CITY-COUNTY ADVISORY BOARD ON CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY

200 E. Wells Street City of Milwaukee Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 Meeting Minutes CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Ald. Nik Kovac and Sup. Marcelia Nicholson, Co-Chairs Pam Fendt, Linda Frank, Julie Kerksick, Ted Kraig, Janet Meissner Pritchard, Supreme Moore Omokunde, Pamela Ritger, Erick Shambarger, Rafael Smith, and Freida Webb Staff Assistant: Linda Elmer, lelmer@milwaukee.gov, 414-286-2231 Legislative Liason: Luke Knapp, luke.knapp@milwaukee.gov, 414-286-8637 Google documents for this body can be found at : http://bit.ly/CCTFCEE Monday, May 24, 2021 11:00 AM Virtual Land Use Work Group Zoom link: Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84916861324 Meeting ID: 849 1686 1324 One tap mobile +19292056099,,84916861324# US (New York) Working Group Members (13) Linda Frank, Chair George Martin, Janet Meissner Pritchard, Bruce Wiggins, David Weingrod, Dynasty Ceasar, Kelly Moore Brands, Sam Leichtling, Scott Baran, Kimberly Kujoth, Tracy Staedter, Benjamin McKay, Katherine Riebe 1. Call to order and roll call; assign notetaker Call to order at 11:05 A.M. Working Group Members (13) Linda Frank, Chair George Martin, Janet Meissner Pritchard, Bruce Wiggins, David Weingrod, Dynasty Ceasar, Kelly Moore Brands, Sam Leichtling, Scott Baran, Kimberly Kujoth, Tracy Staedter, Benjamin McKay, Katherine Riebe City of Milwaukee Page 1 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Present: Janet Meissner Pritchard, Chair (7 members present) Tracy Staedter, Katherine Riebe, David Weingrod, Kimberly Kujoth, Kelly Moore Brands, Bruce Wiggins, Benjamin McKay Absent: Excused: Linda Frank, George Martin, Dynasty Ceasar, Sam Leichtling, Scott Baran Visitors: Erika Olmos, student at Alverno College 2. Approve minutes of 5/10/21 meeting On motion of Weingrod, the minutes were approved. 3. Announcements a. Items in Google Drive document repository b. Education and Outreach Working Group update c. Revised proposal for American Rescue Plan Act funds approved by the task force d. Timeline – Confirm Land Use “Big Idea”; work on new Chapter Template; take a break after June 7 e. Scribe for Land Use chapter Updates 1. Google Drive Janet Reminded the group that there is a shared Google drive accessible to all members and the public. Link here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aHuU64sJETOY75e3Gmr-FQTPpPJzgBbp 2. Update of the Education and Outreach working group from Bruce Wiggins. The group is working toward two events in June: 1) soft launch, comm conversation with leaders leading up to 2) big event on June 24, aiming to engage a broad range of people. Want to build support for the planning efforts and solicit ideas. Go online to record their thoughts on the climate talk’s video app, to record your thoughts to spread the word to get the community to do that. The idea is to put together a recording to give a broad sample of ideas. https://www.videoask.com/f4u9gs2q5 Katherine R posed a question: do people that receive it need to reside in Milwaukee? Bruce W: Yes, they are the main constituents of this efforts but if you think people are plugged into the concept of climate and equity and have good ideas and can make a contribution, I think that would be wonderful. Katherine R: The reason I’m asking, because most people who live in the suburbs have interaction with the county and the city, whether they work or shop there. Bruce W: That’s a good point. People commute and come into the city for sporting events, art, and they have a stake. If there’s some doubt, go ahead and send it to them. Janet P: I don’t think there will be a strict exclusion on people attending meetings and sharing ideas. Mayor and Common Council will be concerned with their constituents when making ideas, but I’m sure they don’t want to limit the conversation. Bruce M: Added link to the video survey in the chat so that it can be part of the City of Milwaukee Page 2 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY minutes (see above). Janet P: the first meeting in June is to be a meeting of community leaders to describe task force, what we’re doing and planning. Identifying who should be invited to that first group. If there are people you think should be on that list, who should be contacted? Bruce W: Jennifer Evans should be contacted. I’ll put Jennifer Evans’ contact in the chat. From Bruce via chat: Send recommendations for community leaders to be invited to June 10 or June 24 community conversations. Send to Jennifer Evans, CoChair of Education and Outreach Work Group evans_jennifer@sbcglobal.net Dave W: Make sure the schoolboard is invited to that, they will have money to spend 3. The Land Use Work Group’s recommendation on the use of ARPA funds were enthusiastically adopted by the Task Force. Janet will forward an announcement about the CC special hearing of the Committee of finance and personnel, taking formal public input. This Wed, May 26. Opportunity to speak into that hearing in relation to the issues. 4. Brief Discussion of “Big Idea” – Nature in the City Janet presented the main topic for our discussion today. Review bullet items prepared by Linda Frank on the document “Starting Ideas for Completing the Project Chapter Template” developed by Erick Shambarger. Propose today that we look at those two documents, look at Linda’s notes, have some discussion. We may or may not decide to include all of those. Janet proposed to share the document on screen to go through. She asked, “Do we want to structure our BIG IDEA with a handful of ideas, or do we want to hone in one particular thing? Bruce W: The big idea is BIG. I would come up with an overall concept with multiple aspects that might proceed with different funding, schedules, implementations. Nature in the City. I think we are being requested to come up with an idea that has multiple aspects. We can prioritize. I would suggest that’s the approach. Janet P: We could take that approach. The way Erick summarized the Land Use work group isn’t a recommendation but rather an indication that the group hadn’t honed our idea yet. It was left general and left to us to refine or define. It’s for this group to decide. Maybe we should take up this question, though. One approach is the generalist approach, define a baseline of what our land use is across different metrics and set some goals about how we want to see that shift. Maybe we have a 3-year point, 5-year, 10-year, etc. Ben M: developing a land use baseline is a good idea. We have that type of data to work with. What is the baseline of turf grass or how much actual paved area, that could be a difficult level to get that. It’s beyond what SEWRPC has in the database. Dave W: I think it’s useful to have 1-year, 3-year, 5-year plan so they can see the progression. We need more details. What does it mean to go from 25% to 35% tree canopy. We need some specificity in there. My sense is start with a big goal, but in these categorical areas, we can get more specific. Tracy S: Advocates for generalist approach City of Milwaukee Page 3 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Kimberly K: If we have a general idea with four or five sub-goals and then each has 4 or 5 or 6 areas, it makes it harder to fund, because it’s spread out over. That’s concerning. I don’t know if we want to do all. Maybe we try for two major ideas, and those have sub-category of 4 or 5 strategies to achieve gains. As funding is secured, you’re able to see more progress. Maybe there are ways to combine some of them. If it’s 4 or 5 different things. It can make it difficult to demonstrate progress. Kelly B: I see two broader categories, de-paving and then expanding tree canopy fits under there; the need to protect and preserve. Those feel like the two larger ideas. Bruce W: We need to remember where we are in the process and the ultimate outcome. In the final plan, to have 10 or 12 ideas that have a budget and implementation agency identified. Clear and we’re going to move ahead. At this point in the process and trying to get community contact and buy-in, we can suggest multiple projects and aspects. I would lobby for having something with multiple aspects to it. Katherine R from chat: Priorities we talked about in the Biodiversity & Soil Health sub-group: 1. maintain/protect prime environmental areas 2. increase/strengthen significant lands 3. replace/switch out impermeable surfaces Wanted to remind people some things that we talked about. When looking at undisturbed old growth and biodiversity, these needs to be a priority because we get more bang for our buck. Janet P: I found Kelly’s comment helpful to organize the ideas into those two groups. Preserving old growth is the highest value. I don’t think there is a comprehensive plan from the county. Also, this transformation from less desirable to more desirable, grouping them under depaving. Maybe part of what we want to do we could look at city’s landscape guidelines. Maybe we want to sharpen them. Maybe we focus on that in particular. If we want to go for a third prong, there could be some incentive. It keeps it broad but gives some focus to it. Kelly B: I wanted to give an example. There is a school Lincoln Ave school had to take ash trees out and principal asked me to look at the list of trees. If you’re a nursery in MKE you couldn’t sell invasive trees and MPS shouldn’t be planting invasive. Janet P We can improve landscape design guidelines. Dave W: One question is there a lot of area in the central city for depaving. I don’t know the answer. If we want to keep equity in mind. Bruce W: Erick S showed pictures of school lots and abandoned industrial areas. One big issue is the urban heat island effect. Tree planting cools and creates cleaner air. Janet P: Lots of opportunities. We want to lift up that we want to prioritize where these suggestions can have impact. We should be thinking that we have $5K for research and we should keep in mind ways that we can mobilize that over the summer. Ben M: I shared a series of maps and tables about where environmental corridors are and natural areas. We have a lot of baseline work done. Not sure where that is. Janet P: Let’s check the Google Drive. City of Milwaukee Page 4 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Bruce W: Need to add source of data. City has land use data for describing existing ideas. Tracy S added to minutes: https://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPCFiles/Publications/pr/pr-048_regional_land_use_plan_ for_se_wi_2035.pdf#page=54 Ben M: More detail on the data we have. We have a land use inventory. We are starting to do the update now. Most up to date is from 2015. It goes into 66 different categories. We don’t know how much turf grass or how much pavement. I asked someone to do that. Janet P: another approach in looking at what land use we have, we propose a pilot program. Select a targeted neighborhood that we want to highlight, with a smaller demarcation. Do a survey to bring it to a high detail. One recommendation is to do a mapping to see how a set of policies shift and bring about change. Could figure out which policies are impactful. Kelly B: When I had a conversation about brownfields with Tory Kress at RACM, when it’s possible to show co-benefits of biodiversity, then they would be able to say, we can develop or use phytoremediation and see financial differences. Monetizing co-benefits that we’re talking about. Pilot program to see what the values are and compare them. (Meeting started to be recorded at this juncture.) Ben M: Existing land use inventory – we have general regional standards but not as specific. I like the pilot idea. It could work well. Tracy S requested a link to Google Drive. Katherine R submitted via Chat: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1aHuU64sJETOY75e3Gmr-FQTPpPJzgBbp Janet P will also email link to Google Drive. Janet P went through main bullet points of the Land Use template, which Linda Frank had partially filled in. Janet P offered one comment to open: I see building resilience of flooding as a benefit, it’s not a separate measure itself. Katherine R: I thought there was a working group for water. Janet R: There is one for resilience Katherine R: The bullets do fall under the priorities I listed. Bruce W: What are those percentages of hardscape. Janet P: Different percentages that Linda found Bruce W: I would add that we need a metric for vacant land, especially in inner city areas. It belongs under background and existing conditions. City of Milwaukee Page 5 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Janet P: Leading by Example in the template is meant to highlight existing program or commitments that we can lift up. Green Infrastructure plan, Green Lots, Branch Out MKE, Mayors Monarch Pledge, Biophilic Cities Network. Are there examples from Milwaukee County? Bruce W: Add urban agriculture to this. Ben and I have been working on aspects on this and will comes up with specific ideas on how that fits in. Katherine R: Friends of County Grounds and MKE Riverkeeper Dave W. Urban Ecology Center. The county owns the parks, but then there are entities in the county. Examples: Cudahy and West Allis. Janet P: That’s a broader question. Kelly B: Add Reflo Design for Schools program Bruce W: Add MMSD, Green Schools program Ben M: Working for a regional advisory agency, it couldn’t hurt to have advisory recommendations for what communities outside Milwaukee could do. Katherine R: Friends of the Monarch Trail Bruce W: The city of Glendale has a webinar. Green is Good Webinar June 13. Glendale Mayor Bryan Kennedy is a speaker, along with Mandela Barnes. Sponsor is Grass Roots North Shore. Sun., 6/13 7-*:15 Katherine R: Suggested adding UW Extension Master Gardener’s program Kimberly: I would want to see something highlight tree canopy and the Department of Forestry’s efforts. I see this as leading by example. At some point we would have to prioritize this list. Janet P: I agree. This list would be visited as we hone the recommendations. Kelly B: Suggested adding Walnut Way and The Mayor having signed the Paris Climate Agreement. Janet P: That’s a larger framing issue. Janet P: The next section on the big idea, in some ways we covered this when we were talking about framing things. Perhaps we can return to that. Katherine R: When we look at our desire for equity and prioritization, we are looking at depaving and tree canopy but when we look at priorities for preserving naturally sensitive, these areas are not in parts of the city that are most vulnerable. I’m pointing out the tension between those two things. Janet P: I think there are ways to link them. Bruce W questioned “Nature in the City,” because it might exclude things like agriculture. City of Milwaukee Page 6 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Janet P: We are proposing to do an inventory of undisturbed areas and identify strategies. Kelly B: Under Big Idea, the bullet points of the background. Our description is there. Kimberly K suggested some language from earlier: The big idea is to protect high quality landscape, moving from the least desirable to more desirable. If we’re trying to get to one sentence, it’s protecting and trying to create better. Bruce W: We are trying to get up to the 40% tree cover, we need to set the baseline and the argument for that. Janet P: What would be the next stage for developing this idea? Maybe we want to articulate a set of principles. Identifying policies and programs. I think in terms of quantitative outputs, what kinds of things are measurable? Ben M: I will take time to look at the example to give a better answer. We can identify areas in the county such as woodlands that are more or less protective. I do like developing principles. That’s how SEWRPC reports are organized. Janet P: Looks like Linda didn’t develop notes beyond metric chart. I will pull up the template. We need to define gov agencies, collaborators, description of operations, focus on equity concerns, we can highlight areas we want to focus on, we need to address funding and financing. The goal is that we want to make sure the ideas we recommend are actions the city and county can take directly. If we recommend a policy or program, we need the city to have the resources. Bruce W: When is this level of detail needed? Janet: We should have time through the Autumn, but we should be thinking about it. We should be prepared that we can back it up with this level of detail. I personally think that we should sketch out some ideas. The target is to have a plan at the end of this year. We need some notion of where we’re going. Ben M: It does seem like the bullet points are good starting point. We could use those points as appropriate to fill out the document. Does everyone think those are representative Bruce W: Yes, with the exception of the Urban Ag group. I also want to tie into the Waste Group. Janet P: Something else, I’d like to encourage, can we reflect on our conversation today and these details. If we take a break, we might take a break, is there key homework assignments? Do we want to review existing Landscaping Guidelines? Ben M: I agree. We’ve talked about our broad ideas and we need to dive in on the details. The goal for next time should be assignments for the summer. We can reconvene when everybody has some charge to do homework. Janet P: Two takeaways. Do you want to move from bullet points and try putting that into narrative. We could start building a narrative and then think about what is a task you are willing to assign to yourself. That should become a key discussion point. City of Milwaukee Page 7 CITY-COUNTY TASK FORCE ON Meeting Minutes May 24, 2021 CLIMATE AND ECONOMIC EQUITY Bruce W: I like the direction we’re going, particularly as it applies to writing or drafting. Really need to have one or two people working on doing a draft and bringing it back for comments. Maybe a drafting subgroup over the summer. Try to identify if we have ideas for consultancy, getting that figured out and spending it over the summer. That would be an ideal way of doing it. Ben M: I like the idea of, in general, identify what you’re comfortable with. 5. Begin preparation of Chapter Template 6. Action Items and Next Steps a. Items for next agenda b. Next meeting June 7 a. Tracy to begin drafting bullet points into a narrative b. Group should reflect on the conversation today and begin to think about homework assignments for the next meeting, such as reviewing Landscaping Guidelines c. Next regular meeting, 6/7/21 at 11:00 AM 7. Adjournment On motion of Wiggins and no objections, the meeting was adjourned at 12:45 pm. Minutes provided by Linda Frank. City of Milwaukee Page 8