From: Elaine Salinger
To: Clerk
Cc: Michelle Hudson; Robert Whitehair
Subject: A comment for the City Decarbonization Study Session Date: Saturday, January 13, 2024 10:43:24 PM
Hello Mayor Nash and City Council members,
I want to thank you for electrifying San Mateo buildings, for showing leadership, and for honoring your commitments.
There are numerous studies showing that gas appliances are more expensive to run than the newer electric appliances. We replaced a gas furnace with a heat pump and our energy bill went down by 70%. And it is projected that the cost of gas will rise faster than electricity.
The reach codes that San Mateo approved last year do not mandate removal of functioning gas appliances. No one is mandating removal of appliances that are working, but appliances that fail should be replaced with energy efficient electric appliances.
The Rincon Report shows that replacing gas with electric appliances is now comparable in cost, and possibly less expensive than replacing with gas appliances, especially for low income homes.
The 1200+ Citizens Climate Lobby members in San Mateo County and I urge you to move forward with building electrification in San Mateo. CCL has over 200 members living in the city of San Mateo.
Elaine Salinger, San Mateo County Chapter Leader
Citizens Climate Lobby
GREAT!
1) Thank the City for considering this very important issue. It is an example of how the City of San Mateo continues to show leadership and honor its commitments. 2) Strong decarbonization implementation is in accordance with Cit GREAT!
1) Thank the City for considering this very important issue. It is an example of how the City of San Mateo continues to show leadership and honor its commitments. 2) Strong decarbonization implementation is in accordance with Cit when it
fails and take full advantage of funding and rebates.
8) Better yet, removing gas equipment from San Mateo h
From: Linh Dan
To: Clerk
Subject: Agenda Item 1: Sustainable Buildings Strategy - Project Update Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 9:22:37 AM
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:
Thank you so much for holding a study session on this issue critical to public health & equity and a livable climate.
First, thanks to staff for a report that highlights the health and equity benefits of electrification,
and the cost chart that unequivocally proves that NOW is the time for homeowners and property owners to opt for a heat pump water heater over a gas one! Regarding the recommended policy options, I urge you to be more ambitious and front load the efforts to have a chance of meeting the 2030 goal, including directing staff to take all actions necessary NOW to completely smooth the path for same day heat pump water heater replacements to be available in the City of San Mateo by 2025 in time for BAAQMD to see the possibilities of smooth implementation of their clean air water heater rule so BAAQMD Staff can share results with their board.
I'm a Menlo Park resident, and we often take our kids to eat at one of San Mateo's many diverse and wonderful restaurants, combined with a stop at the park or library.
Thank you for your service and leadership, and I look forward to the example the City of San Mateo can set for other Bay Area cities.
Linh Dan Do
From: Anjuli Mishra
To: Clerk
Subject: City Council 1/16 Meeting Comment
Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 1:41:24 PM
Dear Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash and San Mateo City Council Members, My name is Anjuli Mishra. I am 16 and a student in San Mateo . Thank you for taking the
time to consider the crucial issue of building electrification. As a young person, I am afraid of the world that my generation will be inheriting due to the impacts of climate change. The IPCC has determined that the earth only has 6 years until the damage to climate change will be irreversible. In 6 years I will be graduating college and entering the workforce, and I want to be entering a workforce where working in sustainability and climate solutions can still have an impact rather than being looked at like a lost cause.
I applaud the city for taking action and setting the goal to eliminate methane gas use by 2030. However, the city will never reach this goal by not taking the strongest possible actions in a swift manner. Now is the most critical time to act. I don’t want to graduate from college and see that nothing has changed, and that young people still have to fight for the same minimum necessary action that I was fighting for when I was a freshman in high school.
It has been well established that the impacts of climate change will fall disproportionately on low-income communities of color. Addressing climate action from the perspective of equity is crucial. Adoption of a strong electrification policy encourages low income San Mateo residents to take full advantage of PCE’s draft proposal to pay for the electrification of low income homes.
This is how the council can address equity.
Strong electrification does not mean removing existing gas infrastructure from homes, but replacing it when it fails and taking full advantage of rebates and funding. Just one San Mateo home electrifying will eliminate 10 tons of greenhouse gasses, and when applied to even more homes, that is potentially hundreds of thousands of tons per year. In addition to reducing emissions, replacing gas equipment also has significant health benefits. Children who grow up in homes that use fossil fuels for heating and cooking have a much higher chance of developing asthma. Replacing gas is one of the most direct actions that a person can take to respond to the urgency of the climate crisis. San Mateo should be empowering their residents to take action and use the city’s unique positioning and privilege to provide the adequate education and resources for San Mateo residents to take full advantage of the funding available.
Listen to the youth. Our future is in your hands.
Thank you,
Anjuli
From: Gary Trott 2
To: Clerk
Cc: "Gary Trott"
Subject: City Council meeting 16-Jan-2024 Study Session Item #1 Sustainable Building Strategy Date: Sunday, January 14, 2024 10:32:54 PM
Dear Mayor Nash
and San Mateo City council members
Re: Jan 16, 2024 San Mateo City Council meeting
Study Session Item #1: Sustainable Building Strategy
Thank you for considering the future of electrification in all the buildings of San Mateo City. It shows the city leadership is really concerned about the environmental safety of it’s citizens. I am strongly in favor of decarbonizing existing buildings and infrastructure in the best possible way on or before 2030. Especially eliminating methane gas as soon as possible.
Climate change is real. It is happening now. So the time for action is now. The Rincon Report shows that replacing
appliances with electric versions in the home is equal or less expensive than installing replacement gas appliances.
However, implementing broad scale changes upon citizens is fraught with uncertainty. So the key elements needed from the city leadership is to promote equity and education to facilitate the changes.
Please take the strongest possible actions to promote decarbonization and provide educational resources to help citizens implement the change from gas to all electric appliances. Resulting in cleaner air, a healthier environment, and a safer future for all.
Regards
Dr. Gary Trott
San Mateo citizen
From: Jayden Wan
To: Clerk
Subject: City Council Special Meeting (1/16) Public Comment Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 7:47:07 PM
San Mateo City Council,
I'm Jayden Wan, a high school student in San Mateo County, and a proponent of building electrification. I represent the youth-led nonprofit San Mateo Youth Climate Action, whose website can be found here (https://www.svyouthclimateaction.org/san-mateo-county ).
Of the proposed "Attachment 3: Building Decarbonization Policy Options," I strongly support the following:
Option 2: New reach codes to encourage and/or require electrification at time of renovation
Option 3: Require electric equipment upon replacement ahead of BAAQMD Zero NOx requirements
After reading the "Sustainable Buildings Strategy – Project Update" extensively, I'm in favor of these options due to their impact and action toward a less fossil-fuel-dependent society. I'm a student, so I don't have first-hand experience owning a home or paying the bills. I can tell that there's significant opposition to the aforementioned policy options due to their economic implications in households -- the switch from gas to electric entails financial implications.
At the same time, I'm concerned about the state of the world, and the state of our cities. I don't think there'll come a time when people don't
oppose electrification, or any policy change that'd
purportedly take money out of their pockets. Whether it's at this upcoming council meeting, or in 10 years, I'm not sure that the social consensus will be much different -- in fact, I think that by then, there'll be even more opposition to electrification, seeing as more time has passed where people are used to gas systems. I'm from a first-generation immigrant family myself, and we're not exactly that well-off. However, I think that the opportunity cost for "neglecting" electrification progress will be too much for the future to bear. Climate change won't destroy us tomorrow, in a week, in a month, or in a year. But it's becoming harder to predict, and I wouldn't be confident to say that we'd be unaffected in San Mateo for the next decade. The action we make in a day can influence the years to come.
I urge the council to adopt the aforementioned policy options, and make good on their precedent-setting progress.
Best,
Jayden Wan
San Mateo Youth Climate Action
Report Review:
Sustainable Buildings Strategy - Project Update
Meeting January 16, 2024
Summary:
A combination of Policy Option 1 following the State/BAAQMD requirements and Option 5 appear to be the most prudent consideration. Option 1 gives the affected parties time to financially plan for the transition. Option 5 is a financial burden that everyone will have for increased property taxes to pay for the municipal infrastructure work. Unclear why the disadvantaged communities are not assigned high-priority. It would be show of good faith. The property tax increase will filter down to the renters. If the increase in property tax becomes a burden, it is common sense that individual electrification expenditures would be prohibitive or require state funding. The latest City of San Mateo flood control funding that increased property tax a small sum barely passed the voters. Overall, Option 5 will be a success/fail reality check and increase confidence a transition will not lead to chaos of the past. In general, this agenda report lacks critical review and information.
Background Review:
The Peninsula Clean Energy statement is vague as to what it means:
What amount of energy are they referring to by 2025? Is this the current electrical demand or the projected energy demand to replace all the gas-provided energy by 2025? What is the projected new electrical demand? This report requires further clarification or the statement has no value.
Project Overview Review:
This section requires some questioning:
The nitrogen dioxide concentration levels from gas stoves referred to would be this:
This data can be interpreted in different ways as these are conditions during operation/in-use. It is apparent that a gas stove with a pilot light should not be used if there is a health concern and substituted with an electrical ignition. It is also apparent that an exhaust should be used to remove the trace nitrogen dioxide as well as oil vapor, coating out-gassing, and/or smoke.
Electrical fires are also an inherent risk carrying high amperage. A gas leak may be easier to detect compared to compromised electrical wiring confined in a wall or attic.
It is implied that solar and battery storage is implemented as a band-aid for power outages and an additional cost with declining benefit (i.e. NEM 3.0). The lack of reliable electrical infrastructure is the problem and not burdening the public with the lack of power management, competence, and/or profit over power security.
A gas furnace and gas water heater can operate with a battery backup and inverter. If it needs to operate for an extended period of time, then the lack of power reliability is the problem. A gas range for cooking can be lit with a match as one would do before a pilot light and/or electrical ignition was available or when camping. This portion is reads as looking for an excuse and loses credibility to shielding the utility from accountability.
I am not sure what this is implying other than a sense of priority:
The disadvantaged communities should be considered as high priority as well as the resulting financial burden, if this intent is meaningful at all. Retrofitting these communities may be costly and inconvenient requiring alternative, short-term housing and state funding.
Project Overview Review:
The structure of the policy options are self-limiting in nature and lacks strategic thought:
Option 1 appears to be the most prudent and least problematic. The California Public Utilities Commission cannot even figure out when a nuclear power plant can be decommissioned correctly (now a 5-year push-out). These mandates may need to be revised further into the future.
Option 2 appears to be prudent as one does not want to dig and install a new power service line as an example. The local grid infrastructure should be deemed ready for full electrification with the necessary capacity. This will add further undetermined cost to utility bills by the CPUC.
Option 3 is only common sense viable if full electrification and necessary capacity is deemed ready in the selected area.
Option 4 is controlled by business interests and influence as well as economic impact, so the expectation the implementation will be delayed.
Option 5 would be a practical demonstration the transition to electrification can be accomplished to the City Council goals and expectations in the prescribed deadline. The cost will impact the public in terms of higher property tax for an undetermined number of years. This cost will reduce that amount of financial resources for the individual, so this cost must be known first.
Building Electrification Costs Review:
This review is missing the first logical condition: does the structure have a sufficient amount of total amperage per code to power these new electrical loads? If not, what is the cost to increase the amperage to support this new electrical load? How many structures are affected? If not, it may mean digging up and installing a new, higher amperage service line or removing and installing a new higher-amperage weatherhead and a new, higher-amperage service panel in both cases. This would be even more costly for a multi-residence. There appears to be no incentives to offset these costs. Unclear how this fundamental condition of total required power was missed and may require state funding.
Project Timeline and Next Steps Review:
It is unclear why there is a sense of urgency for any action sooner than the State/BAAQMD mandates. This sense of urgency should be clearly stated if there is a near-term threat to the welfare of the City. Based upon the public vote for flood control, the public seems to not see this real-time threat as significant as it barely passed. For this small increase in property tax, the household economic conditions may not be as good as assumed requiring state funding.
Overall, this report lacks significant information to do a common sense assessment. The Rincon analysis was superficial and lacked important information. It appears most of the Rincon report can be obtained by complying information from contractors, equipment specification and performance data, and publicly available information. A "collect problems and fix the problems later" plan of operation should be avoided based upon public comments. A ballot measure for funding the electrification of all municipal buildings may be challenging.
Regards,
Alan Ouye
January 13, 2024
From: Robert Mayo
To: Clerk
Subject: comments for city council meeting
Date: Sunday, January 14, 2024 2:48:35 PM
I would like to provide comments to the City Council about the Sustainable Building Strategy to be studied at the meeting on January 16th.
Congratulations on your stated desire to electrify all buildings by 2030. With the climate crisis upon us, as seen by the events of last summer, action on climate is of critical importance.
The report in the agenda packet presents five policy options. They all should be moved forward as rapidly as possible. However, they seem insufficient to achieve the goal. Further options should be developed.
For city buildings (policy option 5) simple math says that electrifying 100% of city-owned buildings by 2030 requires that 16% be completed each year. Please develop a plan for electrifying 16% this year and another 16% next year.
Option 1 requires outreach and incentives. The current pace is too slow, though, to accomplish the task. The city needs to find ways to step this up.
New reach codes for renovation are important to electrify the existing base. (option 2) A burnout ordinance, perhaps based on zero-NOx (option 3) is important. The BAAQMD rules are too far away to meet the city's goals. San Mateo can show leadership by passing this ordinance. In addition, going first with the implementation allows the city to gain experience in overcoming any related practical obstacles.
Please also adopt the building performance standards for commercial buildings, or a similar policy solution.
In short, please take the strongest possible action.
Robert Mayo
Mountain View, CA
Visitor to San Mateo--Bob
From: Robert Whitehair
To: Clerk; Lisa Diaz Nash; Adam Loraine; Amourence Lee; Richard Hedges; Rob Newsom Cc: Michelle Hudson
Subject: Decarbonization and Sustainability
Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 4:06:52 PM
Dear Mayor Diaz Nash and City Council
I thank the City of San Mateo for national leadership in decarbonization, which is an example by the City Council of its implementation of bold policy and honoring commitments.
Please take the strongest action policy position possible for the sustainable buildings strategy - decarbonization - on tomorrow's study session agenda.
The time for electrification is here now, because of rebates, tax credits, and other funding by the state, Peninsula Clean Energy, the federal Inflation Reduction Act, and many agencies. Adoption of a very strong policy encourages low and fixed income San Mateo residents to take full advantage of Peninsula Clean Energy‘s pending proposal to pay for the electrification of low income homes. This is one of the best ways to address equity.
Let's make sure that our residents and businesses are given the best possible advantage. You will be remembered for that.
Let's also be very clear: no one is proposing to remove gas equipment from the home. No one will come knocking on doors. But help our residents and businesses be ready for the replacement, if and when equipment fails. Allow us all to take full advantage of funding and rebates.
Why replace gas with gas, when outstanding rebates are available to make electrical replacements even more cost effective than replacing gas with gas? Better yet, removing gas equipment from San Mateo homes will eliminate 10 tons of greenhouse gas per home per year, several hundred thousand tons per year in San Mateo.
I think you know that Teri and I have fully electrified our home, receiving the electrical modernization award from Peninsula Clean Energy in 2023. We have learned so much, which we are gladly sharing with others.
The members of San Mateo Climate Action Team stand ready to help the decarbonization of all buildings in San Mateo.
I cannot speak for Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action, Silicon Valley 350, Citizens Climate Lobby, Elders Climate Action, or Elders Action Network, but I do know that elimination of carbon, through electrification, is a major goal of the hundreds and hundreds of members of those organizations.
We will salute bold action
Thank you
Robert Whitehair
San Mateo Climate Action Team Co-Leader
From: Rustard Mustard
To: Clerk
Subject: Decarbonization/electrification of all buildings in San Mateo.
Date: Friday, January 12, 2024 9:30:00 PM
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council,
I want to thank the City of San Mateo for considering this urgent issue.
The City of San Mateo has set a cutting edge path toward a clean and healthy future where we continue to exist. That said, the plan can get even better if we truly commit to saving ourselves and our planet.
It is imperative that we eliminate carbon emissions by leaning strongly into electrification.
We are lucky in San Mateo County to have Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) which provides carbon free electricity every day, all day long. PCE is committed to delivering 100% renewable energy by 2025. The Rincon report shows that replacing gas appliances with electrical appliances is comparable in cost as a result of help from the Federal government, the State, PCE, and other organizations.
We must make every effort to eliminate the flow of natural gas in San Mateo by 2030.
There is help for those who are of limited income and NOBODY will be required to change a gas burning appliance that continues to be serviceable.
Rebates and incentives are AVAILABLE and
MAKE THE CHANGE POSSIBLE FOR ALL SAN
MATEO RESIDENTS.
I am fed up with people making excuses about not everybody can afford it. This is a bold-faced lie intended to mislead us down a dangerous path. Please don't be fooled.
New research shows that over the long run electricity will be a more affordable source of energy.
In closing, I urge the City Council to think carefully and boldly take the strongest action possible to save our planet, our children, our grandchildren and all of humanity.
Sincerely,
Suzanne Bonilla
From: Ricki McGlashan
To: Clerk
Subject: Electrification.
Date: Saturday, January 13, 2024 9:03:31 AM
I have been so proud of San Mateo in regards to moving toward electrification. What the council does now to further this movement can serve as a model—is serving as a model—for cities all over the country.
Replacing gas appliances with electric when they need replacing is one of the most direct and effective way any of us can help with the climate crisis.
Any council anywhere could kick the can down the road, but I hope you/we will stand up and continue to be leaders. Imagine how our kids and grandchildren would feel if we didn’t address this with all the powers we have.
Ricki and Doug McGlashan
San Mateo
Replacing gas with electricity is the one most direct,
immediate personal action that anyone can take in response to the climate crisis.
Replacing gas with electricity is the one most direct,
immediate personal action that anyone can take in response to the climate crisis.
Replacing gas with electricity is the one most direct,
immediate personal action that anyone can take in response to the climate crisis.
From: L. Eberhart
To: Clerk
Cc: Robert Whitehair; Michelle Hudson
Subject: Electrify San Mateo - Building for the Future: City of San Mateo Sustainable Buildings Strateg Date: Sunday, January 14, 2024 1:40:39 PM
Dear City Council Members:
Thank you for considering this very important issue. It is an example of how the City of San Mateo continues to show leadership and honor its commitments that we are able to review this report today. The city of San Mateo decarbonization work arrives at the right time. Peninsula Clean Energy is currently delivering carbon free energy on a yearly basis, and PCE is committed to delivering 100% renewable energy by 2025.
Addressing San Mateo residents concerns of cost and grid capacity through educational outreach is an excellent idea.
We want everyone to be on-board for our cleaner future. There is no time like the present to proceed with sharing the scientific facts and benefits that rebates can deliver. The Rincon Report shows that replacing gas with electrification is now comparable in cost, if not less expensive than gas replacement, especially for low income residents.
No one is proposing to remove existing gas equipment from the home, but to replace it when it fails and take full
advantage of funding and rebates. This is an important point and one that should be shared widely so that people living in San Mateo can understand that their voices and concerns are being heard. This is a mission to help all people in San Mateo with cleaner air and healthier lives. We will all benefit without imposing hardships on anyone.
Thank you for your continued effort to help move San Mateo forward with education and health.
Sincerely,
Leane Eberhart
From: Cheryl Weiden
To: Clerk
Subject: Electrify San Mateo: Decarbonize All Buildings in San Mateo Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 1:27:34 PM
Dear Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash and City Council
San Mateo must act now to decarbonize. It's not just about the environment; it's about our health, our economy, and our future.
The urgency is undeniable. We have a narrow window, mere years until 2030, to avoid irreversible climate damage. Extreme weather, respiratory illnesses, and economic instability are all on the horizon.
But we have the power to change course.
Peninsula Clean Energy is currently delivering carbon
free energy on a yearly basis, and is committed to delivering 100% renewable energy by 2025. Funding abounds, and studies show electrification is affordable, especially for low- income residents.
It's not just about the planet. Electrification means cleaner air.
The Bay Area Air Quality
District estimates that eliminating NOX and particulate matter from gas fired air and water heaters can save lives (up to 85 a year) and reduce asthma attacks (15,000 yearly). It fosters green jobs and attracts sustainable businesses.
Choose to be leaders. Adopt ambitious electrification policies with a 2030 deadline. Choose clean air, a healthy future, and leave a legacy of resilience.
With utmost respect and hope,
Cheryl Weiden
From: Andrea Chow
To: Patrice Olds; Martin McTaggart
Subject: FW: Tues, Jan 16 Study Session on Sustainable Buildings Strategy Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 8:44:49 AM
Attachments: image013.png
image014.png
image015.png
image016.png
image017.png
image018.png
From:
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2024 10:27 AM
To: Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Tues, Jan 16 Study Session on Sustainable Buildings Strategy
Andrea-
I am a disabled retiree, working part-time and I cannot afford a $40,000 home energy retrofit with correspondingly higher electricity rates.
The fact that I am a white homeowner in San Mateo is irrelevant.
Inflicting economic hardship on low income residents while virtue signaling is cruel.
X Bill Williams, San Mateo
Sent from Outlook
From: Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2024 12:00 PM
Cc: Andrea Chow <[email protected]>
Subject: Tues, Jan 16 Study Session on Sustainable Buildings Strategy
Study Session on Sustainable Buildings Strategy – Tuesday, Jan. 16
Join the upcoming City Council Study Session on Tuesday, Jan. 16 to learn more about building electrification and the policy options being introduced for City Council feedback and direction.
Your feedback is critical in shaping an equitable and effective strategy which reflects the lived experience and values of all San Mateans.
The session will focus on analyzing how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our community by decarbonizing homes and buildings. Staff will share an update on the development of the “Building for the Future: City of San Mateo Sustainable Buildings Strategy.” The goal of this project is to develop a long-term strategy to electrify buildings in San Mateo, including policies and actions for both residential and nonresidential buildings. The meeting packet is available on the
San Mateo Public Meeting Portal.
You are receiving this email because you responded to our survey or made a public comment on a Sustainable Buildings Strategy or electrification item. If you would like to be removed from this list, please reply to this email.
Sincerely,
Andrea
Andrea Chow
Sustainability Analyst | City Manager’s Office
330 W. 20th Ave. San Mateo, CA 94403
650-522-7007 | [email protected]
* PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information that is confidential and prohibited from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete this message along with any attachments from your computer. Thank you.
From: Marty Jordan
To: Clerk
Subject: in support of electrifying San Mateo buildings Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 10:39:53 AM
Dear Mayor Nash and City Council –
I am writing to express my strong support of the initiative “Electrify San Mateo.” I appreciate the Council and City for their ongoing leadership and commitment to this important effort. The time for electrification is here, what with all the local, state and federal funding/rebates available to everyone. It is important to adopt a strong electrification policy now to abate ongoing climate pollution in our city.
In promoting this policy, it is important to dispel the myth that the city is going to take away everyone’s gas stove.
Our citizens need to understand that all that is being asked of them is to replace any gas appliance, that needs to be replaced, with an electric one. And given the rebates and the decreasing cost of electric appliances, and the positive impact on the environment with this action, this is a no brainer.
Please take the strongest action possible.
Marty Jordan
From: Rick Ballard
To: Clerk; City Council (San Mateo)
Subject: Public comment regarding San Mateo Sustainable Buildings Strategy Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 2:35:12 PM
Dear Mayor Diaz Nash and City Councilmembers,
Climate change is the most urgent issue of our lifetime; an existential crisis dwarfing all others. I applaud the council for your time and attention to electrification policy, and I urge you to move forward on decarbonization and electrification measures for our city. We need to stop replacing aged-out gas appliances with new gas appliances which continue to burn fossil fuel. The ideal time to electrify most existing homes is when their appliances already require replacement, so we can't afford to miss that opportunity. While there are challenges to any new policy, please devote your energy to addressing those challenges instead of backing down from electrification. Future generations are depending on you.
Thank you,
- Richard Ballard
San Mateo Resident
From: Chip B. Goldstein
To: Clerk
Subject: Support for electrification
Date: Sunday, January 14, 2024 9:04:01 PM
San Mateo City Council,
Please keep enhancing your previous commitment to "Establish policies to decarbonize existing buildings and infrastructure and eliminate methane gas use by 2030." Although I am a resident of Half Moon Bay, which has adopted electrification goals, the pernicious effects of carbon emissions do not distinguish between city and regional boundaries.
Thank you,
Dr. Chip B. Goldstein
Half Moon Bay
From: Michelle Hudson
To: City Council (San Mateo); Clerk
Subject: Sustainable Buildings Strategy Session
Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 9:10:15 PM
Dear City Council Members,
Please adopt the strongest policies and actions possible for the sustainable buildings strategy - decarbonization - in tomorrow's study session.
With the intersection of the climate crisis, increased understanding of health hazards of gas appliances, and the very generous sources of funding now available, the era of building electrification has arrived in San Mateo.
Please continue the City’s strong leadership in advancing building electrification through the adoption of strong decarbonization policies, and by providing educational resources to help residents make the change from gas to electric appliances.
Thank you for all you do to provide the community with cleaner air, a healthier environment, and a safe future.
Thank you,
Michelle Hudson
San Mateo Resident
From: Matthew Lau
To: Clerk
Subject: Urging San Mateo to Take Action on the Climate Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 11:22:07 PM
Dear Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash and San Mateo City Council Members, My name is Matthew Lau and I am a Junior at Aragon High School in San Mateo. Thank you for taking the time to consider the crucial issue of building electrification. As a young person, it is terrifying to know that my generation will inherit the impacts of climate change on Earth. The IPCC has determined that the earth only has 6 years until the damage to climate change will be irreversible. As I see news everyday about climate disasters ravaging the world and reports being publicized that the planet's temperature is rising to an unbearable high, it is extremely concerning and makes me almost hopeless. I will be graduating soon, and I hope to pursue learning more about environmental science so that I can become a change-make in mitigating the effects of climate change. But as with everything, it will take time for me to get to that level. Currently, I am part of SMC organizations like the San Mateo County Youth Commission to reduce effects of climate change, but I cannot personally firsthand create policy changes in the government field.
I applaud the city for taking action and setting the goal to eliminate methane gas use by 2030. However, the city will never reach this goal by not taking the strongest possible
actions in a swift manner. Now is the most critical time to act. I don’t want to graduate from college and see that nothing has changed, and that young people still have to fight for the same minimum necessary action that I was fighting for when I was a freshman in high school.
It has been well established that the impacts of climate change will fall disproportionately on low-income communities of color. Addressing climate action from the perspective of equity is crucial. Adoption of a strong electrification policy encourages low income San Mateo residents to take full advantage of PCE’s draft proposal to pay for the electrification of low income homes.
This is how the council can address equity.
Strong electrification does not mean removing existing gas infrastructure from homes, but replacing it when it fails and taking full advantage of rebates and funding. Just one San Mateo home electrifying will eliminate 10 tons of greenhouse gasses, and when applied to even more homes, that is potentially hundreds of thousands of tons per year. In addition to reducing emissions, replacing gas equipment also has significant health benefits. Children who grow up in homes that use fossil fuels for heating and cooking have a much higher chance of developing asthma. Replacing gas is one of the most direct actions that a person can take to respond to the urgency of the climate crisis. San Mateo should be empowering their residents to take action and use the city’s unique positioning and privilege to provide the adequate education and resources for San Mateo residents to take full advantage of the funding available.
Listen to the youth. Please help take action for our planet that we can continue in the future.
Thank you,
Matthew Lau
From: Elaine Salinger
To: Clerk
Cc: Michelle Hudson; Robert Whitehair
Subject: A comment for the City Decarbonization Study Session Date: Saturday, January 13, 2024 10:43:24 PM
Hello Mayor Nash and City Council members,
I want to thank you for electrifying San Mateo buildings, for showing leadership, and for honoring your commitments.
There are numerous studies showing that gas appliances are more expensive to run than the newer electric appliances. We replaced a gas furnace with a heat pump and our energy bill went down by 70%. And it is projected that the cost of gas will rise faster than electricity.
The reach codes that San Mateo approved last year do not mandate removal of functioning gas appliances. No one is mandating removal of appliances that are working, but appliances that fail should be replaced with energy efficient electric appliances.
The Rincon Report shows that replacing gas with electric appliances is now comparable in cost, and possibly less expensive than replacing with gas appliances, especially for low income homes.
The 1200+ Citizens Climate Lobby members in San Mateo County and I urge you to move forward with building electrification in San Mateo. CCL has over 200 members living in the city of San Mateo.
Elaine Salinger, San Mateo County Chapter Leader
Citizens Climate Lobby
GREAT!
1) Thank the City for considering this very important issue. It is an example of how the City of San Mateo continues to show leadership and honor its commitments. 2) Strong decarbonization implementation is in accordance with Cit GREAT!
1) Thank the City for considering this very important issue. It is an example of how the City of San Mateo continues to show leadership and honor its commitments. 2) Strong decarbonization implementation is in accordance with Cit when it
fails and take full advantage of funding and rebates.
8) Better yet, removing gas equipment from San Mateo h
From: Linh Dan
To: Clerk
Subject: Agenda Item 1: Sustainable Buildings Strategy - Project Update Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 9:22:37 AM
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:
Thank you so much for holding a study session on this issue critical to public health & equity and a livable climate.
First, thanks to staff for a report that highlights the health and equity benefits of electrification,
and the cost chart that unequivocally proves that NOW is the time for homeowners and property owners to opt for a heat pump water heater over a gas one! Regarding the recommended policy options, I urge you to be more ambitious and front load the efforts to have a chance of meeting the 2030 goal, including directing staff to take all actions necessary NOW to completely smooth the path for same day heat pump water heater replacements to be available in the City of San Mateo by 2025 in time for BAAQMD to see the possibilities of smooth implementation of their clean air water heater rule so BAAQMD Staff can share results with their board.
I'm a Menlo Park resident, and we often take our kids to eat at one of San Mateo's many diverse and wonderful restaurants, combined with a stop at the park or library.
Thank you for your service and leadership, and I look forward to the example the City of San Mateo can set for other Bay Area cities.
Linh Dan Do
From: Anjuli Mishra
To: Clerk
Subject: City Council 1/16 Meeting Comment
Date: Monday, January 15, 2024 1:41:24 PM
Dear Mayor Lisa Diaz Nash and San Mateo City Council Members, My name is Anjuli Mishra
. I am 16 and a student in San Mateo. Thank you for taking the time to consider the crucial issue of building electrification. As a young person, I am afraid of the world that my generation will be inheriting due to the impacts of climate change. The IPCC has determined that the earth only has 6 years until the damage to climate change will be irreversible. In 6 years I will be graduating college and entering the workforce, and I want to be entering a workforce where working in sustainability and climate solutions can still have an impact rather than being looked at like a lost cause.
I applaud the city for taking action and setting the goal to eliminate methane gas use by 2030. However, the city will never reach this goal by not taking the strongest possible actions in a swift manner. Now is the most critical time to act. I don’t want to graduate from college and see that nothing has changed, and that young people still have to fight for the same minimum necessary action that I was fighting for when I was a freshman in high school.
It has been well established that the impacts of climate change will fall disproportionately on low-income communities of color. Addressing climate action from the perspective of equity is crucial. Adoption of a strong electrification policy encourages low income San Mateo residents to take full advantage of PCE’s draft proposal to pay for the electrification of low income homes.
This is how the council can address equity.
Strong electrification does not mean removing existing gas infrastructure from homes, but replacing it when it fails and taking full advantage of rebates and funding. Just one San Mateo home electrifying will eliminate 10 tons of greenhouse gasses, and when applied to even more homes, that is potentially hundreds of thousands of tons per year. In addition to reducing emissions, replacing gas equipment also has significant health benefits. Children who grow up in homes that use fossil fuels for heating and cooking have a much higher chance of developing asthma. Replacing gas is one of the most direct actions that a person can take to respond to the urgency of the climate crisis. San Mateo should be empowering their residents to take action and use the city’s unique positioning and privilege to provide the adequate education and resources for San Mateo residents to take full advantage of the funding available.
Listen to the youth. Our future is in your hands.
Thank you,
Anjuli