Speaking of our monthly meetings, our January minutes have been shared. And at this time, we would approve
the January 15th minutes. Sounds good. Sounds good. All right, Matt and Nadia have definitively take
this off for a vote. Why would somebody not approve that? If they don't agree with how things are represented
in them. If they weren't here, they can't stand.
Okay. Uh, Nadia Cain? Yes. Matt Caldy? Yes. Adam Budeker? Yes. Adam Martinez? Yes. Mitchell Owens? Yes.
Kerry Albright? I vote yes. Heidi Brown? Yes. Motion passed. Thank you so much.
You know, while we're voting, I'd love to suggest that we consider our special EC meeting that we had
last month where we came in to vote on the ECPC memo. We did a quick gathering here and there was a
set of minutes that covered that conversation. It was quite brief because the meeting was quite brief
as well. So I'd love to consider voting to approve those minutes. So moved. Thank you, Matt. Thank you,
Mitchell. Okay.
Adam Fudiker. Yes. Adam Martinez. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Carrie Albright. Oh, yes. Heidi Brown. Yes.
Nadia Cain. Yes. And Matt Caldy. Yes. Motion passes. Wonderful. Thank you all so much for being active
members of our commission.
All right, so now we're on to public comment. We actually have a handful of members of the public here,
so I would love to give the folks in the room a chance to introduce themselves, and you have up to five
minutes to share if you've got something, and then we have somebody online as well. Sure, thank you.
Hi, my name is James Ford. I just wanted to share with the group what happened at the tree commission
on Monday. I see that there's no liaison here. I happen to be present for that meeting.
So I just wanted to let you know that there was no quorum. They only had three people there,
George Heckman, Stephanie, and Julie. They spoke mostly about the North Grove project and the changes
that were being considered at the time. That took up almost the entire hour. At the end of the meeting,
they talked about the INDOT project at Pete Ellis and John Dinko
And Daisy Garden's house, I'm sure, he's familiar with that. They did go over time. And that was basically
the entire meeting. Great. Thank you so much for the updates on that, Dan. Great. All right. We'll do
that when she's done. Yeah. I'm Carl Greisner. I don't have a whole lot to comment on, other than I
could have an interview with the committee. That's where it gets away to the process itself.
Just here to listen and keep up to date with EC committee business. Perfect. Thank you for joining us.
And then as folks online, we'd love to have you try and introduce yourself if you're comfortable with
that. Nicole, if you would like to speak, you'll probably have to raise your hand and I'll ask you to
unmute if you'd like to introduce yourself. And Taylor Brown is one of the city attorneys.
He's not a member of the public. Very quick point of order. Nicole is actually the legal intern, so
she's been following me around. Technically, no members of the common, though Nicole is of course a
welcome member of a public at large, but I digress. Perfect. Well, thanks for joining us. I'm guessing
you will have more to share as we get into our agenda, but thanks for joining us. Thanks members of
the public for being here too.
Well, I know that we've got some big items on our new business list. So I'm going to go ahead and kick
it over to Rachel and the folks that we have here to talk a little bit about some of the legal updates
at the city. Yeah, so I'll go ahead. So yeah, anybody in the room, make sure to talk loudly. So we have
Jackie Scanlon, who is the Assistant Director of Planning and Transportation. We have Anadina Casamanian
and Taylor Brown, who are both
attorneys who work in the city legal department. We have Nicole, who is also an intern in the city legal
department. And then I believe is Jennifer Crossley in the room. Jennifer is here. I believe she is
a deputy clerk in the clerk's office. So I wanted to invite all of these city staff. I'm so sorry for
the background noise.
I wanted to invite the city staff because there had been some questions about just working group policies,
the letter process with the previous ECPC letter that went to council earlier this month, the ability
to produce memos, and also some accessibility questions. So the staff are here. If there are any pointed
questions on any of those topics, I think that's
What is top of mind for everybody, for staff members, but if there's anything else that might also be
addressed by staff, you are welcome to ask it. You want me to do a little? I can totally go. Yeah, I
just feel the heat.
Again, as Rachel has mentioned, and some of y'all might know me, because I've seen some of you in some
of the interview committees, my name is Jennifer Crossley, and I have been with the city for four years,
but I have been in my current role as deputy clerk of communications and outreach for at least one year.
And so what that entails is some of you all, I'm never gonna assume everybody knows, so I'm gonna not
do that, so I'm just gonna explain.
There was a report that was done in the city a long time ago called the no back report that kind of
went through boards of commissions to kind of look at you know how processes are happening and it came
from the idea that position such as mine will be created and the clerk's office already works in tandem with the.
Council office for the council appointments. And so I am super nerdy. And that was me. I volunteered
myself to the Tribune actually did more than that interview. And then I've been in it since December of
Yes, because it's been a full year. And so what that basically entails is for the past year, I've been
able to kind of talk to various staff members. I've spoken with legal. I've attended some of the commission
meetings to kind of get a feel for how our boards and commissions have worked. And if I've not been
in person, I've definitely watched cats because, as I mentioned, I'm a nerd. And I like to watch cats
as I work throughout the day. It helps my brain go by so much faster.
That being said, um, I have heard just in general and kind of going through all of the commissions and
boards and whatnot. Um, there's some concerns that some of y'all might have with what's your role and
what is the mission of the commission and how your role as a commissioner play into that. And I get
that. I completely understand. Some of y'all probably have not.
had a true onboard experience of, hey, now you're on this commission, now what is expected of me, you
probably got an email from either office of the mayor or myself that says, hey, you've been appointed
for X, Y, Z, and here's this information. The idea is after a whole year of being in here, I've been
working with folks from legal such as Taylor and other people to come up with
boards of commission kind of turn. And so right now we're in the process of trying to finalize that.
But the idea is to have staff liaisons go through that training first to make sure they know what is
expected of them in their role and how they play an integral part with you all as the liaison and the
pipeline from the city to this commission or
any board or commission for that matter. So once they go through that training, then you all will go
through as commissioners will go through your training. And so all of this is still to be determined.
We're still finalizing things. And again, as I mentioned, the idea is to have staff go through it first.
You might've heard last night at the council meeting that there was something also called the code of conduct.
and that is something that will also be released in our training so that you already know we have that
onboard process and this is something that we expect to have everybody go through annually is to have
an expectation of what it means to represent the city. This is what you should be doing and what we
expected you and what you should expect from your experience because it's a big deal.
And like everything that's going on, you all are stepping up to the plate and running to do something.
Cause right now everybody wants to do something at least out. So with that being said, it's also been
coming to our attention specifically like in kind of looking at some of the other boards and commissions,
some of you all have, or some of the boards and commissions have working groups.
And there's this little fine line of like what does that mean and who is supposed to be at these meetings
and my understanding from listening to some of the meetings and listen to some of the staff liaisons
is that there's a lot of limbo of who's supposed to do what like and.
Can we have it staff supposed to be and if that means, you know, can it be recorded is it not all of
those different things. And it seems like there's this yo yo of yes no maybe so when those different
types of things and I understand that it's frustrating to hear because
You know, being on the receiving end and hearing people. I don't like when people are frustrated with
that because I like to say communication is the key to my heart. And so I can effectively communicate
to the staff liaison who can effectively communicate to you all, then I feel like I'm doing my job.
But if we aren't communicating because things are just a little very, um, then we got to do something
that's better.
So my idea as Rachel had invited me to this meeting is to kind of just, you know, tell you all here's
the things that are coming down the pipe. And if there are suggestions or anything that you would like
to give to me that I can take back and incorporate and are soon to be turning in that will be rolled
out here soon.
Really soon, that's that's my goal and I really want to be able to do that and do that effectively.
Again, we're still kind of working out the process of working groups and we hope to have an answer for
that soon. So once we know we can effectively communicate that to the staff liaisons who can effectively
communicate that with you all. But other than that, I know you all have a packed agenda and I don't
want to take too much of time, but
If you have questions for me or suggestions, you can email me and I can give you my contact information
or you can let me know now and I can take that back to the drawing board and work with the powers that
be. Thank you for that opportunity. Thank you for sharing, Jennifer. I know that there is an open, what
questions do we have generally for legal that is a separate piece, but before we get into any of those
questions, as far as what Jennifer shared specifically around
the concept of training and all that. Are there any specific questions or clarifications that folks
want to ask while we have Jennifer in the room with us? This is the training for all the boards, just
like LDR board. Every single last board or commission. Like Robert Phillips board or something? Yes,
yes. So that actually is a good thing. So that will talk about what's the mission of a board or commission
and is the work that you're currently doing, how is that, are you doing the work?
On that, you know, the mission entails you to do and what code is telling you, uh, or telling you that
is allowed for you all to do. Um, but you know, some people have a novice experience aboard or Robert's
rules of order and that's okay. So we want to treat everybody as this is a brand new space. You are
coming in and you might learn something if you think, you know,
something about or Robert's Rules, he might find out you didn't and we'll get trained on that. As a
third aspect of my life, I think I know all things about Robert's Rules and then sometimes I don't and
it's fun for me to discover. So yes, so that is, of course going through the Code of Conduct, expectations,
of course Robert's Rules and other things. And actually I'd like to do,
kind of like a tree branch of who does what. So you can get an idea of, we don't, again, as I mentioned
earlier, I want to assume everybody knows what everybody is supposed to do, but you might find that
you might be able to work with other groups. Yeah. So of course, if there's anything that you all think
that you would like to know that you didn't get to know, again,
here now and you can definitely let me know or you can send me a link. It would be nice to see at the
church how the city's organized, departments. I saw that online somewhere, but I can't remember. I have
two specific logistical questions. Do you have a sense of how long the training will be, like one hour,
20 minutes, four hours? Any sense of that? Not as of right now. Obviously, we have over 40 boards and
commissions.
And that's a whole lot of people to go through and to take up a block of your time when also this is
volunteer, and you think you pay because all the more so, you know, that would be fantastic. But it's
gonna take a little bit, but my idea is not to have it like not like a whole day.
hopefully maybe a couple of hours if that so and of course to give you all like a handout that you can
have to reference because you don't have access to email or anything like that but to give you all something
to walk away and of course your staff liaisons would have this too so if you lose it or misplace it
and you just need it as a reference it could come back to you too. Do you have a sense of if it would
be like rolling trainings
every 12 months, there would be like one, everyone attend or if it's like every month we do another
one. And so if you're new, you go and you just have to do it once a year. Do you have a sense of that?
Honestly, I think right now the test is for everybody to do it just this one time, everybody. But, and
this is something that we can try to work with with people, is maybe the idea too is any new person
that comes in immediately after they come in,
you know, to really kind of maybe do like a batch of training or, you know, anybody that came in from
January through March and April, like we will, you know, get them in and do a board commission training.
I was just thinking about if it does turn into it, we do it, you know, twice a year and everyone goes
at least, you know, whatever that we could consider that being like, if we want to cancel a monthly
meeting for whenever that training is going to be required, that might be a good way to not over stretch.
Our time. And I think if it's not virtual, then the delivery. You know, I don't know. It's a little
too early to tell. And I think just kind of like how you all have your meetings here and how the city
does. You know, I think for accessibility and when things come up, I don't think you can say, and I'll
look at the books that we built, that everything has to be in-person only. So I think
and we would have to do a hybrid approach, but I see Taylor has to stand up. Yeah, so we've actually
been kind of experimenting on a couple of different things here, especially with accessibility and recording
meetings and things like that. I've been doing a training kind of ad hoc for internal city staff about
a couple of different things that people have asked about. And we've been kind of test piloting
While we can about having a digital access and things like that, especially because most commissions
meet after hours and like I am from home right now because Thursdays aren't usually my commission after
hours days. I'm sorry. I can't be there.
But we're testing a lot of these things. We're hoping that we actually can have a digital component
and which would make everyone's, all the commissioners lives easier, certainly. Or we do it like a,
here's the live version and we record that live version for dissemination to all who couldn't make it.
And then we have, you know, reach out to your liaisons for these staff members, ask Taylor for ODL questions,
ask Anna for ethics questions, things like that. If that helped at all, Jennifer.
It did. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Safe. So we're at 622. But what other questions do you
all have? What are things that while we have Jennifer and the legal team here? Specific to the training
or all legal questions? Is there any other training question? I have one that's sort of both. Everyone
has to take it. So I'm assuming a quorum of members would be there that have to be signed and posted
as a special meeting of every board and commission.
We've been told that if there is a quorum training board and commission, something has to be posted
the minimum two days and it has to be noticed, signed, et cetera, et cetera. If we were trying to train
all the boards and commissions, not in phases, but at once, would those hoops have to be jumped through?
It'd be a special meeting of all the boards and commissions or is the training exact from that?
There is an exemption written into the open door law specifically for training regarding boards
of commissions. I have a related question and it may have been clarified since this happened,
but when we, so our, our commission.
had to take a memo that we'd written to the council to read it aloud at a meeting last month,
I think it was, earlier this month. Anyway, so we were going to that, but we were informed that we could
not have, because our subcommittees have a quorum of two, because our subcommittees are so small, they
have a quorum of two or two for the working group.
we were not allowed to have two commissioners in the same council meeting at the same time, even if
they were not co-presenting, like if one was just sitting there listening. So example, Matt went to
the podium and read his memo. If I wanted to attend, because we're both on a subcommittee of the EC,
that would
be in violation of that. Yeah, we were informed that even if it was for different items, I mean, the
other member who wanted to attend, Adam Martinez, who's online right now, was commenting on a different
agenda item, but we were basically told we can't both be in council chambers because it is not noticed
as a working group meeting. And his was unrelated to these. No, it's true. Even if it was, everyone
is a private citizen wanting to
Listen or talk at a city council meeting. We were explicitly told that since working group meetings
can function with 2 individuals. We can't do that. We can only have 1% of their city council meeting
and that. Didn't feel quite right because even if we all wanted to comment on the same thing, which
was what we were doing, I think.
Yeah, we weren't doing it as. So just kind of trying to clarify that we make sure that we're continuing
to participate in our. So to clarify is that so you were speaking on behalf of the EC, but you are speaking
in your own individual capacity one individual was there for the.
EC's memo, and then we had other individuals that were there for other things that they hadn't, they
mentioned nothing about. Another individual wanted to speak on the proposed closure of Kirkwood, but
we were basically told we can't both be there. We kind of had to tag in, tag out of the room. Like,
Adam, text me as it leads. Sorry, Matt, were you done? Just to give some additional context, Jennifer
and legal, the bylaws of the environmental commission say working group
has a quorum of two people. So that's where this quorum of a working group is coming from is the bylaws
specifically. And so since those two members were on the same working group, that's where a quorum might
like would have been triggered. So I'll open it up to I think probably Taylor Brown is who I'm guessing
is going to answer the question, but I didn't know if anybody else had thoughts either.
I'm sorry. No, please. Go ahead. I was just going to say, I had looked through the handbook on Indiana's
public access laws and exemptions for open-door laws that include chance encounters. We both planned
to be at the city council meeting, but we did so independently. This was not an attempt to circumvent
open-door laws. It just seemed very curious to me that
that we were advised to not both attend a city council meeting even as citizens. Just looking for insight.
Sure. I've chatted with Anadina a little bit about this and she mentioned what she had previously talked
about and I agree with all of that. Yes, let me start with the baseline.
Absolutely, we want civic engagement, right? We want you to go to your representatives. We want you
to be actively engaged. I would not be working in government if that were not a belief of mine, right?
However, the state legislature is nervous as an understatement regarding open door law potential
circumventing. I don't know whose small town ticked off, an Indiana senator,
But one of the rules in open door law, I'm sure you saw in your review was not even in the same room
as counsel. If you're in the same room as a legislative body, you have to record your meetings and are
subject to other open door law requirements, even just being in the same room. It can be frustrating.
especially when you're trying to keep track of as many boards and commissions as we have, which is why
you have the chance encounter language and other kind of safe harbor provisions in there. I believe
there is a stipulation in open door law where it says if you both think you are going to be in a similar
meeting, you can
post a notice that says, essentially, there is a chance a quorum could be here. And you can address
it that way. Again, if it's like, hey, this is a big deal and everyone wants to show up to a council
meeting, which, hooray, please show up to a council meeting and express your views, there does need
to be, unfortunately, for state law reasons, there needs to be a notice that a quorum could be met
even if it is just a working group of two. So, I'm sorry, follow up, that's okay. Please. Provided,
say it's something that even a quorum of the full commission might attend, like everyone really wants
to weigh in, it has a huge environmental impact, or if it's a different board and commission, whatever
their purview is. Does it just have to be publicly noticed that a quorum
could be there or is it technically considered a meeting of that body even if we don't meet? Because
I guess I'm worried about in that instance, we all tend to give public comment to something. There's
no expectation from the city that we have a memorandum or anything. We were just people at a city council
meeting. I mean, I don't know. Am I making that concern sort of clear? Yes, yes, yes, yes. Nadine, I
don't know if you wanted to chime in before or after.
Oh, we can't hear you. I don't know if she's muted actually, but we can't hear her. Her laptop has been
absolute horrid the last couple of days. Oh no, we can't hear you. We can't hear you yet. Okay, I'll
go ahead and answer this question while you're troubleshooting. So to answer your question, yes, just
a special notice.
The concern, looking at legislative history and kind of what they were thinking when they put this together
was they want to avoid like, everyone shows up. So in this hypothetical, right? Everyone shows up to
a council meeting and you hear something and you go, oh, well, we got quorum here, right? We have everybody
here. Why don't we get together, have an agenda, vote on the thing real quick and be done, right?
has happened before, unfortunately. And that has caused some headaches when the meeting wasn't noticed
and there was no memorandum. And they said, oh, we voted on that right after the meeting, because everyone
was already there. And everyone went, I'm sorry, what? And we had to kind of backtrack a little bit.
So I hate to say that some people ruined the fun for everyone. But I think it's a matter of just being
above board and saying, hey, there is a chance a quorum will meet.
Uh, corn will be here. We are not anticipating any business to be conducted. We, you know, there are
various ways to kind of. Encapsulate, like, we are showing up to talk to the care to listen to the council
and to do only that. We are not meeting. We are not voting on anything. Period, right? Some notices
can be done that way. Um.
Unfortunately, for when when people ask for lawyers for advice, sometimes we really like black and white,
and we do not like gray areas. We like gray areas when they benefit us, right? But that's why everyone
hates lawyers. So, um. Does that answer your question? Yeah, for the most part, I have additional follow
ups, but I can, I can not so much speak. I think, I think to just sort of summarize what you just said, the.
The rotten part of it is that at some point there was a group that said, we're all together, let's quickly
go through the process of going through a bill to make it happen and then done. And that could happen
when we're all together talking about something and it turns into a bigger conversation. And that the
idea is to prevent people from making those decisions. I think that's really frustrating that that has
happened to make it so that this is such a pain for us to go through, but I think it makes sense. I
think that I would like to make sure it's heard that like as an advisory board with
no control. We do have a budget, technically, but we do have to get our budget approved, but with no
ability to create ordinances for no ability to actually enact things at a city level in any way. It's
super frustrating that we are just providing a service of information, connection to the community,
advocacy for our environment, and it's so hard that
that I understand that we're being treated like other groups that may have much more power than we do.
It's really, really hard. And it makes it hard for us to keep making all this time to be participating
as much as we love it. And I appreciate it when they're doing it. I do want to add quickly, you guys
are needing a situation because you have such a low core. So like most other boards of admissions don't
have all of the stuff facing that, but they definitely don't have two people for us. The only one I
can think of, I mean, like there are larger ones, like BZA,
And they do like, we have, if we know that more than one museum member might go to an open house or
something they're having, we post notice. So you guys are in a similar situation. You just have a lot
more of those groups. Are there, are there other commissions that have working groups? Like are the
alarms for those like five or six people? Like do they have that many people involved?
Um, I think y'all have six and I think there might be other, I looked around at this. There's like a
handful of other boards and commissions that have working groups and they don't have nearly as many
as you all have. Um, some might have like one or two and then some of them are either standard working
groups or like ad hoc work that like once something's done, you're done and there's no need to meet
again. So I think, um,
That's what some people do as well. The other thing to kind of give an example, like I understand where
you all are coming from. So to kind of put it from this perspective, you are technically like an extension
of government through the city of Bloomington as a board or commission member. So I'm thinking of a
recent example of, say for example, in
The city council wanted to go to a meeting of the county council to go talk about something related
to whatever. They wanted to do some type of collaboration. If the city council all showed up and they
have a quorum of people, even if it's not in their meeting, technically,
And correct me if I'm wrong, Taylor and Adina. My understanding is you have to notice it because if
you have a quorum of those members and there's some type of decision that's made by way of them being
there, that could be a huge red light and a huge no-no. So that's how I'm understanding that. Did I
get that right? Okay. So therefore, you all would
You're just think of yourselves as little but mean council members, because in my brain that's kind
of how I have to work my thought process around this too, because I understand your frustration and
I understand it's like I'm just this little me and I just want to participate, but you're so much bigger
than that. And therefore,
We just want to be able to protect you all. And also, of course, the city of Bloomington from anything
where somebody thinks in a meeting that they've gone in and they've heard a decision and they knew by
attendance somewhere else, they heard you. So that's a little sticky situation. And then, of course,
you can also, and I'm looking to my legal people here too, when you're speaking, and this is something
that will be covered in boards of commission too,
even if you are there, and like it's a quorum of people and you want to speak as an individual, you
can just identify, you know, I am speaking as an individual and not a member of any board of commission,
I'm sorry. So that's so something. Taylor, does that, if they do that and say, I'm here as a member
of the public, not as a member of the EC, does that like remove them from the council in this quorum? No.
Unfortunately, it's like, it's like Superman. He doesn't stop being Superman just because he puts on
the glasses. Yeah. I know that Matt and I have gotten to chime in. I'm going to take a quick minute
for Adam or the other folks in the room. If you have any specific things that you want to add before
we kind of keep the conversation going.
Can I say something? Yeah, of course. Or comment. So can I say something we totally off topic? We're
still talking to the legal team, so if it's not related to this. There might be a tornado warning imminently.
So just everyone brace yourselves. And it looks kind of like nasty. So we don't want to go downstairs.
We don't want to escape from each other. Is there? Well, we have an alarm though, I'm sorry. Our phone
tool and we should hear the sirens. I just don't want to like come out of nowhere and then help out.
And I've seen you social media. Awesome. Thanks, y'all.
Sorry. No, no, no, that was an appropriate. Yes, thank you for the safety warning. Yes, it looks pretty
nice. Other thoughts from other commissioners. Otherwise, I think. And Mitchell Adam, you had something
you want to say before I ask a complicated question. So, so I fully.
I fully understand where legal is coming from on most of these points. Like I tried to review kind of
the public access laws and read title two, but we read our handbook. I understand the mess, but I guess
what I want to communicate to legal is that almost all of the stuff that we have come to is out of necessity
because of different rules or advice from legal. I mean, if we were allowed, if Adam Martinez and I
were allowed to send each other an email about light pollution,
we wouldn't have to have a working group with a quorum of two. We're backed into the corner we're in
because of existing guidance we've been given or existing rules. We created the working groups with
a quorum of two so that we could work on small issues outside of the whole commission. Because we cannot
send emails to each other.
So the thing that becomes a conflict, since we cannot communicate outside of meetings, we have been
advised not to call each other, not to email each other anything if it concerns and commission business.
There we go. We can go upstairs. Okay. Are we back, Katie? By motion, we go downstairs. Okay, we'll
stay online. Thank you. Okay, I think we are coming back. Great.
Thank you. Thank you. Can you hear me? I can hear you. Awesome. Thank you so much. As we come back to
this at 723, I wanted to see if there's anything that anybody would like to say additionally. Otherwise,
like I said, we can follow up via email through Rachel or if it's necessary to invite them back for
another meeting. Any specifics that you would like to continue the conversation on before we move forward?
Think if it is possible for legal people's schedules, we would really appreciate having you back at
our next meeting. That way, we don't have to command anymore of your nightmare. We lost an Adina. I
will connect with Taylor probably next week because I know Fridays can be busy. So we'll connect next
week, Taylor, and figure out a time. Sounds great. All right. Thanks, Joe.
Thank you for legal for coming. All right. Glad everyone's safe. Do we have any other non-legal members
of the public online? I'm just asking for information. Do we have anybody join us since we were out?
It'd be weird. I'm just asking. No. No. I didn't see everybody on mute. Great. OK. Well.
Then moving into the next stage of our agenda, there's a note about, there's a couple of different notes
about our handbook. And one topic that I wanted to bring up specifically that Matt will talk about for
you now is about our needs, how we handle voting on things. And so I wanted to, I'm glad that legal
is here if you don't mind being here.
Consider when we are writing ECPC memos, which are on, as we all know, a very, very, very, very short
turnaround with getting information, sitting down to write a memo, getting that memo out and approved,
and then being able to share that memo with like the DA packet or the Planning Commission packet or
the Council packet. Being able to vote to approve submitting that memo is something that I
that I'm mindful is a very tricky thing and it's asking a lot of our commission to have an emergency
meeting. So I wanted to put that out there for any conversation about thoughts on that and also see
if according to legal, if there are any ways that we can potentially approve variations of like a final
version versus draft version. So as far as the topic that I'm talking about, does that make sense with
folks? I need clarification.
Say it once again. Yeah. So we have the ECPC memos that the ECPC will write if there is something that
is being proposed as a variance through the Planning Commission or the Bureau of Zoning Appeals. We'll
sit down with whatever that request is. We'll talk about environmental considerations. And then if we
think it's something that's important to be heard, because we think that variance is actually bad for
environmental purposes or has an opportunity for something else environmental. In fact, we might write
a letter that would then
can hopefully be considered by that board or the commission who are potentially granting those variations.
But the question is really, if we write that memo, PCPC, at this time, we have to vote on it as a commission
to approve it. But because of the timing of how, what, when the BZA meets or when the planning commission
meets, sometimes there's not even
for us to vote on, we'd have to come here like we did this last month to vote in it. So I wanted to
put that in front of folks for consideration because I don't know how frequently we'll have these memos,
but it is certainly another ask of our team to do something that is requiring CHEM, especially because
we currently only have eight appointment members, so like everybody. And then we'll see if it's worth
exploring any kind of like
Draft or framework that could be approved in advance versus going on the final version and that might
be a legal question. Do you all have thoughts on that? Or does that sound like it's worth entertaining
or are you okay with how we have things right now? Just totally okay too. Do any of the other boards
make recommendations regarding variances? I don't believe so because I
because we're through the planning and transportation department, I think that's why we have so much
of the information from Rachel, who's the environmental planner. I don't know if other commissions get
access to that, or if that's something that they would do. They could, but yeah, it would be very unlikely
for another commission to weigh in on a variance request. It's possible, like for example, if the request
was related to like pedestrian facilities or something, the transportation commission might weigh in.
They are also through the
But I would say most commonly, no, we don't engage in the other words and actions. Do you have thoughts
on the idea of final memo approval versus anything before that final version being ready? I think it's
the nature, definitely the nature of
document doesn't change from the draft to the final version. It seems like we could consider accepting
approval on a draft. On a draft. Do you agree? I mean, so in a draft, so I'm trying to understand what's
happening. So in a, there has to be an approval by the ECPC, not on the ECPC, but there has to be an
approval by the ECPC on a draft, right?
Yeah, the ECPC would write the draft. And the question is, does there have to be an approval on the
final draft or could an earlier draft be enough? Or could even the bulleted outline of concerns or relevant
topics be enough, if possible?
I'm thinking about the timing, because sometimes we have information, sometimes we have nothing, and
sometimes we have everything. So being opposed to that would mean that there's concern that the nature
of the draft is going to change. That would be the only output. Yeah. And I'm not sure if legally we're
required for it to be the final version. But yeah, would the ECB be comfortable with it being potentially
a draft? Yeah. I sent Taylor the bylaw, so I think he's looking over that now.
Modify the bylaws, but at the end of the day, I think title to and Taylor, you're the attorney. So feel
free to add in title to only gives the environmental commission as a whole to provide the recommendation,
not a working group of the environmental commission. So I Taylor can certainly weigh in on that, but
that's my understanding. So title to would have to be changed by council.
And we just went through Title II changes last year. So I don't know how often they changed Title II.
Rachel, I'm so sorry. Where in Title II are you seeing the... Yes, I think it's 02-1250. Does that sound
familiar? It's the Environmental Commission's Title II and the powers and duties. Yes, I'm there right
now. The exact... The report...
Submit an annual report in writing. Is that what we're discussing? No, they are talking about
recommendations. Okay. I think that's earlier on in the powers and duties. And I might have the powers
and duties here in this. The powers and duties will give us the ability to advise, write memos,
write reports, et cetera. It's actually in our handbook that says it has to be from the whole.
commission, not just from working groups. Yes, all working group recommendations, correspondence, or
public events must be approved in advance by the entire commission. It's not Title II that's actually
keeping us from doing that. It's our own handbook. Correct. The handbook is what explicitly says the
working group documents must be approved by the full commission. However, reading Title II,
The power itself is delegated to the environmental commission. So there has to be a vote of some sort.
Basically having the commission say, whether that's the commission saying, hey, we approve this working
group, right? Because essentially what's happened is council has said, hey, environmental commission,
you have to write this report and let us know, right? So they've delegated that authority to
the environmental commission. So then we're following the bouncing ball, right? And so now environmental
commission has the bouncing ball.
And you can hand it off to one of your working groups. And as long as there is a vote of some sort that
says. We approve whatever this working group is right. Does that make sense? As long as the authority
is clearly delegated. Then we're okay. However, in that last. Sentence, they're all working
group recommendations corresponds to public events must be approved in advance by the entire commission.
Um, I think in advance.
could give you some wiggle room if you're looking for some flexibility. I also am giving you kind of
on the fly legal advice. So take that with a grain of salt. But yeah, we are desperately looking for
some wiggle room, mostly just because some of this does have to happen very fast in order to get into
someone else's packet. So my suggestion, Taylor, tell me if this is like wildly out of line.
could be the environmental commission in our monthly meeting says, you know, the ECPC has some things
that are probably going to be coming down the pike in the next few weeks. Does the environmental commission
vote to approve the ECPC to write a memo? And if they approve that, then that is fine. And the ECPC
can send it out as well as amending our handbook language to say, to make sure that the language is
granting a non-specific approval from the EC before a memo goes out. So it's kind of reaffirming that.
Is that possible? I am always a fan of clarifying language in any context, really. I think that one
extra thing I would throw in there, not to be a lawyer about it, I know you.
If you could have some sort of like, we approve the memo, we approve the working group to write this
memo. And I would even say like, if possible, give some broad, and I'm not quite familiar with the memo
even says or what the memo content is. But if you could have the environmental commission essentially
say, it says, here are the broad strokes of what will be in that memo or in that report. And we will
leave the minutia of writing the actual report and the exact verbiage and everything.
to that working group, but as long as the overall message and theme is approved by the committee as
a whole, that works for me, or the commission as a whole, that works for, that would work for me. Does
that make sense? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's what happened again. It's to prevent the appearance of going
rogue, essentially. Yeah, that's definitely not what we're trying to do. I guess my follow-up is, is
there specific language that you would
like to see, because if I was gonna propose that we vote to amend our handbook, is there specific language
in that section that you would want to see to allow basically what you just described? Would you allow
me to think on that and get back to Rachel? Because when recommending exact language, like recommending
words, I mean, my little nerd heart just got excited, right? But I would just need a little bit of time
to think about the exact verbiage, if that's okay.
Well, I think so then this is where my head is at. So let's plan on talking about this next month to
say, do we want to have that kind of vote for the EC says ECPC? This is something that may come up and
we approve you writing them a book. And you have to change your hand at that time. So yeah, if we were
able to amend it such that we are able as a commission to do that, that would help.
that would help us function. It would be very good. Well, thank you, Taylor, for your on-the-fly advice.
We've got it recorded. We are recognized. Now, that's great. I do appreciate your thoughts. Yeah, wherever
we can simplify is excellent. All right, well, I'm going to pass it over to Matt for this quick handbook
update as well. Yeah, I was going to propose that we amend the handbook in just above that working group
section, Quorum Determination.
As it currently stands, says a quorum meets or a quorum means that 50% plus one of the appointed
commissioners are in attendance with a minimum of six commissioners present. As we have gone quite a
long stretch right now without receiving another commissioner, minimum six when we only have eight bodies
is a big lift. So I was going to move that we do that, whatever that's called, the de minimis.
Basically, we turn that back down to five so that it's less likely that we have a panic right before
a meeting about whether we need to cancel or not if someone's traveling for work or something. This
is something that we can vote on. Every single month we have to. Ideally, we would not change it that
often, but because we are so limited. We're responding to our circumstances. We are not trying to circumvent
anything to make it easier.
Is there any discussion or question that people have about Matt's proposal to move the de minimis to
five people, which means if five people are in the same room, it is a quorum for the EC, which means
working groups are now limited in that way as well. So working groups that have more than four people
are now not able to do their thing if they're all, some of them have to leave. So yeah, I'm just,
moving that we change that number six to a number five. And technically when someone seconds that motion,
we can still discuss it before voting. So thank you, sir. So Matt motion and Mitchell seconded. Okay.
Any discussion? Are we ready to vote? Rachel, I think we're ready to vote on something. Okay.
Let me get my screen ready. I think we're on Adam Martinez. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Gary Albright.
Yes. Heidi Brown. Yeah. Nadia Cain. Yes. Matt Caldy. Yes. Adam Budeker. Yes. Motion passes.
Great. Thank you for bringing that, Matt, and excited to see all eight of us at the next meeting. Okay,
next thing on the list is elections. This is going to be a voting topic because we talked about elections,
but I'd actually like to suggest, and I think we can vote on this. Rachel, remind me if we need to vote
on changing the election dates. We do. It says February in the handbook, so that's why it's a vote.
Is there anything else needed from Taylor?
Oh, I'm so sorry. Taylor and I will work together in the coming weeks. We'll figure something out. If
there are questions for Taylor, feel free to send them directly to me and I can consolidate them for
him. Thank you, Taylor. Thank you, Taylor. Thanks, Nicole. Thanks, you guys.
Yeah, of course. Thank you. Thanks, Jennifer. Thank you so much. All right. For the elections, basically,
we've been trying to do elections in February, but so many appointments happen in January. And with
the annual plans in place in January and only having a couple of weeks under our belts, switching
the different officers can sometimes feel like both years shift. So I would like to recommend that we
do our election in June instead so that we have a few months to pass the sort of, to get in the flow
of what we're doing for that year. And hopefully there'll be more solidified commissioners by that time
as well. Yeah, so that's my move that we vote to
change our elections for officers to June each year. Okay, so in the handbook, like, for the future,
not just for this year until they figure it out? Yeah, because with the new year and with the changing
committee, so many commissioners in January, it just feels like we're constantly like, oh, ugh! Yeah,
June gets us through ECO here. That was right. That was my only point of clarification, so I will second
your motion. Is this motion to modify the handbook, or is it just for this year? Modify the handbook?
Thank you. Is there any discussion people want to have about preferring that we do not make this modification
or aren't spending thoughts on it? I think like so many other things, including forum, if it's something
we feel the need to return to, we can. I think it's a good move right now and it may well stick,
but it also, you know, depends on everything that's going to happen in the next year. So I feel generally
supportive. I think Adam Martinez also had a comment. Yeah, just to clarify that.
That means like current officers would keep their positions until June, right? Yeah. So we would not
vote like this month. Sorry, what was that? We would not vote this month for like new officers. Correct.
Yeah. Yeah. But that's a really good question. Yeah. Provided our secretary is willing, they would keep
their role in June. Are you sweating? We're voting to modify the handbooks so that
From this year on, unless again modified, it'll be in June instead of February. Yeah. That works for
me. I just wanted to make sure we were clear. That'd be a great question. OK. Are there any comments
or concerns? Ready for a roll call vote? OK. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Kerry Albright. Yes. Heidi Brown.
Yes. Nadia Cain. Yes. Matt Caldy.
Yes. And food occur. Yes. At the Martinez. Yes. Thank you. Motion passes. Awesome. Thank you. All right.
Well, Rachel, we've got you for the free commission appointments, uh, when I'm the agenda. Oh, yeah.
Okay. So, uh, we received a application, uh, for the tree commission. I included it in one of the packet
addendums, um, but I also included it here. So.
The applicant is James for I don't know if James is still present with us. Okay, I took out James's
personal information and that is included in the application. So I did take that out. But here is the.
The qualitative.
Part of the application. So I wanted to introduce this to you that so title 2 of the tree commission
gives the power to appoint someone a member or a non member of the appoint someone to the tree commission.
And so that member of the tree commission, I believe they have voting powers at on the tree commission and then.
Historically, that person has came to the Environmental Commission as well to report about what the
Tree Commission is doing and serving as kind of a liaison between the two commissions. Carrie and Matt
might be able to provide some more context on how David Parker served in his position being in this
role. So I wanted to provide the information to you and should you want to appoint, you can take a vote.
I'm actually a little confused about how this works. Yeah. Rachel, I don't know if I am known of a tree
commission member who has only come to the EC meetings as a tree commission member, so I'm not sure
if I remember how that works. Would the term be similar to all the other commissions where it comes
up every two years or needs to be approved by the council or the mayor?
I'm not sure the, the person I would know that, but just left Jennifer cross Lee probably could have
answered that. Let me pull up the tree commissions title to quickly to see if I can quickly find an
answer. Yeah, it's probably in the tree commission rules. Like, for example, on commission,
we have like, who is appointed by or how it works. Um,
So what they serve on our mission, just as someone would serve on the tree commission. Because
my understanding was right, was that there is an open spot on the tree commission for an EC member.
So I didn't know if someone's applying for the tree commission, I would think that would be decided
by the tree commission. So I found the title to, let me try to share my screen here. So many different tabs.
Okay, so what we're looking at here is this number two section. So appointments, the tree commission
shall consist of seven members serving three year terms to shall be appointed by the mayor to by the
common council one by the Bloomington board of park commissioners, one by the board of public works,
and one by the environmental commission.
For my understanding, this does not have to be a member of the environmental commission. The environmental
commission is just appointing somebody. I believe most commissions have the clause where you have to
be a resident in Bloomington. I think the tree commission is the same. So this is what is giving the
power to the environmental commission to do that. Gotcha. Okay. And I know that in the application,
there's a little description from James on sort of the relevance of this commission for him and what
he's hoping to
Um, do you add that liaison? So we do have James in the room so we can, um, Talk about it. We can,
I assume, ask him questions if we have any. Um, we can consider voting on this now, or I assume it would
be okay if we consider voting on this next month if for some reason that the folks not ready to vote.
Yeah, I think so. Okay. Okay. Do we, I know it's a long shot. Do we know if Dave Harkerst was appointed
to the tree commission by the EC or if he had just
Apply to and I'm not sure that is before my time, so I'm not sure on that. Mine too proudly. Okay, well,
from my understanding from what Haskell said, so the Haskell Smith, the urban forester, I believe Dave
was the environmental commission appointee. Do we discuss.
this application further before or after a moment? I mean, it can be either, but yeah. And I mean, if
you'd like us to request James to step out while we talk, that's OK. We're obviously on CAS. We're available
for all the worlds to see either way. But if it makes it a little less direct, that can be. Thanks,
James. Yeah.
I mean, we haven't done this before, so this is like a really interesting thing to consider. And I think
there are questions that we probably haven't even thought to ask about our trade commission. I think,
well, my initial thought was like, I think he would do a really good job because he took a lot of initiative
and is still taking a lot of initiative and clearly is very passionate about these issues and is very
qualified. I wish that James had not left the room because I guess I just want to say that I appreciate him
applying to do this. I personally would be very comfortable with him being our appointment at the Tree
Commission and I appreciate him also coming to EC meetings in spite of not being a commissioner here
to report back on those monthly meetings. So I think that's wonderful and I'm supportive of his application.
Before Adam jumps in, I want to point just a point of clarification to in any type of appointment for this
position. If there was ever a reason to rescind that appointment, the EC also has the power to do that
upon a vote. So you have the power to appoint, you have the power to rescind. Otherwise, this would
have to be reappointed every three years. So just wanted to make that point of clarification. Sorry
to cut in front of you, Adam. Now you're good. I don't really have any qualms with appointing him for
the reasons that the other
Commissioner has mentioned, I just think in the future, should we have someone on the EC who feels especially
passionate about joining the Tree Commission or is willing to, maybe we should prioritize them, but
we don't have anyone like that right now. So, yeah, I'm perfectly fine with the point again. Yeah, I
think the bigger.
I think the bigger issue was that we don't have anyone who can make like a Monday, 9 a.m. meeting. So
it's one of those things. It's not that we don't have anyone who's passionate about trees. It's that
we have people who are working during those hours. So again, I appreciate his application. And I agree
with your general sentiment that we should give priority to someone within our own commission should
they be interested and available for such meetings. But in the interim, I feel happy to support James
on this role.
Yeah, I agree. So I guess I will move that we appoint James Ford to the Tree Commission. I second that
we vote on that. All right, so Matt and Nadia. OK. Let's do Heidi Brown. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Adam
Martinez. Yes. Adam Futiker. Yes.
Matt Caldy. Yes. Nadia Kane. Yes. Kerry Albright. Yes. Motion passes. All right. Well, I'm going to
go grab James real quick. And I'm going to put him in there. I hope he can study canon. Let's see. Thanks
for what? Let's light something. Maybe some black lights might be better. Don't worry. Great. Come back.
James. OK, we'll see. We'll see what happens. OK, the button. I know. Adam, did you have something to
say? Yeah. Yes.
Our meeting officially ends at eight, right? So if we want to keep going, we'd have to vote to extend
the time. Perfect timing. OK, so I would like to consider two different things. One, extending our meeting
by a few minutes, and also amending our agenda for things that we can push to next month. Because we
do have a lot still on here, but I think there's value in moving forward. I would suggest that we extend
by 15 minutes.
and see if we can buzz through this. Second. Matt and Mitchell post that second, so you can choose whoever
you want to. Yeah, I was looking to see if there was anything I wanted to remove from the agenda, but
I think especially things like working group updates and reports can just be done at light speed. Like,
I don't see the need to push them back, so I think we'll be all right. I do want to add that the staff
update has, because of just the bylaws, the Monroe County Gardener Fair we technically need to vote on.
The Grand Elementary, we need to vote on, and Earth Day table registration, we need to vote. So there's
three votes there. I won't take up any more time while we do that. OK, perfect. So yeah, we have a motion
to vote to extend by 15 minutes. OK, so I'll do the vote real quick. Adam Fudiger. Yes. Adam Martinez.
Yes. Kerry Albright. Yes. Heidi Brown. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Nadia Cain.
Yes, Matt, call the. Yes, motion passes. Thank you. Okay, so we're going to move through this. Feel
free to be as brief as you'd like. Sustainable energy utility project. Is that something that came from
Rachel? I think so. So this maybe Matt can also provide clarification. This was the B coast project
that they are working with the O'Neill school with. They had a.
memorandum and a statement of work. It's pretty long. I think they were just looking for feedback. So
if you have feedback, feel free to email me. Perfect. All right, we're gonna move into working group
updates then. Biodiversity working group has not met. However, there is a Mayor's Minute on our pledge
item on the agenda that I don't know about beyond what I saw in the packet.
So I signed up for updates about the Married Monarch Pledge. So this is basically our opportunity to
apply to be part of the Married Monarch Pledge. We can do it between now and March 31. So I wanted to
share this with you all in an approved way so that we can look into if that's something we want to do.
I would recommend that we consider, I mean, I think we have this vote now, but I would recommend we
just plan to vote on it. Let's vote on it this month.
I do want to say the administration is not interested in pursuing this certification at this time. So
that might reduce discussion on that as well. OK. So I'm glad that we shared it. And moving on to the
next thing, eco heroes. So we have a sponsorship letter that we need to vote on to approve to send.
That was part of our conversation at the beginning of the meeting.
in the packet. I hope you all had a chance to read it. And I would love to hear any edits you have,
or if people are interested in voting on it. I hope you've read it. Hold on the letter. Second. Do you
also want to include the flyers in this vote? Yes. We don't need separate votes for that, OK? Yeah.
I included it just as eco-hero materials. Sorry, Carrie. We'll move that.
All right, so here are flyers that we're also using to share with the public. Would you like to amend
your motion, Mitchell, to include the flyer? Yes. I move to approve the letter and flyers and, yeah,
the eco-virus. And I once again second. OK, Mitchell moves. Matt seconds. Thank you for noting that,
Rachel. Yeah. OK. Owens, Maldi. OK. Matt Caldy. Yes. Nadia Cain.
Yes. Heidi Brown. Yes. Kerry Albright. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Adam Martinez. Yes. Adam Voodeker.
Yes. Motion passes. Excellent. Thank you. Not a voting item, but just one while we're on Eco Heroes.
Will it be possible for Fiona to post about Eco Heroes soon so that it can be shared?
If you send me, if you send me a post, send me a Facebook post and I will get it approved. The press
release goes out on Tuesday. I believe so. Thank you. Perfect. Okay. There's some more conversations
that were. The committee.
It's kind of thought about having, including ideas for what would be the live event. We talked about
that in the outreach meeting, which I'll talk to in a moment. Um, Rachel, there are purple follow up
questions about the live event. So can I email those to you with the eco heroes group? And then you
share back what the responses are just to save time right now. Uh, I believe so email me individually,
please. And I will get answers back. Great. Sounds good.
And then lastly, judging. So when we're getting on these submissions, they start coming in on St. Patrick's
Day. The last day is April 7, which is a Tuesday, and we need to have them voted on so that we can tell
the winners to come to the Eco Heroes ceremony on the 18th. Ideally, we'd be able to tell them by the
10th. So there is a recommendation for judging of all the submissions
on April 9th. It's a Thursday and it would, I assume, be Rachel hours that work for you set up in the
planning department where people can come by and just fill out a form saying, this is the one I like
for first place for this age group and just kind of fill that out. It doesn't have to be everyone at
once. Does that work for us to plan on April 9th being the day that people make time for that? If you're
working out of a non-Bloomington profession, does that work for you or is there something that would
work better for you?
Well, what would the hours be? I think it would be while the office is open, it would be back in the
cleaning department, which is until... Well, I'm not back until like 5.30 or 5.45. Yeah. So, I mean,
like, yeah, as logistics go, technically not everyone has to vote. Yeah. Right. So I guess, right, is
this okay or do you want to try to make another
carved out. No, I mean, the only thing that would work would be an evening or a weekend and that's not
worth pursuing for one person. It works for the most people. I was going to say, I'm sure I can make
it work. I'll swing over on lunch or something. Okay. All right. Adam, does that work? Adam Martinez,
is that work okay for you? Yeah, I can stop by during lunch. Okay. All right. Great. Okay. Thank you
so much. We'll plan on the ninth.
and be overflowing with submissions. Great. Okay. The next group is the ECPC. Rachel, what do you have
to share? Oh yeah, that's me. Okay. So ECPC met in late January. So we've had that special meeting since
then. I included the letter that was sent to council after the meeting.
uh, provided a public comment during the council meeting. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to read the
entire letter because of the three-minute addendum. Um, so I appreciate ECPC for working on that.
I'm sorry, um, it worked out the way it did. Um, definitely a learning experience for me. Um, and I'm
glad Legal was able to come and, um, provide some clarifications on how it can work in the future. Um,
but did any, that's kind of my update. ECPC did not meet in February, um,
for the petitions going to BZA and Plan Commission. So the next meetings are as scheduled in March.
Any other updates from ECPC members? I received an email about the North Grove variance request. Oh,
yes. I'm sorry. I included that in the packet as well. I'm sorry. I forgot. Was it from Julia Livingston
or was it from another individual? Mine was from Molly O'Donnell.
Okay, so this about the 2511 North Dunn. Okay, so that was the site that it's a four acre site. I think
ECPC has seen it. I sent the plans a couple of times. A four acre site with about 2.6 acres of closed
canopy. Now they are planning to put in 15 subdivisions and have several common areas for the riparian buffer.
and trying to remediate some closed canopy. Environmental Commission did receive a letter, or I'll let
you all read the letter, but a public comment. It sounded like Harry also received a public comment.
Yes, so this is the public comment that I got was from somebody sharing about their concerns and some
of the specific things that are concerning them. And then they have a petition that they would like
the support of the commission or at least consideration from the commission because I just got it yesterday
or last night. So I couldn't work it into this agenda, but I assume, Rachel, if I share it with you,
then this is something that we could potentially discuss and vote on and the ECPC if it wants to meet
and discuss
our thoughts on it beforehand, we could do that. As far as timing goes, does that work for us to plan
on this for the March meeting? Jackie can probably provide more comment on the timing on that. I think
the BCA... Go ahead, Jackie, I'm sorry. Oh yeah, sorry. BCA is next week, so that's not great. We're
not sure if they're going. If they go next week, then they will go to land mission on March 9th, which
seems inevitable, second or third for that.
So we can, you know, I know this is kind of a weird one because I think you guys have like not highlighted
it, now it's available to me. We do want to read it. We can let you, we should know by tomorrow if it's
going to the museum next week. We will know, it's going to the museum next week. So you'd like,
you know, maybe it's based on that because if it doesn't, then that means you'll have a month because
it won't sort of like push on the line. They'll both, John. Yeah.
So my feeling is it would make sense to plan to put this petition that none of us, but you have seen
yet on our March meeting agenda and packet and et cetera. And ACPC previously met and decided not to
write a memo for 2511 North Down Street. So we could decide whether we want to stick with not writing
a memo or whether we want to write one. I was moved by this letter. I thought it was great. And I know that,
I know that a lot of the neighborhood has been speaking at those meetings and that it's a complicated
one for others that are non-environmental as well. So I personally still don't feel driven to write
a memo, but I appreciate the public's input and reaching out to us as well. And if we get the petition
on next month's agenda, I'd be happy to look at it. Yeah. And that sounds good.
Rachel, will you just keep us up to speed on if this is actually going to the next one? Definitely.
If that's the case, we can decide. Thank you. OK, light pollution group? So we had planned to meet in
January, but we ended up canceling it due to some of the confusion around how working groups work, I guess.
I will probably reach out to people and try to get another one scheduled in March, which will set us
up nicely to hit the ground running after Eco Heroes, I think. I had a quick question for Rachel. You
mentioned there might be someone at the Parks Department who is interested in working on evolution in
the parks. If we wanted to talk with someone from city staff,
would we have to set up a meeting if it was just one of us and therefore we weren't meeting the quorum?
I don't think so. I think one person's fine. Jackie, do you agree? I'm so sorry. If one person from
the EC Andorra working group, just one person wanted to meet with city staff, does that require an inspection
notice? No. Okay. You're good, Adam, to meet with people. Okay. Just wanted to clarify that.
Sorry not to make confusion about the working group. We've received mixed guidance. Now you're good.
Yeah, that's why I was here. Because I know you may not hear that from some of the others, and it's
hard on Rachel to try to explain a thing. We have been getting completely opposite guidance from legal
and the administration. And so then Jennifer's in a weird spot where she's trying to be like, well,
this is what legal told us. So we're hopeful, like Jennifer said, they're going to come to some sort
of actual conclusion soon.
Because all the rules, as we told you, that is what they told us. And then just extremely recently,
we heard directly from the administration, like, oh, we don't have to do X, Y, and Z. And it was like,
that is my planet. So it has to be bad for us, too. And for Rachel, trying to disseminate that information
to you guys in a timely manner. We're hoping to have an actual answer soon. And then if you'd like just
to move on, and you can grab your groups around that. That's awesome. We appreciate that. Yeah. Well,
I think I'll go ahead, Adam.
Yeah, no, I understand. Music for all of us. Great. Well, I'm going to go ahead and move then to the
next group, which is Outreach and Education. That's tonight. Rachel, I have some specific questions
from our group that I will email you with. And then if you could respond to the group with their replies,
that'd be perfect. Special Projects has not met, but we're going to schedule a meeting, which is totally
allowed in the email. So we'll figure that out and have an update for you next month. How about water
quality? I was going to say, as it's
I've not scheduled a meeting yet. It's hoping to have one soon, but I heard through the grapevine, and
by the grapevine I mean the guy two desks down from me at work who runs this kind of stuff was in a
meeting and I could hear him talking. Apparently the county has gotten a grant of the type that we're
going to apply for. So I don't know how, I don't know the details of it yet. I haven't had a chance
to talk to Tim about it yet.
but I don't know if that would negatively impact our chances of getting something. And if the county
does have something, we should figure out, we should really start getting the right hand to talk to
the left hand and figure out what they're doing and see if we can collaborate or anything with them
because water goes to all of them. So yeah, gonna try and figure that out. And once I have more details,
I'll try and get some on the schedule and see if we can talk to our stormwater people and figure out
who we need to get from the county and to report us to talk about this stuff as well. What was it for?
What was the grant for? It would be for EPA 319 non-point source pollution reduction programs. Awesome.
Okay. Thank you, Mitcha. All right. Well, we're to the staff updates. So Rachel, I'm going to turn it
back over to you.
Okay, the 1st thing is the environmental amendments. We have a landscape update, which I'll cover and
then there's also an update that Jackie will cover. So the landscape update is we.
are changing the parking lot perimeter landscaping. So we're adjusting this landscaping to reflect what
is actually feasible in parking lot areas to address what the intention was, which is to better distinguish
purposes such as visual screening and provide landscaping within parking lot areas that are feasible.
So we are taking this language where
pretty much reflecting it, what the county has. There's not been a finalized language developed, but
because things are moving quickly as far as these changes going to plan commission and to council, I
wanted to give you just a summary or a quick synopsis of where this is headed. So what we have now is
one, I didn't look this up, I'm sorry, I'm like going to make things up.
How many trees is it? Rachel, right now, do you remember on the permit or it's okay if you don't?
I don't. It's one tree. It's very similar. It's like one tree every three spaces. So every space is
nine feet wide. Or every four spaces. But at the county, they just do it by million feet. So the thing
we've been running into is that our regulation is based on the number of spaces you have total. So that
really isn't related to what your perimeter is. And so then we're like,
they're being very, cause they like literally can't, they have to move to 10 feet and they can't do
it. So we are changing our regulations to be similar to the counties where it's one regulation for the
outside and a separate regulation for the inside, as opposed to one that you're just kind of
like gerrymandering that. So the actual number, the shrubs, I think they, the actual numbers are going
to be very similar. It's just how we get there. It's gonna be different and it'll be easier, much easier
for staff.
developers to understand what needs to know inside, which is really kind of important as well. I mean,
that is important for the reasons Rachel mentioned, but for the coverage and the actual asphalt inside
is more important on some of these big plots to see. And then if there are any questions about
the landscaping, Jackie can provide the second update.
Okay, the second thing is, a number of years ago, we changed the requirements for easements
on environmentally sensitive areas so that basically everyone had to do easements if they were doing
a project on a site with environmentally sensitive areas. Previous to that, we only had to record the
easements if it was in a subdivision. So we wanted to include large sites that have sensitive areas.
We wanted to compel them to record easements as well.
What has happened is that we maybe just went too far to that end because we get a lot of small projects
now where they are not going to pay about this. They have money to have a surveyor come out and survey
easement. And so like all of the regulations in the easement still apply. We are just trying, we are
not requiring them to report the easement. So what the regulation will be changed to is that it will
still be for all subdivisions and it will be for all
major site plans. So anything that's going to go to plan and commission any major commercial or multi-gammal
site plan will have to do that. So obviously those next commissioners do have the money to meet that
requirement. Yeah, so that's the average. No, so they're there for major site plans. It's there are
different thresholds. So over a certain number of units, I believe it's 30 now, it might be 50. You're
going to definitely be a major site land. If your site is more complicated, the director can send it
up and have it be a major site land, even if you don't have the threshold. If you're over 30,000 additional
square feet of non-residential, you're going to be a major site land. So it's really like the bigger
projects will learn land commission and they will still have to do the expense. And again, the smaller projects,
they'll still have to follow those regulations. It just won't be recorded that there's an easement on
that site. So it's recorded easement. Yes, it's specific. Correct. So recording easements are a best-case
scenario, and that's why we wrote it that way. And some of us are hesitant to change it back. But I
think the middle ground, that is what the county does. And I think it does address some of those things
we've seen, which is really small projects where people weren't anticipating they were going to have
to do a survey
And I feel like some of those projects are nice. Thank you for sharing that update. To continue on,
we've got a few different items to vote on because they require registration and fees. So the first
one is the Garden Fair. We talked about doing that. We had an interest from Heidi, from Adam M,
Matt maybe, maybe me to do the tabling. If we go to register, then we will need to make sure that there
are people there tabling for that event on April 11.
We have next month to plan the details, but I would like to move that we vote to approve registering
for and teetling at the Master Garden Fair. We're OK. I think it's like a two to four shift, so awesome.
We're busy in the morning. If we're confident collectively that we can cover it, which it seems like
we are, then I'm a favor of voting. Two to four shifts, just an agreement.
Okay, so I moved and Nadia seconded it. Okay. Is there an amount that or is there like a preference
on what table spot? I know spots are filling up, so I'm sorry we didn't vote on this last month.
but I just want to make sure I'm not, I'm respecting your all's budget whenever we're getting a table.
Okay. And we would be choosing indoor or outdoor. Uh, yes. Or single or double space it looks like.
And so I know it costs a little more, but the indoor just in case the other one says rain or shine.
So indoor is fine with me. Okay. Do you want a single table for 125? Is that okay? Yeah.
Okay. If they're out, do you want the double table? It's way more. I would say it's more than we need.
I say if they're out, we can switch to outdoors. Outdoor. Okay. I will get that set up and let's go
for a vote. Let me share them in the right column. Okay. Let's go. Adam Futiker. Yes. Adam Martinez.
Yes. Matt Colby. Yes. Heidi Brown.
Yeah. Carrie Albright. Uh, yeah. Mitchell Owens. Yeah. Nadia Cain. Yes. Motion passes. Great.
Thank you. As we've reached 8.15 and have a couple more voting items, I move that we extend the meeting
by hopefully not, but up to 15 minutes. I'll keep you in the staff, I promise. Mm-hmm. Okay. Thank you,
Nadia. Okay. Okay. Um, Nadia Cain.
Yes. Carrie Albright. Yeah. Heidi Brown. Yeah. Matt Pauldy. Yes. Adam Budicker. Yes. Adam Martinez.
Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes.
Thank you very much. Next item on the list is the Grandview Elementary STEM night. This is where it's
like a ton of tables that are showing different forms of STEM. And in the past, we had the Habitat for
Nativity Plan in its previous version. So now it will be amazing. But it is the same night as our currently
scheduled BC meeting. Because we need to make sure we're hitting quorum, which at this point would mean
up to three people could table at Grandview for the six to 730 window. We can do that?
It's an interesting option. I can tell you from personal experience of tabling, our booth was not even
close to as exciting as everyone else's. It was fun being there, but we were the boring table for sure.
I'm open to us being creative with what we do if we want to table at the Gran V STEM nights, but it's
cool to be invited. So I think it's a really fun thing for us to think about. And if we want to do it,
then we would need to decide. So you wanna confirm.
I think that it would be great if it wasn't on the night of our regular meetings. So I don't currently
have the appetite to try to also table with that. Any other thoughts about it? Sounds fun. It's cool.
Sounds cute. This is not, I mean, we need five people in our quorum at this moment. So if it happens,
people want to. I'm not sure. We can't move the month.
I think at this point, it would probably be pretty hard to move it, just because. Yeah, that idea.
It's very, very tight stuff. Yeah, I mean, with everything, but yeah. But if there are one or two people
who want to do the tabling that would like to move, that we vote to. I think technically either way
we move to vote, I'm just, I am, I plan to vote back. Are there people that would want to vote?
We need two, all right? I would love to do it. We need two. If we're sure that everyone else can attend
our meeting. In a risk forum, if anyone else is traveling, then that puts us in a really good spot.
We might have more members. They're doing interviews, so we may have more members at that time.
That's true. How about a potential member? Would you be interested? No. Do it. Are you going to do it?
No. Adam, Martinez?
I mean, it's a voting item. So, uh, I vote, I move that we, um, vote on tabling at the Grandview Elementary
Seminary. Sorry. Oh, quick question. It's free, right? There's not a fee. I think so. Let me check this
Google form. Uh, it didn't say that there was a cost.
This Google form does not say that there's a constant. Can I ask Adam another question? Adam, are you
going to do it if we don't do it? Because we need two people. Yeah, I will. I'm already scheduled to
go to the meeting anyway, so I'm free.
Yeah, I just, I really don't, I really don't like the risk of not meeting Coral at our meeting is why
I plan to go now, but either way, I still, I just like that. It's an opportunity to actually like, yeah,
like get hands on people and do something. So we can vote on it. It has moved in seconds. It's ready
for a roll call vote. Okay. Adam Futaker. Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Adam Martinez. Yes. Carrie Albright. Yes.
Matt Colby. No. No, Heidi Brown. You have to say yes, but I can't get the tape on. That's OK.
That's OK, yeah. Nadia Cain. We're going to register. Motion passes. This is the first. Nadia, I'm assuming
it's over here. No, I was filling. Oh, since I've made a reference. OK, thanks. We don't like contentious stuff.
Okay, and the last thing I have is the Earth Day registration. You all will be at Earth Day for the
Eco Heroes event anyway, but do you want to vote to have a table there as the Environmental Commission?
I move that we have an EC table at the Earth Day event. Second. All right. Okay. We have a lot of volunteers
for being there already, so we're ready for a roll call. Heidi Brown.
Yes. Mitchell Owens. Yes. Gary Albright. Yes. Adam Martinez. Yes. Nadia Kane. Yes. Adam Fudeker. I want
to say no just to do it. Matt Caldy. Yes. Okay. Those are all the staff updates for the evening. Thank
you so much, Rachel. I have a question. Yeah. If I wanted to meet with Adam to talk about what we would
want to do, is that
Yeah, we would, we would bundle it under the probably education and outreach meetings and it would be
something that you would schedule with Rachel and she would set up a notice and then you two could meet
each other way. If two people who aren't on the same subcommittee, why do you have to notice about the
same subcommittee?
I don't think I have to notice if they're not on the same subcommittee meeting. However, a lot of people
are on the same subcommittee meetings, even if they're in multiple. So even if it's an unrelated one,
that's right. Right. So even if you both are on like the biodiversity meeting, but you're talking about
water quality in a separate thing, I would say I didn't notice it. So don't do it. They won't apply.
You know, she needs to go to work.
Um, just lay on that one. Adam Martinez has a question. Yeah, is there going to be an issue with two
of us being there talking about environmental issues? I don't, I think public events are separate. So
I think that's why like Earth Day and like these other events are separate. Yeah, like the board and
commissions deliberation and stuff like that. Thankfully makes it under the wire. All right. Um,
Okay. Well, we're at the report section. Um, if you'd like to pass on your report, feel free to do that.
If you'd like to get to an update, we'd love it. We have exactly eight minutes left. So, uh, tree commission.
That was already given earlier. I presented at tree commission this month. So yes, James covered it.
We talked about 2511 north done. And we also talked about the, um, the trees removal being removed on
PLS. So I can provide more context on either one of those if there's questions. Okay.
Thank you. Anything from Iraq? There is. Should I wait? You can share next month if you'd like. I'll
do it next time. Sounds good. OK, friends of Blake Monroe, I don't believe we have anyone attending
that. Bicos. I do want to report on the Bicos one. They had a very similarly packed agenda, but it was
a good meeting. They had a presentation on the Grandview Hills pollinator garden from their sustainable
neighborhood grant last year. It sounds like it went great.
He had a capstone presentation. Now I can skip that. They passed a resolution to thank the city and
council for stepping up when snap benefits last lapsed. And they also advanced to a second reading,
a resolution aimed at disabling flock cameras and surveillance. That's about it. That's great. Thank
you for the update.
We've got MC Iris. Anything you want to share about that? I presented MC Iris as well. We were talking
about how to incorporate remediation methods for ground cover removal. So sometimes we have residents
that are trying to convert their turf lawns to naturalized yards, or if they want to do any type of.
overall turf lawn killing or even yard killing. We just talking more about how to work with residents
on how to properly remediate that without triggering enforcement, or even if it does trigger enforcement,
how to go about that in a less nuanced way. So again, I'm happy to answer any questions about that.
So. Cool. I think, I think as if there is anything that would be helpful for
you to keep sharing about that. That seems really interesting and very in line with the materials and
all that. So yeah, that's exciting. I'm glad to hear that those are conversations happening. All right.
Our last report is for Clean Community Program. Anything for that besides aiming at that silver? Great.
Any additional commissioner announcements that they would like to share as we're wrapping up here? Who
could I posture for some of the
How's that going to be? Pledge, outreach materials, kind of stuff. Because I have some people I'd like
to like, do a little church table. You want stickers? We have stickers. Yes, absolutely. We want stickers.
But they have to sign up. Yes. I'll make them work for the stickers. Yeah, I think Virgil's got them.
Yeah, I think there's one piece of lit that's good, and then there's stickers. Okay. Yeah. So she would,
yeah, that's good.
Yeah, Adam. I just want to say, be careful getting home because I heard there, I don't know where there's
like down the power lines in the streets somewhere. Just keeping an eye out. Well, thank you. Glad you're
home and not on a bicycle. Any other announcements from commissioners? All right. Well, our next meeting
is March 26th. It was moved for, I think, spring break purposes, so it is not the third. It is the fourth
Thursday of the month. Please note that.
If you cannot attend or you have any reason that you are planning to attend remotely, please let me
and Rachel know that just so that we can plan. Because if we need to adjust, then we can have
that conversation. But for now. I don't think I can. I can't. I have my family spending time for a show
at the auditorium for my birthday. Okay. So Nadia is officially not going to attend at the next meeting.
So we have two other people miss at this point.
So please, please, please be mindful of what you're doing. That will be missing two in a row by tabling
at the Grammys STEM event. Don't miss three. That's it. It was that. I motion to adjourn.