ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE 2020/08/19 PacketENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday, August 19, 2020 – 6:30 P.M.
REMOTE ACCESS MEETING
AGENDA
Please be advised that all of the Environmental Sustainability Committee members will be
remotely attending this Committee meeting by electronic means, in compliance with Governor’s
Executive Order 2020-39, issued on May 29, 2020, that extended the suspension of certain Open
Meetings Act provisions relating to in-person attendance by members of a public body.
Specifically, the Governor’s Order: (1) suspends the requirement in Section 2.01 that “members of
a public body must be physically present;” and (2) suspends the limitations in Section 7 on when
remote participation is allowed. This Executive Order is effective the duration of the current
Gubernatorial Disaster Proclamation.
The City will be providing members of the public with various opportunities to watch or attend this
meeting, as well as provide public comment at the meeting. For example, members of the public
can participate remotely in the meeting by following the public audience link which will provide
both video and audio means to attend the meeting.
Public audience link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86127554553?pwd=U0Q3S2d0NkVWR0RlVnorUHJObFprQT09
Or dial by phone at: 312-626-6799
Webinar ID: 861 2755 4553
Passcode: 1861
Attendees are strongly encouraged to use the public audience link to access the meeting, or if
they are interested in providing public comment during the meeting.
I.CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
_____ Ald. Melanie Rummel, Chairman
_____ Ald. Jed Morris
_____ Ald. Jim Preschlack
II.ACTION ITEMS (:05-:10 per item)
a.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF JUNE 7, 2020 MEETING MINUTES
III.DISCUSSION ITEMS (:30-:45 per item)
a. SUSTAINABILITY VALUES & DECISION-MAKING PRESENTATION –
Presented by Mike Stopka, MIST Environmental
IV.REVIEW OF FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS (:05-:10)
V.PUBLIC COMMENT (:05)
VI.NEXT MEETING DATE(S) – SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER
VII.ADJOURNMENT
ITEM II.A:
Draft Meeting Minutes
from July 7, 2020
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE MEETING 1
Tuesday, July 7, 2020 – 6:30 P.M. 2
REMOTE ACCESS MEETING 3
4
DRAFT MINUTES 5
6
ROLL CALL/CALL TO ORDER 7
8
Chairman Melanie Rummel called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M. Aldermen 9
Jed Morris and Jim Preschlack were present. 10
11
Staff in attendance included Mike Strong, Assistant City Manager; Chuck Myers, 12
Superintendent of Parks, Forestry and Special Facilities; Robert Ells, 13
Superintendent of Engineering; Jim Shaw, Director of Innovation and Technology 14
and Layla Werner, Administrative Intern. 15
16
Also in attendance was Mike Stopka, Consultant and Crystal Egelkamp, 17
Consultant. 18
19
There were approximately 18 members of the public that attended the meeting 20
remotely. 21
22
Chairman Rummel made a statement in regards to COVID-19 and why the 23
meeting is being held remotely, in concurrence with the Open Meetings Act 24
update from the state of Illinois. 25
26
ACTION ITEMS 27
28
I.REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF JUNE 10, 2020 MEETING MINUTES29
30
Alderman Morris moved to approve the June 10, 2020 Environmental31
Sustainability Committee meeting minutes subject to the corrections32
shared with Mike Strong. Alderman Preschlack seconded the motion.33
The following voted “Aye”: Chairman Rummel, Alderman Morris and34
Preschlack. The following voted “Nay”: None. 3-Ayes, 0 Nays, motion35
carried.36
37
II.APPROVAL TO PARTICIPATE IN THE METROPOLITAN MAYORS CAUCUS38
CS2 COMMUNITY SOLAR CLEARINGHOUSE PROGRAM39
40
Assistant City Manager Mike Strong gave a brief update on a41
municipal sponsored community solar program. He gave an42
explanation on what community solar is, and how businesses are able43
to subscribe a portion of their ComEd bill with community solar credits.44
He stated that the City was able to include eligible residential45
accounts, which will be on a first come first serve basis. He further46
stated that an eligible subscriber must be on a ComEd fixed. This allows47
residents to receive a 20% net discount on their electricity bill.48
DRAFT - Environmental Sustainability Committee Minutes
July, 7 2020
Chairman Rummel asked if there were any questions on this agenda 49
item. 50
51
The Committee had discussion on comments from the City Attorney 52
and if there were any agreements that needed to be discussed 53
further. Mike Strong explained that the City is not a partner in this, and 54
there was no necessary agreements that needed to be executed. 55
56
The Committee had additional discussion on the potential cost savings 57
for City buildings that are subscribed to this program. Mr. Strong 58
explained that the value of subscription offers a higher benefit for 59
residents for potential savings, and stated that this is more about 60
promoting renewable energy, not focusing only on cost savings. 61
Additionally, Committee members inquired on how residents knew 62
they were eligible for this program. Mr. Strong stated that official letters 63
would sent out by the metropolitan mayor’s caucus to all eligible 64
customers, pending approval of this agreement from City Council. 65
66
Alderman Rummel asked if there were any questions or comments 67
from the public. 68
69
Emily Watts offered her comments on Crystal Point being able to 70
participate in community solar. 71
72
Alderman Preschlack moved to recommend approval to City Council 73
to participate in the Metropolitan Mayor Caucus CS2 Community Solar 74
Clearinghouse Program subject to City Attorney review of the 75
Resolution, seconded by Alderman Morris. The following voted “Aye”: 76
Chairman Rummel, Alderman Morris and Preschlack. The following 77
voted “Nay”: None. 3-Ayes, 0 Nays, motion carried. 78
79
Seeing no additional comments Chairman Rummel moved to the next 80
agenda item 81
82
DISCUSSION ITEMS 83
84
I. SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT PRESENTATION – MIKE STOPKA 85
86
Assistant City Manager Mike Strong introduced Consultant Mike 87
Stopka, representing MIST Environment. He gave a brief presentation 88
about the sustainability initiatives that Lake Forest has conducted, and 89
how MIST is helping the City achieve additional goals. He summarized 90
the project scope and the three phases that are included in their 91
strategic planning process. He discussed the stakeholder meetings 92
they facilitated, as well as the survey results that were collected and 93
analyzed. After this information was collected, MIST conducted a peer 94
assessment including Highland Park and Winnetka. Mr. Stopka offered 95
DRAFT - Environmental Sustainability Committee Minutes
July, 7 2020
his recommendations to the committee on how to successfully 96
accomplish strategic goals related to sustainability. 97
98
Chairman Rummel asked if there were any questions on this agenda 99
item. 100
101
The Committee thanked MIST environment for the work they have 102
done in helping the City. 103
104
The Committee had additional discussion on how the peer 105
assessments were conducted, and how the communities were 106
chosen. Mike Stopka provided comments on how Staff and the 107
consulting firm came to these decisions. 108
109
Mr. Stopka stated that the City is excelling in specific areas in the 110
assessment that was conducted, and offered additional 111
recommendations for the City to accomplish sustainability goals. 112
113
Chairman Rummel asked if there were any additional comments from 114
the Committee, seeing none she asked if there were any questions or 115
comments from the public. 116
117
Mary Beth Nawor offered her comments to the Committee about 118
measuring greenhouse gases and the usage of water from the water 119
plant. 120
121
REVIEW OF FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS 122
123
Chairman Rummel asked if any members of the Committee had any suggestions 124
on items they wanted to discuss at future meetings. 125
126
PUBLIC COMMENT 127
128
Chairman Rummel asked if there were any public comments on any non-129
agenda items. 130
131
Seeing none, she moved to the next agenda item. 132
133
NEXT MEETING DATE(S) – AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER 134
135
There was concurrence among the Committee members to meet in the month 136
of August. Assistant City Manager, Mike Strong, stated that he would send out a 137
poll to gauge the availability of the Committee members prior to setting the 138
August meeting date. 139
140
ADJOURNMENT 141
142
DRAFT - Environmental Sustainability Committee Minutes
July, 7 2020
Alderman Morris moved to adjourn the meeting of the Environmental 143
Sustainability Committee at 7:54 P.M. seconded by Alderman Preschlack. The 144
motion carried unanimously by voice vote. 145
146
Respectfully Submitted, 147
148
Layla Werner 149
Administrative Intern 150
151
152
Reviewed by, 153
154
Mike Strong 155
Assistant City Manager 156
ITEM III.A:
Sustainability Values and
Decision-Making Criteria
Information Needed for ESC to Evaluate Project Idea / Request
The information document’s MIST’s recommendations related to criteria the ESC should consider when evaluating potential
projects, policies or initiatives brought before them. It was generated based on the recent values / priorities survey responded
to by the ESC, staff and local stakeholder groups. Items 1-8 are presented in order of priority with weighting indicated on a 1-
10 scale (10 highest importance, 1 lowest importance).
1.Positive environmental impact – Weight 10
a.Does the project measurably reduce LF’s environmental footprint in the areas of the LF Sustainability Plan?
i.Quantified major improvement, including metric(s)
ii.Unverified or qualitative improvement
iii.Little to no environmental improvement
2.Ongoing Cost – Weight 9
a.Does project create annual operations savings or reduce ongoing city staff time required?
i.Savings 20% or greater than capital expenditure.
ii.Savings >10% and <20% of capital expenditure.
iii.Savings less than 10% of capital expenditure.
iv.No
3.Initial Cost – Weight 9
a.What Lake Forest Capital Funds are required?
i.High cost
ii.Low
iii. Medium
4.External Funding Source – Weight 8
a.Is outside/grant funding secured to finance or does project support an existing revenue stream?
i.100%-50% grant funded?
ii.<50% grant funded or supports revenue stream?
iii.No outside funds
5.Does the project address an existing or near future deferred maintenance need? – Weight 7
a.Addresses a major need
b.Addresses a minor need
c.No
6.Does the project improve Resident or Local Business Experience and there is Community Support? – Weight 7
a.Major improvement and community support
b.Minor improvement and / or mixed support
c.No
7.Aligns with Lake Forest strategic priorities – Weight 6
a.Does the initiative / project clearly align with an objective in LF’s strategic plans?
i.Strong alignment with multiple strategic initiatives
ii. Limited alignment with one strategic initiative
iii.No
8.Marketability, PR, Comparison to Peers – Weight 4
a.Does project offer opportunities to promote LF’s achievements, leading to stronger standing as compared to
peer communities
i.Yes
ii.No
BACKGROUND MATERIALS:
Lake Forest Sustainability Strategy Initiative
(Phase 1 Assessment Presentation)
LAKE FOREST SUSTAINABILITY
STRATEGY INITIATIVE
July 7, 2020
Project Objectives
MIST supports the Environmental
Sustainability Committee (ESC) on:
•Committee Charter documents
•Assessing sustainability goals
•Sustainability commitments and
partnerships
•Decide upon a guiding framework
for the next 3-5 years
Project timeline is approx. June -September
Project Scope
1.Assessment:survey current LF sustainability plans, strategy, websites, hold discussions with key stakeholders
Deliverables: Summary brief or presentation documenting LF’s current sustainability assessment: level of performance, peer
comparison, recommendations, current gaps and future opportunities with the greatest impact.
2.Strategy Framework:work w/ LF sustainability committee to define guiding sustainability vision and priorities
Deliverables: Summary brief or presentation outlining LF’s sustainability vision, strategy and decision-making framework to be
used to assess potential sustainability policies and projects.
3.Prioritized Project List:rank potential sustainability policies and projects using the Strategy Framework.
Deliverables: A prioritized list of up to ten sustainability short and long-term projects, assessed via the criteria outlined in the
Strategy Framework. The assessment will include quantitative and qualitative information.
June
July
August -September
Phase 1: Assessment Methods
•Survey stakeholders
•Peer review two cities
•Assess Lake Forest’s current level of sustainable
performance
•Identify gaps and future opportunities
PHASE 1 –STAKEHOLDER DISCUSSIONS
Phase 1: Public Survey
Surveyed residents through online questionnaire:
1.Are you aware that the City of Lake Forest has adopted a
Sustainability Plan and/or Sustainability initiatives?
2.Which initiatives are you familiar with?
3.How are you aware of these initiatives?
4.Which current initiatives should Lake Forest improve?
5.Are there new sustainability initiatives you would like to
see the City implement in the future?
6.How do you feel Lake Forest’s sustainability initiatives
are going overall?
Phase 1: Public Survey
•Total of 139 residents responded to the survey
•98% of respondents were residents; 95% were over 40 with the majority (53%) 60+
•Are you aware that the City of Lake Forest has adopted a Sustainability Plan and/or
Sustainability initiatives?
•63%of respondents are aware of LF Sustainability Plan
•69%of respondents are aware of specific LF Sustainability Initiatives
•Which sustainability initiatives are you familiar with? (multiple answers allowed)
Sustainability Initiative % of Respondents
Waste Management 37%
Stormwater Management & Water Usage 24%
Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation 22%
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy 9%
Transportation & Air Quality 7%
Phase 1: Public Survey
•How do you feel Lake Forest’s sustainability
initiatives are going overall?
•Most respondents had no opinion (32%)
•Which current initiatives should Lake Forest
improve? (ranked highest to lowest)
1.Stormwater Management
2.Ecosystem Conservation
3.Waste Management
4.Energy Efficiency
5.Transportation
News Method % of Respondents
Dialogue Newsletter 30%
Community Groups 18%
Website 18%
Public meetings/forums 16%
Neighbors/friends 10%
Not applicable/aware 8%
How are you aware of these initiatives?
Phase 1: Public Survey Key Takeaways
•Respondents are likely biased and “pro” sustainability
•Respondents show an interest in sustainability, but don’t feel they have the
knowledge to empower actions they could do to support
•Recent communication initiatives around waste are raising awareness
•The Dialogue newsletter seems to be an effective information sharing
strategy
•Nature and outdoor conservation are greatly prioritized over building and
infrastructure sustainability
Held Zoom discussions to survey opinions on sustainability from:
•Lake Forest Environmental Committee Members
•Staff: Public Works, Community Development, Engineering, Parks
& Forestry, City Manager’s Office
•LF Collaborative for Environmental Leadership
•Green Minds
•Open Lands
•Elawa Farm
•League of Women Voters
Phase 1: Stakeholder Discussion Methods
1.Lake Forest should model leadership in order to
motivate residents to make meaningful sustainable
changes
2.Lake Forest needs a strong vision and municipal
framework that allows decisions to be more easily
made regarding environmental initiatives
3.Lake Forest should consider broadening its
sustainability focus to include other areas such as
equity and inclusion, health and wellness, air and light
pollution, and recognition
4.Environmental impact, not just cost benefit, should be
taken into account when deciding which projects are
allocated funding
Phase 1: Stakeholder Discussion Takeaways
5.Lake Forest should communicate and engage
with residents and local community groups on
environmental actions and provide positive
incentives for residents to participate
6.Lake Forest is home to unique natural resources
that residents take great pride in and that can
also help the city become more resilient to
climate change
7.Thoughtfully consider language and how
environmental and social sustainability initiatives
are framed when communicating to residents
and other communities.
Phase 1: Stakeholder Discussion Takeaways
PHASE 1 –PEER ASSESSMENT
Peer Assessment Methods
•Researched neighboring cities that are similar to LF
and share comparable issues with publicly available
info
•Cities chosen: Highland Park & Winnetka
•Reviewed additional materials provided to MIST:
•Sustainability plans, policies, ordinances,
educational materials
•This is NOT an exhaustive review
Peer Assessment: Highland Park
•Highland Park has strong environmental goals
and initiatives and tracks their progress well
•Endorses GRC & tracks yearly GHG emissions
•Highland Park does an excellent job at
informing residents and businesses about
opportunities to advance environmental
priorities in a collaborative way
•Green infrastructure or stormwater
management materials to help residents with
implementation
•Rewards businesses and residents through
recognition of sustainable efforts
•Environmental Award and Sustainable Projects
map
Topic Initiative Score
Strategy &
Governance
Budget & Funding
Inclusive Approaches
Municipal Governance Structure
Sustainable Business Development
Natural & Built
Environment
Climate and Resilience
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Waste Infrastructure and Management
Stormwater Management & Water Usage
Transportation and Mobility
Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation
Health & Wellness
Education &
Engagement
Communications & Public Engagement
Credibility & Recognition
Local & Community Partnerships
Transparency & Reporting
Peer Assessment: Winnetka
•Winnetka is in the process of a a community-
wide planning project that will end with an
updated Comprehensive plan called
’Winnetka 2040 Plan’
•Will have an increased focus on
sustainability and climate change
•Winnetka provides decent educational
resources for residents on many initiatives
•Needs to increase efforts more around
diversity and inclusion, sustainable business
development, and climate change
•Has set goals via GRC but no actions
found
Topic Initiative Score
Strategy &
Governance
Budget & Funding
Inclusive Approaches
Municipal Governance Structure
Sustainable Business Development
Natural & Built
Environment
Climate and Resilience
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Waste Infrastructure and Management
Stormwater Management & Water Usage
Transportation and Mobility
Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation
Health & Wellness
Education &
Engagement
Communications & Public Engagement
Credibility & Recognition
Local & Community Partnerships
Transparency & Reporting
Peer Assessment: Lake Forest
•Reviewed Lake Forest’s website for any relevant
information on sustainability initiatives
•Reviewed materials that were publicly provided:
•Sustainability plans, policies, ordinances,
educational materials
Assessment: Lake Forest
Topic Initiative Score
Strategy &
Governance
Budget & Funding
Inclusive Approaches
Municipal Governance Structure
Sustainable Business Development
Natural & Built
Environment
Climate and Resilience
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Waste Infrastructure and Management
Stormwater Management & Water Usage
Transportation and Mobility
Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation
Health & Wellness
Education &
Engagement
Communications & Public Engagement
Credibility & Recognition
Local & Community Partnerships
Transparency & Reporting
•Reds are just gaps that can be improved, it
doesn’t mean they should be
•The natural environment is well addressed
•Communications efforts like Bart the Cart are
key to boosting broader awareness and
participation
•Strategy and Governance is the biggest
opportunity for improvement and is critical to
long-term success
Peer Assessment: All cities
Topic Initiative Highland Park Winnetka Lake Forest
Strategy & Governance
Budget & Funding
Inclusive Approaches
Municipal Governance Structure
Sustainable Business Development
Natural & Built
Environment
Climate and Resilience
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Waste Infrastructure and Management
Stormwater Management & Water Usage
Transportation and Mobility
Ecosystem Vitality & Ravine Conservation
Health & Wellness
Education & Engagement
Communications & Public Engagement
Credibility & Recognition
Local & Community Partnerships
Transparency & Reporting
Peer Assessment Key Takeaways
1.All three communities include sustainability in their decisions, however successful
implementation is the difference between a “red” and a “green”
2.All three cities are grappling with similar environmental issues: flooding, ecosystem
restoration, waste, and climate change
3.Involving and collaborating with residents helps engage them with sustainability
initiatives, driving awareness and participation, but it takes resources to do so
PHASE 1 –SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS
Summary Observations
1.Many residents are supportive, but are unclear about specific and actionable steps
they should be taking. Communications are key.
2.Lake Forest stakeholders want both a greater focus to achieve deeper impact on
environmental initiatives and also a broader set of initiatives to be covered. Limited
resources do not allow both.
3.Lake Forest is on-par to slightly above average compared to peers.
4.Lake Forest should find opportunities to focus more resources on the Strategy &
Governance items to better implement sustainability in the long-term.
NEXT STEPS
Next Steps: Phase 2
2.Strategy Framework:work w/ LF sustainability committee to define guiding sustainability vision and priorities
Deliverables: Summary brief or presentation outlining LF’s sustainability vision, strategy and decision-making framework to be
used to assess potential sustainability policies and projects.
Being clear and consistent in decision-making. What is valued?
•Environmental Impact?
•Cost Benefit?
•Health & Well-being?
•Quality of Life?
•Comparison to Peers?
ESC Mission Statement –June 10
The Environmental Sustainability Committee exists to encourage stewardship of our community’s natural
environment and provide sustainability policy leadership for the City Council on projects and community
initiatives. Stewardship of our natural environment may include activities related to:
•Solid waste reduction
•Energy conservation
•Storm water management
•Air and water quality enhancement