Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sustainability Plan Implementation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sustainability committee asks staff to test feasibility of carbon-reduction roadmap
Summary
The Monona Sustainability Committee voted to have staff meet department heads and report back on the feasibility, roadblocks and —low-hanging fruit' for an energy-focused action grid intended to help the city meet adopted carbon/clean-energy goals; the committee emphasized a small set of priorities, quarterly tracking and a July timeline tied to the CIP.
The City of Monona's Sustainability Committee voted March 5 to ask staff to meet with department heads and report back on what is feasible to achieve the committee's energy and carbon-reduction goals.
The motion, initiated from committee materials that include a carbon-reduction grid and a staff draft plan, directs staff to gather department feedback on feasibility, roadblocks and the top three —lowest-hanging fruit' that could move Monona back toward its numerical targets. The committee set an expectation that staff return findings in time for the April meeting and signaled an intent to present priorities to the City Council by July so they can be considered during the capital improvement plan (CIP) and budgeting cycle.
Why it matters: Monona has multiple overlapping sources for sustainability targets — a 2015 city sustainability plan, GTLC (Green Tier Legacy Communities) recommended actions and a later city resolution with numerical clean-energy targets. Committee members said the group has spent years reviewing metrics but not pushing for implementation; their request to staff is framed as an effort to convert plans and metrics into department-level tasks and a reporting cadence that will let the committee press city leadership when items stall.
Committee debate centered on implementation authority and accountability. One committee member urged a sharper focus on action over paperwork, saying the group —we have a metric— and —have never went to the city council and made any ask towards that goal— and that the committee should "hold your feet to the fire" by raising items at council if projects lack EV-ready specs, solar or other sustainability components. Staff acknowledged the committee's limited decision-making powers but recommended a narrow list of priorities with quarterly updates so the committee can provide regular oversight.
Staff outlined the intended schedule and method: combine the 2015 plan, GTLC energy metrics and the resolution's numeric targets into a short action plan; ask department heads to annotate the draft grid with feasibility, resource needs and the top three actions they could implement; and return a consolidated staff recommendation ahead of the committee's April meeting. Neil, the staff lead on the draft, told the committee the goal is to have committee priorities available by July for budget/CIP conversations so sustainability elements can be incorporated early in capital planning.
The committee approved the motion by voice vote; members also discussed focusing on a small number of municipal priorities (for example, three) rather than a long —kitchen sink' of objectives, and emphasized documenting impediments and concrete next steps for any missed targets.
Next steps: Staff will meet department heads, collect written or verbal feedback tied to the carbon grid, identify resource and timing constraints, and return findings to the committee in April. The committee plans to use that input to narrow priorities and schedule quarterly reporting to track progress and surface stalled items to council.
