Meeting MinutesFebruary 8, 2005 Attendees: Faith Klareich (FK), Carl Henn (CH), Alicia Hosmer (AH), Gerald Leighton (JL), Tolulope Odunlami (TO) and Nate Wall (NW)
Absent: Geoff Sanders (GS) and Jaskaran Singh (JS) Also in attendance: Kris Dighe and Pete Kushner (prospective Commissioners) Agenda: 1. Welcome, News and Agenda Review 2. Review and Approval of 1/11 and 1/25 Meeting Minutes
Minutes from 1/11/05 and 1/25/05 approved. 3. Tree Maintenance Position Paper a) Discussion of Rough Draft
Commissioners took several minutes to read through the rough draft distributed by AH. JL and CH suggested a few minor wording changes. JL then brought up the issue of whether this position paper should include paved and/or marked trails within forest preserves as it was currently written, or if that should be excluded altogether. CH felt keeping the distinction between paved and unmarked trails was a good one, and that there was no reason to take it out. It was put to vote, and the majority consisting of FK, JL and TO favored its removal. AH said she would move the section regarding paved trails to the preceding paragraph where the applicability of the proposed guidelines is discussed. b) Assignment to Finalize Paper - AH will incorporate the changes, and send out a final version to all Commissioners.
- NW will schedule another interim meeting to approve this final version of the paper, to expedite getting it to the Mayor & Council.
4. Discussion of Position Paper Procedures
FK explained that she would like to see a sub-committee created to handle position papers. This sub-committee will likely not be created until the vacancies have been filled and the Commission is back at full strength. JL mentioned that there were two types of position paper: one is done by request from the Mayor & Council, asking the Environment Commission’s position on an issue; the other type comes from within the Environment Commission, and is the EC expressing their opinion on an issue to the Mayor & Council. FK clarified that this sub-committee would only be handling the second type of position paper – any position requested by the Mayor & Council would be worked upon by the entire Commission. CH indicated interest in being on this position paper sub-committee. - NW will send out email to see who else on the Commission is interested.
5. Interfacing with County Environmental Initiatives
FK mentioned that it may be beneficial to get a handle on what Commissions exist at the County level, and to rotate EC members through them, as sustainability requires an awareness of what others in the area are doing. TO concurred, saying that rotating through would help share information between groups and make sure we were not re-inventing the wheel. - CH to research County website and create list of other Commissions and meeting times.
6. Discussion of Sustainability and Green Building Program
FK asked if the Commission wanted to pick a handful of focus areas under the umbrella of sustainability to focus on (an example being a Green Building Program). She listed some ideas/actions that have been discussed in the past: a) Prioritize other Board & Commissions for outreach – JL is working on this
b) What are procedures for liaising with these or other outside groups?
c) Information packet for the new City Manager / invite City Manager to a meeting
d) Zoning Ordinance Update outreach – has been pushed back for now with departure of Chief of Planning; gives EC more time to do its homework on this
e) Reporting & Metrics – creation of a baseline for the City; Pam Rowe had worked on an “annual sustainability report” which could possibly be re-instituted
f) Guidelines on Sustainability – the creation of a “living document”
CH suggested a collection of past position papers to familiarize the new City Manager with the issues of concern to the EC. Discussion on whether to create a Rockville-specific sustainability document from scratch, or to gather “off-the-shelf” information and modify. JL mentioned that we first need an idea of what we’re trying to “sell” in terms of sustainability before we start writing papers or going to other Commissions. Suggested inviting Councilmember John Hall (EC’s Council liaison) in for a meeting to see how we can best get input to the Mayor & Council, and other Commissions. FK: Do we want to take a handful of crosscutting issues under the broader scope of sustainability for focus, and bring these issues to other Boards & Commissions as it relates to their duties; OR do we want to attend other Board & Commission meetings, understand the specific issues they face then address them individually? The EC is already becoming involved with Noise and SWM, so perhaps pick one more “category” such as energy efficiency, green building, or mobility. - Approach for sustainability will be agenda item at next meeting for final decisions
7. Staff Update a) Commission Vacancy Recruitment
Notice of vacancies emailed to all neighborhood associations – have received some responses. Interested individuals will be attending the March meeting. The two prospective Commissioners in attendance (Kris Dighe and Pete Kushner) were given time to introduce themselves, explain their backgrounds and their interest in serving on the Environment Commission. b) Liaison With Other Boards and Commissions
JL has the Boards & Commissions packet to review to determine where the EC should target their outreach. Further discussion is necessary to determine the sustainability issues to disseminate to other Boards & Commissions. c) Montgomery County Sierra Club Recycling Committee
CH and TO attended this meeting, and were given case study “homework”. Discussion on how Commissioners were to separate their personal opinions from the “voice of the EC” when attending other committees. d) Noise Study Task Force
Joint meeting between EC and T&TC Commissioners to take place on Feb. 9th. JL to attend, others interested. Consultants will be present to get feedback before making recommendations at the March 7th Mayor & Council meeting. e) SWM Fee study task force
JL to serve as EC delegate to this task force, to be created by DPW. Consultant proposals have been reviewed by the City, and interviews and consultant selection should be performed by the next EC meeting. f) Staff Discussion with City Manager concerning Tree Management
NW gave a summary of the meeting held between City staff and the City Manager earlier that same day. City staff was concerned that they would have a difficult time with the notification step in many instances, as truly hazardous trees need to come down immediately. However, the City mentioned that it has taken down less hazardous trees in conjunction with immediate tree hazards to save time; this is a practice that can be changed, giving full notification and scheduling the less hazardous tree for re-inspection at some time in the future. City staff would like to provide comments on the EC’s draft paper before it is made final.
8. Wrap-up and Adjourn | 
