Loading...
Full Agenda Packet Sustainable Janesville Committee Council Chambers, Municipal Building 18 N. Jackson St., Janesville, Wisconsin Tuesday May 19, 2009 6:30pm I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES “C” III. PUBLIC COMMENT IV. NEW BUSINESS 1. Introduction from Councilmember Frank Perrotto 2. Selection of New Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson V. OLD BUSINESS 1. Continued Discussion of the Framework for the “Green Action Plan” 2. Continued Discussion and Proposed Action on the Sustainability Initiatives Letters to the City Manger and City Department Heads VI. CITY STAFF UPDATE VII. MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA VIII. ADJOURNMENT Sustainable Janesville Committee Council Chambers, Municipal Building 18 N. Jackson St., Janesville, Wisconsin Tuesday, May 5, 2009 6:00pm I. ROLL CALL Members Present: Mills, Swanson, Peterson, Udell, Hyzer, Backenkeller Cunningham entered at 6:28pm Members Absent: Councilmember Perotto Staff Present: Motl II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES “C” III. PUBLIC COMMENT None IV. OLD BUSINESS Committee member Mills indicated he would like the Streets Department to pick up some brush generated from the Rock County Humane Society Garden Project. Motl indicated that John Whitcomb who oversees the Operations Department would be the person to request this service from. John is out of the office this week, but Peter Riggs the Asst. Ops. Director could be contacted as well. V. NEW BUSINESS 1. Presentation by Steve Hiniker with 1000 Friends Organization – Green Tier Program Question and Answer Session: Udell mentioned her idea about starting with the City and its operations to create more sustainable habits and procedures. Udell mentioned her letter (see below) to department heads and the City Manager. She asked if Mr. Hiniker had a spreadsheet for measuring operations departments throughout a City. Mr. Hiniker showed the committee his spreadsheet regarding building operations, and noted that it isn’t in too much detail, but a general idea. He noted this would be a good template for starting a program like Green Tier. Backenkeller asked if Madison has been declared an Eco-municipality? Mr. Hiniker responded that yes they have along with 12 or 13 other municipalities, but there is a lack of support. Hyzer asked what the incentive is, and what consequences are if someone doesn’t follow their program. Mr. Hiniker indicated that the program hasn’t actually “penalized” anyone at this time. He indicated that benefits are self accruing, and should see a savings in costs. Mr. Hiniker discussed multiple communities entering into a program together. Backenkeller asked if the spreadsheet for the green tier program has been implemented? Mr. Hiniker indicated it has not been implemented yet and is just a guide at this time. Mr. Hiniker asked the committee to think about what we can do as a city and as a committee to involve other communities into starting programs and projects to benefit each other. Hyzer asked what relationship do you have with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)? Mr. Hiniker indicated that the WDNR ultimately operates and runs the Green Tier Program. Backenkeller asked how the Green Tier Program would work with a City’s Comprehensive Plan? Mr. Hiniker indicated that a City is not eligible without an adopted Comprehensive Plan. An adopted comp plan is open for amendment. Mills asked about into what depth has this program gone? Mr. Hiniker indicated that there are many examples of success and who has done this program the right way. As an organization, 1000 Friends, serves to be that link and introduce new programs to these organizations and individuals. Their organization can help give guidance as to work did and did not work for others who have done this program. Peterson asked what the Wi Energy Independent Communities were? Mr. Hiniker indicated the Wisconsin Energy Independence Office, and they are geared toward the efficiency end of things (i.e. ethanol plants). Peterson asked about neighborhood electric vehicles, and how this could fit into this Green Tier Program. Mr. Hiniker mentioned that NEV would take a city ordinance to pass. Motl indicated that we already have a City ordinance for allowing NEV within the City limits. Motl also mentioned that we did apply for the 2025 Energy Independence Grant, but was not chosen as a recipient. Backenkeller asked about how the cities and towns can work together to have a Green Tier program? Mr. Hiniker indicated that any cities and towns can work together on this program. Mr. Hiniker discussed the working lands initiative and the downtown Peterson asked if the City wanted to be a green tier, what would it cost? Mr. Hiniker indicated it isn’t available yet, but they will be doing pilot studies. It essentially would not cost anything up front, and in the pilot phase would include looking at what the program would do for the City and what those cost may be. Peterson mentioned that somehow the program would have to be funded, so somehow we would have to be paid for this, it wouldn’t be for free? Mr. Hiniker indicated that initially it is grant funded. Peterson asked if a community wants to do this, does 1000 friends help completely or does the City have to provide an employee to work part time only on this program? Mr. Hiniker indicated that is what they would be looking into, and hopefully able to get through a pilot program without having the City accruing too many costs. Mr. Hiniker indicated the pilot program should start within the next few months. Peterson indicated this is exactly what the City should do. Peterson asked Motl if the City had extensive training on becoming an Eco-municipality? Motl indicated that no the City did not. Udell discussed her letter to the department heads and City Manager, and how this relates to being an eco-municipality by having open dialogue and keep costs down aside from training. Backenkeller asked how to get the City to “buy in” to being an eco- municipality, and not just declaring it. Mr. Hiniker mentioned that showing the managers, department head, city manager how we can save money, that may catch their attention. Cunningham mentioned that the comp plan is not a finished product and items were not address in it. Mr. Hiniker discussed walk score and other measurable indicators. Cunningham noted that the comp plan had no measurable objectives within it. Mr. Hiniker will email Backenkeller the power point slides tonight. VI. CITY STAFF UPDATE Motl handed out the Electronics Recycling Report requested by the committee on 2.17.09. Motl asked the group to review and the committee can have a discussion at the next meeting. Motl mentioned that the WWTP currently has a Green Tier Program for Mercury. VII. MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA Udell mentioned the letter she emailed and handed out today regarding sustainability initiatives. Requested that we discuss next month and have it as an action item at that time. Udell also handed out a proposed ordinance for LEED standards, and would like to discuss and take action at next meeting. Discussion ensued regarding changes in Udell’s letter to the City Manager and Dept. Heads. Mills requested to take action on the LDA presentation and the request from them. Peterson discussed the green roof concept, and wanted to discuss this item. Udell mentioned this was a LEED standard, and could discuss in the future. Cunningham gave each member a handout pertaining to a Green City Action Plan. A discussion ensued amongst the committee on getting LEED certified. A discussion ensued among the committee regarding Udell’s resolution for LEED standards. Cunningham discussed his handout on the Green Action Plan idea and the framework for the plan to become sustainable. Peterson wants the group to think about being flexible within the LEED standards, and that the City should have a good reason for incorporated or not incorporating LEED standards into city facilities or city funded projects. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:55pm. Report provided by Staff Members Motl and Hulick: CITY OF JANESVILLE MEMORANDUM May 5, 2009 TO: Sustainable Janesville Committee FROM: Lindsay Motl, Environmental Technician Al Hulick, Community Development Specialist SUBJECT: Electronics Recycling Report As requested by the Sustainable Janesville Committee, staff has prepared a report to address options for electronic recycling. Electronic waste or “e-waste” is a loose term for describing obsolete, broken, or discarded electrical or electronic devices. This may include, but not be limited to computers, televisions, cell phones, printers, and other devices. Lead, mercury, and cadmium are among the substances of concern in electronics. These substances are included in the products for important performance characteristics, but can cause problems if the products are not properly managed at end of life. Although electronics comprise a small percentage of the total municipal solid waste stream, the quantity of electronic waste that we are generating is steadily increasing. The following sections summarize specific information requested by the Committee: Potential partnerships with recyclers There are several companies in our local area that can assist residents with recycling various electronic materials. Some companies offer discounted rates for certain brands of electronics or for an event day (i.e. clean sweep). The following list are the larger electronic recycling facilities in our area, the City does not specifically endorse any of the companies listed. ? CRT Processing (2535 Beloit Avenue) – CRT provides a wide range of recycling options for a variety of electronic material. CRT charges various fees for recycling electronic waste. The fee is dependent on the type and size of the e-waste. ? Janesville Recycling Center (340 Blackbridge Road) – The JRC will accept electronic material for a charge of $0.35 per pound; however, there are certain brands that they do not charge for. ? Best Buy (2850 Deerfield Drive) – Best Buy now offers recycling at all locations throughout the United States. They will accept any electronic devices, such as televisions, DVD players, computer monitors, cell phones, and more. Residents can drop off up to two items a day, per household. Most items are available for recycling at no charge; however, there is a $10 fee for TV’s 32’’ and smaller, CRT’s, monitors, and laptops – but, Best Buy will give each individual a $10 Best Buy gift card in return. ? Cell Phone Companies – a variety of cell phone companies in the area provide recycling of your old or unused cell phones, and typically do not charge for this service. ? Other local options – A variety of brands/companies may provide recycling services when you purchase a new electronic device. Please check with local electronic stores, office stores, and electronic companies direct for recycling services. ? National Take-back Options – An example of this is DELL. DELL will take back any unused or nonfunctional computer when you purchase a new one, or if it is a DELL brand. This may apply to other companies/brands of computers. ? Donation – An electronic device that is still in good condition could be donated to a local organization. Storage and separation of electronic waste from landfill stream Currently the sanitary landfill offers on-site collection for other materials banned from the landfill, such as tires, motor oil, appliances, and more. Unfortunately, it may be difficult to add electronic devices to the list. The bins in which these banned materials are collected in are uncovered and exposed to the elements. However, a bin for electronic material would need to be covered at all times because the material harvested from the unused devices could be compromised if exposed to the elements. One option to mitigate this concern may be to have a portable enclosed storage unit delivered for holding electronics dropped off by residents. This could be covered throughout the day, and completely closed at the end of each day. When the storage device is full it would be hauled off site by. However, this would be a new, additional cost to the landfill operations. Another option would be to hold the electronics in the scalehouse; however, the amount the scalehouse could hold is very limited. Depending on the facility or company used for recycling electronic waste, there may be additional procedural and cost issues. After speaking with CRT Processing, they indicated that the dropped off materials would have to be individually boxed and placed onto a pallet within the storage device. This could cause problems in two areas – more costs associated with overtime for landfill employees and costs associated with the number of pick ups and drop offs depending on how large the items are. Cost implications and fee options At this time, the amount of electronic materials that are disposed of at the landfill is unknown. This makes it difficult to fully realize the potential costs associated with offering a recycling receptacle on site. It could become very costly to have individuals stay past regular operating hours to box each item received that day. If we fill an entire storage device in a week, we may be looking at costs associated with transporting, not to mention the costs associated with actually recycling each device. On the other hand, if we filled the storage device on a monthly basis, it may be more feasible to offer this service. The costs associated with the electronic material would vary. A fee option could be created to pass a majority of this cost onto the residents, similar to tires and refrigerated appliances. CRT Processing discussed an approximate fee of $100.00 for a portable storage device including transportation. However, this does not include the actual cost of recycling the electronic material inside. Case Studies After some local area research, it was found that Dane County landfill does ban computers only from their waste stream. However, they do not have an on-site collection; they only provide residents a list of where they can take their material. In most US states, it is perfectly legal for households and many small businesses to throw electronic waste in the trash. However, several states have enacted statewide bans on disposing some types of electronic waste in landfills. Below is a table indicating which states have done this. Effective State What e-waste is banned from the trash? Date CRTs Flat Panel Desktops Laptops Other? TVs/Monitors TVs/Monitors Yes – bans broad group of universal California Yes Yes Yes Yes 2002 & 2006 waste – strongest law in US Connecticut Yes Yes Yes Yes 1/1/2011 Illinois Yes Yes Yes Yes Printers 1/1/2012 Maine No No Yes No 7/20/2006 Massachusetts No No Yes No 4/1/2000 Minnesota No Yes No 7/1/2006 All video New Hampshire No Yes Yes Yes display 7/1/2007 devices New Jersey Yes Yes Yes Yes 1/1/2010 Keyboards, North Carolina Yes Yes Yes Yes 1/1/2012 Mice Oregon Yes Yes Yes Yes 1/1/2010 Rhode Island Yes Yes Yes Yes 1/1/2008 Texas Yes Yes Yes Yes 9/1/2008 TOTAL 12 States In addition to states across the US implementing bans, sometimes bans are enacted on a local (county or municipality) level, even if the state has no such ban. The following are some examples of this: ? Fort Collins, CO: This municipality enacted a city ordinance banning electronic materials from being disposed of in the landfill on 2/20/2007. They do not provide collection curbside or at any local landfills. They simply ban certain electronic devices and require household to take those materials to a qualified electronic recycling company. ? New York City, NY: On 4/1/2008 New York City established an e-waste recycling program. The new law will require electronics manufacturers (covering computers, monitors and TVs) to create a collection program for their products from City consumers. The law also bans e-waste from disposal into the City's solid waste stream. Health Hazards Associated with e-waste Recycling electronics recovers valuable materials, conserves resources, and results in lower environmental emissions (including greenhouse gases) than making products from original materials. They may also contain hazardous or toxic materials such as heavy metals which can damage the environment when landfilled or incinerated. A single component of e-waste, cathode ray tubes (CRTs) has emerged as the leading cause of the hazardous waste concern at the local, state, national, and international level. CRTs are the glass "picture tubes" in television sets, computer monitors, and other video display devices that amplify and focus high-energy electric beams to create the images we ultimately see on our screens. In order to protect consumers from radiation dangers, the glass in CRTs contains lead. Lead composes approximately 20% of each CRT which equates to approximately 4 to 8 pounds per unit. Lead is an extremely toxic metal, exposure to which poses serious public health and safety risks. Given these essential issues, the proper disposal of e-waste has become a concern for our community. Below is a diagram of what components are hazardous on a computer system. Pros versus Cons on banning e-waste at the City of Janesville landfill PROS CONS 1. Creates a clear mandate to address 1. Imposing a city ban takes time and the problem of e-waste. can cause households and small businesses increased disposal costs they currently do not pay. 2. Our community offers a variety of 2. The ordinance would have to be very recycling options for properly disposing specific as to which electronics and of electronic devices/materials (but this components are included in the ban. comes with a price). 3. Eliminates a hazardous waste 3. The community may not be source from the City’s landfill. educated enough on the effects of electronic disposal at landfills; and, this may cause some to not support the idea of a ban. Conclusion and Recommendation In Conclusion, City staff believes that it is important to focus on education and awareness and allow the community to understand why electronic recycling is important. Therefore, staff suggests that the Committee do a number of things to increase awareness in the community and promote electronic recycling. It may be beneficial to pursue a special event day for recycling electronics. This may involve having drop off sites at local businesses or having a collection facility on- site at the landfill for a one-day event. It would be beneficial to the landfill and our community to enact a ban; however, if the state passes the current bill (SB 107) being proposed on banning e-waste from landfills, then it would be more beneficial to the City’s residents for more outlets and options on recycling e- waste. Handout provided by Committee Member Udell City of Janesville – Sustainability Initiatives Department Inventory To: All Department Heads, City of Janesville From: Sustainable Janesville Committee Date: April 23, 2009 RE: Sustainability Initiatives Department Inventory Dear Department Heads, As you may be aware, the Sustainable Janesville Committee was formed in August of 2008 to provide guidance to the City Council on sustainability issues, and to work to create a more sustainable city. In 2008, the City Council declared Janesville an “Ecomunicipality.” What does that mean? And what are we doing to advance this declaration? With Ecomunicipalities, the “Natural Step” process is used to evaluate whether a project is sustainable with the Sustainability Principles: SP#1: Does not increase concentrations of substances extracted from the earth’s crust. SP#2: Does not increase concentrations of substances produced by society. SP#3: Does not increase degradation of nature by physical means. SP#4: Does not increase conditions that undermine people’s capacity to meet their own basic needs. Our committee would like to work with all employees of the City to work towards a greater goal of becoming a more environmentally conscious, sustainable city. We would like everyone to feel like they have the opportunity to approach their department heads with potential sustainable initiatives that could be considered. Getting this dialogue started and getting employees engaged in the process is essential for the City to not only become more environmentally friendly, but to potentially save taxpayer dollars. We would like each department to lead a brief discussion regarding sustainability and what their department and individuals can do to be more environmentally friendly. Each department will be required to create sustainability goals with timelines, which will be documented in a “Sustainability Initiatives” report and sent to the City Manager by August 15, 2009. The City Manager will compile all of the departments’ reports into one document that will be given to the Sustainable Janesville Committee for review. The report should also include previous sustainability initiatives that the department has undertaken and the positive environmental impacts of such practices. The report’s goals should be measurable and documented. Each department will need to review and update their Sustainability Initiatives reports annually, due the last day of June each year. Each report will be reviewed and commented on by the Sustainable Janesville Committee, and department heads may be requested to attend a committee meeting for further discussion. Talking points and potential goals for departments may include (but are not limited by): ? No idling policy ? Replacement plan for more efficient technologies, vehicles ? Paper use reduction (double-sided printing, reuse of scrap paper) ? Energy use reduction (computer, printer settings, lighting and miscellaneous electrical device usage- cell phone chargers, etc.) ? Purchasing policies for department needs (recycled content paper, food from local vendors) ? Waste reduction (use reusable plates, silverware, cups) ? Water/Resource waste reduction The report shall include the results of an employee survey, which should be given to every employee and handed in anonymously. They can be discussed as a group or just summarized in the report as issues and opportunities. The survey should include the minimum questions: 1.What could you modify in your daily job routine to become more environmentally friendly that WOULD NOT take any extra time or supplies? 2.What could you modify in your daily job routine to become more environmentally friendly that WOULD take extra time and/or supplies? Please describe. 3.Do you have any specific ideas on how your department could improve its fuel efficiency, energy use, water use and reduce our dependence on non-renewable materials? 4.Do you have any ideas on what you think the city should do to become more environmentally friendly? The report shall be formatted in the following sequence: I.Overview of Department in terms of resource use and number of employees II.Discussion of past sustainability initiatives III.Issues and Opportunities in Department (summarize results of employee survey) IV.Sustainability Goals for 2009-2010 and demonstrate how they are measurable and a timeline ? Differentiate between low-cost, short-term sustainability initiatives and long-range sustainability goals V.Sustainability Ideas for Department, multiple departments, and the City as a whole This report should be in a location accessible to all department employees, and the goals shall be posted in a visible location. We look forward to your report, and appreciate your help in learning more about our City’s operations, past and future sustainability success. Sincerely, Members of the Sustainable Janesville Committee Handout provided by Committee Member Udell City of Janesville – Sustainability Initiatives Department Inventory To: Eric Levitt, City Manager From: Sustainable Janesville Committee Date: April 23, 2009 RE: Sustainability Initiatives Department Inventory Dear Mr. Levitt, We are asking for your assistance in getting started on a sustainability initiatives inventory of the city’s departments as part of enhancing our “Eco-Municipality” status. Our committee would like to work with all employees of the City to work towards a greater goal of becoming a more environmentally conscious, sustainable city. We would like everyone to feel like they have the opportunity to approach their department heads with potential sustainable initiatives that could be considered. Getting this dialogue started and getting employees engaged in the process is essential for the City to not only become more environmentally friendly, but to potentially save taxpayer dollars. We would like each department to lead a brief discussion regarding sustainability and what their department and individuals can do to be more environmentally friendly. Each department will be required to create sustainability goals with timelines, which will be documented in a “Sustainability Initiatives” report and sent to you by August 15, 2009. We would like you to compile all of the departments’ reports into one document that will be given to the Sustainable Janesville Committee for review. We would like you to analyze each department’s reports, and look for existing and potential sustainable city-wide policies to be included at the beginning of the report. Examples of potential city-wide policies could include: ? No-idling policy ? Purchasing Policy for materials with recycled content (i.e. paper, etc.) ? Opportunities for reusing furniture/supplies rather than purchasing new – provide information to departments on sharing opportunities ? Look into lowering overall cost by sharing purchasing cost/equipment with adjacent municipalities ? Waste reduction goals (paper plates/cups, etc.) ? Prohibit the purchase of bottled water for municipal operations and government sponsored events. ? Adopt municipal fleet fuel efficiency standards/fleet replacement standards ? Promote the purchase of (state) foods for municipal events and operations. The potential city-wide sustainability policies should be listed with an implementation goal and deadline. We would also like an analysis done on all city buildings, starting with the municipal building. The building analysis should include the quantity and cost for: ? Energy use – electrical & gas (is any renewable energy currently being purchased?) ? Water use – waste, storm, domestic ? Time of Operation/Use ? Any other applicable data that you feel would be beneficial We appreciate your willingness to move Janesville towards becoming an Eco-Municipality! Sincerely, Members of the Sustainable Janesville Committee Handout provided by Committee Member Udell Resolution No. (adapted from the City of Portland’s Green Building Policy Resolution) WHEREAS , development and construction practices are significant contributors to the depletion of natural resources and a major cause of air and water pollution, solid waste, deforestation, toxic wastes, health hazards, global warming, and other negative consequences; and WHEREAS , buildings use one-quarter of all of the world’s wood harvest, consume two-fifths of all materials and energy flows; and WHEREAS , the City of Janesville recognizes its responsibility to implement and promote building practices that protect the quality of the air, water, and other natural resources; reduce construction practices that impact native fish, vegetation, wildlife and other ecosystems; and minimizes human impact on local and worldwide ecosystems; and WHEREAS , the United States Green Building Council has, in a national collaborative process, created Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards that identify a range of actions that define green buildings and establish certification processes for new and existing buildings; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Janesville City Council creates a Green Building Policy for all new and major retrofits of City facilities, and all City-funded or -financed projects, to implement the LEED “Certified” level as set out in the United States Green Building Council’s LEED standards without requiring USGBC certification; and shall direct all City Departments and Councils to: ? Require that all new, City-owned facilities construction projects meet LEED “Certified” level without requiring project LEED registration and certification ? Require a minimum of: 75% of all construction and demolition (C&D) waste is recycled; and o 30% water savings beyond the Energy Policy Act of 1992 baseline code o requirements; and 20% energy savings based on LEED baseline criteria o 1% of calculated electricity usage shall be provided by on-site renewable energy o ? Require that all new, City-owned facilities construction projects explore applicable Federal and State rebates and credits (i.e. Focus on Energy) ? Require that all tenant improvements to City-owned facilities meet LEED for Commercial Interiors “Certified” level without requiring project LEED registration and certification ? Require that LEED for Existing Buildings (EB) “Certified” level be explored for all City- owned and occupied existing buildings without requiring project registration and certification BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City will require at least one city staff member to become a LEED Accredited Professional; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Sustainable Janesville Committee will work with City project teams to implement relevant Green Building Policy directives in City- owned projects; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager and Sustainable Janesville Committee will provide technical and organizational assistance to help City staff meet the requirements of this resolution and will provide biennial progress reports to City Council. Handout provided by Committee Member Cunningham Janesville Sustainable Committee; May 5, 2009. Alex Cunningham The presentation provided by Julie that pertaining to the Green City Action Plan that follows the United Nations Urban Environmental Accords of 2005 has significant merit. I would like to make a couple observations regarding these efforts for the committee’s consideration. First, the action statements are commendable to move the city towards a more sustainable path – and they are also measurable actions to afford easy monitoring of attainment. Yet there are a couple problems with the actions. First, they do not well address the scope of sustainable issues that the city may engage in; second they presuppose the existence of a baseline inventory of these natural resources/community services/consumption patterns. Since the city does not have any information management system in place that monitors these issues the desired objectives may or may not be realistic financially. Furthermore, these actions do not sufficiently address agricultural, natural resource management and human needs issues. For example the public transportation services and parklands within ½ kilometer of all residents may not be realistic – perhaps an interim objective of ½ mile after assessing the city programs would be more realistic. Or again, they occasionally overly steer “the solution” by appearing to specify how to solve an issue – the public transportation action is an example – perhaps the best solution would be to incentivize taxi, jitney and para-transit services, build complete neighborhoods and junk half of the public buses and their routes. As another example, we do not know how much of the stormwaters are currently treated/contained or are proposed to be treated before discharging to surface waters or the groundwater aquifer – so what measure of improvement is needed to make significant improvement in water quality and quantity protection in a fiscally feasible manner is not known. I recommend that we assemble these and other inventories with the predominant efforts of city staff to establish the baseline information necessary to define feasible action statements in relation to our current operations and the fiscal health of our community. As was mentioned at our last meeting we should not merely focus on city operations but look to business performance and the larger community to achieve sustainable objectives. Furthermore, we will need to address public education, institutional strengthening and neighborhood development issues. The following outline is not generally intended to directly identify action statements and objectives, rather it is to present a broader scope of sustainability linked with the UN Agenda 21 Framework and is adapted from a policy plan I developed previously while serving in the Philippines. Once we sculpt the scope of our efforts and assemble the baseline inventory with staff support, then we can identify action statements relevant to each area of local government management associated with sustainability. I. MASTER LAND USE POLICY PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS 1. HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: METROPOLITAN SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Human Settlements Spatial Requirements: Hierarchy of Towns and Service Provision: Intergovernmental Coordination Regional Center: Janesville Urban Service Center: Beloit Secondary Service Centers: Evansville, Edgerton, Clinton, Milton, Broadhead Tertiary Service Centers: Urban and Rural Neighborhoods Additional Settlement Hierarchy Issues: 2. ESTABLISH PATTERNS OF INTEGRATED LAND MANAGEMENT Broad spatial patterns of functional integration of the community Human Settlements: Neighborhood / Village Strengthening Strategy Wildlife Habitat Management Natural Resource Habitat Management Disaster Mitigation and Environmentally Constrained Lands Management Industrial and Commercial Habitat Management Neighborhood Structure and Operations Spatial Analysis and Space Economy Networks Carrying Capacity Assessment Spatial Scenarios Future Land Use, Zoning and Unified Development Code 3. SUSTAINABLE LAND USE MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES A. RISK ASSESSMENT, MITIGATION, OPEN SPACE AND PUBLIC ACCESS NETWORK Risk Assessment for Natural Disaster Events Risk Assessment for Ecologically Constrained Lands Risk Mitigation for Future Land Use and Post Disaster Redevelopment Public Access Zones: Tourism and Recreation Establish Ecological, Cultural and Economic Open Space Standards B. BIODIVERSITY, FORESTRY AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT NETWORK Management Plan for State/County/City Designations Critical Upland Habitat and Designated Species Programs (Prairie, Savanna) Forestry and Watershed Lands Management Programs (Riparian, Woodlots) Exotic Species and Pest Management Establish Nature Wardens Program C. SOILS, AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY AND MINERAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION Protect Soil Resources and Agricultural Lands Soil and Water Conservation Programs for Agricultural Lands Land Capability Policies to Increase and Diversify Agricultural Production Sustainable Agricultural Best Management Practices Conserve Mineral Resources and Aquifer D. CONSERVE THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATERS Establish Waterbasin Inventory for water related issues Conserve and Protect Quantity and Quality of Groundwater Resources Conserve and Protect Quality and Quantity of Surface Water Resources Protect Floodplains and Floodways Implement Stormwater Management Programs E. AQUATIC ECOLOGY AND SHOLELINE RESOURCES CONSERVATION Protect Freshwater Wetland Values and Functions Public Access and Shoreline Protection: Tourism Development Program Fishery Habitat Resource Management Zones Aquatic Habitat Restoration Programs Aquaculture BMPs 4. ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES & PHYSIOLOGICAL ECONOMICS A. FRESHWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AND FACILITIES REQUIREMENTS Water Shortage Preparedness Plan (Water Budget) Conservation of Potable Water by Consumption Modifications Well head Protection Programs and Well Capping Industrial and Commercial Policies (Water Use and Pollution Issues) Stormwater Management Guidelines and Investments, Upgrade Drainage Infrastructure Maintain, Renovate and Develop Potential Water Sources for Irrigation Sewage Treatment and Sludge Application B. FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENTS Model Farm Program for Demonstration of Agricultural Best Management Practices Economic Infrastructure for Prime and Secondary Agricultural Lands Invest in Post-Harvest Facilities & Materials Processing Industries Invest in Agricultural Marketing Programs Invest in Import Substitution for Farm Operation Inputs (energy, machinery, fertilizers, pest, etc) C. SOLID WASTE, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS & POLLUTION CONTROL MANAGEMENT Prepare and Implement a Solid Waste Management Plan based upon waste inventories. Siting and Management of Sanitary Landfill Facilities, Transfer Stations Management of Village/Neighborhood Resource Recovery Yards (Compost and Recycle) Properly Manage the Production, Use and Disposition of Hazardous Materials City/County Environmental Services Department & Pollution Control Board Unified Development Code (environmental aspects) D. ENERGY CONSERVATION, PRODUCTION AND AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT Energy Conservation and Emergency Shortage Preparedness Plan (Energy Audit) Ambient Natural Energy Resources Assessment and Energy Production Technologies Distributed Energy Production Systems and Co-Generation Protect Air Quality and Climate (Open Burning, Urban Forestry, etc.) Governmental and Urban Business Fleet Fuel Management Programs Governmental Operations and Buildings performance Complete Neighborhood Standards and Redevelopment Priorities 5. ECONOMIC LANDS AND NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS A. TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE SERVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Marina and Locks Improvement Plan and Program Airport Specific Plan: Industrial Development Regional Ground Transport Linkage Enhancements (Rail, Freight, Commute) ‘Public’ Transportation Program including Paratransit and Private Services Infrastructure Standards and Investment Priorities for Accessibility and Mobility Needs B. WIRE & INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE SERVING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Power Distribution Network and Upgrade Services Tele-Communications and Satellite Standards Information Network in Support of Economic Development C. QUALITY, COST & AVAILABILITY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SITES Inventory of Available Sites and Buildings (costs, vacancy, utilization, obsolescence, services) Mitigate Financial Costs Born by Business in Land Use Regulations Protect and Develop those Lands Most Suitable for Industrial Development Establish Scaled Distribution of Retail and Commercial Services Land Uses & Standards Conserve Lands for Institutional Use and Economic Utilities / Networks / Environmental Easements. Conserve Agricultural Soil and Water Resources through Regulations and Easements Market Development and Management Services (Farm Markets) D. ECO-TOURISM LAND DEVELOPMENT Quality/Diverse Accommodations to Meet the Needs of Tourism Industry Man Made Recreational Facilities Land Allocations, Standards & LDRs Conserve, Protect and Develop Eco-Tourism Destinations and Sites Protect Open Space, Access and Wildlife Easements Name Recognition and Tourism Marketing Programs 6. NEIGHBORHOOD, HOUSING AND RESIDENTIAL LAND STANDARDS A. NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT Existing Neighborhood Inventories Neighborhood Development Principles (Services, Housing Mix, Work, Play, Mobility/Access) Central Business District Expansion Neighborhood Plans and Councils: Priorities and Funding and dedicated revenues B. NEIGHBORHOOD/VILLAGE SERVICE DELIVERY Public Infrastructure and Utilities Public Facilities Standards Standards for Educational and Child Care Services Subsistence Economic Services Neighborhood General Services C. DISASTER RISK MITIGATION & HOUSING SERVICES Housing Supply Appropriate for Resettlement/Redevelopment Programs Land Banking for Establishing Effective Municipal Housing Operations New Residential Land Development Regulations regarding disaster Demand/Need assessment for Housing Services by Special Populations Housing Services for Special Populations Identify and Implement Supply Side Incentives for Housing Production Demand Side Incentives that Stimulate Adequate Housing Consumption Service vs. Need Gap Financing D. HOUSING LAND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Supply Side Inventory of Housing to Model the Housing Market Current Lands/housing Inventory (Vacant, under-utilized, prices, utilities, zoning) Residential Construction Requirements during Plan Horizon Upgrade the Design & Development Standards of Existing Residential/NGBH areas Building Materials Standards and Local Production Potentials Resource Conservation Requirements for New Construction II. MASTER PLAN INTEGRATED SERVICE RECOMMENDATIONS 1. INTEGRATED PROTECTIVE SERVICES A. DISASTER RISK ASSESSMENT EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND MANAGEMENT SERVICES Disaster and Emergency Management Institutional Strengthening Natural and Man-made Disaster Risk Assessment and Mitigation Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management Services Fire Protection and Rescue/Ambulance Community Property Insurance Programs B. CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM Establish an Integrative Protective Services Plan Crime Preventive Services Incarceration, Rehabilitation, Restitution, Huber Nature/Environmental Wardens; Code Enforcement Court System: (Drug Courts) Arbitration, Family Court, 2. INTEGRATED WELL BEING SERVICES A. HEALTH CARE: IMPROVE THE HEALTH OF THE POPULATION Public Health Service Standards and Rehabilitative Actions Preventive Health Care Service Standards Primary Health Care and Medical Service Standards Rehabilitative Health Care Service Standards Insurance Coverage and Community Health Care Support B. MENTAL & SOCIAL HEALTH: FAMILY PLANNING, SUBSTANCE ABUSE, AND OTHER SERVICES Special Populations and Service Providers Inventories Maternity and Fertility, and Supplemental Family Services Mental Health, Substance Abuse and Crisis Intervention Services Disabled and Elderly Services Other Special Populations Needs and Services C. RECREATION AND PARKLANDS Adequate Active Participatory Sports, Recreation Facilities and Sports Events Social Recreation and Social Group Development Services Cultural Enrichment (Arts and Humanities) Service Standards Cultural and Natural Heritage Landscape Protection Neighborhood Open Space D. COMPULSORY EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Education Internal Efficiencies and Service Standards Neighborhood and Community Schools Special Programs and Projects Non Traditional Learning and Curricular Research: Community Resources Management Education External Efficiencies and Service Standards 4. INTEGRATED LABOR FORCE AND ECONOMIC SECURITY SERVICES A. LABOR FORCE STRENGTHENING SERVICES Inventory of Labor Force Educational, Occupational and Skills Characteristics, Self Employment HS Curriculum for non-college directed students Post Secondary Education Facilities College & Post Secondary Curriculum; Institutional Strengthening Employment Services Needs of Labor Force B. INCOME SECURITY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND SUBSISTENCE ECONOMY SUPPORT Review and Re-Organize Governmental Programs to Meet Needs of Integrated Service Delivery Food and Nutritional Services Access to Clothing and Household Furnishings for Disadvantaged Groups Protect and Enhance the Subsistence/Reproductive Economy Transportation Services for Disadvantaged Groups Income Security Programs Small Business, Cooperatives, Consumers and Producers Credit Networking and Advocacy III. MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES A. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION Administration of Plan Formulation and Implementation Public Participation in Plan Development & Management Protection of Private Property and Bundle of Rights Inter-agency Partnership Building to Enhance Government Performance General Administration Performance and Capacity Building B. INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND EDUCATIONAL CAPABILITY BUILDING Manpower skills necessary for Institutional Strengthening Environmental Sector Capability Building and Training Requirements Sectoral Service Delivery Management Training Public Education and Awareness (the IEC Campaign Implementation Program) Multi-Media Program Development C. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Computerization and Management of Governmental Records Establish Information Management for Plan Monitoring and Indicator Development Economic Decision Making Capacities for Local Area Management Establish Bio-Physical Land Management Information System Carrying Capacity of Ecosystems Assessment of Growth Scenarios and CBA of Alternatives Refine and Implement Capital Budgeting Methodology D. FINANCIAL MOBILIZATION Funding and Incentives Policies (Special Taxing Districts) Growth Impact Fees and Tax Increment Financing Land and Water Revenue Mobilization Generate Outside Sources of Funding, Enhance Investment Efficiency Partnerships, Allocation of Development Rights