Is St. Louis Sticking to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement?

Seven mayors in the St. Louis Region have all signed on to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. The mayors, all from Missouri municipalities, are as follows:

• Ben Uchitelle; Clayton
• Robert G. Lowery; Florissant
• Mike Swoboda; Kirkwood
• Mark Langston; Maplewood
• Francis G. Slay; Saint Louis
• James A. Hobbs; Sunset Hills (note: John Hunzeker is current mayor)
• Joseph L. Adams; University City

From an Oct 18, 2005 press release from the Ozark Chapter of the Sierra Club we know St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay signed the agreement in October 2005:

A coalition of conservation-minded groups applauded Mayors Mark Langston of Maplewood, Joseph Adams of University City, and Francis Slay of St. Louis for making commitments to reduce global warming pollution in their cities. The event was the result of a grassroots campaign and part of the Sierra Club’s national “Cool Cities” tour. The event featured a fuel-sipping hybrid Mercury Mariner that is made in Missouri.

At the news conference in front of Maplewood City Hall, the mayors were presented with certificates of thanks for signing onto the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement, an effort initiated by the mayor of Seattle earlier this year and now supported by 185 mayors nationwide. Mayor Slay, who signed the agreement last week, did not attend, but his office provided a written statement:

“`I am particularly interested in considering environmental policies that will create jobs for the residents of our City,’” said Slay in the statement. “`As we assess implementation of new policies, their potential to create new jobs will be the priority consideration.’”

The list of mayors is now over 300 strong. Here is the agreement to which they’ve signed on:

ENDORSING THE U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT

WHEREAS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors has previously adopted strong policy resolutions calling for cities, communities and the federal government to take actions to reduce global warming pollution; and

WHEREAS, the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international community’s most respected assemblage of scientists, has found that climate disruption is a reality and that human activities are largely responsible for increasing concentrations of global warming pollution; and

WHEREAS, recent, well-documented impacts of climate disruption include average global sea level increases of four to eight inches during the 20th century; a 40 percent decline in Arctic sea-ice thickness; and nine of the ten hottest years on record occurring in the past decade; and

WHEREAS, climate disruption of the magnitude now predicted by the scientific community will cause extremely costly disruption of human and natural systems throughout the world including: increased risk of floods or droughts; sea-level rises that interact with coastal storms to erode beaches, inundate land, and damage structures; more frequent and extreme heat waves; more frequent and greater concentrations of smog; and

WHEREAS, on February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to address climate disruption, went into effect in the 141 countries that have ratified it to date; 38 of those countries are now legally required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and

WHEREAS, the United States of America, with less than five percent of the world’s population, is responsible for producing approximately 25 percent of the world’s global warming pollutants; and

WHEREAS, the Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction target for the U.S. would have been 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and

WHEREAS, many leading US companies that have adopted greenhouse gas reduction programs to demonstrate corporate social responsibility have also publicly expressed preference for the US to adopt precise and mandatory emissions targets and timetables as a means by which to remain competitive in the international marketplace, to mitigate financial risk and to promote sound investment decisions; and

WHEREAS, state and local governments throughout the United States are adopting emission reduction targets and programs and that this leadership is bipartisan, coming from Republican and Democratic governors and mayors alike; and

WHEREAS, many cities throughout the nation, both large and small, are reducing global warming pollutants through programs that provide economic and quality of life benefits such as reduced energy bills, green space preservation, air quality improvements, reduced traffic congestion, improved transportation choices, and economic development and job creation through energy conservation and new energy technologies; and

WHEREAS, mayors from around the nation have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement which, as amended at the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, reads: The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement

A. We urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States’ dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel-efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels;

B. We urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes

1) clear timetables and emissions limits and

2) a flexible, market-based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries; and

C. We will strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities such as:

1. Inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community, set reduction targets and create an action plan.

2. Adopt and enforce land-use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities;

3. Promote transportation options such as bicycle trails, commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car pooling and public transit;

4. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by, for example, investing in “green tags”, advocating for the development of renewable energy resources, recovering landfill methane for energy production, and supporting the use of waste to energy technology;

5. Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements, retrofitting city facilities with energy efficient lighting and urging employees to conserve energy and save money;

6. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use;

7. Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED program or a similar system;

8. Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; reduce the number of vehicles; launch an employee education program including anti-idling messages; convert diesel vehicles to bio-diesel;

9. Evaluate opportunities to increase pump efficiency in water and wastewater systems; recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production;

10. Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community;

11. Maintain healthy urban forests; promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2; and

12. Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of Mayors endorses the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting and urges mayors from around the nation to join this effort. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The U.S. Conference of Mayors will work in conjunction with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability and other appropriate organizations to track progress and implementation of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as amended b73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting.

I’ve searched through St. Louis’ website looking for any evidence of action on the part of the Slay administration with respect to this agreement but I’ve come up empty handed. In fact, in searching the city’s press release system for the dates in which the agreement would have been signed I could not find a single mention of even having agreed to the concept. Who is working on this initiative? In particular I like #2 above:

Adopt and enforce land-use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities

Well, in St. Louis we are sticking with our 1947 pro-sprawl zoning which supersedes our new strategic land use plan so we are not doing so well on the reduction of sprawl. If fact, the mayor seemed supportive of Ald. Florida’s McDonald’s drive-thru in a walkable urban community and is advocating reducing public park land. I’ve heard nothing of looking into bio-diesel for the city’s fleet of trucks or hybrids for city vehicles. I have not even seen the establishment of any kind of committee or group to begin investigating options for compliance by 2012, much less any real action.

The City of Clayton has an ‘Ecology and Environmental Awareness Committee’ (see April 2006 Minutes). Looks like Clayton is talking with Centene about LEED certification for their project — a start. It also looks like Clayton is making room in their budget for hybrid vehicles for city use. Nothing major but clearly open progress.
In August of 2006 Kirkwood announced an award:

The City of Kirkwood has received an award from the U.S. EPA Blue Skyways Collaborative for efforts to reduce air pollution and decrease U.S. consumption of foreign oil. The city’s efforts have included the city fleet’s Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and Bio-diesel program; the city’s commitment to the Mayors’ Climate Protection Plan known as “Cool Cities”; Kirkwood Electric’s “Plug in Partnership” and energy savings program with LED street lights; and the Sanitation Division’s recycling program.

I found nothing on the websites for Maplewood, Florissant or Sunset Hills. On University City’s website I found a newsletter announcing the signing but nothing beyond that. Looks like Clayton and Kirkwood are leading the region in this area.

Did the idea of Leed certification come up in the talks between the city over Ballpark Village? If not, why? And where is the new zoning to make the 2005 adoption of the Strategic Land Use plan meaningful? Otherwise, the land use plan becomes yet another long-series of plans trumpeted and then added to the pile in city hall to collect dust.

It is certainly hard to acheive a goal without putting forth any effort to get there. Budgets are always tight and time is limited, you must have the political will to make it happen — otherwise don’t sign the agreement. Mayor Slay: do something or ask that your name be removed from the list!

Speaking of political will, I wonder if our aldermen even know about this agreement… I’m also curious to ask Aldermanic President Jim Shrewsbury and his challenger Ald. Lewis Reed how they feel about the agreement and what they think the city should be doing (or not doing) in this area.