2026-09-14 - Green Worcester Advisory Committee

00:00to make a comment.

00:02Um, they should click the react button

00:05on the bottom of your Zoom screen.

00:07What's on the bottom of my computer, but

00:09hit the react button to raise your hand.

00:12You can also agree with things by

00:14raising your hand. If we're taking any

00:16votes, you can do that or you can if we

00:20call a role, you'll have to say your

00:21name. This is a public meeting. It is

00:23being recorded. The draft meeting

00:26minutes are generally available for

00:27review and approval at the consequent

00:30meeting. Once an agenda item is called,

00:33there will be a brief presentation on

00:34the item, followed by any additional

00:37comments and clarifications from members

00:39of city staff and then an opportunity

00:42for anyone from the public to speak on

00:43that item before we proceed to comm

00:46committee discussion and action. The

00:48members of the public will be given a

00:50maximum of two minutes to speak in order

00:52to provide enough time for the

00:53discussion and keep the meeting on time.

00:57To [clears throat] help maintain an

00:58orderly meeting, please address all

01:01comments and questions through the chair

01:03rather than directly to any of the other

01:05speakers or committee members.

01:07Each agenda has the opportunity for the

01:10public to speak on a matter not on the

01:12agenda for a limited amount of time, no

01:14more than two minutes per person. at the

01:17public participation/ community

01:19engagement or standing items

01:22items to be considered for placement on

01:24the next agenda. While an item outside

01:27of the agenda cannot be discussed by the

01:29committee, the committee may decide to

01:31take a vote to formally place the item

01:32for formal discussion on one of the

01:34forthcoming agendas.

01:37So we will start by calling the role.

01:44Uh, Mary N here.

01:47>> Evelyn Herurwitz

01:48>> here.

01:51>> Pat Austin

01:52>> here.

01:54>> Ted Connor.

01:59>> I see his name.

02:02>> We'll come back to Ted. Mary Leovich

02:05>> here.

02:06>> David Macaulay

02:07>> here.

02:08>> Deja Murphy.

02:12Okay. Ted Connor

02:14>> here.

02:15>> Here. Good.

02:16>> There we go. Okay. I'm having

02:18[clears throat] issues.

02:21>> Yeah.

02:21>> And Mary Deardra just is trying to join

02:24too. Oh,

02:25>> okay. I see Dearra.

02:27So, we're all here. The gang's all here.

02:29Thank you everybody for joining us

02:31tonight. Um, in spite of not being in

02:34person.

02:36Uh, the we've done the welcome and the

02:38rules. Not everybody heard the um the

02:41part about the the comments. So we

02:43encourage people to use the react button

02:47to raise your hand if you'd like to be

02:48recognized.

02:51Okay. Um and

02:55there is a chat and people can put

02:58things in the chat as well if they need

03:00to.

03:05So, um, the first order of business

03:08after all of that is the approval of

03:10minutes.

03:11Any comments or questions on the minutes

03:14as they are presented in your packet?

03:17Otherwise, we'll take a motion to accept

03:19them.

03:24>> So, moved.

03:26>> We have a second.

03:28I

03:29>> have a comment. Oh,

03:29>> Ted's hand is up. Sorry.

03:33Go ahead, Ted.

03:34>> So, two things that I would like to see.

03:37Um there there was um

03:42I had I had um

03:46I had said

03:48>> at at the meeting in relation to um the

03:52discussion

03:54of the specialized code

03:57that I would like to see the city

03:59potentially boost the specialized code

04:02using a a tiff. and I had suggested

04:04language

04:06um at the meeting well for the minutes

04:09about what I said at the meeting.

04:12>> Um I would like to see that included in

04:14the minutes. That's the first thing. The

04:16second thing is that I also suggest

04:20that when like the last meeting we had I

04:23had four pages of notes on paper. The

04:26city provided four different memos um to

04:30us on paper.

04:33Open meeting law does not require us to

04:36attach all those things to our minutes,

04:38but I just think it's good transparent

04:40practice because otherwise

04:43someone's reading the minutes, they want

04:45to see one of those things, it takes a

04:48public records request and by the time

04:50you get it, you've lost interest or the

04:53world has moved on. Um, and this stuff

04:56all exists electronically. So I don't

04:58see that it creates any any kind of

05:00burden or problem to attach it. So So I

05:04would move that all of those things be

05:06attached to our to our minutes um for

05:10for this round and also going forward

05:12and then just referenced as um

05:15attachments in the minutes.

05:22>> Okay. Thank you Ted. Does anybody have

05:24any comment or question on that? Mary,

05:30>> I think Ted Ted makes a valid point and

05:33if people are people could be interested

05:36in why make it harder for them. I I

05:38don't think that's what we're about,

05:40right? So, I I agree with what Ted's

05:42proposing.

05:44>> Okay. Thank you, Mary. Uh John.

05:48>> Yeah. Um so regarding uh the second

05:53question uh proposal first um the city's

05:57policy in general is and I think it's

06:00just good practice is we absolutely

06:03always include uh presentations or

06:07reports that are uh formally included uh

06:11or presented um for uh meetings like

06:15this. Um, and I wholeheartedly agree

06:18with Ted's rationale that they should

06:20be. It's good practice. The concern I

06:22have is with notes when they are not um,

06:27uh, a for in the form of a presentation

06:30or report uh, opens up a bit of a

06:32Pandora's box because there's a lot of

06:35context that are missing from notes that

06:37you get in a presentation or a report.

06:40Um, and they can cause more confusion

06:43than they solve typically. Um, so I'm

06:46I'd be concerned with that adding notes

06:49for that reason. Um, and for that same

06:51reason, I would be concerned it as as a

06:54precedent. Um, we typically, uh, as Ted

06:58correctly mentioned, we're not obliged

07:00to include this. If we're going to be

07:02transparent, I want it to be in a way

07:05that actually is beneficial for the

07:08public. And I don't want to set us up

07:10for not just for this particular set of

07:13notes, but for anybody's sets of notes.

07:15Ted's were actually in relatively good

07:17order, but that's no guarantee that all

07:19of them will be. And even his did not

07:22have uh um uh nuance that were actually

07:27captured already in the minutes. So, it

07:28seemed redundant. And it also seemed

07:31that we did not need uh to add

07:33potentially in my mind confusion to the

07:36topics which is why they weren't

07:38included in the first place.

07:42>> Thank you, John.

07:47Does anybody else have any Ted?

07:51>> Well, uh sure. just in in reaction

07:54uh to that

07:57um I mean as as you know I think it's

08:00good policy

08:04we can certainly make exceptions to our

08:05own policy or we could do it case by

08:08case um but I think we all agree that

08:12transparency is good and completeness is

08:14good with regard to my notes I I know

08:19it's I mean I provided the notes on

08:22paper and then in the meeting we had

08:24limited time and I said well I'm going

08:26to summarize what's in the notes. So the

08:29notes I think add some value to someone

08:34who wants to see it. Um but I I guess

08:38you know I I certainly also understand

08:40John's point that you know we don't want

08:42a blanket policy that has us publishing

08:46things. We don't publish anything that's

08:48in draft form for example. those come

08:50out to us. I get that they don't go

08:54public until we've approved things. Um,

08:58but in this case, there were there were

09:00four different memos from the city.

09:03And you know, the city there were good,

09:06clear memos. The city had gone to the

09:08trouble of producing them.

09:10Again, if someone wants to see it, why

09:13put them through a public records

09:15request? So

09:18that's all.

09:21>> So do you have um we had a a motion to

09:26approve the minutes as they were.

09:29And did you make a motion to change the

09:31minutes? I mean, will we vote on that

09:33one way or another and see how that

09:34lands before we take this further?

09:38>> Well, I guess if you're there would be

09:40two motions. One would be to add that

09:42sentence that I suggested and um the

09:47second

09:49and I can read that sentence uh

09:51referring to me.

09:54He would like to see the city promote

09:56the specialized code by offering a tiff

09:58to the first large multif family

10:00developer building a project under the

10:03specialized code.

10:05And since sustainability equals

10:07affordability and sensitive economic

10:09development, he see no sees no reason

10:11why the city couldn't do so. So that it

10:15was the sentence that I would like to

10:17see in the minutes at the end of uh

10:23it's uh section E of number three,

10:30the end of section 3E.

10:33Um,

10:34and my second motion would be maybe

10:37rather than do a a motion that's sort of

10:40blanket would be to just say, you know,

10:43those five things that we received on

10:46paper for this meeting,

10:48I would like to see them attached to the

10:50minutes as a as attachments as a

10:53resource if anyone wants to see them.

10:59>> Okay. So,

11:01>> well, that's two separate motions.

11:03>> So, now we've got three motions.

11:05>> Well, the third one,

11:07>> the third one was to accept the mo the

11:09minutes as they were.

11:10>> Oh, yeah. These come first and then

11:12that. Yeah.

11:14>> Okay. So Ted has made a motion to amend

11:19the paragraph about the specialized

11:21stretch code to include the language

11:23that he just said which he took from the

11:28transcription

11:29of the meeting.

11:32Does anybody want to second that?

11:36Evelyn will second it.

11:40[clears throat]

11:40>> All right. So we'll do a roll call on

11:43adding that sentence.

11:46um which you have already written down

11:48and provided to the department. Is that

11:50right, Ted?

11:51>> That's right.

11:52>> Okay. And do you have that, Jesse?

11:56Okay.

11:57Um

12:01so the roll call. Um Mary Nettle, yes.

12:05Evelyn,

12:07>> yes.

12:10>> Pat,

12:11>> yes.

12:13>> Ted,

12:13>> yes.

12:15Mary Leovich.

12:16>> Yes.

12:18>> And Stephen McCauley.

12:20>> Yes.

12:21>> Okay. And Dearra,

12:23>> yes.

12:24>> Okay.

12:27So likewise with the handouts.

12:32Ted's second motion is to

12:37Evelyn.

12:39Evelyn

12:41>> second his motion as was stated.

12:45>> Okay. And that is

12:47>> excuse me sorry Mary through the chair.

12:50Can you repeat the motion? What were the

12:53I just want to make sure I capture it

12:54accurately.

12:58Ted, so we're attaching

13:00the the four handouts from the city plus

13:06your list of notes

13:08>> that you provided at the meeting.

13:10>> Hold on. Yeah, there were four uh memos

13:15from the city

13:18that were um included in our meeting

13:21packet last time for our review. And

13:24then the fifth item was my notes from my

13:27presentation, those five things.

13:31>> Okay. So Ted's motion is to

13:35add those things to the minutes, those

13:38five items. Evelyn has second it.

13:40Seconded it. We'll do a roll call. Um

13:45>> Mary Nettle, yes. Evelyn,

13:47>> yes.

13:49>> Um Pat,

13:50>> yes.

13:51>> Ted,

13:52>> yes. Mary,

13:56>> yes.

13:58>> Uh, Stephen,

13:59>> yes.

14:00>> And Dearra,

14:01>> yes.

14:02>> Okay.

14:05So, do we need to approve the minutes

14:10with those amendments?

14:12>> Yes. I

14:13>> another motion.

14:14>> I move that we approve the minutes as

14:16amended.

14:18>> Okay.

14:19>> Second.

14:20>> Second.

14:21>> Second.

14:23Okay, I'll call a roll. Mary N, yes.

14:27>> Evelyn,

14:28>> yes.

14:29>> Pat Austin,

14:31>> yes.

14:32>> Ted Connor,

14:33>> yes.

14:34>> Mary Leovich,

14:36>> yes.

14:37>> Steven Macaulay,

14:39>> yes.

14:40>> And Dearra Murphy,

14:42>> yes.

14:43>> Okay, thank you everyone.

14:48So with that we will move on to item

14:52three our new business for this meeting

14:55um which is a presentation by the

14:56department of transportation and

14:59mobility on vision zero and mobility

15:02action plan with Brian Pigeon.

15:06>> Welcome Brian.

15:07>> Thank you. Good evening everybody. Um

15:11as you said uh my name is Brian Pigeon.

15:12I'm senior transportation planner for

15:14the city uh department of transportation

15:16and mobility and uh I'll go ahead and

15:20share my screen here.

15:24All right. Are we able?

15:28All right. Are we able to see the

15:29presentation?

15:31>> Yes.

15:31>> Yes. Okay. Very good. Um

15:34so the mobility action plan is a uh

15:38transportation plan that we completed in

15:412024.

15:42in uh

15:45with the support of staff from

15:48sustainability and resilience and uh we

15:51have issued our first annual report on

15:54the status of that plan uh much as you

15:58guys do with the the green worester

16:00plan. So just a refresher here and I

16:03believe some of my colleagues have

16:05spoken to you in the past but the

16:07mobility action plan was a plan that put

16:10together

16:1246 different strategies with the four

16:15different goals of safety, connectivity,

16:17equity, and sustainability for the

16:20city's transportation network. One that

16:22would support um people of all ages and

16:25abilities with all mobility choices.

16:29And I'm not going to go over all 46 the

16:31strategies because that would be longer

16:33than we have tonight. But just uh wanted

16:35to run through a couple of the ones that

16:37would be uh of interest to this group.

16:40So, one of the first things we got to

16:42working on was expanding the safe routes

16:45to school program. Now, safe routes to

16:47school, if you're not familiar with it,

16:48is a a nationwide program that promotes

16:51walking, biking, and rolling to uh to K

16:54through2 schools. And while it has been

16:57available in Massachusetts since 2005,

17:00up until recently, it hasn't really been

17:03uh comprehensively

17:06directed by by the school district.

17:08really it was up to the individual

17:09schools to participate or not. And so we

17:13got together with uh the school safety

17:16office, the school parent engagement

17:18office, and the facilities office uh

17:21along with some other city departments

17:22to really promote this program and get

17:25more schools participating. And since

17:27then we've had

17:30funded through the program we've had

17:32some projects done at Belmont Community

17:34School, City View School. We have funded

17:37some walk audits at Jacob Hyatt and

17:40Vernon Hill schools and uh done some

17:43arrival and dismissal evaluations where

17:45we observe the arrival and dismissal

17:48procedures and get some recommendations

17:50on how to improve those. Um obviously

17:53most schools in Worcester were built at

17:55a time when most kids did walk to

17:57school. So there's a very high um

18:00potential for walkability with Worcester

18:02schools and we want to get back to that.

18:08To promote walking more generally,

18:11we've done a number of corridor and

18:13intersection studies. Um most notably

18:15Stafford Street, Berno Street, and Grove

18:18Street. Um, we have installed new

18:21sidewalks in some places where there

18:23have been sidewalk gaps. And we've

18:26completed a uh ADA transition plan which

18:29is looking at all of the curb ramps and

18:31sidewalks in the city, looking at their

18:33condition and getting a sense of which

18:35ones uh meet ADA standards and which

18:38ones need uh need some work.

18:42And additionally, we've painted 14 new

18:44crosswalks,

18:46um, installed 13 new curb extensions,

18:48and installed 22 new rectangular rapid

18:52flashing beacons, which are those, uh,

18:55neon

18:57yellow pedestrian signs with the

18:58flashing lights that you may see uh,

19:00around the city.

19:04And one of the things that we wanted to

19:06do as well is to support community

19:09groups that want to do popup projects um

19:13with in their neighborhoods. So the

19:17image at the top there, we had uh done a

19:20project with Vernon Hill School as part

19:23of our ver of our vision zero project.

19:28um that included a street mural, um some

19:32painted crosswalks and some

19:34demonstration curb extensions and a bike

19:36lane up there. And that inspired a lot

19:39of other community groups to want to do

19:42similar types of either crosswalk art or

19:45um street murals. So, with the Main

19:49South Community Development Corporation

19:51and the uh business group in the

19:53Pleasant Street area, we've had two

19:55projects where the community has

19:56initiated projects to paint crosswalks

20:00and paint curb extensions to draw some

20:03more attention to pedestrians in the

20:05area and uh and promote some safety

20:07along there. Um, that's something that

20:09we want to see more of. And so if you

20:12are part of a community group that's

20:13interested in that kind of thing,

20:15contact our office and we can talk

20:16through the uh project ideas.

20:21In terms of promoting biking, we have

20:23installed uh over 13 miles of new bike

20:26lanes on Grove Street, Burncoat Street,

20:29and Safford Street. We installed our

20:31first bike boxes to assist with bikers

20:34turning through an intersection at the

20:36intersection of Grove Street and Forest

20:38Street. And we've painted a number of

20:41painted bike crossings uh on different

20:44streets in the city as well.

20:47And whenever we do anything like that

20:48that's new to Worcester that people

20:50haven't seen here before, we uh team up

20:53with the city's communications

20:54department to have a social media

20:57campaign about that. Um, some of you may

20:59have seen we put out a video earlier

21:01this year where I got out on my bike and

21:03rode through the uh, Grove Street,

21:05Forest Street intersection to

21:07demonstrate exactly how those uh, bike

21:09boxes should be used. Uh, it got a ton

21:11of views and a ton of likes. So, that

21:13was really great to see people um, so

21:16interested in that one.

21:23Additionally, in promoting biking, we

21:26need to have safe places to lock your

21:28bike up once you get to your

21:29destination. So, we went about creating

21:33an inventory of all the publicly

21:35available bike racks in the city and we

21:38posted an interactive web map of those

21:40locations on our website and we created

21:43an online request form for locations

21:45where you might want to see more bike

21:47racks and that is still open. Um, and we

21:50check it regularly. So, if you have a

21:52location you think might warrant a bike

21:54rack, go ahead and put that in there and

21:57we can take a look at it and see if it

21:59is an appropriate location.

22:01We also published bike rack guidelines

22:04for the city that describe the type of

22:06racks that we prefer uh where they

22:09should be spaced and included some best

22:12practices as well for private property

22:14uh whether that's bike racks outdoors or

22:17in some kind of indoor bike room.

22:20And we installed a total of 96 new bike

22:23racks around the city.

22:29We also launched a pilot ebike share

22:33program. So this is funded through the

22:35Massachusetts clean energy center. They

22:37have a program called uh accelerating

22:40clean energy for all. And Metrobility,

22:43which is a Cambridgebased bike share

22:46operator, received funding to install

22:49their bike racks near three uh regional

22:53transit agencies. So here in Worcester

22:56as well as Lawrence and Lel for a pilot

22:59program that would support transit

23:00ridership through uh these ebike shares

23:04and income eligible riders are able to

23:07rent these bikes for a dollar for a full

23:1024-hour period. And

23:14each bike is GPS enabled. So that allows

23:17us to get good data on where people are

23:20riding them uh to understand those

23:21travel patterns. And it also helps with

23:23maintenance as well. so we can quickly

23:25uh retrieve them if they're abandoned or

23:28anything like that.

23:30Um so we've seen a lot of a lot of

23:32enthusiasm for this program. Um the

23:35hotspots are some of the streets you

23:37would expect. Shrewsbury Street, Main

23:39Street. But we've also noticed some

23:41cases where people are taking these onto

23:44say the commuter rail, riding into

23:47Shrewsbury or Westboro or uh somewhere

23:49like that and then riding the rest of

23:52the way to their destination to a place

23:54that they can't get to by transit alone.

24:01And on the subject of transit, uh we

24:03work very closely with the WRTA and they

24:06have been doing a lot of work to improve

24:08their service lately. Um they have

24:10recently put together new real-time

24:13transit information. So you can now on

24:18your phone apps you can find exactly

24:20when new buses are going to be arriving

24:23and help plot out your your trips. Um,

24:27in FY25 they had a record ridership of

24:29over five million passenger trips, which

24:31is a record for WRTA.

24:35They are working on a bus stop inventory

24:38study right now and putting together

24:41guidelines for bus stops when they're

24:43appropriate to have shelters or benches

24:45or other amenities that would make

24:47riding more uh

24:52something you would want to do.

24:55And they have also implemented the first

24:57phase of a schedule change that expanded

25:00the service hours and uh the frequency

25:03of that service.

25:07And we've partnered with sustainability

25:09and resilience uh as you guys are no

25:11doubt aware to repurpose some of the

25:13space in the McGrath municipal parking

25:15lot into the first Mawaki forest.

25:21And lastly, what I'll end on

25:24is our vision zero plan. So, one of the

25:27big things that came out of the mobility

25:29action plan was the need for us to um

25:32adopt a vision zero plan, which is a

25:35deep dive into all of our crash data and

25:38identifying where our most dangerous

25:40streets are and come up with a plan to

25:43eliminate death and serious injury on

25:45our roads.

25:46And we have just published our first

25:48annual report on the vision zero uh

25:51implementation. So that is available on

25:54our website. Uh probably warrants its

25:57own presentation. Maybe we can come back

25:58later and and discuss that. Um but that

26:01is available online. We're happy to take

26:04any questions.

26:11>> Thank you, Brian. That's fabulous

26:13information. Um, does anybody on the

26:17committee have any comments or questions

26:18for Brian? [cough and clears throat]

26:26>> I um

26:28>> I do, but I can't find I can't find the

26:31little um hand.

26:33>> That's all right. We we've got you. You

26:34can also put your own hand up.

26:37>> Okay. All right. So, I was just I was

26:39just curious if you've um

26:43this a little maybe little beyond what

26:45you've presented tonight, but I've had a

26:49lot of really bad experiences in this

26:51summer with those um

26:55ebikes with young kids that I think

26:57shouldn't be on them. And I was just

26:59wondering if um like the safety in terms

27:03of very scary in terms of I was afraid I

27:07was going to hit them or something like

27:09that. So, I just wondered about if

27:11that's something that's being addressed

27:13and looked at.

27:15>> Yeah, we've had a lot of conversations

27:16with uh with the school department, some

27:18folks with um some conversations with

27:20police department, and ebike safety is a

27:22big concern for for all of us. So, it's

27:24something that we're looking into. Um I

27:27don't have a lot to report on that right

27:28now, but it is something that we're

27:30we're looking into.

27:32>> Thank you.

27:34Thank you, Pat. Uh Stephen,

27:37>> uh thanks a lot, Brian. This is really

27:38awesome to hear about all this. Um, on a

27:41related note, are you all tracking data

27:43about uh e scooters and scooter use

27:45around the city and looking at that?

27:49>> Yeah, and that's another one that we're

27:51uh that we're looking into. Um, there's

27:53a lot of different categories of what we

27:54would sort of term micromobility. Um,

27:57and there's actually some there's some

27:59legislation pending in the state house

28:01right now. Um, recently the state

28:04convened a special commission on

28:06microobility to recommend updates to

28:10state law uh to bring state law more

28:12into in line with how people actually

28:16use scooters and ebikes and some of the

28:19other things that we're seeing on the

28:20roads right now. Um, so once that

28:23advances, we'll be able to have a lot

28:26better data on that. um it will

28:30once it's passed, it'll change some of

28:32the ways that um a lot of reporting is

28:35done when it comes to accidents and and

28:37things like that. Um so we'll be able to

28:39get better data and it's certainly

28:41something we're looking into. We don't

28:42have a lot of good data on that right

28:44now, frankly, but it's something that

28:46we're looking into.

28:49>> All right. Thank you. Anybody else have

28:53any comments or questions? Ted,

29:00you need you're you're muted, Ted.

29:03>> There we go.

29:05I I want to echo the those comments that

29:09I I too think that particularly the the

29:13motorized and and sometimes over

29:15motorized microobility. [clears throat]

29:18I mean, there's all already people

29:20getting killed because they don't know

29:21how to use it and there's going to be

29:23more of it without some kind of public

29:26education. So, I think the the schools

29:29is a perfect place to have that

29:31partnership and we want to encourage

29:34micromobility, but we certainly want

29:36anyone who's riding to understand how to

29:38do it safely. Um, and I'm sure that, you

29:43know, you folks at DTM are are probably

29:45all over that. Um, I hope you are. I had

29:49also a couple of bicycle questions. Um,

29:52you mentioned Shrewsbury Street as being

29:55a a major corridor for cycling.

29:59Shrewsbury Street is on my short list of

30:02streets I hate to be on a bicycle

30:05because there are no bike lanes. And I

30:08also think of Main Street, Park Avenue,

30:10Goldstar Boulevard.

30:12>> Gold Star Boulevard

30:13>> for various reasons there. you know,

30:15it's harder to integrate bike lanes in

30:17those places. But I'm wondering if that

30:19is the long-term plan because, you know,

30:22Main Street's not so bad because it's

30:24not quite it's slower and it's not quite

30:25so busy. But when you get into fast

30:27traffic in two lanes with no bike lane

30:30and parked cars, it's pretty gnarly on a

30:34bicycle. And and I get less and less

30:36comfortable with it as I age.

30:39Um, you can laugh. And and my my second

30:44uh uh thought comment was at one point I

30:48I had I took the bus to the Brookfields

30:51and and the bus had a bike rack,

30:55rode in front of the bus and then I got

30:57off the bus and rode two more miles and

30:59that was awesome. And I wonder how many

31:02of the buses have that. Um obviously

31:06more useful in some places than others.

31:09So those are my comments. Sure. So to

31:12the uh to the question about the uh bike

31:16lanes on some of those streets you'd

31:18mentioned, um the mobility action plan

31:20does lay out a sort of broad vision for

31:23what a cohesive bike network would look

31:25like and some of those streets you

31:27mentioned are included on there.

31:29>> Um but that is sort of the grand

31:31long-term vision of where we want to

31:33take things. And on some of those

31:35streets that where we do see higher

31:37speeds and higher traffic volumes are

31:39going to require a lot more study than

31:41some of the other streets that we've

31:43done where we've incorporated bike lanes

31:45through um the pavement management

31:48program. Um so

31:51some of those do require a lot more

31:53study and probably a lot more

31:55infrastructure work. Um, in terms of the

31:58bike racks on the buses, uh, all was all

32:01all WRT buses do have bike racks on them

32:04on the front. Um, they are not equipped

32:07to in most cases handle ebikes. Um,

32:09they're just not strong enough to do

32:12that. They're typically uh designed to

32:14handle standard

32:16conventional bikes.

32:22>> Thank you, Dearra.

32:24Are there any e trikes available

32:29>> in the pilot program that we have? There

32:32are not. Um I have seen some um just

32:36generally I've seen them around but um

32:38we don't have any in the uh in the pilot

32:41program right now. [clears throat]

32:44>> U Mary

32:47>> uh yeah you know it's it's good that

32:49we're having this conversation today. I

32:51was listening to Boston Public Radio

32:53this morning, early afternoon, and they

32:56were having this discussion in another

32:58part of Massachusetts talking very

33:00specifically about the dangers of

33:02children in motorized vehicles in

33:04hightra areas like ebikes and ecooters.

33:08And so it sounds like uh across the

33:10Commonwealth actually they may be

33:13looking at this um from a perspective of

33:16of safety perspective as well as a um as

33:20as something that's age related as well.

33:23And so I was wondering if um if uh the

33:26gentleman was aware of that and um if he

33:29had heard any inkling perhaps of people

33:32needing a license in order to have an

33:34ebicycle because after all it is

33:36motorized over

33:39>> Yeah. So we have uh we have heard from a

33:41lot of our um our colleagues in other

33:45towns are having a lot of similar

33:47concerns. This is definitely a

33:48conversation that is that is happening

33:50statewide. um in the the proposed

33:53legislation that I had referenced

33:54earlier um basically comes up with a

33:58speedbased categorization for different

34:00types of vehicles for microobility and

34:05would set age restrictions on some of

34:08them and empower the RMV to set

34:12licensing and um insurance requirements

34:15for for certain of the higher speed um

34:19types of microobility as Well, so that's

34:22something that is that is probably in

34:24the works. Um, one thing that we we've

34:28had a lot of conversations with with

34:29other folks about, it's important in any

34:32sort of public safety messaging on this

34:34to make a clear distinction between the

34:38sort of safe and legal ebikes that are

34:41um sold by, you know, reputable shops

34:44and um for folks who are

34:48behaving uh

34:50>> Yeah. and the really the illegal ebikes

34:56that are really e motorcycles that are

35:00causing a lot of the uh the harm here.

35:02Things that are being aggressively

35:03marketed to kids and teens that are not

35:06safe and not street legal and really not

35:08bicycles but really um electric

35:11motorcycles effectively. So, it'll be

35:13really important to make a clear

35:16distinction between those because we are

35:18supportive of ebikes, the the safe and

35:21legal ones. They I think they're great

35:22for trying to get around a hilly city

35:25like Worcester, but there's a lot of

35:27things that are being deceptively

35:29marketed that are really dangerous right

35:31now.

35:34>> Thank you. Um Ted has his hand up.

35:39>> Yes. in relation to uh the the the sort

35:44of busier streets that that don't yet

35:47have bike lanes,

35:49you mentioned that some of the ones I

35:51mentioned are in the long uh range plan.

35:54Is there

35:56is there anything that isn't any street

35:59that's really just too busy or, you

36:02know, too dangerous to even think about?

36:04Obviously not the highway, but now I'm

36:07just thinking of the biggest arterials

36:09in the city. They're the hardest places

36:11to uh ride a bike. Typically, a cyclist

36:15will try to find an an alternate route.

36:17That's what I do. Um but I wonder if

36:21there if there are major arterials that

36:23you just are saying we're not going to

36:25do it there.

36:28>> You know, I I don't have that map in

36:30front of me right now. Um, but a lot of

36:33the busier materials

36:35in order to have bike accommodations

36:37would need um a lot more work. And so I

36:41I don't want to categorically say that

36:45any particular street is is off the

36:47table. Um, but you know, we would have

36:50to do a lot of studies to determine

36:52what's appropriate in any given

36:54location.

36:58>> Thank you. as as we're running out out

37:01of time on our [clears throat] our um

37:04allocated time for this. Ted, did you

37:08are you all set with that?

37:09>> Well, I was just going to say, is it

37:11fair to say that the the harder it is,

37:13the further in the future it probably

37:15is?

37:17>> It typically if it's going to be, you

37:19know, requiring a full full scale

37:21reconstruction. And if if you're

37:24thinking of some of the busier streets,

37:26probably a separated bike lane that does

37:28require generally to seek funding um

37:31either from the federal government or

37:32from the states and that does take a

37:34while.

37:37>> Um so I'd like to add one thing as a

37:40Burn code street resident. Um, it's just

37:43beautiful up here. And anybody who's

37:45pushed a baby stroller or a wheelchair

37:47along the straight straight line of

37:51sidewalks, all ADA, um, it's it's really

37:56a beautiful thing and, you know, we

37:58appreciate it and appreciate in

38:01particular um, the adding of the

38:03sidewalk at Quincig, which was a large

38:06space, just rocks. It was a it was a

38:08real challenge for people and you did it

38:10in such a way that um very old trees

38:13were preserved. So um we met a lot of

38:16goals there and and one other question

38:19and it might not be your bailey wick but

38:21is it too soon

38:23to know if there's any data about

38:27um reduction in accidents or incidents

38:31related to the decrease in the speed

38:33limit across the city?

38:37It's it's tough to say u this early on.

38:40Um the initial results are promising um

38:43and the the vision zero um annual report

38:46does discuss that

38:49uh in some degree. And so yeah, I would

38:52say the initial results are promising,

38:55but to get any real statistical

38:57significant uh data, we need a little

39:00bit more time to be able to definitively

39:02say um if it's working or not.

39:05>> Yeah. and and probably compliance

39:07enforcement

39:09>> in some areas.

39:09>> That's definitely Yeah, that's

39:10definitely um but the police department

39:14has been a really good partner with us

39:15in in targeted enforcement and uh really

39:20assisting with that.

39:22>> That's great. Um Steve, last last

39:25question.

39:26>> I know. Sorry. Um, I loved seeing Brian

39:29the um, painted bike crossing and

39:30painted bike boxes and I understand that

39:32those painted lanes are much safer but

39:35also expensive. Can you give us just a

39:37perspective on any data or understanding

39:39you have about how much safer and also

39:41how expensive and how likely to do that

39:43more widespread.

39:47>> That's kind of a big one. Um, you know,

39:50I I I don't know if I can I can put a

39:52hard number on

39:54the degree to which that uh increases

39:57safety. Um, it's a proven safety measure

40:01um to draw visual attention to those

40:04places where where cyclists are going to

40:06be. Um, but I can't necessarily put a

40:08hard number on that. Um, and then in

40:11terms of cost, it it's really kind of

40:13rolled into our um general striping

40:15budget. Um, so it's a little tough to,

40:19you know, block that out. Um, but it's

40:23we find them effective and, uh, we hope

40:26to include them in future projects.

40:30>> That's great, Evelyn. Okay, the real

40:33last one.

40:36>> This is just a quick thank you to you

40:38and the department for helping to

40:41establish the Miaaki Forest at McGrath

40:44parking lot. very much appreciated.

40:49>> You're welcome. Thank you.

40:51>> Well, thank you, Brian, for very

40:53informative and you can see we have a

40:56lot of questions. Everybody's very

40:57engaged in your presentation. So, um,

41:00extend our appreciation to your

41:03colleagues in your department and thank

41:04you very much for being here today.

41:06>> All right. Thank you for having me.

41:10>> Thanks, Brian.

41:10>> You're welcome to hang out for the rest

41:12of the meeting if you're very brave.

41:16Um, our next item

41:19is a presentation from our member Ted

41:23Connor, a followup on the data center

41:27information that he provided us with

41:29last month. So, if you're ready to go,

41:31Ted, we'll turn it over to you. It's

41:346:13.

41:36I forgot to time Brian at the beginning.

41:49You're muted.

41:51>> Thought I did that. All right. There we

41:52go. Better.

41:54>> Better.

41:55>> Okay.

41:56>> Thank you.

41:57>> So, well, I had um I emailed everyone

42:01links to uh two things over the weekend.

42:04uh both the document and the press

42:06release for the state's framework for

42:09evaluating data centers which was

42:13released in June. And then just last

42:16week uh there's an executive order um

42:19number 658 that came out on September

42:228th

42:24that is uh you know focused on starting

42:27to implement that framework. Um so I'll

42:31I'll talk about both of them. Um I I

42:33hope people have had a chance to look at

42:35them because I won't go into that degree

42:38of detail.

42:40But the framework I find to be

42:45um

42:46very comprehensive and it starts by

42:50acknowledging that this is not a totally

42:53black and white thing.

42:55Um, as we talked about last time, data

42:58centers can have major impacts, but also

43:01in New England, the climate can give us

43:03a natural efficiency advantage when

43:06we're trying to cool them in the winter.

43:09Um, so that cold climates actually have

43:12a benefit.

43:13Um, so the framework is intended to

43:19establish explicit expectations for

43:22those seeking sales and use tax

43:24exemption.

43:25Um, that the this that's available under

43:28state law.

43:30And the state intends that the framework

43:33be used to guide their own executive

43:35agencies

43:38as well as municipalities in evaluating

43:40data data center proposals

43:44and um and the DPU um within its

43:47authority.

43:49Um so it's

43:52intended to apply to

43:55data centers

43:58uh whose

44:01Let's see. Um,

44:06exceeding 25 megawws

44:09of of peak demand.

44:13And just going down the list, there's

44:15eight there's eight key points in the

44:17framework. The first one is that uh the

44:20data centers should either supply or

44:22directly procure

44:25their own green energy uh in alignment

44:29with Massachusetts climate laws and

44:31clean energy requirements

44:34because they demand a lot of energy. We

44:36we we want them to bring their own. Um

44:40second point related to that is that

44:42they should um

44:45attempt not to make transmission

44:48and distribution system stress worse so

44:52that we're not putting extra demand on

44:55the grid. Um, and that they ought to try

44:58and promote grid efficiency and avoid

45:01unnecessary infrastructure expansion and

45:04cost by means of using solar and

45:07storage, advanced energy management

45:10systems, and partnering with communities

45:12in in sort of uh micro grids and such.

45:18Um they're looking to see them use

45:21alternatives to diesel-based backup

45:23generation in in uh in support of air

45:27quality. Again, focus on solar and

45:31storage and cleaner alternatives like

45:33fuel cells.

45:35um

45:38water um so again planning so that they

45:42don't make uh water system stress work

45:45worse or cause water shortages or impact

45:48water quality including temperature

45:51and um

45:55let's see then uh and we're looking for

45:58best management in cooling technologies

46:02which also in often includes closed loop

46:04systems that recycle the water rather

46:06than just have a throughput and high

46:08water demand.

46:10Um

46:12point five, data center projects should

46:14support high quality jobs, training, and

46:17workforce opportunities.

46:20Uh community benefit and engagement.

46:23They're looking for um

46:26citing decisions that don't make

46:28existing inequities worse, align with

46:31host community needs,

46:34and um ensure early, transparent, and

46:37ongoing community engagement.

46:41Um point seven uh is that they be um

46:48um

46:50congruent with local economic

46:52development goals and among other things

46:54try to avoid citing them in places that

46:57are designated for other priorities. Um

47:02and the final thing uh the state wants

47:04to see is project transparency that the

47:08data center developers should provide

47:12the information necessary for state

47:14agencies,

47:16municipalities and communities to make

47:18informed decisions about them.

47:21uh avoiding non-disclosure agreements

47:25and reporting on annual and peak energy

47:29demand um fossil fuel use, energy and

47:33water use

47:35and uh efficiency measures and water

47:38sourcing.

47:40Um

47:43and

47:47um oh and the other thing that the that

47:51that the um framework said is that the

47:54executive office of economic development

47:57and uh energy and environmental affairs,

48:00that's two offices,

48:02will develop and disseminate a resource

48:05guide to support municipalities in

48:07potential sighting of these data

48:09centers.

48:11So, that's a a quick summary of um the

48:16um framework, the June framework. And

48:19what did I just burn? Half my time.

48:23>> When did I start, Mary?

48:26>> You're muted.

48:27>> You started at 14.

48:29>> Okay. So,

48:30>> six minutes in.

48:31>> I got a few more. Good. So um now on uh

48:35on just last week the state came out

48:38with the executive order number 658

48:43which is beginning to implement this

48:45framework and I'll I'll sort of rip

48:47through that the the again it's for data

48:50centers of 25 megawws or greater

48:55with certain exemptions

48:57and those include college college and

49:00university data centers for academic IC

49:03research,

49:04those for the provision of medical care

49:08and those involved with a state

49:10sponsored program. So there's a few

49:13caveats there, but otherwise greater

49:16than 25 megawws,

49:19the state wants to see them conform to

49:21the framework. And until they get local

49:26approval, the state will not permit

49:29them. And by local approval, the state

49:31means

49:32they want to see a community benefits

49:34agreement with the community.

49:38Um, and the state wants to see uh is is

49:42basically the governor's ordering that

49:44there be no

49:47NDAs, non-disclosure agreements

49:50with state permitting agencies.

49:53Um

49:56the uh let's see I'm going to just skip

49:59through some of this. Um and you

50:02obviously it's available and perhaps

50:04some of you have already read it. Um

50:07again they want the DPU

50:11to um

50:14develop large load rate schedules to

50:17ensure other rateayers don't end up

50:20paying for grid upgrades or or data

50:23center infrastructure.

50:26Um the DPU is to direct electric

50:30distribution companies to eliminate

50:32speculative data center projects from

50:35interconnection cues

50:38>> so we don't have

50:39>> two minutes to

50:40>> okay um so that we don't tie up

50:43potential um capacity

50:47um

50:51many of these things are it's repetitive

50:53of of the framework work. They're

50:55basically just dictating that that um

51:00that the uh the the the state agencies

51:04actually um

51:06um follow the the framework they want.

51:09Uh so that this is for clean

51:12electricity, for greenhouse gas

51:14emissions, for water quality. State

51:17agencies will oversee that.

51:20uh they want to see annual reporting as

51:23the framework said.

51:25Uh the municipal guidance that I talked

51:28about should be published by um the end

51:31of this year to support municipal

51:34leaders uh trying to um evaluate uh data

51:40centers in their engagement with data

51:43center developers

51:45um

51:48and encouraging responsible labor

51:50practices.

51:53um annual reporting to begin a year from

51:56now.

51:59And um

52:02that's that's basically it that the uh

52:05the the exec order 658 was to was to

52:08implement the the framework. So I I do

52:12have uh some thoughts about what we

52:15might do with this, but let me open it

52:16up to questions.

52:21What questions does he do you have,

52:22Evelyn?

52:24>> Yeah. Oh, thanks Ted for the summary.

52:26Yeah, I did skim through the materials

52:28you sent and it's it just seems very

52:31very thoughtful and careful and

52:34comprehensive to me. So, I don't know if

52:37what you're thinking of is us doing some

52:39kind of an endorsement of it or support

52:42statement of some sort. Um, that's what

52:45comes to mind for me.

52:52for Mary

52:55>> through the chair. Are you able to hear

52:57me?

52:58>> Yes.

53:00>> Okay. So, folks, actually, to be honest

53:02with you, um I have a soap box on this

53:05because I did go through the framework

53:07and the executive order news uh news

53:11bite as well. And so I just I'll but

53:14I'll try and stick to a couple of bullet

53:17points on this. Number one, I you know I

53:19applaud the state for taking a a bite

53:22out of this huge elephant because the

53:24elephant is a recently emerging one and

53:27you know wrapping wrapping your arms

53:29around it can be quite hard uh to start

53:31with. So I I think it's a great a great

53:34first attempt. But there's some concerns

53:36I have and I think very specifically for

53:39Worcester um as Worcester goes forward

53:42because um on the advisory committee

53:44that's we talked to uh but there's I

53:48think we we should be very um look very

53:51carefully at how those things are are

53:53worded. For example, words like should

53:56instead of shall are used throughout the

53:58uh framework and the executive order.

54:01That's concerning because should is a

54:03request versus shall is a direction. So

54:07there's nothing there that's that is

54:09saying that the state will hold these

54:11the utilities or the stakeholders in a

54:14data center accountable for anything.

54:17However, it does on the state agency

54:19side um

54:21say um put some onus on them to provide

54:25some amount of oversight, some amount of

54:28uh coordination and compliance. So it's

54:30good that the state is stepping up in

54:32that regard. However, the the mechanisms

54:35to hold um data center stakeholders

54:39accountable is unfortunately the

54:42language is quite weak. It's it's

54:44comprehensive but the language is weak.

54:46So I think that we should hope and

54:49expect that um even in the absence of

54:52states um strong a strong wording from

54:56the state or or an aggressive position

54:58from the state that the city considers

55:00through its various mechanisms ways to

55:04to help actively and proactively and I

55:07cannot stress the word proactive enough

55:11um take positions on data centers as

55:14those um applications come across on

55:18city desks in the future. And I can also

55:21point out that there is a fund um it

55:24points to some of this literature uh

55:27points to a fund that should be um

55:30instituted to you know assist you know

55:33greater taxpayer

55:36um and utility rate payer

55:40to to benefit them. However, it doesn't

55:42talk very specifically about who that

55:45taxpayer rate uh who that would really

55:48directly benefit, how it would directly

55:51benefit them. Uh so funds are always one

55:54of those things that makes it look like

55:56uh you know, well, they're giving us

55:58money towards this fund, so they're kind

56:00of complying. It's like a very dangerous

56:04uh thing to go down. Um there's also uh

56:07the transparency.

56:09Transparency is also one other thing

56:11that it's not just transparency but

56:14these things are a lot of them are very

56:16much after the fact. So after a data

56:19center has been implemented if they're

56:21doing this they should be reporting on

56:24it or they should be fixing it. But in

56:26fact we should be thinking proactively

56:28instead about what ex what do we mean by

56:31transparency? What exactly do we expect

56:33out of them and how do we mandate that

56:36before we give approvals? And I and I

56:39think the same thing goes with on the

56:41environmental side. What regulations are

56:43we expecting them to comply with? And we

56:45need to call them out. You know, we

56:47don't just say they should they should

56:49comply with this. In fact, they shall

56:51comply with it. And uh and I also on a

56:54on a secondary note also uh find concern

56:57with some of our our Worcester County

57:00neighbors, you know, because we may not

57:03have land in in the city of Worcester

57:05for a data center. I don't know. Maybe

57:07we do, maybe we don't, right? But I

57:09think it's probably more likely that the

57:10towns are going to be looking at this

57:12and town resources are even more

57:15restricted than um than the city of

57:18Worcester has. And so the city may cons

57:20consider um being making their experts

57:24available to whatever they can um to

57:26coordinate with our local towns that may

57:29be looking at a data center trying to to

57:32be put in their neighborhoods, too. Uh

57:35because you know if you have a town a

57:37town clerk for example who's only

57:40available three days a week, maybe their

57:43town council only meets once a month.

57:45You know the this is not a town that it

57:47wouldn't be a town that would have

57:49resources to to do a full investigation

57:52to really to really sus out the impacts

57:55of a data center. And so um I like I

57:58said I I think it's it's a great first

58:00step. I don't think it's an a full

58:02answer. I think I've got concerns over

58:04the language, frankly, that public

58:06utilities and private partners will take

58:08advantage of. They absolutely 100% will.

58:11And so, and I don't think that that will

58:14be to the benefit of the people in our

58:18communities. I think it will be to the

58:20benefit whoever is making fun of

58:23um the the information and the power

58:26generated through through this mechanism

58:28in the data storage. So, and I think

58:30what what's very important is Ted

58:33pointed out that there are medical

58:35institutions, academic institutions, and

58:37public institutions can get waiverss.

58:40Well, my god, this is Massachusetts.

58:41That's all we are, guys. We're medical,

58:44we're academic, and we're public

58:45institutions. There are no other types

58:47of major industries that sit in in

58:49Massachusetts. Uh so or at least the

58:52majority of them are are revolving

58:54around medical in the medical industry,

58:57the biotech industry, academia. And so

59:01what we can we're going to say we're

59:03going to that we've got these

59:05restrictions, but these the people who

59:07would most likely need a data center are

59:10going to be exempted from it. I think I

59:13I think that's a a disconnection in in

59:16what we would be trying to achieve. So,

59:19uh, it's probably quite controversial

59:21that I've said that, but I'm saying that

59:23as a as a warning label for as we move

59:26forward for some things for us to keep

59:29in mind as we will probably have to

59:31address them in the near future.

59:38>> Okay, Mary, that's a lot. You've done

59:41some thinking about this. Um, Steve has

59:44his hand up.

59:45>> Yeah, thanks for that, Mary. I echo

59:47those um thoughts about it. Um I was

59:50concerned about the language too,

59:51especially, you know, I like the the

59:52guidance that um these data centers

59:55should produce their own uh power

59:57through green energy. Um that was

1:00:00encouraging, but if it's just a

1:00:02suggestion, then I'm not hopeful about

1:00:03it. Um I'm also concerned about the

1:00:06exemptions that Mary mentioned and even

1:00:08the size exemption because in a city

1:00:10likely they would be smaller but the

1:00:12aggregation of a bunch of data centers

1:00:15in the city would still put a a higher

1:00:18you know load on and and still put

1:00:21stress on the system and increase cost

1:00:23for everybody. So, if we are to endorse

1:00:26the these guidelines or if we are to

1:00:28come up with other guidelines for the

1:00:30city, we might look at um a lower size

1:00:33threshold that isn't exempt um in the

1:00:35city.

1:00:39>> Thank you, Steve. Um Pat,

1:00:42>> yeah, just kind of in this kind of

1:00:45following the same vein, but maybe

1:00:47taking a step back. Um I'm not really

1:00:50even sure what an executive order means.

1:00:53Um, I worked in EOEA for 35 years doing

1:00:58regulatory stuff and I never did I never

1:01:03recall doing getting somebody to do

1:01:05something because of an executive order.

1:01:08There has to be a framework of um

1:01:12environmental regulations and you know

1:01:15certainly these

1:01:18encompass a lot of different um agencies

1:01:22a lot of different uh CMRs or whatever.

1:01:25So I just yeah I think it's kind of it's

1:01:28kind of wishy-washy.

1:01:33Okay. Uh Mary again.

1:01:41>> Sorry about that.

1:01:45Um so one of the other things too that's

1:01:48I find concerning is that you know I I

1:01:50love that they're they're trying to

1:01:53empower local communities to make

1:01:56decisions on this. The problem also

1:01:58becomes though if the framework does not

1:02:01call out requirements like um specific

1:02:05environmental requirements, specific

1:02:07interconnect requirements that again

1:02:11local resources do not it may not be

1:02:14regulated at the local level. Right? EPA

1:02:16stuff is federal. Mass has its own

1:02:18environmental but I I can pretty much I

1:02:21can pretty much put a bet on the fact

1:02:22that Shbury doesn't have environmental

1:02:24regulations. If they do, good dog, good

1:02:27on them, for example. Uh, but I think

1:02:30the onus uh there's also um there there

1:02:33there are going to be gaps, right? And I

1:02:36I think we should be very mindful of

1:02:38gaps. Um it's just it's out of an

1:02:40abundance of concern. And um yeah,

1:02:42executive orders, who does it really

1:02:44apply to? Well, on the federal level,

1:02:46executive orders really only apply

1:02:49within government. So you can't you

1:02:51don't usually executive orders don't

1:02:54usually um have anything to do with

1:02:56outside of government. It's you're

1:02:57directing members of government to

1:03:00behave in a certain way and in that case

1:03:03well the shoulds I guess make sense as a

1:03:06language tool but then they don't really

1:03:08mean anything if that's the case. So I I

1:03:12just and uh to to the gentleman's point

1:03:15about um interconnects and um providing

1:03:18their own clean power, you know, I

1:03:20worked micro grids out in the on in the

1:03:22Pacific um of several years ago and

1:03:26interconnects between self-generated

1:03:28power at scale are um a big they are an

1:03:33engineering challenge. Uh not one that

1:03:35can't be overcome of course because it

1:03:37they are done. It's just that they're

1:03:39not um just some easy, oh, we're going

1:03:41to stick up some solar panels, generate

1:03:43power, and when we need it, we'll pull

1:03:44from the grid. Me, okay, that's the

1:03:48thought. But the engineering process

1:03:51requires some some uh

1:03:54equipment and infrastructure that is um

1:03:57not always transparent at the beginning

1:04:00can hold up progress and that starts to

1:04:03be when stakeholders start looking back

1:04:06to government and saying you know we

1:04:07didn't anticipate this can you give us a

1:04:09grant and it brings a lot of stuff to

1:04:11screeching halts so um and I it's just a

1:04:15voice of some experience out West on

1:04:19that issue uh to make Worester aware.

1:04:22Over.

1:04:25>> Thank you, Mary. Um Evelyn.

1:04:28>> So, um I just want to say I certainly

1:04:30respect

1:04:32[clears throat] the apparent opinions

1:04:34and experience of those of you Mary and

1:04:36Pat and Steve who have much more

1:04:39experiences in engineering than I do.

1:04:42Um, I I just want to be a little bit of

1:04:44a devil's advocate here and say, you

1:04:46know, the perfect is the enemy of the

1:04:49good here. And I think that there is a

1:04:53sincere effort on the part of the Healey

1:04:55administration to move in the right

1:04:58direction and start to provide some

1:05:01framework and guidance and priorities

1:05:04about these data centers and that

1:05:07whether we agree fully with

1:05:10the um the way this is worded and I

1:05:14understand Mary's point on the shall

1:05:16versus should as a writer I get it but

1:05:19at the same time I think we need to

1:05:21recognize that this is a good first

1:05:22step. I don't think it's presented as

1:05:25the only step, the final step or

1:05:27anything. They're trying to shape the

1:05:30conversation and I I I think that

1:05:33they've done a good job starting that

1:05:37whatever the weaknesses are that you all

1:05:39are pointing out. That's all.

1:05:43>> Right. Thank you, Emiline Ted.

1:05:46Um yeah, let me try to just first of all

1:05:50regarding should shall that that

1:05:53nuance may may be reacting to what's in

1:05:56writing. Um I may very well have mucked

1:06:00that up in my presentation. Um

1:06:04um but the executive order

1:06:08seemed to be directing various state

1:06:11agencies

1:06:13to to do what they can within their

1:06:16legislative authority to follow the

1:06:18framework which it was written a few

1:06:21months earlier and seems to be more

1:06:24aspirational.

1:06:26Um,

1:06:27and you know, I mean, this is how

1:06:31policy develops, I think. And I agree

1:06:34with with Evelyn that it's a it's a very

1:06:38good start. Sure, there'll be a lot to

1:06:40work out. In fact, um, some of that is

1:06:44in that more more detailed language is

1:06:48is in the executive order. I just didn't

1:06:51repeat it because I I couldn't do it

1:06:53articulately. you know, some of this

1:06:55stuff gets pretty arcane in in the

1:06:58details and and hard to uh convey.

1:07:01So, I think that um I think it is a good

1:07:05first start. Um it seems like that to me

1:07:09the state framework, you know, I

1:07:11couldn't think of anything that was

1:07:12missing from it and um and they seem to

1:07:18hit a lot of the key sustainability

1:07:20points.

1:07:21Um,

1:07:23and so I just uh hold on, I'm looking

1:07:26for a note here. Yeah. Oh, I just, you

1:07:29know, Mary mentioned the towns. I wanted

1:07:32to come back to that too. Um, because

1:07:36with regard to data centers, interest in

1:07:39this subject, you know, it's becoming a

1:07:42a political flash point quickly all over

1:07:45the country. People are concerned about

1:07:48AI and and data centers are the sort of

1:07:51the physical.

1:08:00Oh dear.

1:08:04We we may have frozen Ted.

1:08:11Let's give him a moment.

1:08:21Interesting that he freezes talking

1:08:23about AI.

1:08:24[laughter]

1:08:28>> AI is listening.

1:08:30>> He's gone. He'll be back.

1:08:35Mary, I call on you in the meantime, but

1:08:37I probably want Ted to hear it.

1:08:49I wrote him in the chat that his

1:08:50connection froze.

1:08:52>> Yeah, thank you.

1:08:58>> Any signs of him, Jesse?

1:09:03>> No, I think he dropped off.

1:09:06>> Do you think he knows?

1:09:08>> Yeah, he's not in the waiting room. He's

1:09:10not showing up there yet. Can you all

1:09:12see the waiting room or No. No. Okay.

1:09:15Well, he's up there.

1:09:16>> I haven't looked. [laughter]

1:09:19>> All right. Well, while we're waiting for

1:09:21Ted to come back, um Mary, do you want

1:09:24to

1:09:28>> Yeah. Well, so first of all, I started

1:09:31out with my opinion saying that I

1:09:34thought it was a good first effort.

1:09:37>> Yeah.

1:09:37>> Right. I did say that. So, you know,

1:09:40it's always hazardous providing an

1:09:42opinion here, you know, because I'm

1:09:44doing so in public. I did acknowledge

1:09:46the fact that this is a very that I said

1:09:48it was a a bite out of the elephant and

1:09:51it was a big one. It was a big elephant,

1:09:53right? But the fact is is that we won't

1:09:56make progress unless we are critical of

1:09:58what we are seeing and understand where

1:09:59the gaps are because we may not see

1:10:02further written direction for some time

1:10:04out of the state because it does take

1:10:06some time to to pull that stuff

1:10:08together. In the meantime, the city

1:10:11should be thinking about it and thinking

1:10:12about it critically. So

1:10:15I stand firm on the fact that I see gaps

1:10:18here that Worcester should be thinking

1:10:21about and uh it doesn't mean that healy

1:10:24bad Worcester good. It just means that

1:10:27nothing is perfect and there is no such

1:10:29thing as a perfect communication and and

1:10:31we should be thinking about problems in

1:10:34other communities that some of your your

1:10:37your teammates have already experienced.

1:10:40And this isn't an issue of word smithing

1:10:43and picking on words. And it's not a a

1:10:46matter of because we have deep

1:10:48engineering experience, you couldn't

1:10:50possibly know it. No, we're pointing out

1:10:53things that we already know are out

1:10:55there that are concerns that typically

1:10:58happen with these communities. And I got

1:11:01to say that most of my experience when

1:11:03it comes to uh public private

1:11:05partnerships and these kind of

1:11:06frameworks has happened throughout my

1:11:08engineering career. It doesn't just have

1:11:10to do with public utilities. It's just a

1:11:13matter of program management issues. So,

1:11:17you know, let's let's not try to pin

1:11:20Mary's opinion in a corner. It it's

1:11:22really just we need to be thinking about

1:11:24this. Here are some flaws that are

1:11:26there. And I already know those kind of

1:11:28flaws will be exploited if they're given

1:11:31a chance to be exploited. So, let's get

1:11:33in front of it and let's think about it

1:11:34as a problem instead of saying, "Well,

1:11:37geez, it's a let's wait for somebody

1:11:38else to make it more perfect."

1:11:41>> Over.

1:11:44>> Thank you, Mary. I think your comments

1:11:45were very well received with with the

1:11:48intention that you just expressed as you

1:11:50said them. So, um

1:11:53just just want to put that out there. Um

1:11:56Ted, nice to see you back.

1:11:58Um if you want to continue your thought,

1:12:01you can go ahead. Uh yeah, sorry about

1:12:04that. I just lost the the the

1:12:06connection. Um

1:12:09what where exactly was I when I cut out

1:12:13was talk about to talk about the towns

1:12:15perhaps

1:12:17>> physical manifestation of

1:12:19>> All right. Yes. Thank you.

1:12:21>> Very near the end, Ted.

1:12:23>> Very very good. [laughter]

1:12:26Thanks, John.

1:12:30Yeah, it comes after the beginning

1:12:32somewhere. [laughter]

1:12:35Um, this what I need a heckler.

1:12:39[laughter]

1:12:40Um, yeah. So, I was about to say that,

1:12:43you know, this is heating up as a a

1:12:46political flash point about people's

1:12:49concerns about AI.

1:12:52And you, Mary, mentioned the towns. In

1:12:54fact, since our last meeting, I've read

1:12:57that both Shrewsbury and Grafton

1:13:00are starting to talk about this and what

1:13:03what do they want to do? What controls

1:13:05do they want to put in place?

1:13:08A lot of places are talking about

1:13:10moratoria and and which is temporary and

1:13:14bans which are more permanent. Of

1:13:16course, those have limits as well, but

1:13:19that's the the typical choice is do you

1:13:21ban it or do you try to mandate best

1:13:25practices?

1:13:27And you know, that's a conversation we

1:13:30could have. I think my own view

1:13:33in the city um

1:13:37you know, bands just move a problem

1:13:39somewhere else. Whereas if you mandate

1:13:41best practices, ideally you're you're

1:13:44advancing the industry toward more

1:13:47sustainable practice.

1:13:49Um so so that that's been um

1:13:54my my thought is is to you know to to

1:13:57sort of focus on trying to bring about

1:14:00the best practices that we can um if

1:14:04this becomes an issue here in the city.

1:14:06I agree with what Mary has said. I

1:14:09agree. We need to be very proactive. We

1:14:11need to be on top of it. Devil's in the

1:14:14details.

1:14:16Policy develops over time and part of

1:14:18that is public participation.

1:14:21Um, but as a starting point,

1:14:26I want to offer uh four suggestions uh

1:14:29that that echo what some of the rest of

1:14:32you have have said. Um the first thing

1:14:36would be that um that we the Green

1:14:41Worester Advisory Committee

1:14:44um endorse the state framework and it's

1:14:49um its use and application here. If if

1:14:53if the city of Worcester ends up in a in

1:14:56a position to need to evaluate a data

1:14:58data center proposal,

1:15:01I I think uh it would be good for Guac

1:15:04to endorse the use of the state

1:15:05framework as a starting point in

1:15:07evaluating the proposal.

1:15:10Um that's the first thing. The second

1:15:12thing is

1:15:14um

1:15:16hold on just a second because when I

1:15:19have three things I always forget the

1:15:21third one.

1:15:24Here we are. Yes. So the second thing

1:15:26would be that the the state um executive

1:15:30order

1:15:32mandates no non-disclosure agreements

1:15:34with state agencies.

1:15:37Uh, I would like to see Guacco on record

1:15:39that we do not want to see any

1:15:42non-disclosure agreements between a data

1:15:45center developer and and the city of

1:15:47Worcester.

1:15:49So that if a proposal comes to

1:15:51Worcester, it gets done in daylight and

1:15:54it doesn't show up on the public agenda

1:15:56as a done deal. That's my second point.

1:16:01The third thing I would like to see is

1:16:04that if Worcester's called upon to

1:16:07develop a community benefits agreement

1:16:11and offer local uh welcome to a data

1:16:14center that the department of

1:16:16sustainability and resilience and the

1:16:18Green Worester Advisory Committee

1:16:22be at the table as stakeholders in in

1:16:25developing what that looks like.

1:16:28Okay. And and the fourth thing, and

1:16:31Steve raised this, and I'm I'm glad he

1:16:34did.

1:16:3525 megawws is big.

1:16:38Um, and in fact, I did a little bit of

1:16:40of number crunching. This is very crude,

1:16:44but based on the peak load, peak

1:16:48electricity load for New England is

1:16:5025,000 megawws roughly, and New England

1:16:54population, which is a little bit north

1:16:56of 15 million, 15.4 4 million.

1:17:01That means peak load is about 1.62

1:17:06megaww per thousand people.

1:17:10Um and what that means is that a 25

1:17:14megawatt

1:17:16uh data center is consuming electricity

1:17:19comparable to more than 15,000 people.

1:17:23And this is total load. This includes

1:17:25the commercial, the medical, the

1:17:27industrial. We're just sort of reducing

1:17:30total load to to per capita per people.

1:17:36So in the and using the same numbers,

1:17:39the city of Worcers's peak load is in

1:17:42the neighborhood of 350 megawws.

1:17:45Now

1:17:49Mr. Odell, John may have better numbers.

1:17:52If he does, I hope he'll he'll share

1:17:54them. But I think that gets us in the

1:17:56ballpark of scale and and 25 megawws

1:18:01would be a huge hit trying to add that

1:18:04to the grid. So I would suggest that

1:18:07that we

1:18:10in in terms of the pol the three things

1:18:12that I just mentioned that our own

1:18:14suggestion be that I mean it for any

1:18:18size data center um

1:18:22I think that the framework is a good way

1:18:24to evaluate it but I think we are our

1:18:26threshold ought to be five megawws not

1:18:2925.

1:18:31So I I make all that in the form of

1:18:35a motion or four motions. Uh not sure.

1:18:40Um but that that's what I would suggest

1:18:43we do with this.

1:18:50Okay. Any further question or comment on

1:18:53what Ted is saying?

1:19:00Evelyn.

1:19:02>> Yeah. Um, I'd certainly agree with your

1:19:05first

1:19:06suggestion, Ted. I think the others are

1:19:08getting very specific early on and maybe

1:19:13I don't is is now necessary except for

1:19:16the non-disclosure agreement. That one I

1:19:18also would support, but the other two

1:19:21are extremely specific

1:19:23and maybe jumping ahead too far. I don't

1:19:26know. I just I want to try and condense

1:19:28what we need to accomplish tonight.

1:19:30That's all.

1:19:33>> Um let's go to Steve.

1:19:36>> Um just because it seems like this is a

1:19:38really meaty issue, I wonder if this is

1:19:40something that we might do a a task

1:19:43force on so that we can focus research

1:19:46and come back with more concise

1:19:48proposals to the committee.

1:19:53>> You got a thumbs up from Mary. It's a

1:19:55good idea, Steve.

1:19:58Um, Ted,

1:20:00Evelyn also has a thumb up.

1:20:05All right, so we've got an unofficial

1:20:07vote happening here. Ted, um, did you

1:20:10want to say anything else?

1:20:13>> I did. Um,

1:20:15>> if you want to wait, you can wait. We'll

1:20:17be fine.

1:20:18>> Yeah. No, thanks. Thanks.

1:20:21[laughter]

1:20:23um if if if people want to dig deeper

1:20:26and and develop this further um and come

1:20:30back to it, I'm certainly okay with that

1:20:33because the the more thorough a job we

1:20:36do, the better.

1:20:38Um

1:20:40I also in reaction to what Evelyn said,

1:20:44um

1:20:46there there was a reason for all those

1:20:48those specificities.

1:20:50Um,

1:20:52you know, no NDAs, BSR is at the table,

1:20:56a smaller threshold. I I don't I mean, I

1:20:59took a a while to say it. I can usually

1:21:01say it more quickly the the second time.

1:21:05Um,

1:21:06but,

1:21:08you know, at the very least,

1:21:11perhaps tonight we could we could go on

1:21:13record doing some of that. And if there

1:21:18are things that people feel warrant

1:21:20further discussion,

1:21:22hold off on acting on everything I've

1:21:24said. Um, I mean, an endorsement

1:21:28of the um of the framework as a as a a

1:21:34um

1:21:36an evaluating tool and uh and no NDAs,

1:21:40you know, those kind of seem like

1:21:42no-brainers to me, but you know,

1:21:48that's what I

1:21:49>> Okay, Mary,

1:21:58>> did you hear me? Mary, can

1:22:00>> you're muted.

1:22:01>> Yeah, problems with the uh interface

1:22:04again. I apologize.

1:22:05>> No worries. So, I just I just wonder um

1:22:07so uh I we did get the read aheads and

1:22:10we did have um a brief presentation here

1:22:13and the proposals out to maybe do some

1:22:15more homework on some of this, but so I

1:22:18wonder if we should table the vote on

1:22:20whether or not the committee um says

1:22:23anything about endorsing or or anything

1:22:26of that nature on on the state's memo. I

1:22:29think that might be a little bit

1:22:31premature given the depth of information

1:22:34that that is there and stuff that should

1:22:37be discussed and its limitations. So my

1:22:40suggestion is this is the first time

1:22:42it's formally come up that we don't take

1:22:45a vote on endorsing it right now that we

1:22:47table that to another meeting. Um, and

1:22:50that way all of the committee members

1:22:52can ensure that they've had adequate

1:22:54time to review and and and discuss

1:22:58or have a subcommittee discuss um the

1:23:01ins and outs of what an endorsement of

1:23:03the state's position would mean and what

1:23:05what it would be. So, I I would ask the

1:23:08committee to uh consider

1:23:12holding off on an endorsement. I'm not

1:23:14saying don't endorse. I'm just saying uh

1:23:16this is kind of fast and this is

1:23:18important and maybe we should take some

1:23:20more time before we take a formal

1:23:22position on it. And let me add our next

1:23:25meeting is October 19th which is very

1:23:28close like sometimes our meetings are

1:23:31much farther apart so it's very

1:23:34very close. So do we have

1:23:38do we have a motion there Mary or does

1:23:42Ted want to respond?

1:23:44Go ahead, Ted.

1:23:46>> Um, yeah. I mean, I again I I feel like

1:23:51there's a certain amount of consensus

1:23:53here that

1:23:55we're at least moving in the right

1:23:57direction.

1:23:58Um,

1:24:01I, you know, I've I've made what amounts

1:24:04to four motions. Um, they would require

1:24:07seconds.

1:24:08I guess Mary Mary is moving that we we

1:24:11postpone

1:24:14I forget the Robert's rules of which

1:24:16comes first, but um but I I don't

1:24:22understand if if there's a a downside to

1:24:25just going on record that you know, we

1:24:28could simply say we're we we uh

1:24:32you know, we support the um

1:24:36uh we endorse the state framework and

1:24:39its use here if it becomes relevant.

1:24:43I'm not sure what the objection would be

1:24:45and I and I'm so I don't you know it's

1:24:49great if we want to dig in and and do a

1:24:51thorough job with this and come up with

1:24:53something better but we have something

1:24:56good to start with and again as Evelyn

1:24:59said let's not let the perfect be the

1:25:00enemy of the good. I think that was

1:25:02Evelyn.

1:25:06Okay, Mary

1:25:08>> through the chair this but there's no

1:25:10requirement for us to even respond at

1:25:12all. So why rush something while we're

1:25:15still very much in a discussion phase

1:25:17about it? I think um the information is

1:25:20just being um formally submitted to

1:25:23everybody. Yeah, sure. There's been

1:25:25talk, there's been whispers, there's

1:25:27stuff available on the internet for us

1:25:29to read, but this is the first time

1:25:31we're formally looking at something of

1:25:34great impact and long-term impact to our

1:25:36community. And I think if we are going

1:25:39to endorse a framework, even if we think

1:25:41it's appears on its first blush to be a

1:25:43good framework um and applicable to us,

1:25:47I still think um I think it's it the the

1:25:51right thing to do is to actually be more

1:25:53deliberative because if we aren't, we're

1:25:56going to end up in the the catch-up

1:25:59phase of well, here we are. we've we've

1:26:01endorsed this framework and we've went

1:26:04out on a limit to say that we think this

1:26:06is applicable to us, but maybe it isn't

1:26:09as applicable as we thought or maybe

1:26:11we're finding more um fallacies rather

1:26:14than truths to our particular

1:26:15circumstances. I just don't think we've

1:26:17done our diligence to be honest with

1:26:19you. I think a brief presentation and a

1:26:21couple of uh very quick readroughs for

1:26:24me doesn't get my endorsement of

1:26:26anything. So, and I think it doesn't um

1:26:29from an ethical point of view for me, I

1:26:32can't support endorsing that framework.

1:26:34Even if in a month I I say, "Yep, okay,

1:26:36I feel much better about this. I I'm I'm

1:26:39happy to raise my hand and say I endorse

1:26:41it." I don't feel like even though I've

1:26:43got notes on it that I've done my

1:26:44diligence yet to give a vote to give an

1:26:46opinion and and do that on effectively

1:26:49on this on behalf of the folks in my in

1:26:53my district that that I that I'm sitting

1:26:55on this committee for. So, I think

1:26:57people expect me to do my homework and I

1:26:59feel like the homework's part none. And

1:27:01I don't know that everybody else has

1:27:05maybe everybody else has uh read through

1:27:07everything thoroughly and convinced

1:27:09themselves that they're satisfied to

1:27:10give their endorsement. Maybe they are,

1:27:13but you know, I I just feel like I feel

1:27:16like we're rushing to an answer for a

1:27:18question that isn't being asked. No

1:27:20one's asked us to give their opinion.

1:27:22We're offering it up. and are we really

1:27:24offering it up in an in an an informed

1:27:27way? Well, partially informed.

1:27:31So, that's where my hesitance comes

1:27:32from.

1:27:35>> Okay. As we're approaching 7 o'clock,

1:27:37we'll take one more comment on this for

1:27:39Evelyn and then we will

1:27:42have to make some decision.

1:27:43>> Yes. I I I think Mary makes a very

1:27:46compelling case and I agree with exactly

1:27:49the way you've expressed it Mary and

1:27:51we've spent an awful lot of time talking

1:27:53about this already and we're not

1:27:55anywhere near any kind of conclusion. So

1:27:57I would you know suggest and thank Ted

1:28:01really for taking the time to bring all

1:28:03of this to us and the thought that

1:28:06you've put into it and let's take the

1:28:09time to do the homework as Mary has

1:28:11suggested. Thank you.

1:28:14Okay. So,

1:28:16go Ted,

1:28:19since it was your thing, you'll get one

1:28:20more last word. This the last last word.

1:28:24>> Well, just you know, in terms of

1:28:26process,

1:28:28um

1:28:29if if the motion is to postpone

1:28:31discussion, you know, take that. I guess

1:28:35um

1:28:38um I I'll want to see it on the next

1:28:40agenda and and we can we can come back

1:28:43to it in the future. No, no one actually

1:28:46seconded my motion. So you you know, you

1:28:49can't do anything until someone does

1:28:51that. And it sounds like this is moving

1:28:53towards uh let's come let's study it

1:28:55some more and come back to it.

1:28:58But with regard to

1:29:00why we do this and no one asked us for

1:29:03our opinion, we're we're advisory and

1:29:06the the whole point here is to be

1:29:08proactive

1:29:10because if someone comes in with a big

1:29:13proposal three weeks from now and they

1:29:15want an NDA and you know five weeks from

1:29:19now our next meeting that's in the past.

1:29:22So that's that's why I'm eager to to get

1:29:25things done here. Um, you know, our job

1:29:29is to advise the city on sustainability.

1:29:31That's what we're trying to do.

1:29:35>> Okay. So, on on Ted's motions,

1:29:40there were no seconds, and they weren't

1:29:42we really didn't define them as motions

1:29:44anyway. We were just talking about

1:29:46thematically.

1:29:48Um,

1:29:49>> well, I did

1:29:50>> before. Well, we didn't write down the

1:29:53words like we've been doing, saying we

1:29:55have a motion that says exactly this.

1:29:59And for um for the sake of argument

1:30:05on any of the three, were they spelled

1:30:08out specifically? Would we have any

1:30:10seconds?

1:30:14Okay. So, seeing none, we're going to

1:30:16put those aside. And I want to echo

1:30:20everybody else's comments, Ted, to thank

1:30:22you because your work on this is what

1:30:24got us to this place. And I think this

1:30:26is a really good place and a really

1:30:28constructive conversation that we're

1:30:29having.

1:30:31So with that um the suggestion is to

1:30:38make a subcommittee to discuss this over

1:30:41the course of the next several weeks.

1:30:46Sorry.

1:30:49Um, and then that group could bring

1:30:53that discussion with perhaps some

1:30:56motions or perhaps not if they're not

1:30:57ready um to our next meeting.

1:31:03Does that kind of um capture what you

1:31:06were thinking, Mary?

1:31:10I don't know. We we don't have a motion.

1:31:12Am I making the motion or do somebody

1:31:14else want to make the motion? Okay.

1:31:15>> Motion

1:31:17motion to uh through the chair. Motion

1:31:19to establish a subcommittee on data

1:31:22centers to report back to the green

1:31:24worester advisory committee at before

1:31:27the next meeting

1:31:31that

1:31:33>> through the chair. So in terms of

1:31:35process remember we make a subcommittee

1:31:39um we end up against open meeting law.

1:31:43Um, if we have an ad hoc group, it's got

1:31:46to be limited to three people. I feel

1:31:49like we might have more than three

1:31:51people here that are interested in this.

1:31:53I'm not I'm just not sure

1:31:56how we uh we proceed expeditiously.

1:32:01I agree it might be good to work some of

1:32:03this out outside of a meeting so, you

1:32:06know, we come in with more of a

1:32:07consensus. But you know,

1:32:11>> well, let's ask um if we form an ad hoc

1:32:16group, who would be interested in

1:32:18participating in that group?

1:32:21>> I would through the chair.

1:32:23>> Okay, we have 10.

1:32:24>> Maybe just raise the hands.

1:32:26>> And we have Mary.

1:32:31>> We have 10. And we have Mary. Okay,

1:32:34we're not gonna exceed the three people.

1:32:36>> Well, okay. So, uh, we you're suggesting

1:32:40that I mean it's open to up to three

1:32:44people,

1:32:45>> right?

1:32:47>> Um,

1:32:48>> I recommend that we do have three

1:32:50people. Um,

1:32:53I will do it if if nobody else is really

1:32:55passionate about it.

1:33:01Okay. So, that's what we have. Two Marys

1:33:04and Ted.

1:33:05>> Okay.

1:33:07Okay,

1:33:08>> thank you all.

1:33:09>> So,

1:33:11do we need Did somebody say something?

1:33:15>> Okay,

1:33:15>> you said thank you for volunteering

1:33:17especially you under uh you know just

1:33:20fill that committee Mary.

1:33:22>> Okay.

1:33:24Um my pleasure. So, we're going to form

1:33:28the the subcommittee. So let's have um

1:33:31we have Mary's

1:33:33motion to form the subcommittee to meet

1:33:36and present. Do we have a second?

1:33:38>> Second.

1:33:39>> Evelyn second. We'll vote on this.

1:33:44Um Mary N. Yes. Evelyn. Yes.

1:33:48>> Yes.

1:33:50>> Since you seconded it. U Pat Austin.

1:33:53>> Yes.

1:33:54>> Ted Connor.

1:34:01Are you saying yes, Ted?

1:34:02>> Sorry, I was muted. Um, yes. I, you

1:34:05know, yes, because that's what we're

1:34:06going to do. [laughter]

1:34:09>> Mary Leovich,

1:34:12>> yes.

1:34:13>> Steven Macaulay,

1:34:15>> yes.

1:34:16>> Dear Murphy,

1:34:18>> yes.

1:34:19>> Okay,

1:34:24I think that that's fabulous.

1:34:27So, the three of us will

1:34:31email

1:34:33tomorrow because I have a meeting to go

1:34:35to tonight when we finish this um and

1:34:38set something up and begin our

1:34:40discussion and prepare something for our

1:34:42next meeting.

1:34:44So, with that, we thank you and

1:34:46everybody, we thank you for your

1:34:47patience as we sorted that out. It went

1:34:49way over time, but I think it had to.

1:34:52So,

1:34:55John and Jess, sorry. [laughter]

1:34:59Um, can we move on to item number four,

1:35:02public participation, community

1:35:03engagement? Is there anybody has

1:35:05anything that they would like to offer

1:35:08in this space?

1:35:16Okay. Then we will move on to

1:35:19um project updates from the department

1:35:21of sustainability and resilience.

1:35:26Ted,

1:35:26>> hold on, chair. With regard to community

1:35:29engagement, there was there were letters

1:35:31we had received

1:35:33>> that I thought uh uh we were told Jesse

1:35:36was going to summarize those.

1:35:40>> I don't think it's coming out of

1:35:41community engagement, is it?

1:35:43>> I thought that's where it did come up.

1:35:45>> Oh, okay. It wasn't that I was going to

1:35:48summarize them. It was we had

1:35:51um DSR internally spoke with Evelyn and

1:35:55Mary about a plan for what to do with

1:35:57the letters and it was determined that

1:35:59summarizing the letters during public

1:36:01comment period would be um appropriate

1:36:04and that's what Evelyn and Mary wanted

1:36:06to do. So that's what we sent the email

1:36:08about.

1:36:09>> Okay,

1:36:10>> that is correct through the chair. That

1:36:12refreshed my memory. Yeah, one of you

1:36:14was going to do it. I could I could do

1:36:16it, but I I didn't want to just sweep it

1:36:19under the rug.

1:36:21>> Okay. Um would you like to do it, Ted,

1:36:23since I have not read them recently?

1:36:25>> Uh if Evelyn agrees to that,

1:36:30>> we just I'm thinking either that or we

1:36:33would postpone it till our next meeting

1:36:34because it's not timely.

1:36:38>> We can do that. I I'll do it very

1:36:40quickly. Um the and the I've seen these

1:36:43letters. The the letter writer is a

1:36:45person that I know. Um I'm going to I

1:36:49I'm I'm going to summarize them in just

1:36:51a few words. One of them was really

1:36:54focused on um good uh stewardship of the

1:36:58city's trees and the other one uh was

1:37:01focused on light pollution.

1:37:04And um both letters contain suggestions

1:37:08that I do not think are actionable and

1:37:11uh and I I've spoken to the the writer

1:37:15and I've told him so that both of them

1:37:18also contain suggestions that I that I

1:37:20think are good and um

1:37:24I'm not prepared to go into it at this

1:37:27meeting. So that is what I was going to

1:37:29suggest that you know maybe take a

1:37:31closer look and and put some some of the

1:37:34good ideas on a on a future agenda.

1:37:39>> Okay.

1:37:41Thank you, Ted.

1:37:43Did anybody else look at them and want

1:37:45to make a comment?

1:37:50>> Okay.

1:37:52Well, then we will move on to the

1:37:55department updates. please.

1:37:58>> Uh thanks Mary. Um so through the chair

1:38:01um I'm going to defer the zero waste

1:38:03program update and the first item under

1:38:06energy smart energy advice if uh Jesse

1:38:10uh could play point on those and walk us

1:38:13through them.

1:38:14>> Sure. Thanks John. So first up is

1:38:17zerowaste events out to lunch report. So

1:38:20I've brought this up uh recently a

1:38:22couple times. So, we had our zerowaste

1:38:25coordinator and our intern out at um

1:38:28some of the out to lunch events this

1:38:30summer and they went really well. Um

1:38:33overall 50 lbs of food waste were

1:38:36collected and composted.

1:38:38384 pounds of recyclables were diverted.

1:38:42Um because currently there's only trash

1:38:45bins there. So, this was adding

1:38:46recycling bins and compost collection

1:38:48bins there. and Taylor and Zach, our

1:38:51intern, actually stood near the bins to

1:38:53make sure they were sorted correctly.

1:38:56Um, and that w that went really well.

1:38:59And it was a collaboration between four

1:39:02community partners. Downtown Worcester

1:39:05BID that uh collaborates with the city

1:39:08to plan those events. Um, Black Earth

1:39:10Compost Collected and Wind Waste

1:39:13Innovations helped by donating

1:39:15compostable wear to give to the food

1:39:18vendors. And this year, 18 new food

1:39:20vendors adopted compostable service wear

1:39:24uh for their meals. And next year, we're

1:39:26hoping to have all 10 events be zero

1:39:29waste. This year, we only did a few, I

1:39:32think maybe three. Yeah, three events um

1:39:35because Taylor was still getting

1:39:36onboarded and we were getting things set

1:39:38up. So, it went really well and next

1:39:40year we hope to make all of them your

1:39:42waste.

1:39:44That's that for the out to lunch event.

1:39:47Then for the city manager clean team

1:39:49events,

1:39:51um wanted to give just a summary of how

1:39:53the summer events went. So we in June we

1:39:56did Union Hill and Lower Grafton Street.

1:39:58In July we did Lower Pleasant Street.

1:40:01August May Street and Park a

1:40:05gave the summer a total of 98 bags of

1:40:08litter collected and 74 bulk items

1:40:11removed from these Worcester

1:40:13neighborhoods. and a lot of great

1:40:15volunteers spending their time helping

1:40:18to clean up and beautify the city which

1:40:20we greatly appreciate.

1:40:23Um, next up is our campaign was to

1:40:27recycles, right? It's an upcoming

1:40:29outreach effort that we're working on.

1:40:32Recently, our contamination has

1:40:35increased in our curbside recycling

1:40:37bins. The city services one to six unit

1:40:40buildings and that curbside recycling

1:40:43has um higher contamination rate than it

1:40:46previously did and we have decided to do

1:40:50an outreach and enforcement effort to

1:40:53reduce the contamination to get those

1:40:55things don't belong in the bin back out

1:40:57of them. We think there's probably a

1:40:59variety of reasons why it's increased.

1:41:01We are hoping that doing this enhanced

1:41:05outreach will really help with that. So,

1:41:08we're going to do social media, press

1:41:11releases, newsletters, all of the online

1:41:15typical outreach that we do. And then

1:41:17we're also going to be hitting the

1:41:19streets. We are creating door hangers

1:41:23and going to walk through neighborhoods,

1:41:26check on bins, see which ones aren't

1:41:28sorted correctly, put flyers or stickers

1:41:31on them to explain this is, you know,

1:41:34kind of a warning. This is what um is in

1:41:36this bin that shouldn't be in the bin.

1:41:38And uh we have outreach materials to

1:41:41give out. So we'll be doing that

1:41:44throughout October, beginning of

1:41:46November. And then we'll have a time

1:41:49frame where if your bin is still

1:41:52contaminated after all this outreach

1:41:54efforts, it won't be collected anymore

1:41:56because the city can't be collecting

1:41:59this recycling that's really

1:42:01contaminated. It's unsafe for workers

1:42:03that work in the recycling facilities.

1:42:06It's more expensive for the city to

1:42:08manage that waste as well. So, there's

1:42:11lots of reasons. That's a summary of the

1:42:14campaign. And we're actually going to be

1:42:16looking for volunteers to help us walk

1:42:19the streets. And Evelyn has kindly

1:42:22volunteered her husband who is dedicated

1:42:24to keeping our city clean. And we'll be

1:42:28out there and um I'm going to send you

1:42:30all an email call for volunteers. And if

1:42:33you can also forward that along to

1:42:35others, anyone who's interested. And

1:42:37it'll be from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. a

1:42:40couple days. and you can come when you

1:42:42can and have a little clipboard and

1:42:44we'll hand out flyers and door hangers

1:42:47and hopefully um help people understand

1:42:49how to recycle. Right.

1:42:51>> Yes. Volunteering your partner is

1:42:54encouraged. [laughter]

1:42:56>> Exactly.

1:42:58>> I I have a question, Jess. Is there

1:43:01>> um

1:43:03have they are they able to identify any

1:43:06particular neighborhoods? Um, are

1:43:08tenants are they tenants or homeowners,

1:43:11single family, multif family? Are there

1:43:13any of those type things that

1:43:15um are indicators more frequently?

1:43:19>> Yeah. So, we do quarterly audits with

1:43:21Cassella, our recycling hauler, and they

1:43:25um sort through the waste by day, by

1:43:27collection day, and Wednesdays and

1:43:29Fridays are consistently the highest

1:43:31contamination days. So those are the

1:43:33areas of the city that we'll be

1:43:35canvasing with the flyers and door

1:43:37hangers.

1:43:39>> Okay?

1:43:40>> Because obviously we can't do the whole

1:43:41city with a small group of volunteers.

1:43:43So we're targeting the most highly

1:43:45contaminated areas.

1:43:47>> Okay. Thank you, Ted.

1:43:52Yeah, I'm I'm just um um the

1:43:56contamination,

1:43:58you know, I see a lot of it in my

1:43:59neighborhood and I I when I see my

1:44:02tenants do it, I give them a hard time.

1:44:05If the penalty is just that we don't

1:44:07pick up the bin, um that seems like it's

1:44:11creating a new kind of problem. And I'm

1:44:14wondering if there's any

1:44:16um thought of of doing some civil

1:44:19enforcement. You know, can you issue

1:44:21something like a parking ticket uh for

1:44:24people who don't, you know, respect the

1:44:26the rules about recycling because it,

1:44:29you know, in Maine South it it it ends

1:44:32up on the street. It makes the

1:44:34neighborhoods ugly, yada yada. We all

1:44:37know. Um but, you know, can can we

1:44:40actually penalize people who do it? And

1:44:42I realize as a landlord that I'm gonna

1:44:45get stuck in the middle of this because

1:44:46the city often blames the landlord for

1:44:49what the tenants do. But I can turn

1:44:52around and and and put that in my lease

1:44:54and if my if I get a ticket, my tenants

1:44:56get to pay for it

1:44:58if they if they're to blame. You know,

1:45:01we got to start somewhere.

1:45:04>> Yeah, I understand your point. We're

1:45:07going to start here. Um, and we did this

1:45:11campaign, a very similar one in 2022,

1:45:13and it was very successful. It turned

1:45:16out really people just needed uh one

1:45:18week of their recycling not being picked

1:45:20up to realize, oh, I don't want to keep

1:45:22all of this at my house an extra week.

1:45:24And it worked really well. The

1:45:26contamination decreased significantly.

1:45:28And we're hoping that we can replicate

1:45:30that again. And that by doing education

1:45:33and enforcement, that will be sufficient

1:45:35to get the contamination rate down. And

1:45:38hopefully we don't need to pursue

1:45:40another avenue like you suggested.

1:45:49>> All right. Thank you, Jesse. You can

1:45:51carry on.

1:45:52>> Sure. Did you want to ask another

1:45:55question, Ted?

1:45:57Well, I was just going to say I imagine

1:45:59[clears throat]

1:46:00the when the city has to enforce that

1:46:03kind of suggestion, it it it probably

1:46:05costs more than it's worth

1:46:08except as a symbolic thing. I think

1:46:10that, you know, the the fact that you

1:46:12you can be penalized might help motivate

1:46:15people to behave better. But, you know,

1:46:18I agree the the the what is it? honey is

1:46:22attracts more flies than vinegar or

1:46:25something like that. There's, you know,

1:46:28I get the point and good luck.

1:46:32>> Thank you.

1:46:35>> All right. So, I'll move on to energy

1:46:37then. Y

1:46:39>> um so quick update smart energy advice.

1:46:42As per usual, we've been writing those

1:46:44brief reports on what outreach

1:46:46activities we've been doing monthly. So,

1:46:49the past two months have been busy with

1:46:50tableabling. The summer is always really

1:46:52busy because there's so many events. Um,

1:46:54so Gabby was at a couple of the out to

1:46:57lunch events and national night out. She

1:47:00also tabled at Wester Community Action

1:47:02Council, the community clinics that

1:47:04they've been doing. Did that a couple

1:47:06times and continuing our partnership

1:47:08with the National Grid Customer

1:47:10Advocates. It's been really successful.

1:47:12So, she's been still tableabling with

1:47:13them. And that's all in the report if

1:47:17you want to read it, but it's pretty

1:47:18brief, just an update on what we've been

1:47:20doing. Um, and the second one, we wanted

1:47:22to share the press release that went out

1:47:25announcing our grant, the community

1:47:27first partnership grant that primarily

1:47:28funds the smart energy advice program,

1:47:31we could officially announce it now that

1:47:34all of the contracts and everything have

1:47:36been signed. And uh we're really excited

1:47:39to have this funding through the end of

1:47:412027 to keep this program going that we

1:47:44think is really having a positive impact

1:47:46and helping a lot of people. So that is

1:47:49the quick report for smart energy

1:47:52advice. Happy to take any questions.

1:47:57>> Thank you Jesse.

1:48:01So, picking up the ball from there, um I

1:48:04will uh move on to the green schoolworks

1:48:07grant uh award. Um, believe you guys

1:48:10have uh seen this in both in the

1:48:12attachment and you uh may have heard me

1:48:15talk about this before, but we were

1:48:16awarded a 2.7 plus million dollar grant

1:48:20to do some um uh air to water source

1:48:25heat pumps over at the City View School,

1:48:27which is the primary um implementation

1:48:30measure that we'll be taking there.

1:48:31There'll be some other um uh efforts

1:48:35there too to uh do some uh insulation

1:48:39work and other related ancillary work

1:48:41that need that needs to be done for

1:48:43that. But uh it's a it's a great award.

1:48:45It's the biggest a single award that

1:48:46we've ever gotten. It was very

1:48:49competitive. So we're very happy to have

1:48:51gotten it. Um and so uh we hope to move

1:48:54forward uh to implement that award

1:48:58through our uh ongoing uh esco project.

1:49:02So that'll be uh uh hopefully we can get

1:49:05moving on that so that if we time

1:49:07everything well we can uh start the work

1:49:09this summer and then this coming summer

1:49:12in 27 and then finish the work in 28 the

1:49:16summer of 28. So,

1:49:18>> more to come on that as we as we process

1:49:20through that, but that's but that's a

1:49:22good news. Um, electric vehicle uh

1:49:26charging installation project update.

1:49:28Um, you may have seen the press release

1:49:30that just went out um today. Uh, we are

1:49:35increasing our portfolio of EV charging

1:49:39stations, city-owned EV charging

1:49:41stations by about 75%. Uh we're adding

1:49:44stage four five new locations uh four

1:49:47through one particular grant um that uh

1:49:51allows us to do them on street and then

1:49:53we're also doing um at the uh Great

1:49:57Brook Valley um in the parking area

1:49:59there which has just been refurbished uh

1:50:02and we installed some uh units there as

1:50:04well. They'll all be uh or are being in

1:50:07the process of installing them. We've

1:50:08got all the um electrical work done for

1:50:12the Great uh Brook Valley. We're just

1:50:14putting in the uh units and and getting

1:50:16them charged uh activated, I should say,

1:50:18shortly. The rest of the work for the

1:50:21other four locations will happen uh it's

1:50:23actually started already today over I

1:50:25happen to see on Russell Street. That's

1:50:27the first one and that'll run through uh

1:50:30December as we get the other four

1:50:32locations up. But once completed, uh we

1:50:34should have a total of 52 uh EV charging

1:50:38station ports available for uh folks in

1:50:41the city owned by the city that are

1:50:44actually owned by the city as well.

1:50:45Plenty of other locations beyond that,

1:50:47but the city owned ones. Um and then the

1:50:51last item under energy and uh if there's

1:50:54any questions on these three after um

1:50:57but just wanted to let folks know about

1:50:58the aggregation price change uh

1:51:00effective with the October bills.

1:51:02Believe I mentioned this at our last

1:51:04meeting. Uh rates have uh going to go

1:51:07down to a little over 14 cents a

1:51:09kilowatt hour for the supply side which

1:51:11is down um almost 10% from what it was

1:51:16uh which is a pretty significant

1:51:17reduction on the supply side. Uh, and so

1:51:21that will take effect uh you'll note it

1:51:24in your October bill, but it actually

1:51:26affects your September usage. So that's

1:51:28uh uh just to let people uh we let

1:51:31people know. We've done a whole social

1:51:32media blast on that. But it's a it's

1:51:34good news um for keeping rates uh a bit

1:51:38lower um especially coming into the

1:51:40winter season uh for folks uh uh who

1:51:43heat with electricity in particular.

1:51:45It's a it couldn't come soon enough. So,

1:51:48>> any questions on the electricity side or

1:51:51energy side, I should say, before I move

1:51:53on.

1:51:53>> Ted has a question.

1:51:55>> Sure.

1:51:56>> Um, yeah. Um,

1:51:59that's certainly good news in terms of

1:52:02of cost, but when I read the fine print,

1:52:05it sounded like

1:52:08the reason the cost come come came down

1:52:11is that

1:52:13the sort of the new projects have kind

1:52:14of ground to a halt. and we were paying

1:52:17a little premium to to advance

1:52:21additional

1:52:23um renewable energy projects. So that so

1:52:26that now the the aggregation program is

1:52:30I think it was just sort of buying the

1:52:32sort of windrex for projects that

1:52:35already exist. Do do I have that right?

1:52:37It's I think it's worth understanding

1:52:40some of the nuances of of how this stuff

1:52:42develops.

1:52:45you partially right. Um you're right in

1:52:48that what we ended up doing is we were

1:52:51buying class one Rex which are

1:52:53essentially renewable energy credits

1:52:56that are uh from um

1:52:59uh renewable project projects that are

1:53:03local in New England um and and

1:53:05particularly in Massachusetts. Uh so uh

1:53:08and the idea is that the buying these

1:53:10incentivizes the installation of more of

1:53:13these uh applications. The difference in

1:53:16what you said though is that it's um uh

1:53:20the seed money that these provide

1:53:23essentially is no longer needed and

1:53:24hasn't been needed actually for a few a

1:53:26few months now. And the trend has been

1:53:28that there's been so many new projects

1:53:31that are come online, they're coming

1:53:33online without the incentive. And so the

1:53:36idea here is um at least for the near

1:53:38term and we can always go back uh but

1:53:41for the near term we weren't getting any

1:53:43value out of paying extra is basically

1:53:47the in if the incentive is not

1:53:48incentivizing anything anymore why are

1:53:51we spending more it was the argument and

1:53:54that's the ultimately we decide well but

1:53:56then we probably shouldn't and so we

1:53:58went back to still buying those uh clean

1:54:00energy renewable energy credits just not

1:54:02the locally sourced ones we're buying

1:54:04them from um uh uh uh wind power out

1:54:08west uh specifically if memory serves

1:54:11the think upstate New York um and so

1:54:13those are much less money and so that's

1:54:15how we can pass those savings on but

1:54:17that's the context

1:54:20>> um yeah through the chair I noticed also

1:54:22that the the difference in cost between

1:54:26basic green standard green and 100%

1:54:29green

1:54:30has has contracted to just fractions of

1:54:33a cent

1:54:35And you know, I'm already on 100% green,

1:54:38but at this point it's it it costs very

1:54:41little more to do that, which I I would

1:54:43think that why doesn't everybody do

1:54:45that? It might be worth promoting that.

1:54:47Um while while that's true, obviously it

1:54:51might not always be true. Um

1:54:54but uh yeah, that was great. I I um the

1:54:58other thing I wanted to just uh mention,

1:55:01you know, I'm I'm I'm um I I my concern

1:55:06about the specialized code um remains

1:55:10high

1:55:12and I know that there was a plan to try

1:55:15and do some developer outreach to

1:55:18um

1:55:20um to to to sort of just make sure

1:55:24people understand it and expedite

1:55:27people, you know.

1:55:29>> Ted, does this have to do with the

1:55:31aggregation?

1:55:31>> It has to do with energy,

1:55:34>> but not the aggregation.

1:55:35>> It's not the aggregation. It has to

1:55:37>> All right. Let's make sure that John has

1:55:39a chance to to finish.

1:55:42>> Oh, well, I thought Yeah. Okay. If

1:55:44there's more on aggregation, I'll I'll

1:55:45wait.

1:55:47>> Right.

1:55:48Are we I mean before we're bringing up

1:55:51something new because

1:55:53>> we really at this hour at 7:30 now and I

1:55:59don't know if we really

1:56:01he might have an update further on with

1:56:03these things. You you tell me John,

1:56:06>> but I want to stick to the agenda so

1:56:09that we can I have a place to be at 7

1:56:11o'clock myself. So let's uh

1:56:14>> you're late if it's seven

1:56:15>> agenda. [laughter]

1:56:17Yeah, let's stick to the agenda if we

1:56:19don't have an update on something.

1:56:22>> Yeah, I don't I didn't prepare anything

1:56:24for the specialized code because it was

1:56:25not on the agenda. So, I don't have

1:56:27anything there.

1:56:28>> Okay.

1:56:29>> But I can uh we can table that for now

1:56:33and it certainly can be put on a future

1:56:35agenda if that's uh the request of the

1:56:38um committee. Um

1:56:39>> okay, we'll get to that part.

1:56:41>> We'll get to that. Yeah. So, in terms of

1:56:43the lakes and ponds program, um just

1:56:46want let folks know that the project

1:56:48blue worester uh which is the uh report

1:56:51that we would be doing on the local

1:56:53watersheds uh the three water the local

1:56:56wersheds that feed into Wister. Uh that

1:57:00report is uh getting closer and closer

1:57:03to near final. Um and we hope that by

1:57:06the end of uh certainly by the middle of

1:57:10next month um we would have that as near

1:57:12final and at that point we will set up

1:57:15uh public meetings on that draft plan

1:57:17which would come shortly thereafter. So

1:57:19look for that. I expect I'll have very

1:57:21specific dates for for at the next

1:57:23meeting. Uh but in case um they come out

1:57:26earlier, we'll be sure to send them so

1:57:27that you can plan accordingly, give

1:57:29yourself a little extra lead time. But

1:57:31most likely in the back end of October,

1:57:33early November is what we're expecting

1:57:35at this point. So, more to come on that.

1:57:38Uh,

1:57:39moving on to resilience. Um, our

1:57:42municipal vulnerability preparedness

1:57:44grant award. Um, again, I think I

1:57:47mentioned this last time, but just to

1:57:49reiterate that, uh, we did receive a

1:57:51$900,000

1:57:53uh, award, which was great. So, we've

1:57:56gotten just doing the quick math in my

1:57:59head, about $3.6 6 million in grants

1:58:01that we've received over the last um uh

1:58:04couple months. Uh which is this 900,000

1:58:07is going to allow us to complete uh

1:58:10phase three of our basically it's our

1:58:13storm water management plan. um which is

1:58:16hugely uh important in both in terms of

1:58:20um uh allowing us to uh plan our um uh

1:58:25understand our uh or how our system

1:58:30works uh for managing storm water. Um it

1:58:33also will allow us to u much better

1:58:36identify the key locations for both gray

1:58:39and green infrastructure improvements.

1:58:42Um and even do the kind of analysis that

1:58:45allows us to know if we solve one

1:58:48problem here or we inadvertently

1:58:49creating a a a new problem downstream

1:58:53from that. We can we can address all

1:58:55that under one model which is pretty

1:58:58exciting. What we're hoping to do with

1:59:01this phase in particular is to do all

1:59:04the calibration and validation work. Uh

1:59:07basically hoping that we get a few

1:59:10>> intense but not overly intense storms.

1:59:13Uh nothing that will cause damage but

1:59:15intense enough that we can actually

1:59:16check and make sure that the model what

1:59:18we the model predicts is actually based

1:59:21uh in reality. So that's uh to come. Uh

1:59:25it's a it's a this one's a good one too,

1:59:27I think, for the long-term uh benefit

1:59:28for the city. Probably has uh potential

1:59:31to save literally millions of dollars

1:59:34over time in terms of to being smarter

1:59:36about our green and gray infrastructure

1:59:38projects.

1:59:40Um,

1:59:42and then the last item uh that I was

1:59:44going to talk to you about is on our uh

1:59:46Wister green jobs video. Uh, as part of

1:59:50our phase two of the, uh, municipal

1:59:52vulnerability plan, the MVP plan, MVP

1:59:56project, I should say, we put together a

1:59:59video. I would recommend that if you get

2:00:01a chance, the website's right there on

2:00:03the agenda uh, uh, on the agenda there,

2:00:05the green Wister green jobs. Take a look

2:00:08at it. I think it's about 12 or 13

2:00:11minutes. Uh it's really well done,

2:00:14professionally done. We've sent it to a

2:00:16variety of folks to spread the word. Uh

2:00:18the key people we did hear back from the

2:00:20tech high school in particular, which

2:00:22was obviously a

2:00:24>> folks we wanted to send this to. And not

2:00:26only did we get the um s the uh

2:00:29environmental class to be a strong

2:00:32endorser of this and very appreciative

2:00:34of it, sent it to the principal and he

2:00:36said that he's going to show it to every

2:00:38incoming freshman uh that goes that they

2:00:41that they have that runs through their

2:00:43whole program. So that's about 350 kids

2:00:45who are in the process right now of

2:00:47selecting what avenue they want to

2:00:50explore. And this, I think, gives them a

2:00:53uh uh a real tool in the tool shed to to

2:00:57promote this kind of uh uh focus in in a

2:01:00future career. So, we're we're pretty

2:01:02excited about this one, too. Um so, take

2:01:04a look if you haven't seen it already. I

2:01:07don't say this lightly. Um you know,

2:01:09some of these are good, but this one's

2:01:12really good. So,

2:01:13>> Okay,

2:01:14Evelyn.

2:01:18>> Yeah. I just want to emphasize I've seen

2:01:20the videos and they're they're really

2:01:22great and they're very um uplifting

2:01:26and wonderful testimonials to get people

2:01:28thinking about green jobs. So job well

2:01:30done.

2:01:31>> Thank you. And a quick shout out to our

2:01:33former member Nate Fornier who's uh

2:01:35highlighted one of the people uh come is

2:01:38in the video and speaks well. It's worth

2:01:42just seeing Nate. The guy has not

2:01:44changed a bit. He is in fact perhaps

2:01:46even more enthusiastic in the video than

2:01:48you've met him in real life. And that's

2:01:50hard to do. So that that's a uh as

2:01:54strong as an endorsement I as I can

2:01:56give. It's it's it's good stuff. Um and

2:02:00that's all I've got. Uh so uh uh turn it

2:02:03back to you, Mary to the chair.

2:02:06>> All right. Thank you, John. There's a

2:02:08lot of good news in there today, so

2:02:10thanks for hanging in there. Um

2:02:16any everybody have anybody have any more

2:02:18questions about any of those items?

2:02:22No. So um for informationational

2:02:26purposes we had placed on and were there

2:02:28anything that we noticed coming up on

2:02:31the city council and school committee in

2:02:33the next couple weeks.

2:02:34>> Anything relevant to the [clears throat]

2:02:36plan now?

2:02:37>> Okay. Thank you.

2:02:40>> So

2:02:40>> to the chair.

2:02:42Um I I noticed a couple of things um

2:02:45tucked into one of the August city

2:02:48council agendas. I don't always

2:02:52scan through these carefully because

2:02:54it's a lot of work. Um but I happened to

2:02:56do it the other night and um so there

2:03:00there were two things of interest. I

2:03:02can't I'm just going to mention what

2:03:03they are. Um the one was from it was a

2:03:07petition from a couple of people

2:03:10including Stephanie Cavino who is

2:03:12another former Guac member who now leads

2:03:17the Blackstone River Watershed

2:03:19Collaborative. I believe she's the

2:03:21director.

2:03:23Um it and it concerned uh

2:03:27posing questions about the development

2:03:29of a long-term control plan for CSOS.

2:03:33So, I I that's as much as I've got. I

2:03:35don't know anything more, but it's

2:03:37something apparently that that uh

2:03:39certainly um might be of interest to us.

2:03:43And and um and the other was uh someone,

2:03:47I forget who

2:03:50asking the city manager for

2:03:52recommendations

2:03:54how we can avoid lake closures.

2:03:57And this is the cyanobacteria and all

2:03:59all of that stuff that you know, I'm not

2:04:02sure

2:04:03I mean, I

2:04:05we could the recommendations are way

2:04:08back upstream, you know, don't don't

2:04:10don't put stuff in the water,

2:04:13but uh but that it's it's on the

2:04:16political radar and I thought we should

2:04:18uh we should just take note of that.

2:04:20That's all.

2:04:23>> Okay. Thank you, Ted. Um what's a CSO?

2:04:27>> Combined sewer. Uh

2:04:29>> oh, okay. Yeah. Combined sewer overflow.

2:04:33>> Overflow. Okay. Yeah.

2:04:34>> It's the It's the older part of the city

2:04:36where the storm water and the sanitary

2:04:40sewer flows in the same divided pipe.

2:04:44>> Yeah. I I had a sense that that's what

2:04:46it was, but I wanted to be sure.

2:04:48>> Yeah.

2:04:49>> Okay. So, then do we have any um items

2:04:53for consideration on a future agenda?

2:04:56Ted wants to know about the stretch

2:04:59code.

2:05:00Um yes through this three things on my

2:05:04list data centers update on specialized

2:05:09code um outreach and um

2:05:13to to return at some point to the uh I

2:05:18want to give those letters that we

2:05:20received

2:05:22a a fair hearing and see if there's

2:05:24anything in there that

2:05:26we want to come back to. So, you know,

2:05:29I'd like to

2:05:31have the committee's authorization to do

2:05:34that when we're ready.

2:05:36It was uh the the issues were were tree

2:05:39care and light pollution.

2:05:43>> Okay. So, in my interpretation of the

2:05:46letters, which weren't necessarily

2:05:47addressed to us,

2:05:49>> they were to departments. So,

2:05:52>> CC No, CC to us. That's right.

2:05:55>> Right. So,

2:05:58I feel it's probably prudent to find out

2:06:00what the department's replies were or

2:06:02responses before we and and maybe invest

2:06:08after that.

2:06:10Is that reasonable? Do we know what the

2:06:14outcomes of these letters were to the

2:06:15people they were sent to?

2:06:18>> Uh through the chair, no. As it sits

2:06:21right now, no.

2:06:23All

2:06:26right. Um,

2:06:29>> you're the chair. I wasn't promising to

2:06:31be ready for that at the next meeting.

2:06:34>> Yeah.

2:06:35>> I would just like I mean, you know, we

2:06:37vote on these things tonight, but then

2:06:38we can add things later.

2:06:41There's a bunch of different ways things

2:06:42get on our agenda. So, I'm not this one.

2:06:45I don't want to burn too much air on it

2:06:48right now.

2:06:49>> Okay. So, we have the data centers

2:06:51already. We [clears throat] can ask for

2:06:53an update if there's anything new on the

2:06:55stretch code.

2:06:57>> Specialized code.

2:06:58>> Do we pardon

2:07:00>> uh for clarification? Specialized codes.

2:07:02>> Specialized stretch code. Yes. Do we

2:07:04need a a vote on that?

2:07:08>> I think you could just do it.

2:07:10>> Okay.

2:07:10>> You don't need to.

2:07:12>> You could do unanimous consent.

2:07:15>> Anyone opposed?

2:07:17>> Yeah. Is anyone opposed to getting an

2:07:18update on the outreach for specialized

2:07:21stretch code? No. Okay, good.

2:07:26Um,

2:07:29any other items that people are

2:07:30interested in?

2:07:32>> Just going back. I don't get a vote on

2:07:33that one, right? Just

2:07:37>> No.

2:07:38>> Through the chair, John, do you want a

2:07:40vote on that one? [laughter]

2:07:42>> I don't have to do a report. I will

2:07:44always say that. I don't want to do

2:07:46that. Could could I just clarify through

2:07:48the chair when when when I ask for a

2:07:52report, I'm not a verbal report is good

2:07:56to me. I don't I don't need a something

2:07:58in writing. I'm not trying to make extra

2:08:00work for you guys. We just want to know

2:08:02what's going on.

2:08:08Okay. Um, one item that I'm interested

2:08:12in discussing sometime in the future is

2:08:15about the volunteer groups that plant

2:08:18things at traffic islands and how

2:08:20they're maintained and who's responsible

2:08:22for them and um how we appreciate them

2:08:26or

2:08:28there was an incident with one recently

2:08:30and I I just feel like it impacts our

2:08:34purview here and not urgent but I would

2:08:37like to talk about that one time.

2:08:45So, um, just for clarity, so we know, do

2:08:48we need to, uh, do you want us to

2:08:50include that for next month or is that

2:08:52or is that just something we're

2:08:53>> I think while we've got the data

2:08:54centers, we've got a lot to talk about,

2:08:56but I think if an opportunity comes up

2:08:59maybe to whoever is responsible for

2:09:01those things or whatever the the

2:09:03pathways that some of those things

2:09:04happen, we can talk about how that's

2:09:08going. But I I think with the discussion

2:09:11about the data centers, we don't want to

2:09:12overwhelm you and we don't want to

2:09:13overwhelm ourselves. Is that fair to

2:09:17everybody?

2:09:18>> So through the chair. So we won't be

2:09:20putting it on the agenda specifically

2:09:21just for our sake. Uh

2:09:23>> right. Just be think about it.

2:09:24>> Got it. Thank you.

2:09:25>> Got it.

2:09:27Okay. Anybody have any updates, events,

2:09:30and programs that are not DSR

2:09:32sanctioned, organized, or provided at

2:09:34this time?

2:09:39Okay, I see nothing mentioned. So, I

2:09:43would like to remind you all that our

2:09:44next meeting is October 19th. And thank

2:09:47you all for your time and attendance

2:09:49today.

2:09:50We have a motion to adjourn this very

2:09:54lengthy meeting. Evelyn, who

2:09:57>> move?

2:09:58>> Jesse, you can't second.

2:10:00>> Second. [laughter]

2:10:01>> Dearra seconds.

2:10:04Oh, anybody opposed?

2:10:07Okay, thank you everybody. Have a great

2:10:10night. Be well. Thank you.

2:10:12>> Thank you, Mary.

2:10:13>> Bye.