##VIDEO ID:Vczh_HqEBRs## uh thank you again so the Berto review board does not currently have an appointed chair uh so I will lead us in a vote for acting chair does anyone on the board want to make a nomination for acting chair today nominate stepen Ellis as acting chair thank you board member lore is there a second second thank you board member farooqi uh I will now lead us in a vote how do you vote for the motion to nominate board member Ellis to serve as acting chair in favor oppose or abstain board member Boyd in favor board member Ellis in favor board member farooqi in favor board member Latimore in favor and board member Nelson in favor great I will now hand the meeting over to acting chair Ellis all right thank you Diana let me just uh pull up the script here okay uh good afternoon I am calling this public hearing to order at 4:36 p.m. in accordance with the building emission reduction and disclosure ordinance regulations adopted pursuant to the building emission reduction disclosure ordinance ordinance Boston city code ordinance section 7-22 the Berto review board will hold a virtual public hearing at 4:30 p.m. on August 26 to review the following topics in regards 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 to with the Commonwealth of massachus executive order suspend suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law we are conducting this public meeting online to ensure public access to the deliberations of the Berto review board the public May access to is call through telephone and video conferencing members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions and provide public comment to do so please raise your hand or in the or type in the chat in the application via the zoom meeting platform if you are calling in cannot use the platform you may raise your hand by pressing star9 send your question to staff via email Berto reviewboard boston.gov for the record I am Steven Ellis acting chair of the board 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 Rita boy Steven Ellis Hassan farooqi yeah lore Jack Nelson staff will now introduce themselves Hannah Payne director of carbon neutrality than an Vasquez biew board manager s chin biew board assistant laia Martinez policy and Equity adviser okay here's the agenda for today's hearing and meeting we'll start with discussing and voting on the funds finalists for the 2024 application cycle then we will switch into a public meeting where we will start with the approval of the meeting minutes next we will hear update guidance from the city the city team will then provide administrative updates and finally we will adjourn before we start this agenda item would any board members like to recuse themselves I see board member lore yes I would like to recuse myself because the agency that I um and the executive director for cin Square neighbor development Corp has a funding proposal has also submitted a funding proposal so I will recuse myself okay thank you board member lore thank you and goodbye the review board will now discuss and vote on the finalists for the 2024 application cycle of the Equitable emissions investment fund the application chosen today the applications chosen today will be invited to present at the September 9th hearing thank you Diana do sorry I can kick it off feel like chair uh hi everyone so I can do a quick review of what has happened so far uh so we've opened and closed the 2024 application cycle for the Equitable emissions investment fund uh as a review in total we received 19 applications this year year the Berto team on the city Side did an initial review with the city's legal and grants team um just to make sure all of the projects submitted were eligible uh and after that initial review we then shared each application with an Acom accompanying cover letter or a cover page and evaluation criteria sheet to each of the individual board members which they then use to do their first initial review um and there's just link to the project evaluation form because it's a it's a public form if folks have been with us for for a minute now they may remember that we discussed this pretty deeply during the regulations development process but in case you would like a reminder this link will take you to the form uh and the next slide will also be a nice big summary so this is what it looks like so these are the different criteria that the board members use to read through the applications and and Benchmark against so emissions reductions benefits to affordable housing benefits to tenants benefit to labor and Workforce Development outdoor air quality indoor air quality and quality of life climate resilience benefits energy benefits and uh other benefits which is a nice bucket for other benefits that the projects may may bring so that's just sort of a a review of what's been done uh in terms of what we're hoping to do today so we on the city Side have summarized the results of those individually completed evaluation sheets we're going to summarize them for the board today uh and have the board members each a chance to share their thoughts or questions on any of the top rated applications uh the board will then open a public comment period for anyone in the in the public who would like to submit a comment uh and then the review board will anonymously rank the applications and we'll share those results here live and the review board will then vote to either invite a group of five finalists to the September 9 hearing to sort of present on their project proposals or if the review board would like more time you could also request more time um so that's sort of the the layout for today so let's just jump into it so in terms of a summary of the evaluation sheets these four applications are applications that were included as a top three or scored as a top three more than once meaning more than one review board member had these applications in their top three ranking in their individual evaluation sheets so they include Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center Fenway Community Development Corporation green energy consumers Alliance and the Community Builders uh and I we'll go we'll have a sheet or a slide summarizing each of these applications next slide please so the first one uh is Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center so this is an affordable housing nonprofit SE seeking $250,000 uh to pay The Upfront cost uh for installing solar on nine multif family buildings uh within two apartment buildings so the Wilder apartments and the Glendale Apartments uh they say that 50% of the savings will be given directly to Residents who pay their own electricity at Glendale because doorchester Bay does pay for electricity costs at Wilder Apartments uh and that money from the fund would reduce the payback period to two to three years um chair if you think it makes sense we can pause on each of these and ask see if there are any questions or comments from board members sure uh do any board members have any questions about the doorchester bay Economic Development application or comments okay I'll go first uh just to to call it out it's been a minute but I I did find this application to be you know relatively straightforward and and and the the level of impact that it has over nine multi multif family buildings and a direct correlation to how residents would able would be able to save money on bills I I found that this application was pretty straightforward for me in terms of selecting them as a a choice that would be amongst uh at least my top um and so we I really didn't have any particular uh comments about things that I thought were missing or any particular questions about things that I would I wanted to know more about I I again I found them to be uh relatively straightforward and the payback period um made sense to me so those are my only comments on that manner um I will pause again to see if there's any other board members who had any questions or comments about this one if not board member farooqi sure thank you um my only questions that came up reading this application were about any kinds of uh barriers that may exist uh before the installation of rooftop solar so like the reinforcement of the roof the having sufficient electrical wiring I assume that the applicant has already considered and mitigated these barriers but um I'd want to make sure that those costs don't arise later on in the process um but overall I found this application to be pretty straightforward and um and you know as I will say for all the applications I'm always curious uh to what extent they're considering other uh incentive programs and in particular the solar for all funding that will soon become available thank you board member faruki I also share that similar sentiment and as we discuss the application in whole all of them I will have some questions for the city about alternative funding sources which were discussed at on one of our previous meetings so uh that's not lost on me and I will be asking some of those questions myself today so are there any other questions or comments from the board okay hearing none Diana back over to you great uh I will then move us on to Fenway Community Development Corporation so this is an affordable housing nonprofit in the Fenway kenar area seeking $245,200 187 cents uh to conduct some Energy Efficiency and weatherization upgrades so some things they list in their application include the installation of a heat pump domestic hot water um insulation of energy star roof exhaust fans and air regulat dampers uh low flow shower heads uh installation of R&D temperature averaging controls and uh common area lighting occupancy sensors oh and upgrade to the electrical service capacity at the site so they have very specific things that they listed um and their request for 240,000 245 23087 thank you Diana are there any questions from the board or comments regarding the Fenway Community Development for operation application uh quick question number so I've seen that they have other funding in the amount of like 1,748 is that right I believe I can look super quickly I just yeah they do I just I just thought that that that should be known that they do have other funding a large amount that's it thank you thank you board member bored any other questions or comments from the the board uh so for me you know this this was a application that um it almost served as a a bit of a reminder that uh Fenway CDC recently received the building portfolio um approval uh from from our board I you know one of the things that I was Finding interesting reading through their material you know the the estimated emission reductions and then potential updated estimated emissions reduction that they were potentially expecting um from this project I do recognize what uh board member boy was saying in terms of um the funding and so this goes back to my comment earlier about the consideration for other fundings and how that may uh add or retract from other projects being able to have access to the um to our overall fund I you know this as many other projects I was wondering about scale um and a scale ability for it to be able to have an impact in the city but I found this application to be something that I was comfortable with but um nevertheless I um I I look forward to seeing how we we continue this conversation um and it it's worth noting that the slide Diana shared earlier although we're a small But Mighty board um the the um the application that are listed beyond the first one have two people or two board members that were sort of recommending that so I expect somewhat of a robust conversation as we go through this um today so are there any other questions or comments from the board board member faruki thanks I think um similarly I know some of these types of um Energy Efficiency measures that they're proposing can also be funded by programs like Mass Save and so I would be curious for all the applicants but especially this one to what extent they've considered that and I'd also be curious whether this can be answered now or later um to what extent we can pair down an application and fund only specific pieces of it and not fund other pieces Diana yes I can I can answer at least a second question uh so the Rew board does have this discretion to either fund less than what's requested or more if you'd like um and you could for example say like in because we have to make a gr agreement which is sort of a contract with these organizations you could have stipulations I'd say like we are uh we would like the fund to go towards this specific uh work so there is there is room and flexibility for the board to have that kind of conversation thank you Diana uh board member Nelson thank you Stephen um I'll just comment that my my rating for this particular project was lower than some of the others due to the amount of emissions reduction um some of the other projects had um a higher annual um reduction in CO2 emissions so that's why it ranked lower as far as I was concerned yep thank you board member Nelson that you're getting at what I was sort of calling out um in the application where there was one projection and then it it sort of acknowledgement that the the um there would be a slightly lower projection after some of the work that they're currently doing so um that was something that I was taking into consideration as well all right um if there are no more no more further question from the board or comments um Diane I'll turn it back over to you so yeah next we have green energy consumers Alliance so this is a climate nonprofit seeking 250,000 to supplement their equisol program uh equisol brings rooftop solar to low and moderate income residents in Boston uh and more specifically they're applying to the fund seeking money to support their blue line solar Access program so they have identified eight properties in East Boston owned by East Boston CDC one in Dorchester owned by Boston Neighborhood Community Land Trust in one in matapan owned by a low to moderate income building owner um so this is to help sort of uh supplement that or support that program uh and they requested $250,000 are there any questions or comments from the board about the green energy consumer Alliance application wmer farooqi very interesting application I appreciated that they were uh thinking actively about how they can scale the economics of this program and um so I'm very interested in hearing more from them thank you board member farooqi I I I share the same sentiment I I felt like um as I read through this application there are more questions coming up for me um there especially there is an opportunity if remember faruki just stated for something like this to be scaled up but I the way I was reading it it it did come across like there were a lot of contingencies that or things that needed to happen or things that would be happening in tandem with one another and so it it was um it was coming off for me like uh they're looking for someone to take a chance on them essentially and I I don't mean that in in any negative way I think it it it is a very interesting application um in in the way was written uh for me to be like okay you're looking at many different sources um and many different ways to to utilize or or deal with decarbonization within the city so I I found this one interesed and I felt like I I feel like I need to ask more questions or even reread this application one more time just to make sure I fully understand what's coming up with with them are there any other further questions or comments from the board hearing none Diana back over to you great uh and now we have the community Builder so this is uh similar similarly a nonprofit CDC seeking 250,000 to support the installation of a solar array uh on the on top of two buildings so 132 uh through 140 sver Street and 280 through 296 SE Street uh in New Franklin Park so the apartments are affordable housing in the neighborhoods of Dorchester the proposed solar array is predicted to achieve a projected 30% energy use reduction from Baseline um and it is projected to produce 163,00 kilowatt hours of energy uh in year one so the Community Builders will act as sponsor and developer of the proposed project and similarly this is for 250,000 thank you Diana are there any questions of comments from the board about the Community Builders application w melson i i just find this one to be straightforward and it um it seems to achieve all of the objectives of the fund and um of Berto thank you boy Nelson I agree I also thought this one was straightforward I you know this goes back to my comments about scale and and it's not to say that you know all the applications had the greatest amount of skills or the least amount of skills uh this application uh is limited right now to two buildings and so I you know I try to think about diverse options of scalability um when it comes to the usage of the funds but as board member Nelson just mentioned it was straightforward as well so um I'll just check one more time are there any other questions or comments from the board thank you mat toew Diana great so those were the applications that received more than one or that were placed at least more than once on a top three uh and then these are the remaining applications that have been scored at least once as a top three so Roxberry tenants of Harvard morville House Apartments Alon Brighton Community Development Corporation built buildings lab neighborhood of affordable housing or Noah and Codman Square neighborhood Development Corporation so we've prepared summary slides for each of these uh chair I was going to lead on you a little bit here if you think it would be worth going through each summary slide or if you would just like to like call on board members one by one whichever you think you know I I think I'm comfortable with allowing board members to comment as necessary because I think you know even as I stated there are some areas where there are questions coming up about um opportunities to select um a different funding source or offer a different funding Source or recommend a different funding source or a different amount for that matter so I'm actually going to um unless the board would rather us go through everything I I do think that you know um this is a tough one because I you know for the public it it might be useful for them to be able to see what had came in but um for for the board I'm just going to elicit or look for immediate reactions first and then maybe we can briefly go through some of them if that's all right so um I'm going to start with you board member board um do you have any questions or comments about the six applications that are listed here uh no not right now thank you thank you board member Boyd all right over to you board member Fuki thank you my questions actually end up being pretty similar across a lot of the applications I think um broadly speaking I'm curious to know all of the other funding sources that have been considered for uh some of these repairs in particular Mass Save and then some of the loans that the mass Community climate bank is offering um I wouldn't want to uh give funding to things that could be guaranteed to receive funding through other funding streams like massave um I'm also curious about the uh Workforce and labor aspects of all of these applications um there wasn't a ton of detail about the workers and all of the applications that um are going to receive jobs and I fully understand that some of that information may not be known by the applicants at this time but I would want to make sure that all of these jobs are paying prevailing wages and um that these workers are ideally that they are Boston residents and that we can fulfill as many pieces of the Boston resident jobs policy as possible through this um so that is something that I look forward to discussing with the uh applicants in the next meeting and then um you know I think specifically um to individual applicants with the um morville house apartments application um it seems like that's one of the applications that uh will require some unit level Renovations such as things like Windows and um in tenance units so I'm curious to know what types of um notification and uh what how they're supporting the the tenants who may have to be temporarily displaced while those um types of repairs are happening so I'd be just curious you know what the nature of that is how long the displacement may occur maybe it'll just happen for a few hours and and what types of things we're doing to protect the tenants um I think that uh really wraps up all of the um questions I have at this time so thank you thank you board member fooki uh I want to pause to see if the city has anything that they would like to respond to or if you're just taking notes on what the board member just stated sorry we're just taking notes excellent not a problem all right board member Nelson yes um so the the rockbury tenants of Harvard um they're really looking for funds for a deep decarbonization study um so um while you know that is definitely something that's needed it's it seemed as though the um if we could go back to the other screen um the morville house apartments they have a project that's shovel ready um more so and um it it rated high as far as its emissions reduction as compared to some of the other projects that um we have reviewed matter of fact when I look at it it rated the highest as far as its emissions reductions as compared to the others um so that's why morville as far as I was concerned rated higher than Roxbury tenants um the um looking down the list the Noah um now that's that's a group of triple Deckers and and I'm wondering that none of those buildings um have to comply with Burdon so isn't this objective of this fund is to help buildings comply with Berto uh I can I can respond chair that's seems appropriate sure if you don't mind can you also pull up Noah's uh application the short version on the slide yeah so yes Noah's um project proposal is mostly related to Triple Deckers in East Boston so buildings that are not subject to Berto uh and the regulations for the fund stipulate and the ordinance stipulate that the fund has to go to projects that reduce building emissions um but it also in the regulation states that the buildings do not have to be subject to Berto so it can go to uh buildings that are smaller than the threshold that makes you subject to Berto so that technically they are eligible should the review board decide you know for this first year you really want to focus on buildings are subject to Berto um for the the first application cycle like the review board can totally do that um but in terms of the letter of the law they are eligible thank you Diana board member Nelson so you know the fact that these triple deckas don't um don't aren't required to comply with Berto um I didn't rate it as high as some of the others um I'm just trying to comment on my thought process um and could you go back to the other screen please that lists all of the remaining built building lab you know that's an interesting concept um and I think that definitely uh you know that we that can definitely help some uh some buildings and homes um you know connect excess materials with buildings that really need that um but I I think that's all my questions Cardman Square I rated that fairly high as well um due to the the merits of that project those are my thoughts thank you thank you board member Nelson so you know my thoughts uh first I want to acknowledge you know two applications that unfortunately did not make it um on this list here um and because we had a total of 12 and so you know the Boston building Resource Center as well as the I I believe I might be missing one more but I I just want to acknowledge that you know we as a board we made the motion to approve to at least $750,000 and so nowhere although you know you know I think what they're trying to do is relatively important and and uh the fact that their their buildings are not subjected to burto right now um and it could be in the future and the fact that they're asking for the max amount that we are looking to release it kind of make it hard for me to really consider them um as a as a a viable application um compared to the others um I did also look at Roxberry tenants Harvard Association um as something to consider given that this board at least I felt convinced me that you know we want to focus on some aspects of of scoping um because a lot of these locations do need some form of scoping because they don't know what what steps they're going to need to take and so this was a project that was hard for me to ignore um it did fall on a higher end of of uh of of what I was looking at and um I guess the other thing that I I would want to ask and maybe this is more so I I'm I'm trying to check if this is the right time to ask the city you know as you were going through these applications um I found myself thinking about that slide that I believe it was Hannah shared back in May about the decarbonization funding landscape and and so in that we talked about the Massachusetts um decarbonized affordable housing program and then we as a board are voted to expend $500,000 to support the decarbonization advisory program um which as a reminder included the en Energy Efficiency conservation block gr block grant excuse me the American Rescue plan act as well as um I believe there may have been one more but across the board I'm just wondering as the city was reviewing these applications did you ever feel like or make a notation that some of these projects might actually qualify for something along those decarbonization funding landscape and so I don't know if my question should be directed specifically to Hannah but I just remember Hannah giving a pretty good presentation on that and so I'm just wondering what were the thoughts as you were reviewing all of these yeah I can try to answer that um so I think I think I think your line of questioning that many of the board members are having is is a good one and I think perhaps something to think to bring back when um at the next meeting when the applicants you're able to like ask them questions and we can even prompt them to come with some of that information um in terms of the um building decarbonization advisor program um that $500 $500,000 of the um Equitable emissions investment fund you all put into support um that is going to be for like a much tend to be for much um kind of like higher level initial zero overtime planning for buildings um we're targeting much smaller amounts for those kind of planning and scoping projects to try to get more people to be able to like at least get started on their Berto planning Journey um so I think um and you know I could I will admit I have not read all of these in detail others on my team have um but you know I think the the level of detail that I think these applications are requesting and the funding amounts are to go at a much deeper level of that engineering scoping than what we'll be able to offer through the um decarbonization advisor program okay so I guess my the answer to my question is you know because I I I think I was looking at Roxberry as being what I consider a potential applicant of that um decarbonization advisory program but if you're saying it's much more High level and what Roxberry is asking for is much more in depth then I think that that kind of give me a perspective about what I might say in terms of the top five today yeah so for context for that program we're um we are reviewing bids that we received from the vendors right now but we're targeting like between like 10 to 15,000 scoping work not in the hundreds of thousands of dollarss so um that's yeah if that helps yep that that that puts things very much into perspective so I appreciate that and and also I early I was trying to acknowledge the the two um applications that did not rise up to the top here um and so I mentioned uh the Boston building Resource Centers as well as East Boston um CDC so those were the two that unfortunately are not on this list here today I just want to call them out because uh you know as we're thinking about who are the five that we want to have come today we've essentially now this down to 10 so it looks like half of these will be selected and the other half um unfortunately not this time around so Diana I I mean let me pause are there any other questions or comments um from the board before I turn it back over to Diana okay Diana great thank you chair yes and I I should mention if there are any other other applications the board would like to mention um the board is definitely welcome to do that we just this is just more of a summary of the evaluation sheets we got back and so wanted to present it in that way but it sounds like I don't think there are any additional question comments or questions I don't think so great uh so we actually now have a public comment period so because this is a hearing so we now chair they'll let you open the comment period sounds good we will now open the meeting to public comment as a reminder to the public uh to the members of the public excuse me to provide public comment please raise your hand or type in the chat in the application via the zoom meeting platform if you are calling in and cannot use the platform you can raise your hand by pressing star n send your question to staff via email at Berto reviewboard boston.gov again as a reminder we are limiting questions to 3 minutes to ensure everyone has a chance to speak we also ask members of the public to introduce themselves and neighborhood we will now wait to give members of the public the opportunity to provide comments okay hearing none uh Diana or Ziggy I'm just going to ask I promis that would do this are were there any questions sent to the Berto review board at boston.gov email no question sent in the email but I do see one question or a comment in the chat apologies all right from Eve Tori I wonder if we could see the slide prepared for the second list sure um Diana can we please go back to those slides and can you do a a run through so that the public can see everything that is listed there sure thing uh so yes we'll start with rockberry tenants of Harvard so this is a an affordable housing nonprofit in Mission In The Mission Hill Neighborhood seeking 187,000 to complete a study with Greener you so as board members have already mentioned this was more on the scoping side versus a shovel shovel ready project um so they would like to investigate analyze and generate a basis of design to decarbonize and Electrify their heating cooling ventilation and domestic hot water systems uh they did also mention EV Char scoping EV charging infrastructure and some renewable energy Generation Um in addition to envelope upgrades and so this is more on the like trying to scope out or or design their project versus uh actual implementation I guess is is what I will say um and then the Mission Park Campus is consists of 147 Town housee units and 620 apartment units for context next slide so yes so now we have Marvo House Apartments so appli to support Energy Efficiency and weatherization upgrades uh as well as solar uh the building itself is owned by the Episcopal City Mission uh but the Marvel House Apartments is an LLC uh it's senior housing um and they're seeking 250 to address issues related to heat loss air sealing um indoor air quality and increase electric usage for the implementation of air source heat pumps um the building is located in Fenway and its primary use is for uh senior housing for low to very low income Elder residents um and they just included in their application that their building is also used for neighborhood events such as voting Etc the Alon Brighton Community Development Corporation they are an affordable housing nonprofit as well seeking 250 to repair partly to repair the roof but also to increase the numbers that are habitable within Warren Hall uh so in their the roof replacement I should mention is just the first phase of a deep energy retrofit um that is in the planning stages so it seems that the before they can really uh in Earnest do the Deep energy retrofit they are needed to tackle their roof uh essentially and it's a new it's a it's a newly acquired building so it was a naturally naturally occurring affordable housing until Austin Brighton Community Development Corporation purchased it um and acquired it uh and so this is sort of the background information as to why they are now working to repair the roof um as part of their first phase of their deep energy retrofit and then built buildings lab so this is a building emissions reduction forming nonprofit so they're currently receiving their 501c3 status seeking 285,000 to develop a district to building level decarbonization road map uh So within uh grove Grove Hall so they are partnering with Grove Hall main streets to implement Grove Hall's green zone so this would help determine carbon abatement potential uh potential for 29 brto buildings within the District of Grove Hall and then determine the district's overall carbon abatement potential and use scenario planning to identify tradeoffs and benefits to District level uh Solutions versus building by building uh and they also include that this would this whole process would engage community in the Discover process and identifying gaps so this is more versus a shovel ready project this is a little bit more in that scoping planning phase uh but more on a a district level versus just a building level approach and they're seeking 285 the neighborhood neighborhood of affordable housing or Noah is a nonprofit affordable housing nonprofit seeking 750 to fully Electrify uh and decommission their fossil fuel infrastructure weatherize project sites and upgrade ventilation needs in 5 to seven of their affordable housing buildings in East Boston uh and as was mentioned these projects are in buildings that are not subject to Berto so mostly triple Deckers and then lastly codan Square neighborhood Development Corporation uh an affordable housing nonprofit seeking $ 39,821 16 uh to install Energy Efficiency and weather weatherization measurement or measures into two of their affordable housing buildings though lighting sensors for exterior lighting low flow air Raiders low flow toilets inunit air ceiling and installing drain water heat recovery I believe that was the last one yes thank you Diana are there any further questions or comments up okay I see a hand uh I will turn it over to you Michelle as a reminder please uh announce your name and your neighborhood and you will have 3 minutes thank you um my name's Michelle Brooks she her pronouns I live in alustin um a question that I had I can't remember which one of the proposals it was in the top four round um for a solar project and I think it had said a projection of around 30% um reduction to energy bills and um I was just wondering if that proposal was also specifying whether whether um those savings would be directly applied to the bills of the residents in those units or if it's just they're just referring to expected um decreased energy bills due to the solar that they would be building Diana yes I believe you're referring to the Community Builders application my understanding is that the reduction would be in energy usage I did not though I I guess that would probably result in reductions in uh utility costs but I can't guarantee that I can look through the application really quickly though I I have some notes up and I believe the Energy savings are mainly for common areas but the savings would be reinvesting in reinvested sorry into the programming of the organization uh Claudia I I may be wrong here but I I I heard solar projects and so the other one that was under consideration for solar was on the Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center so I I uh not sure if Michelle was referring to the Community Builders or the uh Dorchester B Economic Development Center yeah so what oh sorry I I was going to say what I commented on was Community Builders and that's the slide that included the 30% that Michelle mentioned thank you okay thank you Claudia I think that was probably the one um but generally the question I had would kind of apply to both of whether they're specifically talking about applying you know discounts to tenants bills from the production of their solar project or whether they're just talking about um cost savings from energy reduction thank you Michelle Claudia Diana do you want to provide any comment regarding doorchester Bay as well uh yeah I can start but glad please feel fre to jump in um yes so Dorchester Bay is the uh application where they want to apply solar to two buildings and so when the the title the names of their buildings are the Wilder apartment and Glendale apartment developments uh so Wilder Apartments the organization Dorchester Bay already covers the cost uh of electricity for residents uh and they do plan they say 15% of the savings will be given directly to Residents who pay their own electricity at Glendale Apartments my I imagine that means um they will receive like credit for for any solar that's generated up to 15% uh but I can I can double check just to make sure that's totally correct okay thank you Diana and Claudia Eve over to you please announce your name and your uh your uh location apologies um sure hi everybody Eve T um a better city um I had a question it came up in the conversation um around sort of you know the waiting like there are these criteria for how the applications are being reviewed but it came up in one of the comments about whether the um applicant is required to comply with Berto or not and um and that isn't in the waiting you know it's not in the criteria and I just had a question whether it's should be should more weight be given to um those that need to comply or not so I don't know the answer to that but I thought it was a very valid um question I know I know it's legal in terms of the ordinance itself but um it wasn't something I don't think that came up um in terms of you know when when the regulations were when we were thinking through all the criteria I don't think it came up so I just wanted to raise it I thought was very interesting thank you Eve any comments from the city um I'll just add that uh so yes the technically within the ordinance and the regulations both buildings that are subject to Berto and not subject to Berto um could be part of a project proposal to submitted to the fund but the we also left room and flexibility in the regulations for the review board to decide for example if they wanted to focus on uh certain themes I think is what we called them for each application cycle so for example the theme could be this fear that funding will go to buildings that are subjected to Berto um I I guess my one note I say would be ideally we would know ahead of issuing the the like announcement to grant for the grant just because I think that would be very helpful for folks who may be interested to know that ahead of time um but that is a that's a fair question I that's a you know a question for the future in terms of this year you the board has flexibility to the side yeah I think all of that is right and I would just also add that like if you as a board are like feeling like you want to prioritize funding projects that are support you know that go to to support Berto buildings I think that's also an appropriate consideration for you to to have the the evaluation criteria are you know meant to be helpful in in making that but ultimately you will have you know can can make decisions as well on what your priorities are thank you Diana and Hannah are there any other further questions or comments from members of the public okay hearing none are there any other further questions or comments from the board I did have one question um just out of curiosity um you know it was something that you know board member Nelson was mentioning in terms of his Focus or at least I'm not saying that he's the only one focused on that but the emission reductions and so I guess you know there was an application that came in and I I I guess I'm wondering how did it pass or how did it go through the screening process because and I I just want to acknowledge uh looking at the the East Boston CDC for example I I just did not see any information regarding um emission reductions and I guess I'm wondering how did it become um a potential application that was eligible um from the city's review do you want me to answer that one Diana sure okay um so I think when we were doing that review um it was really looking specifically at what um was potentially a trigger for the anti-a amendment more than anything else um so really having a conversation with our um Law Department and then the grants team and kind of um being specific about does the project serve a public purpose and then are there um I think the other criteria we included was if they're if they were already awarded um grants from the city that they have yet to expend um so we weren't looking at all of the the details of each application and there are kind of if they were complete in the same way that we do for giving you for example like a portfolio application um but really look doing that screen to say could we even you know would it even be appropriate to give them money in the in the first place okay thank you Hannah I I think you know as I went through this application evaluation sheet you know that first comment section says that if this is not present under the emission reductions uh then this project is ineligible and I think that's what made me sort of go well what happened here but I do appreciate hearing the the the process and and how you got to that point or how the city got to that point in in general the one suggestion that I'll have that I have for the evaluation sheet um just as a slight update because um there was a moment that I was after I had reviewed three applications I did not remember because of the app on the evaluation form that the lowincome individuals would technically fit within that benefits to tenants row and I started applying them to the other and so I had to pull up the Equitable emission investment fund again just to like wait a minute I know we considered lowincome residents and so if you can please put that language in that line so that you know for future board members that are using this uh evaluation sheet that they're not just looking at that line to only consider tenants it's tenants and lowincome um residents I I would appreciate that I hope that makes sense yes I think so Gia hi I just wanted to add that in terms of the application completeness I think like the having an element of emissions reduction is also based on the project so I believe like is Boston CDC where like hbac upgrades onsite solar so the connection to emissions reduction was clear I think what perhaps wasn't as clear in the application formatting and we can make this more clear for the following application Cycles is to actually include a number because I believe they included like we're reaching zero net zero emissions with these upgrades which is technically complete and like fulfills their requirements but they didn't estimate as per as specific number like other applicants so this is something that we can improve for sure for the next cycle as well and I would also oh sorry I would also add that if you see across applications there were also different methodologies used to estimate emissions reduction so I would also just encourage board members to consider that when they're uh you know comparing these different numbers because some might be apples to oranges rather than the same exact methodology in Baseline and so on that's extremely helpful you know as you sort of think about comparing scoping projects to projects that are ready to go all right um I have no more questions or comments at this time um Diana I will turn it back over to you great thank you chair um and I guess I I would I should add one thing with for example East Boston cdc's application when we did that first sort of first review with the legal and grants team uh they did emphasize for example I believe East spost and CDC had like maybe like elevator upgrades in their application which may not be totally related to emissions reductions they did emphasize that the review board has flexibility to as we talked about earlier today say you know we want the fund to go to exactly these types of projects and not these projects or these components that you included in your proposal so that was also part of the uh the thinking around this uh technically it was eligible for examp example for it's like maybe H HVAC upgrades um and maybe not so much for the like elevator up upgrades great thank you Diana I will now we're g to try something a little bit different that I don't think we've done for the review board just yet uh we're going to try some live ranking so I am sending each board member one by one a link to a ranking system uh you will have to click Start uh sorry I'm sending them via the zoom chat um it is a ranking system where you have to click Start and you will rank your top five uh applications so to rank them you just have to click on them once uh whichever the name of the application that you'd like and then it'll populate on my back end on the back end of this uh account so I can share my screen once board members have had a chance to submit but this is sort of the a sort of like live action in real time ranking system uh so be I guess I want to ask that every board member get the link does it work for everyone yes Diana and I just want to confirm um regarding board member lore's participation um is she participating in this process at all as well or uh no she is not ranking okay got it thank you so I think I'll just give board members a couple minutes and we're picking six to advance to next meeting uh ideally five but if feel if if you feel strongly you can include six right feel like I should have teed up some music not like waiting music e e right I see three have been completed so I think we're just waiting for one more and I can share my screen so folks can see what the results are looking like So currently um Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center um is has the most in favor than green energy consumers Alliance the Community Builders Fenway CDC and morville House Apartments but I believe we're still missing one more submission oh here we go um so with all four submissions top five are Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center Green energy consumers Alliance the Community Builders conman Square NDC and Fenway CDC so with that chair I think we could either discuss these five if we if the board feels comfortable inviting these five at the next hearing or if the board feels strongly we could expand that Beyond these five but this seemed like a good jumping off point to me thank you Diana uh so I just want to provide space uh and time if there are any I think we've discussed quite a few things um regarding these applications already but I just want to check if there are any questions or comments from the board regarding the top five that we see listed here on Diana's screen okay hearing none so far I I will say that you know it does look like the top four that you shared earlier Diana have all you know at least gotten into the top five and so um the remaining one that has uh came through here is the Codman Square um neighborhood Development Corporation so if there are no questions are comments so I'll pause one more time okay is there a motion to approve inviting Geor Chester Bay Economic Development Center or econ economic develop yes I said it right the first time I'm confused myself you mind pulling that back up so I can have all those five I apologize matter of fact I have it on a different screen it's okay I got it we'll try this again is there a motion to approve the Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center the Fenway Community Development Corporation the green energy consumers Alliance the Community Builders and the Codman Square neighborhood Development Center to the September 9th hearing to present as the 2024 Equitable emissions investment fund finalist motion to approve the five entities that have submitted applications as listed by the chair thank you board member Nel is there a second second thank you one moment on the motion to approve to invite the Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center Benway Community Development Corporation green energy consumers Alliance the Community Builders and Codman Square neighborhood Development Corporation to the September 9th meeting to present as the fund 2024 application cycle finalist how do you vote in favor oppose or abstain board member void in favor I am also in favor board member farooqi in favor and board member Nelson in favor the eyes have it the motion passes Dorchester Bay Economic Development Center Fenway Community Development Corporation green energy consumer Alliance the Community Builders and Codman Square neighborhood Development Center will be invited to present at the September 9th hearing as the fund 20204 application cycle final the motion the eyes have it and the motion passes okay yay that's great yeah I think we probably did need some music and there we go there's the Emojis thank you very much thank you sh may I just ask a a quick question to you um I think we noted down some of the questions that you all had but um seeing as we're going to be inviting these applicants it would be helpful if we could give them you know make sure that they're coming prepared to answer the questions that you have things I've noted down include all other you know com discussion of funding sources they've explored including Mass Save and other state and federal funding um their Workforce and labor um commitments and then tenant notifications um I don't know Diana or Ziggy if you got anything else or but just wanted to if if you're okay with it pause and just see if there's anything else that review board um members really would would like us to ask them to come prepare to answer so one question that that I heard board member farooqi bring up earlier and this is my question for at least two of the applications I'm not going to necessarily call them out per say but that connection back to the benefits of Labor and Workforce Development is something that I thought was missing in in several cases and so I would like that to be better explained uh more for the city than for the the applicants themselves I I I found that and this is where I I didn't want to judge too harshly but a definition of energy Justice I'm not sure please forgive me if it is been described in the ordinance somewhere but the definition of energy Justice uh may not be clear to a lot of the applicants and so a lot of times when they were answering the questions they were answering questions about climate justice as opposed to energy Justice and those two are indifferent I mean one does fall underneath the other uh and you know if they're able to come with that that question that I think Bo member Nelson sorry I'm jumping the gun here about emissions and the dollar saved per emissions are things that you know just to be reiterated uh at the time of the presentation so over to you board member Nelson I see you have muted that was by accident all right but I do agree with your comments on um some of the information that would be helpful thank you board member Nelson board member farooqi yes a few things yeah I know the definition of energy Justice is in the regulations but I agree that it would be worth reminding applicants about that and so they can understand that you know both in this round and in the future um I also have a few questions about some of the logistics of um the applicants who didn't Advance uh if this is the appropriate time to ask them if not I can hold yes sure please yeah okay yeah I I'm hoping if we can if we know that we're not going to pick folks if we can let them know uh quickly and then also I'm curious if we can get in touch with them and point them towards all of the various resources that the city's already compiled to support building decarbonization um I'm seeing some nods okay great that that would be very appreciated I'm sure and um and I think that covers all my questions for the time being thanks thank you and for the one further question you know so on September 9th we're picking the aim is to pick three correct yes the the aim is to pick three uh up to 750,000 that being said you know the board has a lot of discretion and so if it turns out that the board feels very strongly you you know you'd like to give more money or maybe four projects um that the board has discussion to do that but in terms if I'm being toally transparent terms of capacity we think three projects would be like an ideal [Music] number okay and I I will remind myself and uh and just to put it out there what board member faruki had asked earlier about maybe funding a portion of certain things is certainly something that you know I I found myself opening up to um in advance of this meeting so on September 9th nevertheless um I'll just check on board member Boyd uh do you have any questions or comments I'm all set thank you not a problem um and if I may jump in and just the the schedule and we're going to go over this later the presentations will be September 9th but then um we we saved time on the September 24th hearing to vote on the the finalist so if there is you know interest in the board after you've heard from the applicants to consider funding part of a project I think we would want to use that time between those meetings to have a conversation with the applicants to make sure that their project could be feasible with just partial funding or something like that so um that hopefully we could get the questions answered September 9th um so that you could have all the information before that 2 the September 24th hearing but if we if it needs to continue we can that's just our proposed schedule thank you for that clarification Hannah I do appreciate it all right I'm going to assume there are no further questions questions or comments I am calling this public meeting I'm reading it as is I'm calling this public meeting to order at uh 5:44 p.m. first on the meeting agenda is the is to approve the previous meeting minutes from August 12 are there any questions or comments about the meeting minutes hearing none is there a motion to approve the minutes I move to approve the minutes is there a second second on the motion to approve the meeting minutes board members may vote in favor oppose or abstain if they did not attend the last meeting those in favor of approving the meeting minutes say I or show your hands I I those board members who wish to abstain say abstain abstain all right the eyes have it and the motion passes we are now going to hear from the city about updates updated guidance regarding building portfolios and individual compliance schedule application deadlines I will now turn this over to Hannah uh sorry chair sorry one second I just wanted to note that uh board member lore has rejoined for at the public meeting ah my apology thank you I will be on mute for the most of this call but thank you welcome back board member Latimore thank you all right Hannah okay um so I wanted to give the board an update on um some new guidance we issued to extend the application deadline for um individual compliance schedules and building portfolio so I know this was something that um several of board members had had raised earlier um about the September 1st deadline coming up quickly for both of these applications um so we have um moved this the deadlines for both of those to January 6th um we um are still encouraging all building owners to get your applications in as early as possible um so that the board has time to review them and that the building owners can have um kind of more assurances of what their compliance path will look like um but we did want to give people more runway on this for a few reasons um one being that there um there have been some challenges with getting um data from the utilities over the summer um so for folks who were able to complete their um reporting this past year on time um this hasn't really been an issue but for folks who had requested extensions um we've been running into some issues as some systems have changed over at the utilities we're working through them all but it's created some challenges in folks getting um their data and being able to do accurate planning so we wanted to you know give people more time for that um and then also um we had some delays in getting our own um emissions calculator up and and with the accurate data so um we updated this guidance we sent it out to the Berto newsletter um I believe the review board newsletter too um thank you ziki um it's up on the website um and we're we're letting folks know about this change um and happy to answer any questions from the board on this um we did not change the short-term hardship compliance deadline that is still October 1st however um building owners can apply for a short-term hardship compliance plan after that deadline if unforeseen circumstances materialize after that deadline but um really if if folks are looking for a short-term hardship compliance plan to give them more time to you know make a plan figure out what their compliance can look like they should be getting that in for October 1st um uh so that that is not changing and then it the deadline for long-term hardship compliance plans for that will be that could be eligible for 2026 um compliance year will be April 1st of 2025 that's per the regulations okay thank you Hannah I will now ask each board member if they have any questions or comments so I will start with you board member Boyd nope all set thank you thank you I just want want to say thank you for revisiting the deadline of those applications I I think that that September F 1st was definitely it's coming up soon but I've sitting there with Labor Day and the and the weekend Mets a lot so I do appreciate um the adjustments that the the city has been has made to allow a little bit more flexibility especially since this is the first time a lot of building owners are submitting these application um I have already gotten majority of my questions answered by Ziggy and Diana so I will pass it on to board memb farooqi great thank you staff for putting this together um I'm curious how the utilities have been in terms of rectifying that reporting issue do we have updates um yes they've been they've been very responsive um and we've been working with them to get temporary workarounds and longer term fixes in place so um we are hoping it is temporary um on eversource side they changed over all of the account number numbers um so they've had some big internal shifts um that we're we're working through but we have good working relationships with Partners in both um grid and eversource good good but the issues are still persisting seems like um I think they're mostly resolved people should be able to get their data now um I can come back with an update next time Aiden knows all the details um I just know that things are like working but I don't know the exact details of where where the long-term fixes stand sure okay well that's good great that's an update a good hear so thank you no further questions thank you board member farooqi board member lore no questions thank you board member ladimore board member Nelson no questions thank you thank you all right I will now we will now be covering administrative updates uh Ziggy all right um so I wanted to give a quick update on the number of applications we've received we currently have 11 building portfolio applications and two IC applications and we're still waiting to hear back from the long-term hardship compliance fund applicants about the resubmissions after the applications were deemed incomplete uh but the city has had some 101s with the applicants to discuss the requested updates so hopefully they'll re submit their missing information soon we have received one nomination still so far from to join the review board for our open seat and hopefully as the deadline approaches which I think it's the end of this week we will receive more nominations uh the Berto emissions calculator has been updated to reflect 2023 energy data and more aely reflect Massachusetts renewable portfolio standard and we have found that the RPS has made a significant impact for some owners so we do recommend people check that out if they have not uh recently and also want to bring your attention that B has sent out some invitations from RDH training uh the training on September 5th we will see on the timeline we'll cover topics beyond the building such as District Energy Systems Rex PPA also there are holds on your calendar for a um this another cor training session like last time please respond yes to any of the times that worked for you and um any and deny the ones that you have complex for and looking at our future meetings October 14th is indigenous people's day uh we can reschedule that meeting to October 15 18 or the following Monday uh if that works for you we can always also do a different date you don't have to decide that I just want to bring your attention and then also to remind uh people that next meeting will be hearing from presentations and then you could vote on September 9th but there's also room on September 24th to V uh if you need more time to discuss and think about the applications you don't have to vote until sep 24th and again our next meeting is scheduled for September 9th um I'll just add for the cohort trainings for RDH to be clear you only have to attend one so it's the same training but uh in smaller groups so if you accept you know different ones that you can attend you don't you're not committing to attending to more than one it's just more so we can figure out the scheduling thank you Diana uh Diana Andy can you just as a quick reminder how remind us how many board members are we how many seats are we still trying to fill at this point we have two empty seats currently so only one application for two empty seats okay um do we need to do anything to sort of you know talk more with the community based organizations to to have more people that they're recommending or you know I'm just curious uh what needs to be done um I can I can jump in on that I I think um what we've seen in the past is applications tend to come in last minute on a deadline so um I think and we have said we would keep um it open if we don't have enough applicants um so I think we can follow up with board members um after this week if we're still if we don't have uh the applicant pool that that we need um to support some of that that Outreach okay thank you very much and just checking on are there any questions or comments uh for the board I know Ziggy just went over quite a bit in terms of the timeline uh opening the floor for a second all right hearing none is there a motion to adjourn this meeting motion to it jiren is there a second a second on the motion to adjourn this meeting board members in favor say I I I I all right I the eyes have it uh the motion passes this meeting is adjourned at 5:55 p.m. thank you all be safe thank you thank you