Great. Now I'll hand the meeting over to Chair Bill Wright. >> Thank you. Um, good afternoon everyone. Uh, I am calling this meeting to order at 4:33 p.m. In accordance with the building emissions reduction and
disclosure ordinance, Boston City Code ordinances section 7-3.2, Two, the Bura Review Board will hold a virtual public meeting at 4:30 p.m. on March 9th to review the following topics in regard to the reduction of greenhouse gases from building energy production and
consumption so as to promote the public health and welfare of Boston residents. In accordance with the Massachusetts executive order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, we are conducting this public meeting online. The public may access this call through Zoom or telephone. For the
record, I am Jessica Boatright, chairperson of the board, and I will now conduct a roll call of board members. Board members, please say your name in the order that they appear on the slide. Uh, Jessica Boight and handing it over to Stephen Ellis.
>> Steven Ellis on Farooqi, >> Halemore, >> Regal Stoval, >> Brian War. >> Thank you. And um welcome to Council Royal to his uh first meeting on our on
the board. Um staff will now introduce themselves. >> Hi Hannah Payne. Diana Vasquez. Hi everyone. Claudius Martinez. >> Thank you. Unfortunately Diggy Chin is not available to be here today. Um but
she did a lot of fantastic work prepping us for a very good meeting. So uh here's the agenda for today's meeting. We're going to start with a vote on solar exemption on a solar exemption request application. Then we will discuss and vote on the funds application cycle for
this year. And afterward we will approve the February 9th meeting minutes and hear administrative updates. Uh at the end we will adjourn the meeting. So, um, we're going to hear some information about a solar exemption request from the Boston Housing Authority. I will hand it over to
Claudia for an overview. >> Hi everyone. I'm going to first start with some background on solar energy and uh solar requirements under Roberto before we go into the application itself. So as a reminder from previous
conversations we've had on renewable energy uh we have very very specific requirements for Berto on which types of solar energy can count for Berto compliance. Um and um in this slide I'll try to explain the background on why those requirements exist in the first
place. So um the first thing to know is that when we have a solar array or a solar farm there are three types of products that we have to think about. The first one is the electricity that it's produced by the solar array itself. And this can be directly delivered to a
building when we have on-site solar behind the meter. For example, this is the classic instance of rooftop solar. Uh or the solar firm can simply deliver electricity directly to the grid. The second product that solar firms produce
are renewable energy certificates or Rex. These are used for renewable energy accounting purposes. So in practice, a company, an entity, even a government cannot claim that they have used renewable energy if they had not
retained and retired renewable energy certificates from the renewable energy market. So this is more like an accounting mechanisms that we use across countries and different types of organizations to take credit for renewable energy. Then in the case of
solar, we have a third product that we call solar net metering credits that are used for billing purposes. So this is what actually shows up in an eversource bill and that helps um building owners that have um contracted with solar
providers that have instal installed solar on site to actually see cost savings in their bills. Um, so this can show up in different ways in an Eversource bill, but for example, for on-site solar systems connected to a building, uh, this will show up as a
kilowatt hour credit that is directly shown in the bill. And for, um, solar farms that are not connected directly to your building, you will see a dollar credit that is being um, credited to your account for Eversource. So again as
I just mentioned under most renewable energy accounting standards this is totally separate from just the Berto ecosystem an entity cannot claim that they have used renewable energy without retiring the associated renewable energy certificates that were produced by a
solar farm or a wind farm. Um however in Massachusetts to get funding from the state to install solar or enter into new solar agreements um there is the smart program that is run by the state and as
an exchange for getting incentives for your solar project. You are not allowed to keep those renewable energy certificates for yourself to take credit for that renewable energy. Instead, those racks are retained by the program and used by utilities to comply with
their own renewable energy requirements. Um, in during the Berdo regulations development process, this was raised as an issue for building owners because a lot of building owners rely on this smart funding to be able to afford to install or enter into community solar
agreements, for example. And we didn't want to penalize building owners that would have relied on smart funding to be able to use renewable energy or solar in this in this case. So in order to um avoid penalizing those owners that rely
on their smart program and in order to incentivize solar development inside of Boston, Berto regulations specifically allow Berto building owners to still take credit for solar energy even if they don't retain and retire the associated renewable energy certificate
if that solar system is located in Boston. So we're saying if you are installing solar energy in Boston, we are not checking or care if you have them the associated Rex for that solar power. You can still take credit for
that under Berto. Berto also grandfathered or allowed solar systems that were already in use before the regulations were passed to still be used for Berto compliance. So solar systems that were located outside of Boston but started operations before
2024 and for which building owners were already receiving solar net metering credits uh for before 2024 are still eligible for BETO compliance. Um, last year we came back to the board and the APCC to be able to allow an exemption
process for this last requirement because we heard from multiple building owners who experience delays or extenduating circumstances in getting solar projects online before the 2024 cutoff. Um, so um that exemption is what
we're going to hear about today. Uh, next slide please. This is just another way to look at solar systems under Berto. Um, in the market when you're trying to install or contract with solar providers, you will
find a lot of market names for solar from community solar, virtual p power purchase agreements, um, virtual net metering credit agreements. There's many ways that we can talk about solar and the market mechanisms to get that solar. To simplify that, under Berto, we
classify solar energy into two big buckets. One, on-site solar located behind the meter. This is again when the solar panel is installed on the property and it's connected directly to your building. So, electricity is delivered directly to the building itself. Um,
because on-site solar in this case would have to be located on site on a Berto building, that means that these systems are always located in Boston. So therefore, they're always eligible to be used for Berto compliance without wreck retirement. And um in the bottom you can
just see how the credits for the solar energy produced by an on-site solar system would show up on an Eversource bill which as you can see we can um actually discern a kilowatt hour amount that is being used to reduce the the
amount of money that that a building owner is paying for their resource bill. The other big bucket we call solar net metering credits. Uh this is for any system where electricity is delivered directly to the grid and not to the building um itself. This can be
community solar power purchase agreements, virtual net metering agreements. Again there are different names that you will find these in the market but for tensing purposes under Berto we just call it solar net metering credits. And this is the the case that is only eligible without rec retirement
if the system is located in Boston or it started operations before 2024 or if it received an exemption from the review board. And at the bottom you can see how those net metering credits are reflected in an Eversource bill. As you can see there is not kilowatt hour amount
associated uh with that solar energy. This is simply shown as a dollar discount in an eversource bill. Um, next slide. So, given that now I will move to a summary of the application that was
submitted by the Boston Housing Authority. Um, in this case, the Boston Housing Authority or BHA is seeking an exemption for five solar farms located in eastern Massachusetts, which you can see in the um table on the left. Um, in
this case, the BHA is working with three different solar providers across these five solar farms. One of the solar farms, the one that you can see at the bottom, has already started operations, but it did so in 2025, while the other f uh four solar farms are expected to
begin operations later this year. Um, based on the submission from the BH BHA, we categorize or organize our extenduating circumstances into four buckets. and I will explain each of those um in this presentation. So um the
first one is a long and complex procurement process that the BHA had to go through to contract with different solar providers. The second circumstance was receiving a lack or not being able to receive or a lack of proposals for solar developments that were located
inside of Boston or that include the retirement of massclass one Rex as part of the same contract. The third circumstance circumstance are the financial constraints that the BHA faces to pursue other types of renewable energy purchases uh such as uh simply
buying unbundled mass one Rex in the market. And finally uh the there were delays in the start of operations of the five solar farms that are part of this application which which were beyond the BHA's control. And now I'll go in depth to each of these uh circumstances.
So first as I mentioned the BHA um had a very extensive procurement process to contract with different solar providers. they initiated a comprehensive request for proposals process or RFP process to solicit eligible solar net metering
credits in 2023. Uh so even before the 2024 cutoff um this RFP process as you may have been able to see in the application package was led by pure pure source consulting and renewables worldwide uh which as they stated in
their letter of attestation assisted the BHA with extensive outreach to different solar providers. Altogether this procurement process including solicitation, the proposal review process, analysis, negotiation and final
contract or awards uh took close to two years. The second circumstance was that while the RFP itself or the the types of contracts that the BHA was open um to
agree with uh included all types of different solar agreements that are eligible under Berto including uh solar net metering contracts that would be bundled with massless one Rex or that would include that component of REC retirement. Uh they also solicited
proposals for solar farms located inside of Boston and that would always be eligible without wreck require wreck retirement or that um were generated by solar farms outside of Boston that started operations before 2024.
Um and the BHA did receive multiple um proposals uh related to solar net mirroring credits. uh a lot of proposals that would function under the smart program that I mentioned in the slides before uh and a virtual power purchase agreement. However, the BHA did not
receive any offers that would um would bundle solar net metering credits with maskless one Rex uh or that would offer only maskless one Rex on their own. And um given that a lot of the offers relied on smart funding, I'll just uh reiterate
here that in these cases, solar developers are unable to retain uh the mass mass class one rexs that are generated by the solar farms. Um as a third circumstance, the BHA also explored purchasing unbundled mass one
rex through other means in addition to the solar net metering credit uh contracts. Uh however this was um deemed unfeasible for the BHA due to financial constraints. Uh this is because purchasing only on bundle mascus one rex
um would uh simply represent a cost for the BHA and they're unable to recover cost through utility savings in the same way that solar mirroring credits allowed them to do. Um so this was deemed as a strategy
strategy that would risk operations and maintenance funding for the housing authority in the long term. Um in the end the BH8 awarded contracts to nine community solar developers and in their compliance road map um all of the
projects related to these contracts uh were assumed to become operational by December 31st of 2023. However, four of the awarded farms haven't uh become operational yet and one of them is already operational but did so in 2025
after the 2024 cutoff and as mentioned before this um commercial uh operation date the delay was beyond the BH's control. Um next slide please.
So, as our official staff comments, uh staff recommends the approval of a solar exemption for the use of net metering credits from the five solar farms that we were shown in the previous previous slide. Um based on our review, we believe that the housing authority
provided enough evidence that they pursued good fate efforts to procure eligible renewable energy for BERT compliance well before 2024. Um, it is also worth noting that in their application, the BHA uh also explains that using solar net metering credits uh
is seen as a complimentary measure, not a substitution to doing on-site improvements to their buildings. Um, and while the Boston Housing Authority is indeed prioritizing on-site decarbonization projects as part of their Berto compliance strategy, these
are ongoing capital projects that will require multiple years to uh reach completion and see those uh greenhouse gas emission savings. So, procuring renewable energy is a necessary complimentary effort for the BHA to reach BERT compliance in the near term.
Um and also while the BHA is seeking this exemption for five solar farms, um their application also mentions that they're exploring the potential for amending other contracts that they have with solar providers to integrate uh
Berto compliant Rex into their strategy and other solutions that would allow them to secure um net metering credits from eligible projects in the future as well. Uh, we believe that this demonstrates that the BHA has a commitment to pursuing compliance efforts that result in the highest
quality renewable energy that would benefit Boston residents and our local communities while also addressing and being cognizant of their financial restrictions. Um, so I'll stop there. >> Thank you, Claudia. Um, before we move
on to questions from the board, is there anyone representing the applicant that would like to introduce themselves for the record? >> Good afternoon. This is Joel Wool, deputy administrator at the Boston Housing Authority, and I'm joined by Amha Abraa, um, who's our senior energy
engineer on our team. >> Great. Thank you. Thanks for joining us. Um, so I will now ask each board member if they have any clarifying questions or comments about the application. Uh, thank you um to both Joel and Aha for
being here today. Um, c can Diana and Claudia, can you just clarify um, board questions are addressed to to staff or can board also address questions to the VHA members?
Yeah, I can add. Uh, so ideally the questions should be about the application and so staff is happy to try to answer those questions, but there may be questions that BHA staff is most probably better um, equipped to answer and so they they're also welcome to answer those.
>> Okay, great. Thank you. I just wanted to be sure. Um and I my question is just about um the requirements for either reporting or compliance if we give an exemption. So
particularly because some of the details in the application talk about things coming online later this year. Um are will is there anything about the exemption that would um allow us to understand if
if those newer farms come online um this year as planned or if if there are delays sort of it are we engaged in that or we give an exemption today and then they sort of manage to the best of their abilities and we've spoken.
I I can take this but um Hannah and Diana feel free to jump in as well. So the way we would get information for their solar net mirroring credit use is through annual reporting. Uh so the burding form asks every building owner
if they have used renewable energy. solar energy is part of the options that they can choose. And then within that bucket of solar energy, they need to report if it was from on-site solar behind the meter or solar net mirroring credits. For solar net mirroring credits, they also have to provide
evidence of whether that they meet the burd requirements that are the default of if they have a solar exemption. So we would catch annual reporting the moment in which u different buildings from the BHA start receiving those solar net maring credits.
Okay. So we but so we wouldn't necessarily know if the 2026 farms come online, but we would know how many credits BHA is using. Okay. >> All right. Um I will move on to board
member Ellis. >> Yes. Thank you, Chair, and uh thank you Jo and for attending. Um I really don't have any questions for you. I think uh Claudia you you did a pretty good job at laying out the you know the overall aspects of the application as well as
reminding us why we have these uh flexibility options available to in this case BHA. So I as I said no uh no questions. So thank you for the presentation. Uh back to you chair. >> Great. Thank you uh board member Furki.
>> Thank you madam chair and I'll join the chair in welcoming councelor Royal to the board as well. um really appreciated this application and the narrative especially answered all my questions. So um none at this time I'll yield back. Thanks. >> Thank you um board member Lidorn.
>> Yes, thank you. And I also welcome the counselor to this uh review board and uh thanks u to the BHA. I did uh review it. So thank you Joel and Anha. Um I wondered just one question that's you know peripheral but related um is you
know how much cost savings if will the BHA realize as a result of you know these solar contracts that were executed if any if there's a way to quantify that or will there be a cost saving
>> um to the chair of the board and is it all right to just respond directly there? >> Oh yes please. Sorry. Um >> um >> go right ahead. >> Thank Thank you. Uh thank you chair boatright and um um and uh member lore. Um so the BHA will receive
substantial cost savings um with our solar contracts for community solar. Um it's it is um it is a little bit uh confusing to calculate I must admit because the
contracts are different percentile savings based on what is produced in the whole um and that um the savings ranges from roughly 10 to 30% um depending on which contract and the
amount of specific energy. However, for the universe that we're talking about today with the exemption request, I believe at the time of award, we estimated about a million dollars annually. Um, some of those to federal sites would get shared with HUD, but I would say it's in
the it is no question that it is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Um, >> um, changing somewhat based on um, electricity rates over time. Um but that um it's a very substantial savings and
that is um going to just to maybe answer the follow-up question if there is one um operating operating savings which is sort of paying staff paying for maintenance you know repairing doors hiring extermination that kind of thing.
So it's very much like the savings to um ways that tenants see and feel in terms of housing quality. >> Great. No, thank you. That that's really helpful. Um just uh and this again is somewhat peripheral but curious. Um it's for me a learning opportunity as well
perhaps. um in the application that uh the consultant letter um that was included in the application talked about um the that there's a public entity net metering cap and is it I I wasn't
familiar with that public entity net metering cap and I don't know if you Joel or know more about this but just it sounds like the the BHA is at that cap or I'm just curious if you know anything about that
>> that's correct. So um so historically um um historically net metering the amount the amount of solar that can be net metered in a utilities like an electric company's uh service territory. So like
in east Eversource in eastern Massachusetts or Nstar before it was Eversource, right? said >> um there's a cap on net metering generally um and um public entities got a partial carve out from that um which both was sort of
op created a higher ceiling. Um but also um as solar compensation has been reduced over time, the public entity compensation rate has tended to be higher because it is in the public interest, right, for affordable housing in this case.
>> So >> um BHA with with some of these net metering rewards is approaching that um 10 megawatt cap or nearly we probably I think we'll be at it with some of these coming online. Um and
there are um the we are certainly part of a constituent body that's hoping that that will there will be increased flexibility on that um public entity cap because as um as was shared so um uh in such a
detailed form by the city staff earlier, net metering while it has the state has generally been transitioning to the smart program, net metering does allow for um the potential for also uh purchasing or owning the Rex in the same
contractual vehicle. Um and one of the things that we're hoping to do with a few of these contracts um with with at least one of the vendors with some of the solar farms is to amend those contracts and and so that they incorporate a partial wreck purchase. Um
>> but um that's as was as was detailed that's only possible under net metering. It's not really possible under smart because they're uh I think it's the utility company that owns those credits for like 20 years. So, so sorry to respond at length, but the short of it
is that um we are um a host customer um signed up with the vendor, signed up with the uh DPU, if you will, for a significant um portion of we're an anchor customer of these community solar farms. They get a specific compensation rate based on being affiliated with
public entity and that is a limited amount at 10 megawatts. >> Got it. No, you're that was really helpful. Thank you, Joel. I appreciate that. And and just just real quick and then I'm I'm done. And that the to get the the increase or the raise in the public entity net metering cap, which
makes sense to me. Is that um regulated by the state DPU or federal? Who who regulates that? >> That is a um would require uh the legislature, the state legislature. >> Oh, okay. Got it. Okay. Thank you. I I'm
I'm all set. Thank you. Um, board member. >> Yes. Um, I didn't have too much to contribute to that. I, uh, read the report that you sent us earlier in the notes and not really too much I can ask. Um, thank
you for putting such a good presentation together um, and informing us. I'm all set. How are you? Back the floor. >> Thank you. Um, councelor Rorell.
>> Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the members of the board for welcoming uh to the board. Um, and thank you to the BHA for their presentation. I have no further I have no questions. Um, the application um and the presentation
covered it all for me. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. Um, so I will leave a minute if there are any further discussions or questions from board members. Sounds like we're in pretty good shape. Um, if there are not any further
discussions or questions, is there a motion to approve the Boston Housing Authorities's application for a solar exemption? >> So moved. >> I second it. >> Thank you. Great. Uh so um there is a motion to approve from board member
Latimore, seconded by board member Stoll. On the motion to approve Boston Housing Authorities application for solar exemption, how do you vote? I'll uh call on you alphabetically. Please vote in favor, opposed, or abstain. Uh I
vote in favor. Board member Ellis, >> in favor. >> Board member Farooqi, >> in favor. >> Board member Latimore in favor. Board member Stell >> in favor. >> Board member Warell
>> in favor. >> The eyes have it. Uh the motion passes. Boston Housing Authority solar exemption request has been approved. Thank you to the applicant for the um thorough application and for your work on this matter and the environment department
will follow up with you on next steps. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks. Um, so we will now discuss and vote on the equitable emissions investment fund 2026
application cycle for this year and I will hand it over to Diana for some information and background. >> Thank you chair. Uh, hi everyone. So I'll present on a proposal for this year's equable emissions investment
fund. Uh I'll just well maybe for some prepared background you may remember we sort of put out some general general feelers or proposals to the board and then asked board members to give us feedback via a Google forum. So I'm just going to review the feedback we've
received um and the proposal that we've made based on that feedback um and sort of like highlight any changes or updates that were made because of the feedback we received. So up top, I just want to say the proposal we're going to put forth today is that the review board allocate $600,000
for this year's application cycle of the equitable emissions investment fund with a preference to make uh to grant multiple awards up of up to $200,000 uh with the intention to open the application on March 30th and close the
application on June 1st to of this year. As a quick reminder of the eligibility in order to apply for the fund, uh any applicant must be a nonprofit organization or an organization with a fiscal sponsor. Um any of the project
proposals that are submitted must include some sort of um building emissions reduction component as part of the project. And project proposals must have a public purpose. So they must serve a public purpose. And on the right side we have the evaluation criteria
that the review board uses when um reading through the project proposals. So as I mentioned emissions reductions are required but other co- benefits that could be evaluated are benefits to affordable housing, benefits to tenants, um benefits to labor and workforce
development, benefits to outdoor air quality and indoor air quality, climate resilience benefits, energy justice benefits, and any other benefits. um that the review board finds help by instead helps forward the the sort of
intention of Berto. So very quickly I wanted to share some of the feedback we received and how we sort of incorporated any of that feedback into our proposal. Um so the first question we asked is whether board members agreed with releasing $600,000
with a preference to release multiple awards of 200,000. um everyone uh all of the feedback received was generally in favor with one sort of caveat. The caveat being um they wanted the language to be flexible
enough to award multiple projects uh of up to $200,000 each and not make an intention of only awarding three projects um with $200,000 each. So, this just gives us more flexibility. Uh, if an applicant applies for a project proposal for up to a hundred,000 grant,
$100,000, for example, um the board could make that grant. Um, so the language is uh with the preference of awarding multiple projects of up to $200,000 per project. That does not guarantee that they get the full 200,000
if they apply for less money or if the board decides to grant less money. So, just providing a little bit more flexibility there. Um the second sort of question that we asked was whether the board agreed with the condition that grantees are expected
to spend down their award within 3 years. Uh so we received some feedback about inquiring uh how the community preservation act team or the CPA team um communicates this. They have a two-year spendown requirement. Um and so that
small text on the left hand side at the bottom of the slide is the language that the CPA uses. They uh they sort of categorize it as a readiness to proceed. So they ask applicants to tell them um sort of explain that the project is in
fact ready to proceed with like planning documents, maybe construction estimates, timelines, that sort of thing. Um, and if they do exceed that 2-year timeline, um, the grantee must submit a sort of formal extension typically after a meeting with the CPA staff. So with that
in mind, we put in our uh the proposal in the grant itself or in the grant application itself would be a question that's similarly that informs applicants that they are expected to spend down the funds within 3 years and all grantees including the ones from the past two
cycle have to provide quarterly updates. So every 3 months they have to provide um an update to the staff around timelines um accomplishments, any delays, those sort of things. And then they also if they exceed the grant the
grant agreement timeline they have to submit a formal uh grant extension that includes a justification for the grant extension. So why is the grant um deadline having to be extended? So those are the things that would be happening within the equitable emissions
investment fund. Uh the third question we asked is whether there was a preference for buildings that are subject to Berto or you know just any buildings that could receive sort of um benefits from a project proposal. Um generally there was no strong preference with a with one
vote voting for buildings subject to Berto. Um so we are stating that in the application there is a preference for projects that impact um buildings that are subject to Berto. We also asked if there was a preference for types of projects prioritized this
cycle. Um there seemed to be a mix of responses with a small preference for energy efficiency improvements in fuel switching. So we are also including planning to include language on a preference for projects that include energy efficiency and or fuel switching.
And just a quick reminder that does not preclude other project types for being submitted as well. So we just sort of indicating to applicants that there's a preference for these but this does not mean other project types could not be submitted. Uh and then we had sort of like an
openformed additional questions. So the first additional question we received um that there was support for requiring projects to be beyond the sort of scoping and assessing stage. Um these projects I guess in other words are more
like shovel ready um because it's something we highlight in the application as well uh is that these projects are better served by the building decarbonization advisor program or or BAP as we affectionately call it. uh BAP sort of provides it provides a a
complimentary zero overtime plan to nonprofit organizations by pairing them up with an engineering firm and that engineering firm then works with them to sort of set up their zero overtime plan. Um so that application form process is much less lengthy, much lighter lift. Um
and we rather folks go to that if they're in the planning or or scoping phase. Um, and so we include we plan to include language that says that. Um, there's also support for projects that include engagement in capacity building. Um, and so I just wanted to remind
everyone that under the project activities and scope section of the application, it asks for a full list of tasks expected to be completed from the project. Um, and that can include engagement and information sessions with tenants if applicable and other things like that. Um, so we could add language
that says, you know, the review board may view that more favorably if there are like engagement plans um for bigger projects. Um, I will say it depends on the type of project. Some projects tend to be smaller, so they may not have as much time like a bigger as a big timeline, but those things are included
as one of the questions in the application. Um and so yes, anything although all projects must include a building emissions mitigation component, um projects that include engagement plans may be viewed as more strongly or more strong by the review board. Um and
then lastly, there were like questions and suggestions regarding how to include workforce development sort of co- benefits. Um, so we've added to the draft application this specific language regarding workforce and hiring practices. Uh, if your project involves
hiring a contractor, vendor, or service provider, describe any internal policies you maintain or plan to maintain for this project proposal regarding hiring man minority and womenowned business enterprises or MWBE um or Bostonbased small businesses as
contractors, vendors, services, service providers, etc. Um, we can wordsmith it a little bit, but essentially asking about any sort of plans to sort of maintain a MB MWP policy or
hiring small Boston based businesses um if part of their project in includes hiring service providers. And then just a quick sort of review of the conditions. So any in addition to the any standard grant ag uh grant conditions from the city grantees are
expected to commit to the following. So one reporting as I mentioned most grantees are expected to submit a progress report and or final report depending on the length of their project timeline. Uh most so far have done both.
So a we sort of we meet with the grantees and agree on a milestone and once that milestone is hit we ask for a progress report and then we release more more of their grant funding and once the project is final and complete we ask for a final report and then we release the
final 10% of the funding. Um so it's a staggered amount that gets released based on their progress report and final report. Uh in addition to those formal reportings we also have quarterly check-ins. So, we ask for a main point of contact for each project and every
three months we ask for a quarterly check-in really highlighting um any changes or any delays, any accomplishments, are they ahead of schedule, are they behind of schedule, those sort of things so that can we can really stay on top of um tracking of the project. Uh and then for any award that
contributes to a physical change to a building that the applicant themselves owns, um they must maintain the work and and public access to that work for a minimum of 15 years. Um so that is also a condition that if they receive money
that that includes any physical changes to a building that they own, um it's expected that that access and that work would be maintained for a minimum of 15 years. And this just is another way of highlighting the proposed timeline. So, opening the application at the end of
this month, March 30th, um, and then closing it for June 1st, um, with an application review cycle in between August, uh, July and August, and with the intention of announcing awards in September. Um, so again, wanted to highlight the
proposal language here, uh, that the review board allocates $600,000 for the 2026 application cycle. uh with a preference to grant multiple awards of up to $200,000 uh with the intention to open the application on March 30th and close on
June 1st of this year. I will now hand it over back to you, chair, if there are any questions. >> Great. Thank you. Um I will now uh do questions and comments. I have a couple questions and then I will um ask each board member
uh if they have any additional questions and comments. Um, first just um, thank you to the staff for all your work to get us ready for this. I think we had a really rich conversation last time. Um, and um, and I think this is a really
good organization of our feedback. I also want to just recognize uh, my fellow board members for um, for per for providing input um, to get us to I think some really strong enhancements. Um can
you can you just remind us um what the application timeline was last year in terms of um how much time people have to respond this year versus last year? >> Yes. So the application cycle was open for two months. So it' be very similar
to this proposal is very similar to last year's proposal. >> Okay. And also um it seems to me like we are making some some good changes to strengthen responses but I don't see anything that
I imagine is going to make the application itself either much easier or much harder to complete. I know that there is this one piece which is that people have to use a new grant making system. So, I just wanted to confirm from the staff
perspective that um that given the new system and any other changes, there isn't anything that's going to make this a more difficult lift for applicants. >> Yes, that's a great flag. Thank you, Sher, for flagging that. Uh so, in the
past, we've used uh a Google form to sort of be the submission mechanism with some additional questions and then primarily reviewed um would be more like a project proposal sort of written out. Um our city hall
grants team so the central grants team for all of city hall has procured what is a platform called wisehive and wisehive is sort of meant to be a more streamlined uh platform. So the applicant themselves will have to make an account but once they're in the once
they have an account um it'll allow them to apply for any grants across the city that are in Wise Hive. So, it's sort of like a a one and done and it'll have all of their information including like their vendor ID, their um IRS tax documents and those sort of things. So,
uh on one hand, it's supposed to help streamline the application process for the applicant, which is great. We love that. Um and for the reviewer as well. So as reviewers you will also have to make accounts um but then you'll be able to go in and directly review the applications um directly in Wisehive and
we'll be able to sort of coate that uh much more quickly. As you remember last year we were using Google Sheets. Um so Wisehive will be able to centralize that a little bit better um for us. So there shouldn't be any additional lift. If anything we're hoping that it actually makes things a little bit more
streamlined for the applicants. um they there is a way to sort of see all of the questions in advance. So they could even like you know print it out and then and then go back in and submit it all. Um but there shouldn't there shouldn't be a significant lift for the applicants.
>> Okay, great. Thank you. I will pass it on to board member Ellis. >> Thank you chair and thank you Diana for the presentation. I didn't say it last time, but I'll welcome councelor or else. So, I apologize I did not say that with my fellow board members.
Nevertheless, I you know, one thing that I I want to appreciate is the the flexibility in the language. Um especially saying multiple as opposed to three. I think that is what allowed us to be able to fund the four projects that we had funded in the last
application cycle. So, um thank you for that update of the language. I just wanted to get uh clarification. I I know I have it somewhere at home, but I don't have it in front of me right now. Um can you remind me uh you know excluding the existing funding or projected funding
from the equitable emissions investment fund if we were to spend the full $600,000, how much money would remain in the equitable emissions investment fund? >> Uh so we currently have 1.28 28 million
that are that are not um already committed. Uh to do some quick math, I believe that would be about $680,000. $680,000. >> Okay. So yeah, that's something that I I'm going to keep on my mind um for a
little bit here because uh what I'm noticing, you know, this is the third year of the application cycle uh with roughly I'm just going to call it 600,000 cuz who knows what can happen with the 80, you know, for for other projects and opportunities and wanted to make sure that the environment staff
always has the opportunity to come to the board to let us know, you know, this may be this project or initiative um such as I BDAP are opportunities for the way that we can spend the fund. However,
it is dawning on me or or quite quite uh somewhat of a reality that's sort of showing up right now that this is potentially the second to last year that we would be doing funding for for uh projects or initiatives through the
traditional equitable emissions investment fund cycle. uh we we still are not clear on where additional funding could come from. I don't want to sit here and say that we will be relying on ACPs or alternative compliance payments, but I just wanted noted that,
you know, I'm rightly concerned about that. But I I want to hear from, you know, the city staff. You know, what are your thoughts about this seeming like I'm not saying it will be, but this seeming like the second to last year that we may be doing funding as a result of this pool of money that we have
access to. >> I'm happy to chime in, but >> Oh, okay. Um I I'm happy to answer that. Um I think it's accurate to say that from the funding that we have from the pre like the 3.5 million that was seated in
the fund um this would be the second to last uh grant making opportunity we could do if we want to make a similar uh size of grants um in the next round. Our intention is certainly to be able to
continue this grant making process. It's an essential part of Berto. Um, and we do intend to be collecting alternative compliance payments. How much we'll get in is still yet to be determined. Um, so that does leave a really big question mark in terms of what could those future
years look like. Um, but that's certainly like our goal is to be able to continue to make grants like this from the equitable emissions investment fund going forward. Um but you are correct to see that we are
quickly running out of the money that has been seated initially for this. >> Thank you Hannah. And in a way that's a good thing. I don't want to paint it as a as such a negative uh thing here. It's just that you know knowing that this is the first inaugural year of the Berto
you know review board and we're about to enter a second iteration which you know Diana will talk about later I'm assuming maybe. Um I just wanted to you know shed some light on that that the the the first round of this review board in this three years has uh you know spent a good
amount of money which uh you know again is a good thing but it is also concerning if we do not have a sense of how that pool will be replenished. So with that being said um I want to pledge my support as we continue to go down the line with this but um that's all the
questions and comments that I have for right now. So, I'll turn it back over to you, chair. >> Great. Thank you, um, board member Farooqi. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and, uh, yeah, thank you to the city staff and all my colleagues on the board for our great discussion last time and as well to
Diana and Ziggy for meeting with me afterward to discuss ways that we can, um, in particular uh, really uh, use this fund to invest in our minority owned business enterprises as well as in workers here in the city. And so I appreciate the language. I think this is
on like slide 19 or something, a prior slide uh around um minority business enterprise use. Um so this is uh I think a great step. Uh what I would like to see added as well is language that
addresses not just the uh business uh contractor use but also the workers that will be employed on these projects and funded by this funding. Um I think similar language to what we've seen here
on the the very bottom um would be like a great you know minimum step uh which is to say that the applicant could you know share more information about uh different uh aspects of their uh hiring practices.
Um the city of Boston's climate ready workforce action plan had made some recommendations as to what those are and uh and I'll quote this from the plan which is page 154. Um the review board must consider benefits including living wages, equitable employment and
contracting standards and the impact of local workforce development programs. Um so I think adding language like that just at the disclosure level would allow sufficient flexibility for the applicants. As I mentioned last meeting, obviously different applicants are already using, they already have their own situations going on. They may have
contractors they work with or standing um project labor agreements. And so we are not necessarily trying to get in the middle of that. But having information would be a welcome change from what we've um sometimes seen in the past. And certainly would allow us as review board members to make a more informed decision
uh once that time comes. So, I'm happy to offer that as an amendment to this, you know, after we hear from all of my colleagues. Um, my final uh question, you know, building on board member Ellis's point, which is a very good one on uh the alternative compliance
payments. I'm curious when within this year we'll have a clearer sense of how much money we'll take in in ACPs. Um, and if that'll happen at some time, that'll coincide within the uh decision-making process for this uh fund.
Apologies, I was having trouble with my mute button. Um, chair, I can answer that. Um, um, so we reporting is due May 15th of this year. That's when we'll determine emissions compliance as well. There will be a
little bit of a process to do that as we have um data quality flags that we run on all reported and verified data. So that's like if anything looks out of the ordinary um the verifier and the reporter will be notified and we'll have
to resolve those issues. Once that is completed, then the um emission status will be reflected in our reporting portal and like in Touchstone, our database that we use. Um and then at that point, owners will be able to tell
us if they intend to come into compliance through an alternative compliance payment. And here's where it gets a little bit clunky. Um they will request an invoice. we then have to create the invoice in our city financial systems and send it to them. So there
will be a little bit of delay there. Um but I think we should have a good sense um by May of you know the folks that are kind of the most proactive doing that. Who's intending to make alternative compliance payments? What's that ballpark? Then I
think we'll have more straggling in as you know we follow up with folks who maybe haven't reported and they start getting angry letters that are like you have not complied with this um and then they look at their compliance options and see oh you know my alternative
compliance payments are reasonable I'm just going to pay that and be done with this and come into compliance. So I I do think it will trickle in over time, but I think we'll have a good sense of like if we're talking about like a a sizable amount of money to be able to do, you
know, similar award size that we have done the previous years um or a smaller amount than that in in the spring, I would say Juneish. >> Great. Great. Great. That's excellent. Thank you so much. That's super helpful. So yeah, I think to respond to board member Ellis's point, by the time we're
evaluating the applications, we'll at least have a sense of the scale, if not the exact dollar amount of the ACPs. And so I would feel comfortable moving forward with this proposal right now. Um, and certainly understanding that if we get to a point in the later part of
this year where we recognize that actually we're not going to have very much money at all to give out in the future, then we can uh vote to give out either a fewer number of grants or smaller grants to begin with um to preserve the funding. But certainly, you know, if we have funding, I think we
should give it out and certainly there's a lot of need out in the community for this. So, um, appreciate that and appreciate the opportunity to make sure this is also helping to build wealth for our residents and for our small businesses. Um, with that, I'll yield back to the chair. >> Thank you, board member Latimore.
>> Yes, thank you. Uh, I also think it was uh wellformed. I appreciate the work that this staff have done. I uh also appreciate and want to echo uh what uh uh board member Farooqi has said about
the um WMBBE utilization piece. I was happy to see that again or at least emphasize. I wondered just to follow up on some of uh his comments uh in terms of um you know if if it's stated in the
application that you know there that that is something that is um an evaluative measure or at least something that the city is looking for. Um I wonder if that it makes sense to provide not any referrals but resources for that
to um applicants. So, for example, I know that Mass um Housing Investment Corp. has a pretty extensive WMBBE utilization list and just wondered if the application should link to that
list or link to the Mass Minority Contractors Association. I'm not sure of the legalities of having that type of thing in the application, but just a way to um kind of encourage people to understand where they can go or what potential resources or sources they have
to kind of uh meet meet the the goal of MWBE hiring and or local hiring. So, that's just a a just a suggestion. Not sure how it lines up with the legal aspects of the application. Otherwise, I don't have
any uh other comments. Thank you, >> chair. May I quickly respond? >> Yeah. >> To that. Um I think those are great suggestions. Um, and what I would recommend, board member, board member Latimore, is if you could,
if you have specific examples of organizations that have maintained those lists or are, you know, good resources, if you could send them to um to the staff and we can take a look and have that conversation of whether we can
point to them. I know for certain that we can um always direct people to the um supplier diversity portal that the city of Boston maintains and the Commonwealth maintains. Um but I also recognize there are limitations in that because of the
you know type of work that is being done. So there might be more appropriate um places to direct folks to that have kind of more of the specific jobs that people will be utilizing for this work um like contractor work and things like that. So um if you send those our way we
will take a look at that um and I would like to try to include them but I will we'll have to look at it before I can confirm >> yes or no. Oh, thank you. And I yeah, I appreciate the reminder of the um city and state's um supply diversity portal
which is an important resource as well. But yes, I will send um the contacts that I know of at least at those particular agencies that I just spoke to spoke of to you. Thank you. I that's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you, board member.
>> Thank you. Um, and there's not really too much that I can add to what everybody ahead of me has said. I just was curious how the city handles their um, minority women business. I mean,
don't you have like a quarter you have to um, initiate every year or every quarter or something like that? I'm just curious. >> I can attempt to answer that, but I will. I think we will probably need to follow up um because I'm I am not the
expert on this, but I will say there are um >> for there is the Boston resident jobs policy that applies to like city- funded construction projects. Um so that does set um goals like targets for how many
Boston residents you're hiring, how many um minority like journeymen and apprentices you're hiring and women on the job site. So that's really for construction for procurement. Um I there are like different requirements
that we have to do for certain procurements of you know requesting bids from um registered minority womenowned businesses. Um but we could get you more of the specific details on that if you're interested. >> I just the reason I the the reason I
asked is you know I see it differently than everybody else probably here. But I see the money coming from the city and you know the thing is so many so much of the money should be spent or at least
given the opportunity should be given to those businesses seeing as we are providing the money from a budget. That's that's the only reason why I asked but um that's that's pretty much all I had to say. And uh I just wanted
to welcome um our new council uh uh council member um Roal. Thank you for joining and I'll yield back the floor. >> Great. Uh thanks. I will hand it directly over to our our new member
council. >> Uh thank you chair and thank you member Ellis and Stoville for welcoming to the board. And yeah, I I would definitely love to see how we can whether it's reporting uh similar to what they do in the BRJP on
money spent on the construction. Um I would love to see how we could factor that in. Um and then the other thing that I am curious to see if we could make sure that when the applicant applies that they have the
full construction season to be able to hire. because right now we're taking out like three months of the construction season with the application starting from you know March to to June I believe it is. So,
it may maybe it's in the next iteration, but I you know, I I could just only imagine like how much harder it would be to find a contractor um after June or July u after you're awarded like I guess in the next
iteration, you know, maybe looking at having the application process from October to March. That way, we're giving the applicant the full construction season to hire and complete as much of the work to be done.
>> Thank you, chair. No further questions. >> Thank you. Um the scheduling point is well taken. I don't know if um if any of the board members want to just respond in terms of where projects have been historically um
when they're applying visav like when they would be hiring. >> Uh chair I'm happy to or sorry did you say board members or staff? >> Sorry I meant staff. I was looking at your square. >> I meant staff. >> Uh yes. Okay. >> I guess no one could tell that but me.
>> Uh yes. So typically, I mean, I say typically, we've only had two application um cycles so far, but in the past two cycles, we've had projects sort of run the spectrum. I would say some of the bigger ones um were sort of a mix of
their capital stack. So, a lot of these projects are already underway and they're looking for sort of um supplemental funding to sort of finish out their project. Uh so a lot of times we're actually the projects that get um
proposed are you know already started maybe in the middle of their timeline that kind of thing. Uh so typically they're they're pretty well on their way. Um I would say the other type of project we get are more like service types of projects. So they provide a service um that are not necessarily
contingent upon a physical change of a building. Um, historically those have not been awarded just yet except for one from Boston Medical Center. Um, but Boston Medical Center does in does require installing solar panels. So there is like a little bit of a physical
change there. Um, and then I would say the other like third bucket are like much smaller physical changes. So an example would be um an affordable housing complex that's doing a heat um wasted heat recovery system. So, it's
you're not really making a significant change. You're more like adding something to the building so that you can like recover that wasted heat and make the building more efficient. Um, and those tend to be much smaller scale. They're not they're not very big construction projects. Um, so and they
those projects typically already have sort of a team in place. They already have a a contractor they're working with, for example, who sort of designed it. Um, and so they're more looking for funding to have it, you know, executed. So, we're we're okay in that sense that um we we tend to be okay in terms of
like where the projects are um and not having to bump up against the winter season. >> Awesome. Thank you for that. >> Thank you. Um any further discussions or questions? Calling on board member Ellis
first. >> Thank you, Chair. I, you know, Diana, in light of what the council shared, I just wanted to confirm, you know, the city the the environment department's capacity. I I know you're a small but mighty team over there. Um, knowing that
late spring is the early is the time for reporting and that that in itself has its own uh, you know, time consumed and attention uh, grabbing for you all. As well as the fall is where we do a lot of the flexibility application. So, I guess I just wanted to confirm that, you know,
if you've heard any concerns about the fact that we've only done these uh applications during the summertime and and has that been a barrier for both applicants and has that been a burden for you all while you are reviewing uh you know the data that folks are
submitting through the the Berto platform. So I just wanted to check on your capacity just to make sure that you know do we need a proposal to push this back or are you all comfortable with the timeline and do you get a sense that applicants are comfortable with that timeline as well.
>> Diana, you're muted. >> Sorry. Um No, that's a great question. Thank you for thinking of us in our capacity. Um so in terms of the reporting timeline uh the we have a we are a small but
mighty team and the reporting team is also a small but mighty team and so we're actually we have a you know Aiden and his team is fully dedicated to helping folks get through the reporting process and as he likes to say across the across the finish line. Um so
fortunately that does free up um sort of you know the review board side of things and we are actually pretty okay on that front. So it we're fine in terms of the reporting and applications sort of running in parallel. Um in terms from
the applicants I haven't heard any com any sort of concerns in terms of like the season. Uh something I have heard and I know I think happens a lot is that they always ask for more time. They're like, "Can we get more time for the application cycle?" Um, but it I don't think it it's related to the season,
more so to just like wanting more time to prepare the materials. >> Um, so no concerns from us. >> Okay. Thank you. Back to you, Chair. >> Thank you, board member Farooqi. >> Thank you. Uh, two points. Uh, first a
question um to anyone. Do we have a sense of what the average project completion time is for the projects that have been proposed to the fund? >> That's a great question. It it sort of depends on the
the type of project. So, you know, like on the on the bigger scale, um an example would be like Austin Brighton CDC, you know, they did a a full deep energy retrofit, right? like theirs was like a multi-stage multi-year project where we were the fund sort of was like
a you know due to some federal clawbacks on their grants the fund sort of like meant to sort of supplement some of the funding that they had were expecting and then was clawed back and we really came at the very end of at the tail end so they've actually are complete they've
finished all their tasks um so but if we were starting from the beginning it would be a multi-year project right um and then on the other And we have sort of like uh Roxberry tenants of Harvard that's doing like a wasted heat recovery system. They're expected to be done they
said by July like they think they'll be done by the end of the summer. Um so it sort of depends on the type of projects. I could do that analysis if that would be helpful to sort of see what the you know average timeline based on the project is. Um, but it just sort of
depends if we're, you know, is this part of a larger project that the fund is just like kind of being a mix like a large mix of capital stacks or is it a smaller project that the fund is helping supplement with some other funding. Um, but I'm happy to do some like analysis
on that. >> Okay, great. Thank you for the information. And yeah, I think the council's point is well taken in terms of the construction season. So, my thoughts were on if the three-year timeline for spending down these funds is sufficient, then it would be possible
for an applicant to be able to take the money in the fall or I mean, I think in reality, the money actually is received in like January, right? Uh or sometime later than that. So, then they would be able to start later, but I would be open to amending that to say, you know, four years instead of three years if that,
you know, provides the level of flexibility that the um contractors and the the owners need in this case. Um beyond that, my second point was actually uh to uh make a motion to amend
um the proposed uh application template uh whenever appropriate. >> Um apologies. Um I was actually going to ask you to for the motion because I know that um you had some I wanted to check back with you in terms of thoughts. So
>> Oh, great. Okay. Excellent. Perfect timing that I can put this in the chat and I can just read it out here. This would um be a motion to add language to the application uh to quote describe the job quality and standards of workers on this project including those employed by contractors and subcontractors. And this
should include but not be limited to living wages, equitable employment and contracting standards and the impact of local workforce development programs. Um and I will give tremendous credit to the office of worker empowerment who has drafted the bulk of that uh language as
well. Um thank you. I'll yield back. >> Seconded. >> Great. Do we is it is it okay that um that we sort of assumed the first part of that motion without speaking it. So
basically, can you go back one one slide? I think I think it was. So basically the motion is in support of this statement with the additional language that board member Fergie just shared. Is that
are we in in order, Diana? >> Um I think that's a great question. I think technically the sorry shan I do think technically the proposal should be the motion should be uh written with as this with the amendment of you know
adding this language something to that effect. >> Great. Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, if appropriate then um I will and I'll put this in the chat as well.
um move to approve the proposal for the 2026 equitable emission investment fund um to allocate the review board allocate 600,000 for the 2026 application cycle with a preference to grant multiple awards of up to $200,000 with the
intention to open the application on March 30th and close on June 1st 2026 with the amendment to describe the job quality and standards of workers on this project including those employed by contractors and subcontractors. And this should include but not be limited to
living wages, equitable employment and contracting standards and the impact of local workforce development programs to the application for the fund. >> Great. Thank you. And um good job. Um and I believe
I'm happy to second it, but board member Latimore, I defer to you to rese it if you Okay, great. All right. Um I will now um ask board members on the
motion to approve the proposal as um stated and seconded by board member Furky and board member Latimore. How do you vote? In favor um opposed or abstain. I vote in favor. Board member Ellis. >> In favor.
>> Board member Furky. >> In favor. >> Board member Latimore. in favor. >> Board member Stell, >> in favor. >> Uh, councelor Rorell >> in favor. >> Great. Um, the eyes have it. The motion
passes. The next cycle of the equitable emissions investment fund will release $600,000 and is planned to be open from March 30th through June 1st, 2026. Um, and I just asked the staff, I guess we do have one meeting before then, but
of course, um, please include us on any announcements so that we can help get the word out about the opportunity. Our, um, third agenda item is approving the previous meeting minutes. Um, are there any questions or comments
regarding the meeting minutes? >> Motion to approve. >> Great. I will second that. Um on the motion to approve the meeting minutes, uh board members can vote. Um in favor, oppose or abstain either by a show of your um actual hand or a Zoom hand or
you can unmute. Um all in favor, please raise a hand or a button. Okay. Um all opposed and Oh, and abstension.
>> Abstained. Council Ry, since it's your first meeting, I'm going to assume an abstension. >> No, I >> Okay, great. Thanks. And um now, uh Diana will give us administrative updates.
>> Yes. Thank you, chair. I am stepping in for Ziggy, so I'll try to do my best to channel her her admin updates. Um, so we have no we have not received any new applications for flexibility measures since our last meeting. Um, I wanted to
announce that we have nominations open for the Boston Climate Leader Awards. Uh, you may remember from last year we uh the environment department um sort of re surged or rebirth the climate leader awards um and we are now in that phase
again for this year. Um, these awards celebrate businesses, community groups, individuals leading the charge towards a greener, more sustainable Boston. The nomination form is now available on the Boston Climate Leader Awards website. I can put that link in the chat. Um, just
so you can check out the different categories. Um, please if you know anyone who you think would be a great fit, um, please feel free to make a submission. Uh, the reporting season has officially launched on February 17th. Uh, and we've had a webinar on March 2nd
to help launch the 2026 reporting season. So, the recording for that, yes, here we go. The recording for that, um, can be found on the Berto website. Uh, we also had a renewable energy uh, webinar that's also available on the
Berto website under previous events. Uh, we still have some upcoming webinars for a series of webinars. Um, and that is also available on the Berto website under upcoming events. So, we have a previous events and upcoming events. Just to make that super clear. Um, we're
also hosting Berto in-person workshops this year. Uh, you may remember from last year, the Berto team went to different neighborhoods, uh, sort of set up shop in different areas where we tried to meet building owners or different folks who had any questions related to Berto and answer their
questions sort of outside of city hall. Um, so we're we're hosting those again this year. The first one is actually tomorrow at the Civic Pavilion in downtown Boston right next to city hall. Um the event pages are all available on the Bura website and RSVP is not
required but it is encouraged because it helps us get an estimate of how many folks to expect. Uh the next review board meeting is scheduled for March 23rd. Uh and then finally I will hand it over to Claudia to discuss some proposed to give a teaser of some proposed
policies and procedures and regulation updates. Oh sorry here's the calendar. Um, okay. So, for this year, as you all know, we love making regulations, fixes,
and making sure that we are keeping up and improving Berto over time as we figure out new issues or um barriers or building owners are facing during the implementation of Berto. Uh, so we have a more narrow scope of regulatory fixes
that we're planning to introduce this year. Um as you may re remember from last regulations update uh last year policies and procedures are now under the authority of the burough review board. So we would come to you for the
approval of any updates for policies and procedures for this year. We're envisioning some narrow updates to appendix A of our policies and procedures which is um the appendix that matches property types in portfolio
manager to the building use classifications that we have under Berto. Uh so we're expecting to bring that proposal to you in the next meeting that we have in March in two weeks. Um and in April we are planning to come to
the air pollution control commission which as you may remember is the entity that has a regulatory authority of Roberto and can approve Berto regulations uh with some proposed updates to uh requirements for the retirement of Masclass One Rex. Uh after
launching our ML class one red connector program this year, uh we identified that the timeline for building owners to be able to um buy and then retire Mask One Rex retroactively to come into compliance with the prior compliance
year is very narrow. Uh for example, this year March 1st was the deadline to buy Masclass One Rex from through our program. uh but reporting as you know is not due until May 15. So we are hoping to add flexibility so that building
owners are able to buy mask plus one Rex uh for a longer period of time. And we are also hoping to come with some regulatory fixes related to enforcement so that all procedures are better aligned with the state regulations that we will follow for enforcement. Um and
I'll pass it back to Diana. Um, I think that's it from us, chair. >> Great. Um, are there any questions from the board on the admin updates? >> Not a question, but uh, um, something I
just want to make sure that we're all aware of. Um, I was just made aware today that on March 11th, the city council has on their agenda a resolution to temporarily roll back uh, Berto and the stretch energy codes uh, for 5
years. Um, I don't have any particular comments, but I do know that it will be on the floor uh, as part of a discussion. Um, I just wanted to check uh for the environment staff if they have any thing that they want to make us aware of or what they may know about
this upcoming resolution that is being put to the floor. >> Happy to respond to that. Um, I I don't have any more details. It is a item before the council. I think that is all accurate. If folks are interested in looking it up, it's on the agenda for
Wednesday's council meeting. Um, but I don't have anything beyond that and to share. >> Thank you, Hannah. Yeah, I'll try my best to watch um and see, you know, what this may lead to. I I I do note that
they are uh combining both Verto and the energy stretch codes uh together, which I'm not going to say anything about that right now. Um but just wanted to make you all aware. So thank you. >> I can't find my hand to raise but chair
I'm raising my hand. >> Uh councel. >> Thank you chair. And um yes there is a resolution on the agenda. Uh resolutions um are non-binding. Uh however, it is the wrong signal uh to be given uh to
the city of Boston when we have um created or have led the way um with our regulations. So just want to also let the public know and the board know that these are non-biden
resolutions. Uh but they do send signals. Um and uh but again non-binding resolutions. >> Thank you. Um thank you to both of you for bringing that up today.
Any additional questions or comments? >> Uh no, just a comment. I I appreciate knowing that as well and had no idea that that was uh on the docket for the city council and um I will try to listen in on that as well. Um but it's in terms
of non nonb binding council that means no even if the resolution passes there are no changes to the current regulations. Is that what that means? >> Right. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I'll follow up with you
separately. Thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah, I also want to say thank you to the counselor for making that clear. Um because yeah, I was wondering what what what should we make of a resolution if it is in support. So, I appreciate hearing your words on that.
Thank you. >> All right. Um thanks everyone. Um I may see some of you uh in the audience on March 11th, but um but we will reconvene um in two weeks. So uh I I will make a motion to
adjourn our meeting. >> Second. >> Second. Great. Um if you are in favor um you can unmute or raise your hand or raise your Zoom hand and say I. >> I. >> Thank you. All right. Uh the eyes have
it. The motion passes. This meeting is adjourned at 5:57 p.m. on March 9th. Thank you everybody. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thanks. Good night. Good night.