Committee Report #1 - Jan 27, 2020 Cambridge City Council

ORDINANCE COMMITTEE - Wed, Dec 11, 2019

Hearing called to order at 2:10pm

Attending: Carlone (Co-Chair), Devereux, Kelley (Co-Chair), Mallon, Siddiqui, Zondervan

Call of the Meeting: The Ordinance Committee will meet to conduct a public hearing on a proposed municipal ordinance entitled “Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings”.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Good afternoon everyone. Thank you for coming to the Ordinance committee meeting. The Ordinance committee has a quorum. We are joined by me the chair, Vice Mayor Devereux, Councillor Zondervan, Councillor Carlone, Councillor Siddiqi, various city staff and a whole bunch of people in the public. The call this meeting is the Ordinance committee will meet to conduct a public hearing on a proposed municipal ordinance entitled prohibition of natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. Everyone should have, at least, all the council should have two sets of documents in front of them. There are also documents in the back. One is, on the front of it, titled Ordinance committee, it says committee meeting agenda. There are four items in that, that's got the call of the meeting at the top. And the other one, it starts off with a City of Cambridge office of the city solicitor letter, and that is dated today, Dec 11, 2019. So those are the two sets of documents. The first set the ordinance committee, committee meeting agenda, one, those are all things that the clerk had in time to put on the agenda. The other ones he did not get in time to put on the agenda but they will be part of the record.... And at some point... I am looking for the first time now at the Dec 11, 2019, law memo from the law department. We will probably take a break to read that. But we're going to start with a comment by me that the meeting is being audio and video recorded. There are attendee and speaker signup sheets. If a member of the public does not wish to speak, please indicate "no" on the speaker signup sheet that's on the table to the left of that barrier as you look at it. If members of the comments have written... if members of the public have written comments, please ask them you to leave them with the city clerk or to email those comments to the city clerk. The format of the hearing will be as follows the petitioners will be heard first, in this case, sort of the lead behind this is Councillor Zondervan. We have city staff who can provide their input. After both Councillor Zondervan and city staff councillors will have the opportunity to... I didn't see you Councillor Mallon over there when introduced everyone, I apologize, I can't see that far with my glasses on or read at the same time. And then after that clarifying questions, we will go to public comment. Public comment is limited to three minutes per person. And then we will close public comment and bring it back to the committee for discussion. It is a two hour meeting. So we will be done at four o'clock if not earlier. So, with that being said, I'm going to suggest that we take five minutes to read the Law Department’s memo. And then when all the councillors are looking up, I'll assume that we're ready to go on to hear from Councillor Zondervan. Councillors finished reading the legal memo yet? Okay, so after you finish the Law Department memo, Councillor Zondervan if you would take a few moments and explain this and I believe also you wanted to read your email as well.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you, to my colleagues and members of the public. First, I would like to frame this conversation a little bit and say why we're here and why we're trying to ban burning of gas in new buildings. Earlier today, one of my friends and Cambridge resident, Sue Donaldson, was arrested, protesting the Weymouth compressor station, which as you may know, is compressing gas to move it through pipelines at high pressure and is an example of new gas infrastructure that's being built in our state. When we know that burning natural gas causes climate change, and is primarily derived from fracking, which causes all kinds of environmental destruction, as well. Also, earlier today, Time magazine announced that the Person of the Year for 2019 is Greta Thunberg, is a 16 year old climate activist, who was traveling the world mostly by sailboat and train to let people know that this is a very urgent issue and that if we fail to take action, her future and those of people her age is... is forfeit. So we have in Cambridge a That's your action plan. And I'm parts partially responsible for its existence. And it is a very good plan. And it will make a big difference in our response to climate change. And it anticipates that future buildings will be net zero emissions, meaning that they will not contribute to climate change through their operation. So if we are already planning to do that, and if our scientists are telling us that we have about 10 years to drastically reduce our emissions, and we have our young people striking and protesting, and we have our old people protesting and striking and getting arrested. Why on earth would we build another building in Cambridge that burns natural gas? And if we were to do so, we would know that we would have to rip out that gas burning infrastructure in the very near future, which wouldn't make any sense. So this summer, Berkeley, California was the first municipality in the country, to my knowledge, to pass a ban on gas combustion in newly constructed buildings. And I have taken that language from Berkeley and adapted it, to the best of my abilities, to Massachusetts with the help of my colleague, Councillor Siddiqi. And earlier this fall, Brookline, Massachusetts passed a very similar warrant article in their town meeting that is also based on the Berkeley language originally, although they did make some amendments to it. So I'll give you a quick overview of the proposed ordinance and it is relatively simple. It's only three pages long. And it applies to the building... the inside of the building, it does not attempt to regulate the utilities or the pipes that would be running to the building. This is all behind the meter regulation and we do not believe that it interferes with the building codes or the energy codes in any way. And it basically says natural gas infrastructure shall be prohibited in newly constructed buildings. That's the main provision. And then it does have some exceptions. So it it says it may be permitted in newly constructed buildings if it's not physically feasible to construct a building without natural gas infrastructure. So, if a developer were to come forward with a building proposal, and it simply wasn't possible to build that building without having gas consumption in the building, then it would be allowed under this ordinance. And it also has a public interest exemption as well. So that if someone were to say, build a hospital, and were to say that it requires burning gas to operate a hospital, and our city could find that it was in the public interest to allow this hospital to be built and to burn gas, despite the existence of this ordinance. And if there is an exemption... it does have... it's very narrowly tailored so it would allow for gas to be provided to that specific appliance or use in the building but not, suddenly, generally to the building as a whole. That's pretty much it in terms of the proposed ordinance, and they'll be some time for... for a few questions. I'm sure. We did receive some letters that I would like to share as well. We received a letter from Harvard University that asks some questions. We asked... we received a letter from the Chamber of Commerce that asks us not to pass this ordinance. We received a letter from Jacob Knowles, an architect with a lot of experience building, all electric and net zero buildings. That was very supportive of The proposed ordinance. And then we received a communication from the Massachusetts Coalition for Sustainable Energy. And I did a little bit of research on that organization. And I sent a letter to the clerk, which I believe... it's available on the agenda, but he didn't want to send it to all of you because of the Open Meeting Law. So I want to just read my memo really quickly so that you're aware of what it says. Dear Mr. Wilson, please convey to my colleagues on the council the following information. The Massachusetts Coalition for Sustainable Energy, despite its name is in fact a front group for natural gas interests, as can be seen from their website, specifically the text below. And I won't read all the text but the important part is, it says expanding or natural gas access the most affordable and cleanest alternative is the best way to backstop our transition to renewable energy. So from that language, expanding our natural gas access, and the most affordable and cleanest alternative, both of which are false statements, we can see that this group is in fact fronting for the natural gas industry. And then I also included a couple of articles in the media that further make that case. So that concludes my remarks for now. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much Councillor. Does any councillor have a clarifying question for Councillor Zondervan? Councillor Siddiqui.

Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui
Thank you, Mr. Chair through you. I wanted to quickly provide an additional note on what Councillor Zondervan said. We had a prior meeting to this, where we discussed this topic. And something that came up was this question of, in my opinion, how... how can we do something that is practical and ideally, make it work for everyone? And the closest example we have to us is Brookline. So I think we did talk to, we did say, you know, we... we want to know how it's worked in other cities, what are the differences, and so forth, because I know in Brookline, there's been... their bylaw has exemptions as they are setting up... they would like to set up a new board for hardship waivers, you know, med labs are exempted, and so forth. So I think what we don't see from the proposed language is that this is a step forward in the conversation. There's a lot more conversation to be had on how this... what it could look like. And so we now have some more feedback from [sic] the Solicitor's Office. So I think this... there's folks who've submitted testimony say... saying don't pass this, don't pass that. There's really... we're trying to think about what it could look like and go from there. Because it is a very complex issue and something that all of us care about. So I just wanted to put that out there. I think people are like, oh, we're going to pass this ordinance today. Just want to let people know that it's... there's a huge interest in this and that there's a lot of... there's some details that we have to figure out. Councillor Craig Kelley Thank you other clarifying... Councillor Mallon. Councillor Alanna Mallon Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, just to build on what Councillor Siddiqui was saying, I have been spending a few days looking at Brookline’s Article 21 and their suggested bylaws that are now being reviewed by the Attorney General's office. And there are some significant exemptions in there that, you know, I think this is a conversation we're starting and having with the community, but in speaking with Brookline board members, they have over 30 meetings with various committees and external stakeholders to get to a place where there wasn't.... There wasn't anybody that came and spoke against this bylaw when they voted on it. I think that's a testament to the tremendous amount of community support and effort that they put into figuring out the exemptions that might work, figuring out how this could work in the best interest of the impending climate change and what we need to do to get to reduce our emissions by 2050. The state standards, I think this is a really critical conversation, but I do want to underscore what Councillor Siddiqi said and allay some fears. This is a starting point and I appreciate the Councillors that have put this forward in particular, I think... I...when I looked at the the ordinance language that was, you know, based on Berkeley, it does feel a little light. So I think this is a great place for us to talk about what that looks like to fill it in for here in Cambridge and what we need to do to move forward. And I want to thank the City Solicitor for putting together this idea that we need to have a home rule legislation because I know the pushback in Brookline has been that this undermines a key purpose of the state utility law ensuring that residents can access a gas service and only the state can regulate utility. So it will be interesting to see what the Attorney General does come back with on Brookline, but I think it's important for Cambridge to be pushing on this, as the Attorney General is looking at that. So I look forward to the conversation today. I look forward to the many conversations that will come after this to put together something for Cambridge that will really work. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you. Other clarifying questions? Okay, does anyone from the city staff, I think particularly Miss Glowa from the Solicitor's Office, want to come and give a brief overview of what the city staff thinks about this?

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The only thing I wanted to add is that cities have the authority under state law to pass ordinances without approval by the Attorney General. But town's bylaws must be approved by the attorney general. So I just wanted to clarify for this body that the Brookline bylaw is not in effect. We have spoken with the attorney general's office, they are presently reviewing it. They don't anticipate a decision until March or so. But I just wanted to clarify that to the extent that there may be any misperception about whether that was precedent that could be useful to us, because until the AG has spoken, I don't think it meets that standard. And otherwise, I think the legal analysis is pretty straightforward. I'm happy to answer questions. But it is our analysis that it is... would likely be found to be preempted by state law. If this were challenged in court.

Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development
Through you Mr. Chair. I just wanted to add one item that we had spoken about when this was discussed in Committee, which is going... just looking at the California example. And one of the major differences between Massachusetts and California is that at the state level, California is looking at all of the various building types and essentially making determination of what building types, at what point, are able to be able to essentially function without the gas connection. So the building... that building profile analysis is being done at the state so that then communities are able to reference those. So if you look at the... the ordinances that are adopted in California, they are essentially not making all buildings subject right away. And in some ways, as Councillor Zondervan pointed out, our net zero action plan lays out a pathway for us, but then we also have an assessment process before the requirement gets triggered for each of the building types. But we don't have a state agency in Massachusetts that is either currently doing that analysis that is happening in California and nor is... nor do we know that there is that intention at the state level.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Councillor Carlone.

Councillor Dennis Carlone
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Your last statement Ms. Farooq was very powerful that there is no study going on. And we know with the plastic bag ban and other issues that many of these things have to start in the towns and the cities to get action. In fact, the state in California didn't seriously look into this until word of Berkeley was coming forth that they knew these meetings had started. And I think that's what we're trying to do today is to get the process going, sending out a strong message just like in Brookline. You know, I suffer from asthma.

Councillor Craig Kelley
I'm sure there's a question. Clarifying one there.

Councillor Dennis Carlone
Didn't I ask question. The question was, when did California begin and I guess I answered it. I apologize. But is it not true? I'll make it into a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair, my fellow chair. I'll make it into a question. Isn't it true that it has to start somewhere and the state is nowhere near where we are or Brookline is in this issue?

Iram Farooq
Through you, Mr. Chair, I'm not sure that you... I think you... this is a rhetorical question. I can't speak for the state.

Councillor Dennis Carlone
Well, you mentioned that the state is not looking into this. So I'm just asking this... isn't this the way it's supposed to begin? And as someone who is affected by the quality of air I'm tired of waiting for a state that has to be pushed. So my question is Isn't this the way that it's done that the cities and towns push on subjects that are needed locally? From a planning point of view? All right, I'll change the question. What is the staff's opinion about the merits of pushing this proposal forward? You have a strong environmental staff who are advocating change. And what is their opinion on on this matter, as their leader?

Councillor Craig Kelley
Can, can I interject? I don't know that that's a clarifying question. We'll get the policy questions later. But questions...

Councillor Dennis Carlone
I was looking for a question in my comment to satisfy your request. I'll wait. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thanks. Councillor Zondervan.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I do have a couple of questions about the legal opinion. And forgive me since I'm not a lawyer. So some of these might be a little simplistic, but it's my understanding from reading the memo that the requirement for a home rule is triggered by, by to essentially two objections, one that we cannot regulate the utilities in our city. And two that, we cannot supersede the building codes. And so I would appreciate a little bit of explanation on both of those because it's my understanding that we're doing neither. So if you could clarify on why this would be interpreted as regulating utilities since it only impacts the inside of the building, and then second, why it would be interpreted as superseding the building code. Since we are not requiring specific equipment or specific building techniques, we are simply prohibiting a certain type of equipment which I believe we have the power to do. So we undoubtedly prohibit all kinds of stuff in our buildings like lead paint or something else that I don't know about. So I'm just trying to understand the legal theory a little better as to how these... this ordinance would conflict with those two provisions.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Through you, Mr. Chair, I think it's a little hard to answer with the kind of technical analysis or detail that I think you're asking. This has more to do with general principles of preemption, and the fact that the state regulates public utilities, and the State Building Code regulates construction of infrastructure related to provision of utilities. So, for example, on page three, we talked about the inspection and regulation of buildings being done through the building code. And the... that would include building permits that you would need to get for this kind of infrastructure. So if we had this ban, it would be a local regulation that would prohibit somebody from getting a State Building Code permit that they would otherwise, presumably, assuming they meet the other criteria, be permitted to get under the State Building Code scheme. So because the state does regulate the issuance of building codes, sorry, building permits for those functions, that would be the type of preemption that courts would usually look upon. And the same thing would be true with respect to public utilities that the state has indicated an intent to regulate the provision of utilities through public infrastructure and how it's delivered, how it's sold, how the infrastructure works, and all of those things. So I, I apologize, I can't really get into more technical details than that. But I do believe that, looking at the cases that we've cited that pertain to these issues, generally, and our understanding of how a preemption analysis works under legal principles, we feel that unfortunately, that that's not within our Home rule powers at this time. As I said, if it's the council's wish, we could certainly prepare a draft Home rule petition for the council to consider. But I don't believe at this time that it's within your Home rule authority to regulate these two areas.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Great, thank you. So if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying it doesn't so much technically depend on what we're trying to do. But... but just more generally, that these areas are regulated by the state and so we can't interfere with a regulation at all.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Through you, Mr. Chair. I feel like they're two questions to the second question. Yes, we can't interfere. To the first question. It might matter what you're trying to do. And that's where, you know, the devil is often in the details. So we would look at what... what it is, in any given circumstance that the council was trying to do at a local level and see whether there was preemption by the state. In terms of this ordinance that we reviewed, it appears that it would conflict with the state preemption of these areas.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thanks. It sounds like that's particularly related to the building permit issue.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Three, Mr. Chair, I think it's both the building permit issue and the regulation or restrictions upon the provision of public utilities specifically here natural gas.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thanks. Yeah. But again, this is my non legal opinion but we are not interfering with provision of natural gas to the building were simply prohibiting its use inside the building. Regarding the... the building permit, would it be less preemptive if we didn't denied a building permit but prohibited the gas infrastructure in some other way in that... in that construction So, for example, I was reviewing section 15.12.020, which seems to regulate in our municipal code... that seems to regulate issuing a permit for gas and plumbing work during construction. So we could for example, say that we will deny any such permits that involve adding or modifying gas in new construction.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Through you Mr. Chair. Respectfully, I think that is along the same lines of what... what this ordinance is already proposing to do, which is restricting the ability of that property occupant to use natural gas.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
So I have one question and it is sort of along the same lines that Councillor Zondervan was asking. And it goes to how far we can go before we're preempted by the thoughts on utilities. And I don't know if we have this but if we were to pass an ordinance that said something like you can only use low flow showerheads. Would that be the sort of thing because water is utility? I understand that we run our own utility, but in theory is that the sort of thing that a municipality couldn't do because that impacts a utility that's governed by the state.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
Mr. Chair, I'm not an expert in all things technical, but I do believe there is some regulation about low flow shower fixtures already at either the state or federal level, at least in terms of how they're sold and some instructions on... that they are meant to be sold that way. I don't know. I'd have to look at whatever it is the council was proposing. And then we'd have to analyze it against the backdrop of the existing legal framework to be able to more specifically answer that question.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Okay. I apologize for the hypothetical, but I didn't get this until not that long ago. So I didn't have enough time there. Either do my research or prep you to do yours? And then a related question, as you talk about Home Rule petition. Can you just outline what the aspects of a home rule petition are.

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
A home rule petition will be a petition to the legislature saying that the municipality wants to be permitted to do something that would otherwise be prohibited under state law. And for the legislature to give authorization to that municipality or if there was more than one, those municipalities to have that legislation, even though it only affects that one or number of municipalities, not all municipalities statewide.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you. And does that mean that the legislature votes on it, as the Senate and representatives and then the governor signs it or vetoes it, and then it's subject to an override, like other legislation?

Nancy Glowa, City Solicitor
I don't know about the override part, but the rest of that is the process. Yes.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Okay. Thank you. Other clarifying questions? Okay, seeing none will go to public comment. Public comment is an opportunity for people to share their thoughts on this issue. Please, don't share your thoughts unless you're speaking so no clapping, no booing, no snapping. We want everyone to feel comfortable at the podium sharing their opinions. We have a number of people signed up, the time limit is three minutes per person. If I call your name and you've decided that you don't want to speak please don't feel any obligation to do so. The first up is Susan RedLich, followed by Bill Actly from Eversource. It looks like... I think I might of got the last name wrong. Followed by Kathy Leflash and I will wave my arms and do something other dramatic, otherwise dramatic when you've got about 15 seconds left and then you will stop at three minute. Okay. Introduce yourself, where you live and then start speaking.

Okay, thank you. I'm Susan Redlich. I've lived in Cambridge for over 30 years and I'm a environmental planner with a background in public health. I'm currently active in the group mothers out front and 350 Massachusetts. I would like to add to your deliberations the importance of working out this proposed ordinance for reasons of environmental justice. By allowing the continued use of default methane gas in new construction, the city is in effect placing the burden of respiratory illnesses on the most vulnerable populations here and elsewhere. Wells, pipelines and compressor stations are disproportionately located in low income minority and marginalized communities, where they may leak gas, endanger health, while producing no local benefits. Gas combustion, for example, and kitchen stoves generates oxides of nitrogen that increase asthma risk and aggravate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. It also releases CO2. The documented health effects of these toxic contaminant releases cannot be avoided by people living in these communities. In addition, the indoor releases from kitchen stove gas top... kitchen stove gas carries an airborne contaminants that exacerbate asthma. We would be forcing children who might live in new affordable housing stock here in Cambridge to be exposed to these dangers. As a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine makes clear physicians consider the expansion of natural gas infrastructure to be a grave hazard to human health. Despite the specific contaminants, details of the specific contaminants are document in a letter from the Greater Boston physicians for social responsibility to Governor Baker. Okay. Despite the letter and letters from 100 Massachusetts Boards of health about the health risks of natural gas, state agencies and Governor Baker have not been responsive. All the more reason for municipalities such as Cambridge to act as elected officials, the council has a power to prevent more emissions and to do it with speed, a distinct advantage over the utility industry response time. Last week, the UN environmental protection... environmental program report made clear that the only way to stay below the 1.5 degrees threshold of global temperature rise is to make dramatic emission reductions of methane and CO2 by at least 7.6% per year. When I was born, the global mean amount of atmosphere of CO2 was 310 parts per million. By the time my daughter was born, the figure was 354 parts per million.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much Your time is up. Next speaker is Bill Ackley, followed by Kathy LaFlash. Followed by John Bunopane, make sure the mic is on and you have three minutes, introduce yourself and speak.

Okay, thank you very much and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today. And your focus on clean energy. I'm here representing Eversource energy, a natural gas and electric utility. It serves 1.7 million customers here in Massachusetts, begin by stating that we are unequivocally aligned and fully support the move to cleaner... and cleaner energy future and share your goal of working to reduce carbon emissions. We have demonstrated this not only words but in actions. We are the number one provider of energy efficiency in the nation, which is the foundation for how we get to where we need to get to a greenhouse gas reductions. We're delivering 70 megawatts of clean utility scale solar across 22 sites in Massachusetts. We're expanding EV charging stations, advancing battery storage technology, partnering with [sic] to deliver up to 4000 megawatts of offshore wind. And today Eversource has announced its industry leading goal to be carbon neutral by 2030. We're investing also in the resiliency and modernization of electric grid and enabling clean distribute energy to be optimized and delivered to all our customers. Our responsibility as a regulated gas electric utility to ensure our customers have safe, reliable, affordable and increasingly cleaner energy to meet their needs. From the hottest summer day to the coldest summer night. We have an incredible team of men and women working here for Eversource that are on the job 24 seven to make this happen. With this we have a deep understanding of what it takes to meet our region's energy demands, and the complexities and independencies required to be successful.

With that we are raising concerns this ban as proposed will have serious unintended consequences, both economically as well as environmentally higher costs both to electric and gas customers, affecting the local economy. Having increased demand on electric generation grid that is not keeping up with the Clean Energy capabilities, and even on the coldest winter today, we are forced to use more oil and coal to meet our demands. Natural gas is the most affordable, reliable and flexible option for our customers' heating, hot water, cooking and other needs. It has played an important role in achieving the progress we made this far to reduce carbon emissions. And current efforts are underway to optimize utilization of things like renewable natural gas, and pursuing pilots to reduce use during the demand days on peak cold days. We commend the city's efforts to reduce carbon emissions and the fact that this has increased the dialogue necessary to address climate change. I am respectfully requesting and urging the city to consider more engagement and collaboration, a perspective on collaboration exists for Eversource where in the last several years we've engaged the mothers out front. The result of those collaborations have moved us to new regulations in Massachusetts to affect higher middle leaks and accelerate to repair them. And recently, assessing developing and now proposing formally a pilot. For district geothermal heating in and cooling in the state of Massachusetts. Natural Gas still has an important role to play as a... as part of the balanced approach to these efforts, especially as new technologies continue to make it cleaner and more efficient. This proposed zoning ordinance will not only help us achieve... will not help us to achieve our goals. We request you to consider a more balanced approach.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Okay, thank you very much. So next up is Kathy LaFlash followed by... Kathy LaFlash followed by John Buonopane, followed by Daniel Wong. And when you've got 15 seconds left, I'm going to waive this white piece of paper in front of me. So you know you have 15 seconds left and then you can stop at three minutes.

Thank you. My name is Kathy LaFlash. I'm the president of the New England Gas Workers Alliance. We represent hundreds of utility workers from Boston to the Berkshires. We are an opposition of the proposed amendment regarding the prohibition... prohibition of natural gas infrastructure in new buildings being considered before the council. The Alliance is an umbrella organization of local unions. Our primary mission of this organization is to improve safety and working conditions for the members of our local unions, to improve reliability and efficiency in gas... in gas operations and to protect the public, first responders and our environment. We applaud the city for their action on the pressing issue of climate change and agree it's an existential threat to our cities and towns. Our members are committed to working with elected officials and advocacy organizations to reduce the environmental impact of natural gas.

There are many opportunities to improve the safety and efficiency of natural gas infrastructure in Massachusetts. However, the amendments before the council will disproportionately impact some residents, while accomplishing a little of an impact to climate change or improve the conditions of our natural gas infrastructure. Natural gas is a clean burning fuel. It is safe, reliable and efficient, if properly maintained and staffed. Mass already has the cleanest and lowest carbon producing power generation systems in the nation. Primarily because of natural gas. Natural gas is twice as clean as coal and produces almost half of the carbon dioxide it does as when it's burned. Using it to generate electricity can dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as opposed to power plants fueled by oil coal because natural gas requires a minimum processing and can be efficiently delivered by pipelines, its production and delivery consumes less energy than many other fuel sources. It's a mistake to lump natural gas in with oil. While natural gas is not as clean as solar or wind. It is the cleanest fossil fuel energy source available.

New technologies such as carbon capture is available to make natural gas even cleaner. The decision to ban natural gas connections in Massachusetts also makes little sense because of the power it is replaced in schools, hospitals, restaurants, homes and businesses by electricity, which is the Commonwealth is generated for the most part by fossil fuels that at higher cost to the community. The decision will further exacerbate Cambridge's affordable housing problems. By increasing construction costs for new construction, it would chill affordable development. The result of this will impact Cambridge's poorest residents at the most. Mandating a switch to electricity for heat, hot water and appliances will be very expensive for homeowners, business and renters. Massachusetts has already had the highest energy prices in the nation. For example, the American Gas Association pointed to federal protections, allowing an average northeasterner's home heating electricity this winter would cost $1391 as compared to $712.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Your time is up. The next up is John Buonopane. Followed by Daniel Wong, followed by... there's a Ginger Ryan that signed up but did not say whether she wanted to speak or not. Yes or no? No. Okay, followed by Audrey Schulman. And I'll do this high tech wave the white paper thing when you've got fifteen seconds left.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you members of the committee. My name is John Buonopane. I represent a number of people who work at different gas utilities throughout the state. I'm also a representative... representative of the New England Gas Workers Alliance, so I'm going to kind of maybe repeat a few things that Kathy just said. But I have to say when it comes to the effects of climate change, we understand that people want to do something now. Want to do something drastic. We care about the environment. Our members care about the environment. Them and they're in their families live on this planet, just like everyone else. So we do care about the air people breathe in the environment that we live in. But we think a long term balanced energy approach is the right answer. It's what we would call a just answer, an effective answer. Banning an energy source, like natural gas is not the right answer. Treating natural gas use the same way as home heating oil, or coal is warm. And you probably know the natural gas is a much cleaner energy source than home heating oil and coal. I don't say this sarcastically. But I'm not sure where this city is on home heating oil. I know throughout the Northeast, I believe home heating oil accounts for over 40% of home heating energy. So I think it's wrong to compare the two and I think it's wrong to single out natural gas. I think the focus should be on exploring different types of technology, different ways to address climate change, the focus should be on the areas where we can all work together. I think it will be much more productive. And in the end, I think we'll all get to the right place.

We don't have to do something where you could potentially put a lot of people out of work. And that's a real possible impact. When when you're talking about ordinances like this. You don't have to do something that may substantially increase how people heat their homes or heat the hot water. This isn't California. People use a lot more energy in the winter time. We all know that, we understand that. I know I've seen numbers where... that the cost is double when you're comparing Gas and Electric. So I really hope you rethink this and take a look at maybe going another way and taking a different approach. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Daniel Wong, followed by Audrey Schulman, followed by Melissa Ludtkey. And you have three minutes.

Thank you Mr. Chairman and Council members. Daniel Wong longtime resident of Cambridge currently living in Inman square. I'm so proud of this city. We lead on so many issues, particularly in the climate space. In 2009, the city council declared a climate emergency and this is another opportunity for us to follow on that action. It is a climate emergency. We do need to take drastic measures. Not only for ourselves, protect our own health for people with asthma, people could be developing asthma to prevent flare ups that have been happening in Andover, or it happened in North Andover, Lawrence and Brookline, but also for the future. As one of the youngest people who have spoken today. I'm extremely concerned about how, myself, my friends and their kids and my friends who are even considering not having kids, because they're so concerned about the climate. I urge the council to work together with other advocacy groups like 350, mothers out front in Cambridge to make this as aggressive as possible, because it is that urgent and that serious. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Audrey Schulman, followed by Melissa Ludtkey, followed by Patrick Barrett.

Hey, I'm Audrey Schulman. I'm the co-executive director of HEAT. It's local nonprofit in Cambridge, we work to reduce emissions by driving systems change. I've worked in Cambridge doing, you know, for HEAT, for 12 years now, and lived here for 30 years. I've personally worked on 10% of the nonprofits in Cambridge to reduce their emissions and trained over 3000 volunteers, most of them in Cambridge. We are a learning organization and we love to be wonky. And we've become experts on energy efficiency, solar, gas leaks, and now geothermal. I would say that this, you know, I do all this work for my kids. And I agree with the previous speaker that this work is urgent because of the urgency though and because of the national attention that these first few towns that pass a gas... a ban on the East Coast are going to have, we have to do this right. We have to ensure success and happiness for all in this move to electrification of buildings. Brookline had over 30 public meetings, I strongly suggest that the city does also and that they convene stakeholders to be able to, you know, address all the concerns, to make sure that we do this in a way that everybody is happy with. And heat would be happy to convene that, if that is, you know, I know the Cambridge energy alliances is here. But if there's any desire, HEAT would be happy to convene those stakeholders to have these discussions. We want to make sure that we do this right. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Melissa Ludtke. Followed by Patrick Barrett, followed by Jason Alves.

Hi, I'm Melissa Ludtke. I'm a member of Mothers Out Front. And I wanted to just thank Audrey for her comments site. I think that sense of convening us as a community, as, as many communities in this city, to, as they say, do this right, is essential. And I welcome that as both a citizen of this city and also a member of mothers out front. I'm also a writer. And as such, I didn't write anything before I arrived. So I've just made a few notes and I want to speak to those observations. The word existential, as a writer, I don't believe should ever be followed by the phrase, "but here's the reason it shouldn't happen."

Existential is really a serious word and we ought to take it seriously. We can't just be throwing it around because it's the new word on the block for climate change. And say, Yes, we feel it's existential but here all The reasons why we shouldn't act on it. Existential literally means it threatens our existence, as a species, not our planet's existence, our planet will do fine once our species gets out of the way and stops doing the things we are doing to hurt it. I live in an all-electric house. I live with an energy saver heat pump. The reason that I can afford to do that, because I also live on social security and a tiny pension from years of working, is that I also live with energy efficiency. I've taken out my dryer, I hang up my clothes. I've taken out my dishwasher. I wash them by hand. I know there's controversy about that. I turn off lights, I pull out plugs. I'm able to make it work because I care. I care about what's going to happen for my child. A few other observations, natural gas, let's stop using that word. Let's start talking about it as fracked gas because that's what it is today. Go look at any of the lines where they have crossed. This is not my grandmother's gas. This is fracked gas. This is something that is impacting the people enormously where it is being fracked out of the ground. And it doesn't stop along the way. Bob Ackley knows and... knows about the leaks. He's been working with us to fix the gas leaks. People know about what happens at this compressor station and why people are being arrested this morning in protest of what's going to happen to children around it. So I just want to leave you with the thought that yes, let's convene conversations let's do this right. But also let us not give in to the pressure that we are going to feel now that people understand.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much, your time is up. Next is Patrick Barrett, followed by Jason Alves, followed by Nancy Donahue.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Patrick Barrett, 41 pleasant Street. I'm not gonna say much more than what other people have said on this ordinance. Although having read it a few times now, there's some things that I have questions for this board in terms of implementation. You may not know but Eversource Electric and Eversource Gas are two different entities. Eversource Gas is actually a delight to work with. They are on time, they are efficient, they are problem solving oriented. Eversource Electric is a different animal. Typically, they'll pull nothing more than 800 amps system through the through a network power before you have to start using things like switch gear and pad transformers. These add exorbitant cost to buildings but in areas that are already developed, like all of Cambridge, it becomes problematic when you have to start increasing the load on a building to accommodate switch gear to accommodate pad transformers where the dimensional requirements are no 20 by 30, 50 foot clearances. And that's not to say that a ban on gas is an absolute "no". But the way that has been phrased in a way has been drawn up, it's extremely problematic in the current world. Building in Cambridge is problematic enough, but oftentimes you have to balance utility usage in a building to make sure that you have enough load in the building to accommodate the things that are going inside it. Most of these buildings were predate building code regs now so they're all underpowered or underserved as the code would suggest. So updating them becomes extremely expensive. Oftentimes, in a larger building, you have a need for emergency power. If the emergency power is not coming from electric as you know power is coming from either gas or diesel.

I don't see the word diesel in this ordinance least not that I've seen it. But if you're suggesting that I should forego a clean pipe to a small generator on the rooftop of my building to a ground floor, multi tank diesel system that is an order of magnitude more expensive, unsightly and if you want diesel engines on the ground floor, I can't imagine that something... an outcome people interpreted or wanted to happen. You know, Brookline is already past this and is running to issues. Berkeley, and I think this is where the language all comes from. They're just two different animals. I think this is something so... previous speakers have said that we can talk about... get to a point that makes sense, but the devil is in the details and a lot of the details are missing. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Jason Alves. Followed by Nancy Donahue followed possibly by Tom Lucey and then by Sarah Gallop.

Hi, Jason Alves. I am the Executive Director of these Cambridge Business Association, 877 Cambridge Street. I think that it's safe to say that I have not encountered a small business owner that doesn't acknowledge the climate crisis that's before us. But I think that they do have some questions about how this proposal would effectively take place. You know, other cities and towns have already outlined some exemptions, I think for Cambridge and what we have here, it's unclear how exemptions or what body is going to give the exemptions. I think that restaurants, off the top of my head, are probably a group of small businesses that would be negatively impacted by this. I often think about, you know, currently on Cambridge Street, we have a hole in the ground where the sunset cafe used to be and this is something that they, as this building is rebuilt, that they would be subject to this. So how would a person building a space with first floor commercial, get an exemption when they... for a restaurant when they probably don't have any lease signed in there. So that's just something that's a... how does something like that get rectified? I'm also on the climate zoning Task Force. And there are two things that we talk about a lot on our task force. One is, how do we get things... How do we get business back to normal after some kind of an event? I would think that having gas infrastructure has a role to play and getting things back to business as usual, when some kind of an event like that, how do we keep warming stations open, cooling stations. You know, those are the things that we're talking about in that and how does that conflict with removing an entire energy source from the city and in new constructions that we're hoping are going to kind of fill those roles, so something that you should keep in mind there. Also more and more we're talking about moving things out of basements, and again, if we're thinking about buildings that have first floor commercial space, already, there are requirements that the city puts on what can go in a basement, what needs to be on the first floor parking by parking, for instance. So bike parking is already impacting first floor retail space. If we don't know what these electrical systems are going to look like to run entire buildings, presumably, they're not going to allow them in the basement because we don't want them in the basement, they're going to end up on the first floor. So what does that do to our first floor retail spaces that we also want to have and support. And then finally, in the... one of these sections here, I know we keep saying this is going to impact new construction. But if you look at 15.10.040, Section D, it's the only space that doesn't mention anything about new construction. So it seems that it would prevent an existing building from taking advantage of incentives to convert from an oil heat to a gas furnace. And I think that there's probably a cost associated with making someone go electric over a gas conversion. So just a couple things to keep in mind as this gets worked out. Thanks.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. The next up is Nancy Donahue followed possibly by Tom Lucey, followed by Sarah Gallop and then what looks like a Steve Lee's or Less from NGA.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee my name is Nancy Donahue and I'm the director of government affairs for the Chamber of Commerce here in Cambridge. We would like to go on record in opposition to the petition before you, prohibiting natural gas infrastructure in new buildings. Cambridge is known as a leader in innovation. The work being done in our buildings is transformative to society. If this proposal were to pass would be very detrimental to the life science and laboratory research community. Also we all promote small business, the chamber, the city, we encourage people to shop local, shop at our local restaurants, eat at a local restaurants if passed this would be very detrimental to small business. The chamber supportive of the city's efforts to combat the footprint of carbon emissions. However, the amendment and petition before you is not the solution. So if we could all work together to find a solution. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Tom Lucey, followed by Sarah Gallop followed by what looks like Steve Lee's from NGA.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Tom Lucey, Harvard University. We submitted some testimony that's in everyone's package. So I'm just going to encourage everyone to take a look at that. And give you a couple of minutes of your lives back. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Sarah Gallop followed by Steve Lee's from, I think NGA, followed by what looks like Jim Brown from Avon Hill Street.

I'm Sarah Gallop from MIT. I'm co director of government and community relations and I thought I had three more minutes to write Tom so... I... We had a brief opportunity to look at the proposed ordinance but we haven't really had the time to prepare a technical response to the suggested ban. But as is our custom and practice with the city, we would be very pleased to roll up our sleeves, engage some of our faculty experts on these matters and take a close look at their proposal with you. In that way we can all fully understand its objectives and implications. And indeed, that's really the best way that I think that we can all work together and the city... I think one of the most terrific things about the city is that is typically how you work. You know, sometimes people joke about the process in the city, but you really do vet topics and issues. And I just want to encourage you to do the same thing here. This is a critical topic for all of us. I think there's no lack of passion or commitment to our shared goals around... related to climate change. I think everyone in this room feels the same way. I think people want Cambridge to be a leader.

MIT wants to be a leader, Harvard does, people in the city do. But I hope that we can tackle this together as we do so many other things. What I was actually working on when Tom took my three minutes away was a list of all the things that we're working on. I'm not going to read it to you. But it is just incredibly impressive how we come together and take on these issues. And I hope we'll do the same thing on this topic as well. Thank you very much.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Steve Lee, followed by Jim Brown, followed by John Pitkin.

Good afternoon, thank you. My name is Steve Leahy I apologize for my handwriting and do better next time. I live in Belmont. But I'm with a group called Northeast Gas Association we are a nonprofit trade association in Needham. We represent natural gas distribution companies, interstate pipeline companies, LNG importers. I'm here today to echo some of the previous comments and express some current concerns about this ordinance, but I welcome the outreach for stakeholder collaboration, we welcome the opportunity to be part of that going forward. I'm going to provide some quick background on natural gas.

Natural Gas distribution companies in the Commonwealth distribute gas to about 1.6 million customers every day. Natural Gas demand and the Commonwealth has continued to rise, with more than 200,000 new residential customers added in the last 15 years. Today, more than half of all mass homeowners use natural gas consumers in Massachusetts have continued to choose natural gas. I recognize the intent in this ordinance to accelerate the electrification of the economy in light of climate change. The transition to clean energy is underway. However, I would respectfully request the city consider some drawbacks to this immediate proposed switch as presented the ordinance. Gas is the most affordable home energy heating... heating source in the US and in Massachusetts. [sic] ER statistics USEIA statistics both clearly demonstrate that natural gas is the least expensive energy option lower than propane, lower than heating oil, lower than electricity. For residents of Cambridge on a fixed income or low income natural gas is a truly beneficial heating option. For businesses managing budgets gas is a helpful prime energy source Cambridge residents deserve to be able to continue to choose this highly affordable energy option. You also know that when it comes to promoting energy efficiency, Massachusetts is a leader in electric efficiency but also natural gas efficiency, our state accounts for less than 2% of all the gas customers in the US. But we invest 18% of all natural gas efficiency dollars. I mean, it's incredible. Punching above its weight but Massachusetts does, and that means it's managing demand, we require less infrastructure, using the infrastructure we have most efficiently. Well, customer growth in the gas system has been occurring. methane emissions attributed to gas systems in the Commonwealth have continued to go down... down by 67% over the last 25 years according to Mass DEP. This is real progress. Furthermore, Massachusetts, according to state officials, is on track to meet its legal requirement for carbon reductions by 2020 is mandated by the Global Warming Solutions act. Natural Gas by offsetting other fuels in power generation, home heating over the last decade and more has been a key part of this progress. I recognize your city's public policy may lead you to want to incentivize citizens to a certain energy path. We think it's better for everyone. However, if Congress focuses on incentivizing and resources rather than restricting and we look forward to collaborating with you in the future on this, thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is John Pitkin followed by... sorry, and that... Next up is Jim Brown, followed by John Pitkin and followed by Steve Nutter. I'm going to blame that one on the previous speaker’s handwriting.

Hello, I'm Jim Brown, 20 year resident of Cambridge. I work for the Department Environmental Protection in the wetlands Conservancy program for 24 years, and my job was to preserve the resources and the safe living in the Commonwealth. It is baffling to me that Cambridge would not adopt a policy of no new gas hookups or gas hookups for new buildings. It is not an easy policy to adopt. I would invite all of you to watch the webinar on its adoption in Brookline. There has to be some concessions on both sides.

There's a lot of legal wrangling. But they achieved a "walls in" success that leads to no new hookups. Takes a little compromise. And, but there is success and achievement and I also want to say there are some dramatic examples of implementation and retrofits. There... and now we have an ongoing movement of banning natural gas in new buildings in a dozen US cities. Berkeley, as we have heard was the first, Seattle is contemplating this move. And here on the east coast dozens of other cities are considering this move, including Newton... Newton, and Cambridge. Cambridge has been a beacon in the pursuit of sustainability. And some examples are single use plastic, increasing tree canopy and managing compost. So the real question is whether this city is going to be a part of the drive towards renewables and sustainability as well as quite simply a beacon to stand up against the evils of the fossil fuel industry.

There's been a lot made of how clean natural gas is. But again, natural gas is not natural. It's fracked gas, and it causes earthquakes and it pollutes the subsurface and makes people's lives difficult in the areas from which it is obtained. You may have read in the newspapers in the last couple of days that Greenland is now losing ice at a rate seven times that of what it was in the 1990s. James Anderson at Harvard, has said that once the glacier for Greenland disappears, there will be a 20 feet rise in sea level, which will in fact....

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Your time is up. Next speaking is John Pitkin followed by Steve Nutter, followed by Joseph McGuire.

John Pitkin about a 50 year resident of Cambridge and I'm on the board of green Cambridge. I have to agree with Audrey Schulman and others who have said that it's important to do this right. I want to speak to the necessity of doing it. And I have... will end with a question for the city solicitor. We had it was more than 10 years ago now that Cambridge recognize that there is a climate emergency. Now 11,000 scientists around the world upside a statement agreeing there is a climate emergency. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized climate emergency as the word of the year. My question is, at what point does the city have emergency powers... the powers that change its ability to make regulations. And I want to add a little bit of one detail to what Jim Brown said about the Greenland ice melting. I learned something last night that will perhaps give, make it more graphic the nature of the emergency that we're in... that we really are an emergency. Greenland is losing ice now at a rate of 250 billion tons of water a year. That is... now to help you visualize that imagine a herd of elephants, 2000 elephants, marching into the sea. Imagine one of those going into the sea every second for a year. That's how much ice is going off of Greenland.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Next up is Steve Nutter followed by Joseph McGuire, followed by Ed Woll.

Hi, I'm Stephen Nutter. I am the executive director of Green Cambridge. Our role and our mission is to make a more sustainable Cambridge for everyone. And that includes not just Cambridge but also work towards other communities as well. I'm a member of the Climate Protection Action Committee, which helps facilitate and the net zero action plan. I just want to say that the existing infrastructure that we have in place, there's a lot of sunk investment. There's a lot of jobs. And that's really important. We want to see... we also want to see that that collaboration move forward. And I really appreciate the sentiments expressed about that. But we have to stop its growth. We live in a broken system. I have natural gas in my home as do many of you. But... But I didn't choose it. And if I was building a new building today, I definitely wouldn't choose it. I think it's our job to show leadership towards fixing... towards fixing it.

This is really personal for me actually. They say natural black gas is cleaner. That... That may be true, but it's not a clean process. I'm not from here. I grew up in West Virginia. My... both of my grandfather's were coal miners. 100 years ago, my great grandfather worked for the gas company. I've seen firsthand what extractive industries do to communities and livelihoods. My home state is now largely under the control of these extractive corporations. Whole mountain tops have been blown off. Fracked gas has destroyed the groundwater, poisoning the people and the land and forcing them off the property. The growth of natural gas, fracked gas, has directly destroyed sensitive habitat... habitats for both animals and people in woods that I used to play in. This existential crisis has already come to West Virginia. And many other states and communities. Imagine if some activity like fracking destroyed Cambridge's water.

If you couldn't drink the water coming out of your tap, we've had over a century of cheap energy fueling the rise of carbon in the atmosphere. After a drop in emissions this year, it's now back on the rise. And even with the incredible efforts of advocates, companies and staff here in Cambridge, and all over the... all over the world, we still see this rise. We have to see... we have to change faster than may be comfortable, and it needs to start now. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Joe McGuire, followed by a wall followed by Matthew Shreiner.

Good afternoon. I'm Joe McGuire from Alexander real estate equities, offices officers at 400 Technology Square. I just want to state that Alexandria continue is to be a strong supporter of the city... city sustainability and net zero and climate change programs. We've been very active in support of many of these Task Force, including the Net Zero, which I spent time with Councillor Zondervan on. We take it seriously. We want to state that we want to have an impact. We believe that over the coming years, that, that, that we need to be net zero. There's been a lot of work that isn't that is... that has occurred with the Net Zero Task Force. In terms in terms of moving to net zero for new construction. We've got some deadlines that are kind of coming up in 2025 and 2030 for new construction, being net zero. And we're making efforts to be net zero ready for... with our effort, efforts in construction today. The city's electric grid is going to need Time to respond to... to the demands that will be placed on it. It clearly... with energy intensive... intensive businesses, such as laboratories, we need energy. And if it's switching from one source to the other, that's not as efficient and electricity is not as efficient and maybe cleaner if it's sourced properly, but we will see a new norm that is going to it's going to be necessary. We'd recommend that the city convened a task force of local stakeholders to study the full electrification of buildings in potential prohibition of new natural gas service and to incorporate this group's findings and recommendations into an ongoing net zero planning related policy for the city. This step will be consistent to how, for example, the city of San Francisco is approaching this top topic. Alexandria will be pleased attempt to help connect the dots and with other progressive US cities that were located in as well.

We operate and are looking to be great building owners and in a great community and want to be great neighbors. So, again, we'd like to... like to have this studied and move forward in that fashion. And again, there are commitments that are out there that are leading us to net zero, whether it be residential, commercial, or laboratories over the upcoming 10 years. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Ed Woll, followed by Matthew Schreiner.

Thank you. My name is Ed Woll at 79 Dana Street. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'd like to focus first on the notion of preemption. I don't know of a bill in Massachusetts that requires a building to have gas, or requires me to cook with gas or heat my hot water with gas, or heat my house or cool my house with gas. So I think that's the focus that one ought to take on preemption. So when you ban gas, you aren't overturning any law in Massachusetts. So take a look at it that way. Also, I think it's time that the building industry needs to learn how to build without gas. That's what our focus ought to be. They should know how to do it. They're behind the times if they don't do it. There are a lot of contractors out there who know how to build heat pump systems and put in induction stoves and to put in heat pump hot water heaters. That's a good industry to promote. Third, there are other ways to ban gas to. There are many pending bills before the legislature right now, whose goal or result of which would be getting rid of gas and getting off gas. There's the future bill. There's 100% renewable energy both of which has been endorsed by this city council. There's also the tax exemptions for heat pumps and storage that are pending before the legislature, both of which have the objective of making it easier for people to get off gas.

There's also the road map bill, the carbon fee and increasing wind power. All of those have a goal of getting off gas. Now also 91 cities and towns in this state don't have gas. So in effect, they already ban gas. So we can follow them to we don't have to gas... have gas here. Now from a personal standpoint, we don't cook with gas anymore. We don't heat our hot water with gas there to six unit condos across the street that have entire heat pump systems. Doesn't that tell you something, doesn't that tell you that people are moving off gas. So let's help them move a little bit faster. And also, we should consider the gas ban carefully. We need more hearings on it. There are lots of people affected by it. But in the meantime, we can go ahead and support the bills before the legislature that moves us toward the goal of getting off gas.

That's our immediate focus, no matter what we go ahead and pass here as a gas ban. It will probably be appealed. And why do we wait and not support those other bills in the meantime? Another factor is I walk home from the subway around Cambridge, I think about what I'm walking over. And as I do, I think about Merrimack Valley. I want to stop thinking about that. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. Next up is Matthew Schreiner. And that will conclude our signup sheet so if there are other people, you can speak after Matthew.

Thank you. So for the opportunity to speak, my name is Matthew Schreiner. I live on 26 Crozier Road. People here know the scale of the crisis. We've already committed to substantial warming from fossil fuels we've already burned. We keep hearing that new estimates are constantly worse than the previous ones. There are plenty of suggestions that we slow down our conversion to handle various problems. What I'd like to see is one time that we do more than we had to, I fear we will never hear... that will never happen, as a slogan says, keep fossil fuels in the ground.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. That concludes our signed up speakers. If you have not spoken yet and would like to speak you can just form a line behind the podium and come introduce yourself and you will have three minutes per speaker if you haven't already spoken.

Good afternoon. I did actually sign up signup sheet so there may be one missing, a signup sheet missing. My name is Karen Luther and I'm the executive director of the Northeast hearth Patio and BBQ Association. We represent hearth retailers, and the related industries including chimney sweeps, installers, maintenance companies and entities having interest in commercial hearths. I'd like to record our opposition to the proposition that the prohibition of banning natural gas infrastructure in Cambridge, we, however, are completely aligned with climate action and slowing negative climate change. By moving to banning fossil fuels, larger strain is put on our electric grid. In Massachusetts over 50% of homes heat with natural gas, 27% heat with oil. Dependence on electric utilities and increased reliance on these utilities is a weakness. Electric delivery systems are still above ground and sometimes fail. This is when people like wood, our gas. During last year's gas moratorium and the National Grid lockout development across the state came to a halt. In the Cambridge area there are over 94 specialty hearth retailers. In addition, there are also those who service wood gas pellet stoves in their chimneys such as plumbers, electricians, sweeps and installers. All of these businesses would be affected jobs will be lost with this ordinance. In 2017, businesses with fewer than 100 employees had the largest share of small business employment. Businesses employing fewer than 20 employees experienced the largest gain, adding over 20,000 net jobs. Banning new fossil fuel infrastructure in buildings does not achieve the stated goal of protection from fuel leaks, explosions or air pollution. It is important for buildings to be healthier, safer and more efficient. However, passing this measure will do nothing to upgrade existing infrastructure or protect residents from potential leaks. It will exacerbate an economy that is just starting to rebound and eliminate small businesses that call Cambridge home. For these reasons, Northeast Hearth patio and BBQ Association urges you to oppose this idea. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you. And it turns out you hadn't fact signed up a long, long time ago and overlook you I apologize. And the next after you is Joseph [sic].

Yes, I was the next one up. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity today. Good afternoon. My name is Joel Etter. I am the senior wholesale account manager for hearth and home technologies. We are a manufacturer of fireplaces and stoves. I'm also the president of the Northeast Hearth Patio barbecue Association. We represent hundreds of hearth dealers in Massachusetts as well as over 1200 art dealers in the northeast. We're also in agreement that we need a solution to climate change. We just don't agree with this solution of banning natural gas and other fossil fuels. The hearth industry is one of if not only locally owned and operated industries left in the United States and certainly in Massachusetts. Over 200 local businesses provide local jobs, keep more money in the local economy. Not to mention they give charitable to towns they support. This industry is the last small business in Mass. It needs to be treasured, protected and secured. Because it's made up of all small businesses, there is no unified voice. We're here to speak for these local businesses. Our industry has gone through extensive regulations to reduce emissions. In 2015, the EPA NSPS code mandated that all wood pellet appliances had to be at 4.5 grams of particles per hour or less. The new code starting in May 2020 will reduce that to 2.0 grams.

Unfortunately, this will only affect change if a consumer purchases a new appliance. The real issue is in existing appliances that are presently in the home. The consumer falls in love with their old wood stoves and needs an incentive to remove it. By offering a change out rebate incentivize the consumer to remove the very old inefficient appliances that can give off 60 to 70 grams per hour. This is shown to massively reduced emissions. Whole town change are conducted in 2007, in Libby Montana, replaced 1100 old polluting stoves with wood pellet, gas and electric heating appliances. The following year, the average wintertime particles levels dropped outside by 28% and inside by 72%. This research was done by the University of Montana. The electric plants industry will tell you that they don't have appliances that will work with power surges or on low wattage electric companies will tell you that the current grid will not support the influx of this power surge. California is a great example with the blackouts. Finally, please consider the ramifications to Mass small businesses that will be put out of business by moving solely to electric, wind and solar and ignoring the importance of wood, gas and pellets as renewable fuels. Thank you for the time.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you very much. I'm pretty sure that is the last of the signed up speakers but if you have not spoken yet, and want to speak, approach the microphone. Seeing none. I'll entertain a motion to close public comment. So moved. All right. Councillor Zondervan suggested that we asked Ms. Peterson, the deputy city manager to talk a little... Hopefully this isn't a surprise... to talk a little bit about the city's recent school construction projects and how they approach this issue.

Lisa Peterson, Deputy City Manager
Yes, through you Mr. Chair. I'm [sic] so as... as. .. I'm sorry, I came in late to the hearing, that I'm sure as you've been talking about when the net zero action plan was adopted, the early... the first entities are... that are responsible for sort of compliance is new construction for municipal facilities. So we really were planning since when the net zero plan was adopted to really look at compliance for new buildings. It started with looking at the Martin Luther King school to see what would it take for it to be a net zero facility. So we installed geothermal there. We also needed to install a gas boiler and that facility as well based on the size of the site. When we got to 859 Mass Ave, which is really a family shelter, so more of a residential. We were able to go to a totally renewable site... source. And we were not able to install geothermal. We had some issues with that but we installed the VRF systems, variable refrigerant flow systems and then when we were able to go to the King Open school, which just opened and we're very proud of that, we were able to go to 100% geothermal for that facility as a 273,000 square foot facility. It's entirely heated in cold by geothermal. It does have emergency backup in there that we have a small diesel tank, bio diesel that we're using, but really it's the hookup so if we lost for some reason, the, the, the geothermal you wouldn't want to lose all your plumbing or anything inside. So there's a hookup that we could bring in... diesel fuel if we needed to, from a truck and to be able to heat the building. We would be looking at that same as we're looking towards the Tobin school and we're looking at the Tobin Montessori Vassal Lane Upper School that we're just in the feasibility study for... we are looking at it being a total net zero emissions building as well. There will be some... which we're looking at geothermal. If we don't have enough space for geothermal, we may need to do the VRF system as well or there may be a combination.

And we will be looking at the... the backup power options of what we do by needing, in an extreme circumstance, of needing to bring in diesel fuel.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you Miss Peterson. Questions for Miss Peterson. Okay, so, any comments, Councillor Zondervan?

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you to assistant... city manager Lisa Peterson for that. And Marty Walsh today in Boston announced that all municipal new construction will be net zero carbon as well. So, again, we see that leadership matters that the City of Cambridge going first and its municipal construction is leading to change elsewhere in in other communities. And it is time that we do the same for private construction. I've been experimenting at my house, which is not new construction. It's built in the 1980s. So relatively new, but not super new. And I want to highlight the importance of reducing the amount of energy that's consumed. A lot of people have spoken. And by the way, I really appreciate the public comment all of it to the challenges of bringing in more power and I completely agree. And that's a huge problem. And we, we can't afford to do that. So I've been able to reduce overall energy consumption at my house by 30 percent and reducing gas consumption by 65%. So in other words, I reduce the gas consumption and I did not increase the overall energy consumption. And because I was able to put in solar, I'm running 60% of the house on solar energy, which means that I'm also not increasing the amount of electricity that needs to come to my house on the grid, I have reduced it. So we really need to think different. And that means thinking about how we reduce the overall energy that we consume. And as you just heard, from the deputy city manager, we're able to do the same thing in our schools and in a residential family shelter that we built here in Cambridge. So we have the technology to reduce our energy consumption, reduce our gas consumption and begin to electrify so that we can depend on renewable electricity. I also want to highlight the issue of jobs and, and justice, this absolutely has to be a just transition. And it cannot come at the expense of people's livelihoods. In terms of gas consumption, this ordinance is banning gas in new construction. We still have tremendous legacy infrastructure that needs to be maintained an upgraded over the next several decades. So there should be lots of jobs in the in those areas, because we need to be fixing all those gas leaks and replacing all those leaky pipes under, under our streets. We also will be creating new areas of job opportunities including geothermal as you just heard. That is a very important technology that we can use to heat and cool our buildings that require similar kinds of expertise that our gas workers currently have. And then last but not least, there is an opportunity for what's called bio gas, which is methane, the same chemical as natural gas or fracked gas. But it is obtained from the decomposition of organic matter. I just saw a report that the state of California, the majority of its methane emissions are from landfills. So those landfills are just sitting there leaking methane from organic material that was buried in them. We could be capturing that methane and burning it using our existing infrastructure, which is the best thing to do because methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. So when we burn that methane, which turning into carbon dioxide, which is has a lesser impact on the climate. So there are plenty of opportunities in terms of jobs around gas, and truly natural gas, which is bio gas as opposed to the fracked gas that we're using right now. So I think this is a an opportunity, again for Cambridge to take leadership. I appreciate the comments about making sure we get this right. And I completely agree, and we have the time and space and the expertise to do that. But we cannot take off the pressure. We cannot say this is an existential crisis, but we can't do that. So I think we have to move this ordinance forward today to the full Council. We won't have time to process it until the next term begins. And we will have many more conversations about it before it's actually adopted, and I look forward to the process. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thank you Councillor Zondervan. Other comments Councillor Mallon.

Councillor Alanna Mallon
Thank you, Mr. Chair through you. I want to thank all the speakers that came to speak, some very passionately about their personal experiences and how this climate crisis is affecting them especially. So thank you to everyone that came and spoke today. I do want to answer some of the questions that were raised today. In terms of the Brookline proposal, someone brought up the affordable housing and how that would affect affordable housing going forward. And Brookline provides a waiver and appeal process specifically for affordable housing projects and for affordable housing in particular, knowing that their capital funds may be limited to make investing in systems with lower operating costs in the long run infeasible. And to speak to some of the other exemptions that Brookline worked through. These are some that we could consider here in Cambridge, we could consider all of them, we could consider some of them based on some conversations that I hope we continue to have in the future. Their exemptions include backup generators, that was something that was brought up by an earlier speaker. All cooking and gas stoves, labs and medical buildings, any buildings over 10,000 square feet that had a centralized hot water system, and portable appliances like grills and barbecues. So those are all exemptions that Brookline got to in there bylaw, through the 30, the 30 meetings and the three months that they dedicated to this particular process. To speak to the load on the electrical grid, that was a concern that came up with some emails and some public speakers today that we have been having a long conversation in this chamber about our electrical load and what does that mean if we are shifting to the electrical grid and away from gas at the same time when we are wondering how we are going to build another substation in the city.

And one of the frequently asked questions in Brookline's ordinance or bylaw is that it speaks right to that it says that this bylaw will affect too few buildings too slowly to affect the electrical grid. So I think that that's something for us to keep in mind. Although that does sound a little sad that it's affecting too few buildings and to slowly. But I think in terms of the electrical grid and the move away from natural gas to the grid, I think it's something that we need to keep in mind. I think all of the public comment tonight that we heard really underscores the need to have more conversations, to get a clearer picture of costs, impacts and how to implement this here in Cambridge. And I want to thank Audrey Schulman for offering HEAT to convene these meetings. I'm sure that there's a lot of people here in the audience tonight, that would be available for those meetings. And so I just wanted to say thank you to her. I would offer a note of caution for the future and putting forward language. This isn't the first time where we've put forth language from another city that has sort of shocked people. In that, here it is we're done. We're... this is the final language. And I think it's, it's a hard thing to do when you think about Cambridge as a city full of people who love process and want to have that conversation and want to feel like they are part of a change. So I want to caution us in the future for just putting forward language from another city and sort of saying this is the thing to work from. I think it's possible for us to have had these conversations prior to today and put together a really good ordinance that people could feel good about and we could amend on the floor. I don't think that this is ready for prime time. And moving it out of the ordinance committee today. I think there's a lot of work to do and I think it's good work to do, I think as an earlier, public comment or said, you know, we do need to move more quickly than we're comfortable with. I think that is a fact. But it doesn't remove the need to be thoughtful, and work with all of the stakeholders who are going to be implemented or affected by this, whatever we decide on. So I look forward to us figuring out a way to involve those stakeholders and come to some agreement very quickly. But I don't think that this is ready for prime time and moving out of the Ordinance Committee today. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Thanks very much, Madam Vice Mayor.

Vice Mayor Jan Devereux
Thank you, and thank you to everyone who came today. I wanted to make sure that people have taken the time to read the letter that we received from Jacob Knowles, who Councillor Zondervan, referenced as director of sustainable design in Brighton. It rebuts a lot of what we heard about what is feasible and isn't feasible. And one thing on the impact on the electrical infrastructure that he says is that it wouldn't result in additional demand on the electric grid, due to the fact that conventional buildings typically have high peak cooling loads in the summer that require a large electric electrical infrastructure. So he gives several examples of large and small but a few quite large buildings that his firm and others have worked on, including two buildings that are owned by Harvard, one by BU, Cornell, Boston Arts Academy. Someone else said that we have the technology. We certainly do, what we what we are lacking is the will. I am listening to public comment and hearing the sort of two diverging... You know, sets of opinions today I think I felt as close to despair as I've ever felt sitting in this chamber just because... we, we don't know. Our time is up as Councillor Kelly kept saying time's up, time is up. We do not have time to over-process this to reinvent the wheel with every single thing that we do so I would move this forward. And I would still concurrently hold stakeholder meetings to work on details and implementation to carve out some very minimal exemptions, but I think that we all need to learn to live more like Melissa Ludtke and less like business as usual. I don't think we have time for a long term plan for this. We don't have the long term. And when we talk about unintended consequences, I think it's really ironic because we are living in a world of totally unintended consequences had we realized 200 years ago or when, however long it was when, when the industrial age invented all of this wonderful power with fossil fuel, that this is what we would be facing today. That's that, that we're living the unintended consequence. So I don't see how any unintended consequences could be worse what I see as a world that is really, really scary. The however many elephants are plunging into the sea in Greenland. So sure, let's have let's have meetings.

Let's make people more comfortable with the radical changes that we have, but I don't want to kick this can down the road. One thing that does comfort me knowing that I won't be on the council for future discussions is that the two new councillors I am very confident will support this very strongly. Both Jivan Sobrino-Wheeler, and Patty Nolan are very committed environmentalists and I have every faith that they will back this up. So I think we do need to move it forward. It doesn't have a deadline, does it? So there's nothing to prevent us from moving it forward. And from immediately getting to work with MIT. Thank you, MIT and Sarah. Thank you, Alexandria. Thank you HEAT. Thank you Mothers Out Front. Thank you, people who have offered to step up and try to come up with a reasonable implementation plan. And thank you most of all to Councillor Zondervan for putting this before us.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Councillor Carlone.

Councillor Dennis Carlone
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Knowing buildings the way I do it's clear that in the next phase of this work, we will have... in fact, the city approach to this is that different building types are more quickly adaptable to implementing such a program, then let's say others that are high energy... labs. But given all that I was very impressed by Ed Woll's public comments, and he's right about the building code, which I've studied, not in depth on this issue, that it doesn't say yes or no on an energy source. I realized the state law complicates that, to some extent. My whole feeling about this other than living with it is it's time for a shot across the bow. And this is only the beginning. This isn't going to happen next week. But it's saying we're serious about this. And I there's no doubt in my mind that we're behind. And we got to move forward as quickly as we can. And this will help that. So I'm in full support of moving it to the full Council. Thank you.

Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui
Thank you a clarifying question. So the conclusion of the opinion states from the Solicitor's Office, that I'm of the opinion that prior to adopting the proposed ordinance, the city must first submit this... first submit and the state legislation must pass special legislation [sic] empowering the city council to prohibit natural gas infrastructure. And so wondering what we're moving out of committee. So and at the end is it says the city council so desires would be happy to prepare a draft home rule petition for the city's review and consideration. So to just... I want to be clear, when... if we move this out, are we moving out... And this is to you Councillor Zondervan and to the solicitor are we moving out and saying we would like you to draft a Home rule petition. Or... I'm trying to understand the process because it's... so we should be clear on that.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Before anyone answers, we have two minutes before the meeting ends. I would entertain a motion to extend this meeting until 4:15. So moved all in favor, aye. Okay, this meeting will last until 4:15.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you, Mr. Chair through you to my colleague. The question of a homebrew competition is quite a vexing one and before I answer that question actually, I would like to speak to the issue of process.

The Berkeley ordinance was passed this summer. And so we only became aware of it at that time. I worked to put forward this ordinance with help from some of my colleagues. And we had health Environment Committee discussion about it that was quite extensive. And that signaled quite a bit of support for this type of approach. We... I put in the language and it has taken until now to have an Ordinance Committee hearing on it. It's also taken up until now to get a legal opinion on it, which we didn't receive until an hour before the meeting. So it is by no means a, you know, this is it. This is the final product, let's adopt it. But as we've seen from this process, we don't make progress unless we put something forward and begin to think it through and ask questions and start to answer them. If... we can talk forever. We had a climate emergency declaration in this chamber 10 years ago. We could have banned it then. But we didn't. So we're having the conversation now. And I do not in any way apologize for the way that I introduced this ordinance. And I will do it again, many times until we take proper action on climate change, which is an existential issue. To answer the question on a home rule petition, if indeed we asked the solicitor to prepare a Home Rule petition, to allow this ordinance, doing so would essentially admit that we do not believe we have the power to regulate gas combustion in buildings in Cambridge in this way. I do not agree with that presumption. Second, if we asked for a Home Rule petition, we are undermining Brookline and any other community in the Commonwealth that seeks to regulate gas combustion in the same way that we do. And third, last but not least, such a Home Rule petition will never pass. So it would just be a grand waste of time. And it would only, if it were the pass, which it won't, it would only allow Cambridge to do it and then Brookline would need one. And then Boston would need one and Newton would need one. That is not a sensible approach. So what I think we need to do is move this ordinance forward, pass it into law. If we are legally challenged defend the ordinance. And in that action, we will prompt the state legislature to do its job and to regulate gas, which it should have done a long time ago and needs to do now. So I would like to make a motion Mr. Chair that we move this ordinance to the entire Council. Thank you.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Okay, there's a motion on the floor that we can discuss. Does anyone want to discuss this motion? Madam Vice Mayor.

Vice Mayor Jan Devereux
I just as soon vote on it. But I think I agree with Councillor Zondervan's legal strategy, if that's the right word for it. I mean, I think we have come to a point where cities can assert that we have emergency powers. And I agree with some of the analysis that we are... the walls in approach is within the building code. And I think it's a fair... fair shot that we can defend that. So given that it is an emergency, and it would undermine other cities and slow the whole thing down if every one of the 341 cities and towns in the Commonwealth had to go through this process, and if it would move the state legislation that is pending forward, get that more urgency than I think it's something that Cambridge can and should do. So can we vote on the motion? Since we only have 10 minutes left.

Councillor Craig Kelley
We can, as soon as comment on it is over. Do I see other comments? I am almost entirely the opinion of Councillor Zondervan with maybe a little bit more frustration that it takes the meeting being called for the city solicitor to give us a report. And it takes someone from the public to point out, in retrospect, some obvious flaws like gas hookups for emergency backup. Honestly, I don't have the expertise to answer that stuff. But if it takes moving legislation to the point where it's about to be passed to get the city staff to do what I consider its job in a proactive manner, then that's what we'll do. Now, unfortunately, I won't be here next term, to keep that going. But I agree with councillor or the Vice Mayor that others will. And there's a lot of frustration with me at least said it takes having an ordinance committee meeting to get before we even have the chance to read it. A legal opinion on whether we can do this or not. So yeah, otherwise, I agree with absolutely everything Councillor Zondervan said. Councillor Siddiqui.

Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui
Just a comment, I think, after this motion, if you have a motion prepared already, but doing a motion on working with the city manager to convening some of these concurrent conversations with stakeholders as we... into the January, February March period... as we move this forward. Thanks.

Councillor Craig Kelley
I have a question for you, Councillor Zondervan. Is this with a favorable recommendation or recommendation or a negative recommendation?

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Favorable?

Councillor Craig Kelley
Okay, so we have a motion on the floor to move this ordinance. And as has been clarified before, this isn't a zoning ordinance. So it doesn't go through those planning board and other timeline related process issues. So it could sit on the council's agenda for a long time or the council could pick it up and pass it. So with that, there was a motion on the floor to forward this proposed amendment to the city ordinances with a favorable recommendation all in favor say aye. Aye. Nays?

Councillor Alanna Mallon
Mr. Chair, Nay. I would like to be recorded as "no".

Councillor Craig Kelley
We have one "nay" and four "yeses". All right on that note, did i miscount one "nay" and five "yeses". I did miscount one "nay" and five "yeses".

1. That the City Manager is requested to direct the City Solicitor, Community Development, Public Works, Inspectional Services and any other related departments to review the proposed amendments regarding the prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings.
RESULT: REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION

Councillor Craig Kelley
So with that, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. That's not a motion to adjourn.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Councillor Siddiqui made a second motion.

Councillor Sumbul Siddiqui
The motion... my colleagues can jump in. That the city... that the City Manager is requested to convene stakeholders to give comments on this proposed amendment.

Councillor Craig Kelley
So on that motion...

Vice Mayor Jan Devereux
May I just propose a slight wording change on the implementation of this proposed amendment because I think we've heard comments today and they were for and against. And I think we need to get to the point where we're talking about we're going to do this and here's how.

Iram Farooq, Assistant City Manager for Community Development
So on that motion, last term, we had a whole discussion about how the city council could actually hold meetings and provide food and whatever for that. And, again, it's not going to be me who's doing this. But I would recommend that someone on the city council do that rather than kick that responsibility to the city manager. So I will vote no on this motion, but the motion is on the floor, to ask the city manager to convene meetings to talk about this zoning or not this zoning proposal, this municipal ordinance proposal. Okay, you look critical Councillor Mallon.

Councillor Alanna Mallon
I'm wondering if this would be a good place to talk about this in the Health and Environment. If we don't want the city manager to convene a group. I'm not sure about that suggestion, but I leave it up to my colleagues but I just wonder if... if we're going to be convening these groups, doing it in a City Council Committee might be better.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Councillor Zondervan.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you Mr. Chair through you to my colleagues. I agree that we can should and will have further committee hearings on this topic. I also think it is useful to ask the city manager to also set up a process to get input and help us figure out how to implement this provision. So I think we can do both things and we can bring the information together in the council and have a good outcome.

Councillor Craig Kelley
So I am going to reiterate. I think that's a bad idea. And we kicked the leaf blowers to the city manager's office and as far as I know, nothing, that was months and months ago. So I don't know how this is different from that. And if the council wants this to happen, I think the council should keep control of this. Vice Mayor.

Vice Mayor Jan Devereux
While we've had two tasks forced... task forces formed by the Mayor this term; one on rent, you know, displacement and the other on the arts. We don't have a mayor yet for next term, but I suppose this motion could direct both the city manager and the future Mayor to work together to co-convene the appropriate, you know, body of experts to work on this.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Councillor Zondervan or was it you, all right? Councillor Mallon.

Councillor Alanna Mallon
If you don't mind I... when I was speaking with Brookline today, what they did was they used existing, not city council committees, but advisory committees to answer specific questions around costs impacts, working with unions for [sic] example. I'm wondering if there's a way to use our existing advisory committees to kind of do that outreach at the same time we're doing it in the city council. So as to... as Mr. Chair has suggested that the city manager's office might not be best equipped to handle this in the rapid way that we would like to. I would like to hear my colleagues thoughts on that.

Councillor Craig Kelley
Councillor Zondervan.

Councillor Quinton Zondervan
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I think we can figure it out in the council. I don't think we necessarily need to put a motion on that right now. And we have in the past done things through the city manager's office and the council at the same time, we're doing it now with the resilience Task Force. And, and we're doing it in other areas. So I think it's, it's sufficient to ask the city manager to convene stakeholders and then we in the council in the next term can of course, do the same thing and work with the city manager to coordinate on exactly how and when and where that happens. So I would like to read the full motion for my colleagues. The motion is to ask the city manager to convene stakeholder meetings to make comments on the implementation of banning gas.

Councillor Craig Kelley
So on that, any comments? All in favor, aye? Nay? Me. All right, so that's another five to one vote.

And on that note, I would entertain a motion to adjourn? Okay, so moved. And we'll see some of you back here at 5:30 for the Harvard Square meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 4:12pm.

2. A communication was received from Nancy E. Donohue, Director of Government and Community Affairs Cambridge Chamber of Commerce , regarding the proposed Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE

3. A communication was received from William E. Ryan, Mass Coalition for Sustainable Energy, opposing the proposed ordinance, “Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings”.
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE

4. A communication was received from Councillor Quinton Zondervan regarding the proposed prohibition on natural gas infrastructure in new buildings.
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE

5. A communication was received from City Manager Louise DePasquale transmitting a legal opinion regarding Awaiting Reports No. 19-124 and 19-133 re Gas Ban for 12/11/19 Ordinance Committee Meeting
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE

6. A communication was received from Thomas J. Lucey, Director of Government & Community Relations for Harvard University regarding Proposed amendment to Cambridge Municipal Code Chapter 15.10, Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE

7. A communication was received from JACOB KNOWLES, Director of Sustainable Design, regarding the proposed Cambridge Natural Gas Ban
RESULT: PLACED ON FILE