Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-08-033 - Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF) - Summary of Public Input & Operating Framework~ ~, ~ T~ E Development & Technical Services Report To: Councillor C. Weylie, Chair, and Members of the Development and Technical Services Committee Date of Meeting: March 3, 2008 Submitted By: Rob Browning, General Manager of Development and Technical Services Prepared By: Barbara Steiner, Senior Environmental Planner Ward(s~ Involved: ALL Date of Report: February 27, 2008 Report No.: DTS - 08- 033 Subject: Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF} Summary of Public Input & Operating Framework RECOMMENDATION: THAT the Operating Framework set out in report DTS - 08 - 33 be approved, and further THAT the updated Strategic Plan for the Environment acknowledge and incorporate LEAF as a key tool for the enhancement /optimization of the environment for Kitchener. BACKGROUND: At the April 16, 2007 meeting of the Finance and Corporate Services Committee, Council approved the $5 million Local Environmental Action Fund (LEAF) and directed staff: THAT guidance for the ultimate criteria for LEAF be obtained through the public input obtained as part of the update to the Council-adopted Strategic Plan for the Environment which will identify the current environmental priorities of the citizens of Kitchener, including input from the Environmental Committee. In December 2007, the City of Kitchener held public workshops to engage citizens in the update of its Strategic Plan for the Environment, and as was previously determined public input on the criteria and operating characteristics for LEAF could well be obtained as part of that community engagement process. An obvious fit with the new LEAF, this policy has long served as a guidance document by identifying, prioritizing, budgeting for and monitoring environmental initiatives across all departments. Notably, the intent of the 2008 update is to focus the efforts of both the City and its citizens on current and emerging issues of environmental concern in Kitchener, and to move the plan from largely a guidance document for City administration to a plan which can also help focus community efforts. Additional direction to establish criteria and operating characteristics of LEAF was obtained from the Council strategy session of April 30, 2007. Direction for this session was given by Council resolution: THAT at the Council Strategy Session in Apri12007, focus be given to providing high level direction with respect to tangible outcomes/success measures we wish to achieve through investments made through LEAF... The results of both the public workshop on LEAF, as well as the Council Strategy Session on LEAF are summarized in this report. Based on that input, criteria and an operating framework for LEAF are proposed in this report. REPORT: It has already been recognized by a number of members of City Council that if we are going to see real and concrete improvements to our environment, changes will need to happen at the local level-municipal governments, communities, businesses, families, individuals. And despite all the completed and ongoing initiatives for improving the environment in our community, Council has, in establishing the $5 million Local Environmental Action Fund, clearly recognized the community's desire to focus even more effort and resources on Kitchener's environment. A. INPUT TO DATE ON LEAF Input has been obtained from staff, Council and the general public. Council Input Since Council's consideration of staff report FIN-07-042, Council's Strategy Session on LEAF was held on April 30, 2007 and a specific public workshop on LEAF was facilitated on the evening of December 11, 2007 as part of the community engagement for the update to Kitchener's Strategic Plan for the Environment. Council's priority areas for funding can be summarized as follows: Energy Use and Air Quality (e.g. green buildings, energy efficiency and conservation} Natural Lands Acquisition and Management ~e.g. increase /enhance urban forest} Environmental Education and Public Awareness (e.g. social marketing, environmental literacy, changing behaviours} Smart Growth and walkable communities ~e.g. integrated greenlands, new trails / bikeways in existing neighbourhoods} 2 Council also offered comment on criteria for LEAF funding, the types of projects or programs that should be preferred. Projects and / or programs should (be}: Transformational Not normally addressed through Kitchener's normal municipal mandate (not normally done, funded} Those that do not normally get the attention of the City Local, with significant local impact Engage the community Action-oriented Not duplicate those of other levels of government Partnerships for synergy Community collaborations Leverage other funds Promote environmental education and public awareness Public Input Approximately 40 people attended the workshop held on the evening of December 11, 2007 to discuss the Local Environmental Action Fund (or, LEAF) approved by Kitchener Council earlier in the year. A good discussion occurred and input was received from a very engaged group of citizens. Twenty (20} written responses were received via the Internet or by mail; citizens were asked to provide answers to the same questions on LEAF asked at the workshop. All these responses are available on request. Summary of Public Responses Four sets of questions were asked, seeking input on the types of projects that should be funded, the criteria that should be used to assess proposals to the fund, potential partners and techniques for monitoring success. How should this money be spent? What types of environmental projects would benefit from increased funding? Which types of environmental projects should be priorities ? Which types of environmental projects might be able to make a significant change to the Kitchener landscape or to the attitudes of residents ? In response to this set of questions, citizens articulated a desire for projects that would improve air quality with initiatives such as those to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation, anti-idling measures, the creation of mixed use areas and complete communities, and transportation demand management ~TDM). Slightly less of a priority than air quality for those who provided written responses was the acquisition of, or protection 1 management of important Kitchener greenlands; at the evening workshop, attendees emphasized the specific need in this general area to acquire Hidden Valley. Related to air quality, priority projects were identified under the "reduced /alternative energy use" category: further incentives for building energy audits; green building design and retrofits. And peppered throughout, the written responses as well as the workshop discussion were requests to improve public awareness and environmental literacy: school curriculum support and school outreach actions; celebrating and rewarding citizens who engage in environmentally positive 3 behaviours; educational events at outdoor natural lands venues; stewardship opportunities for volunteers (specific projects}. What criteria should be used to decide how the money is spent? If there is $10 million worth of interest, how does the City decide who gets the $5 million? What are the characteristics of projects or programs that should be preferred ? (This question was only canvassed at the December 11, 2007 workshop, and not on the written questionnaire.) Citizens responded that the projects or programs that should be preferred should be ones where: They reflect citizens' environmental concerns (as above, e.g. air quality and greenlands} Projects have the ability to leverage other financial or in-kind resources Projects proposed already exist but are having challenges being implemented Projects are primarily within the mandate /control of the City of Kitchener They support the local economy, local agriculture They are "urgent" They can be sustained into the future They provide /support environmental education and public awareness They create energy and enthusiasm in the community-at-large for the environment The City leads by example There exist measurable outcomes and timelines Who could the City partner with? How can Kitchener encourage financial partnerships with stakeholders in the community? How can Kitchener encourage, and partner with, investment from all possible sources (other levels of government, granting agencies, private organizations) Region Universities Business and industry Utilities Alternative power organizations Local farmers, farmers market, community shared agriculture initiatives Schools Province Federal government Other cities and / or towns The GRCA was not identified by the public, but would be an obvious and natural partner. To encourage successful partnering, Kitchener should: Have a clear, defendable plan Lead by example Publicize community leaders' environmental actions 4 Learn from other organizations such as the Kitchener Waterloo Community Foundation and G RCA Make corporate environmental giving "cool" Use, set up partnership tools such as land trusts Publicly celebrate and reward partners. How can the City measure environmental success? What concrete, measurable goals can be used to evaluate environmental successes? The metrics proposed by citizens are the fairly well understood and accepted ones such as the Air Quality Index, % forest cover, per capita transit /energy /water use but included suggestions for more unusual measurements including numbers of environmental partners schools, businesses participating in City-sponsored environmental programs, environmental benchmarking against other cities and numbers of citizens attending environmental events projects year-over-year. Environmental Committee Input The Environmental Committee considered a final draft of this report at their meeting of February 21, 2008. Members commented: that businesses should also be included as one of the groups to be targeted by the public awareness objective for any projects to be funded through LEAF; and that consideration be made that only not-for-profit organizations be eligible for LEAF funding. Following a thorough discussion and with the proviso that the comments above be taken into consideration, the Environmental Committee endorsed unanimously the LEAF operating framework as outlined in staff report DTS-08-033. Preliminary Staff Input Both Council's and the public's comments on the preferred types of priority environmental projects for LEAF as well as how the LEAF should operate echo the preliminary comments of staff who met on February 12, 2007 to discuss Council's proposal for an environmental fund. Those staff comments were discussed in staff report FIN - 07- 42. B. PROPOSED LEAF FRAMEWORK: HOW SHOULD IT WORK? It is clear that Council's objectives for LEAF are reinforced by the public as evidenced by the input they provided. Staff's preliminary input also echoed the priorities and criteria that would be identified by both Council and the public later in 2007. Therefore, based on the input received from Council and the public especially, and staff to date, the following operating framework for LEAF is being proposed. 5 GOAL To reduce, or repair, Kitchener's impact on the environment focusing on the reduction of greenhouse gases1, and to enhance the ability of the Kitchener community to live sustainably2 into the future. OBJECTIVES Projects or programs funded by LEAF should: 1. Contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases produced by the City's own operations and / or the community-at-large, AND 2. Increase public awareness of the environmental impact of the behaviours of municipal governments, communities, businesses, families, and individuals, and promote changed behaviour at this local level AND accomplish ONE OR MORE of the following 3. Contribute to enhanced local air quality 4. Result in reduced energy use, increased energy efficiency, increased use of alternative energy sources 5. Increase City-ownership of significant natural lands where other techniques for acquisition have not succeeded 6. Provide capital enhancements to City-owned and -managed natural lands over and above what would occur as part of normal City procedures 7. Facilitate capital improvements that will make existing communities more complete and residents of those communities less dependent on the automobile MEASURABLES The success of LEAF can be measured through the City of Kitchener meeting its commitments as aCouncil-endorsed January 20, 1997) participant in the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' Partners for Climate Protection. Because of the close relationship of climate protection and air quality improvement initiatives by virtue of the simultaneous impacts from the burning of fossil fuels, and because air quality is a demonstrated significant issue for the citizens of Kitchener, staff feel that the existing and accepted 5-Milestone Framework (see below) established by Partners for Climate Protection can track measurable outcomes that the community cares about and can support. ' Water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone. Human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels leads to higher carbon dioxide emissions. 2 To meet current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. 6 5 Milestone Framework The five milestones are: 1. Creating a greenhouse gas emissions inventory and forecast; 2. Setting an emissions reduction plan; 3. Developing a local action plan; 4. Implementing the local action plan or a set of activities; and 5. Monitoring progress and reporting results. This framework is flexible, recognizing the unique characteristics of individual municipalities. Significantly, milestones can be implemented either in numeric order or in the order that is most appropriate for our community. For example, while many municipal governments start by completing a greenhouse gas inventory, others have moved immediately to formulating a local action plan and / or to implementing specific actions aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: On April 16, 2007, $5 million was established by Council resolution for Kitchener's Local Environmental Action Fund-$2 million in 2007 and $1 million each for 2008, 2009 and 2010. It is anticipated that any special resources (e.g. consulting technical support) needed to implement (especially Measurables), monitor, and report on the success of the program(s) would be available from LEAF. This does not include staff time to generally administer the fund. Barbara Steiner, B.Sc. Alain Pinard, M.A., MCIP, RPP Senior Environmental Planner Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning Rob Browning General Manager, Development and Technical Services Atta~hmPntc LEAF Operating Framework 7