The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-08-07 Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Agenda PacketCLIMATE ACTION AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE Regular Meeting Friday, August 07, 2026 Community Meeting Room & Hybrid 2:00 PM Amended Agenda Amended agenda items appear below in RED Climate Action and Sustainability Committee meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend by teleconference/video conference or in person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at the end of the agenda. The meeting will be broadcast live on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto. VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/85380918387) Meeting ID: 853 8091 8387 Phone: 1(669)900-6833 PUBLIC COMMENTS General Public Comment for items not on the agenda will be accepted for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In- person general public comment will be heard for 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda. Public comments for agendized items will be accepted both in person and via Zoom for up to three minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair. Requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation or as determined by the Chair. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to city.council@PaloAlto.gov and will be provided to the Council and available for inspection on the City’s website. Please clearly indicate which agenda item you are referencing in your subject line. Multiple individuals who wish to speak on the same item may designate a spokesperson. Spokespersons must be representing five or more verified individuals who are present either in person or via zoom. Spokespeople will be allowed up to 10 minutes, at the discretion of the presiding officer. Speaking time may be reduced if the presiding officer reduces the speaking time for individual speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are accepted only by email to city.clerk@PaloAlto.gov at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Once received, the Clerk will have them shared at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that: (1) sticks, posts, poles or similar/other types of handle objects are strictly prohibited; (2) the items do not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and (3) persons with such items remain seated when displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting. 1 August 07, 2026 Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas. CALL TO ORDER IN PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In-person Public Comment is limited to 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda. STANDING VERBAL REPORTS A. Staff Comments B. Committee Member Comments and Announcements ACTION ITEMS 1. Youth Climate Advisory Board Annual Report; CEQA Status – Not a Project Late Packet Report Added 2. Recommendation to City Council to Accept the RWQCP Biosolids Facility Plan Update as Part of the Long Range Facilities Plan Update and Adopt a Park Dedication Ordinance for a Portion of the Measure E Site; CEQA Status – Not a Project Title Updated, Late Packet Report Added 3. Preliminary Review of the 2025 Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Overview of Scope 3 Emissions; CEQA Status - Not a Project Late Packet Report Added FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In-person Public Comment is limited to 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda. ADJOURNMENT 2 August 07, 2026 Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas. PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email, teleconference, or by phone. 1.Written public comments may be submitted by email to city.council@PaloAlto.gov. 2.For in person public comments please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Clerk prior to discussion of the item. 3.Spoken public comments for items using a computer or smart phone will be accepted through the teleconference meeting. To address the Council, click on the link below to access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully. ◦You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30 , Firefox 27 , Microsoft Edge 12 , Safari 7 . Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer. Or download the Zoom application onto your smart phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter in the Meeting ID below. ◦You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you that it is your turn to speak. ◦When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. ◦When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments. 4.Spoken public comments for items using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Council. You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit allotted. CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 853 8091 8387 Phone: 1(669)900-6833 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at (650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@PaloAlto.gov. Requests for assistance or accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or service. 3 August 07, 2026 Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas. California Government Code §84308, commonly referred to as the "Levine Act," prohibits an elected official of a local government agency from participating in a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use if the official received a campaign contribution exceeding $500 from a party or participant, including their agents, to the proceeding within the last 12 months. A “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” includes most land use and planning approvals and the approval of contracts that are not subject to lowest responsible bid procedures and have a value over $50,000. A “party” is a person who files an application for, or is the subject of, a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use. A “participant” is a person who actively supports or opposes a particular decision in a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use, and has a financial interest in the decision. The Levine Act incorporates the definition of “financial interest” in the Political Reform Act, which encompasses interests in business entities, real property, sources of income, sources of gifts, and personal finances that may be affected by the Council’s actions. If you qualify as a “party” or “participant” to a proceeding, and you have made a campaign contribution to a Council Member exceeding $500 made within the last 12 months, you must disclose the campaign contribution before making your comments. 4 August 07, 2026 Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas. Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2607-6571 TITLE Youth Climate Advisory Board Annual Report; CEQA Status – Not a Project This item will be a late packet publication on 7/30/26. Item 1 Item 1 Staff Report Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 6 of 62 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2607-6572 TITLE Recommendation to Accept the RWQCP Biosolids Facility Plan Update as Part of the Long Range Facilities Plan Update and Adopt a Park Dedication Ordinance for a Portion of the Measure E Site; CEQA Status – Not a Project This item will be a late packet publication on 7/30/26. Item 2 Item 2 Staff Report Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 7 of 62 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: City Clerk Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2607-6573 TITLE Preliminary Review of the 2025 Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Overview of Scope 3 Emissions; CEQA Status - Not a Project This item will be a late packet publication on 7/30/26. Item 3 Item 3 Staff Report Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 8 of 62 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: Public Works Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2606-6485 TITLE Youth Climate Advisory Board Annual Report; CEQA Status – Not a Project RECOMMENDATION This is a discussion item; no action or recommendation is requested. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Palo Alto Youth Climate Advisory Board (YCAB) is an advisory body of high school students dedicated to sustainability and climate stewardship. Members contribute to and provide feedback on Palo Alto’s climate initiatives and policies and bring Citywide sustainability efforts to local high schools. The YCAB was developed in partnership with the Palo Alto Student Climate Coalition. The inaugural YCAB meeting convened in September 2024. This staff report summarizes the accomplishments and achievements of the eleven members of the 2025-2026 Youth Climate Advisory Board. BACKGROUND In the fall of 2023, Palo Alto Student Climate Coalition (PASCC) members Julia Zeitlin, Angelina Rosh, and Theo Waltuch met with staff to discuss their proposal for creating a Palo Alto Youth Climate Advisory Board (YCAB). Their idea was to create a student board, similar in structure to the Palo Alto Youth Council, that would address issues about sustainability and climate action that are relevant to the youth community and support the work of the Office of Sustainability. Staff worked with PASCC to develop and refine the YCAB proposal, resulting in the adoption of the Youth Climate Advisory Board By-laws in April 2024. YCAB members are expected to dive into complex issues and invest time and energy into making the City and Palo Alto schools more sustainable. Board members must attend high school in Palo Alto and are expected to attend monthly board meetings as well as additional subcommittee meetings. Board members commit to a full, year-long term, from September of the year they are appointed to August of the following year. The YCAB is led by a Chair and two Vice Chairs, elected by the student board members. The Chair facilitates board meetings, with the Vice Chairs recording attendance and minutes. The Chair and Vice Chairs serve as youth liaisons and attend City staff’s Sustainability Item 1. Item 1 Late Packet Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 9 of 62 Leadership Team meetings. YCAB also nominates a member to serve as the High School Representative on the Climate Action Working Group. ANALYSIS Aiden Miao, Chair Chanew Kim, Vice Chair Jenna Mu, Vice Chair Caitlin Hopkins Alida Cuttriss Anika Agrawal Donovan Carlson Maya Mazin Elsa Lagerblad Will Stover Kiara Yoon FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT Item 1. Item 1 Late Packet Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 10 of 62 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Stakeholder engagement regarding the Youth Climate Advisory Board is wide-reaching and coordinated with multiple departments, the Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Palo Alto Parent-Teacher Association. Efforts include direct engagement, social media and other digital marketing/outreach, website updates, leveraging the City’s communication platforms, and more. Stakeholder engagement by the Youth Climate Advisory Board members included direct engagement with Palo Alto high school students, the Palo Alto Unified School District, community members, and local agencies and businesses; participation in City and school events; social media and other digital marketing/outreach; providing content for website updates; providing content for the City’s communication platforms; and more. This report is for informational purposes only, with no action required by the Council, and is therefore not a project subject to CEQA review. Attachment A: Youth Climate Action Board 2025-2026 Annual Report : Brad Eggleston, Director Public Works/City Engineer Item 1. Item 1 Late Packet Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 11 of 62 Yo u t h C l i m a t e A d v i s o r y B o a r d 2025 - 2026 Annual Report Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 12 of 62 INTRODUCTION PREFACE Over the City of Palo Alto Youth Climate Advisory Board’s (YCAB) second term, the eleven members—both returning and new—furthered Palo Alto’s sustainability efforts across the areas of Adaptation, Electrification, Media, Mobility, and Zero Waste. The combination of experienced members and new perspectives fueled the Board’s focus on education for this term. We are incredibly proud of the work we’ve accomplished. What follows is a report by each subcommittee on its accomplishments. We hope that this report will serve both as an update on what we’ve done this term and as a guideline for what youth in Palo Alto want and need when it comes to climate action. We hope that our efforts will help the City and others make more intentional decisions that reflect the needs of the next generation, taking steps to protect the city and planet that we will inherit. Members Aiden Miao Alida Cuttriss Anika Agrawal Caitlin Hopkins Chanew Kim Donovan Carlson Elsa Lagerblad Maya Mazin Jenna Mu Kiara Yoon Will Stover Aiden Miao Chair Jenna Mu Vice Chair Chanew Kim Vice Chair Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 13 of 62 ZERO WASTE SUBCOMMITTEE Summary This term, Zero Waste hosted the succulent planting activity at the Clay Sustains Family Day event, launched the Green Heroes program, presented about zero waste practices at Fletcher Middle School, tabled at Palo Alto’s Teen Arts Council’s Clothing Swap, met with PAUSD to audit lunch waste, and collected data from over 200 Bay Area students to gain insight on their exposure to climate education. In the future, Zero Waste hopes to use this data in order to analyze how various socio-economic factors affect access to climate education,and possibly present our findings to the Palo Alto City Council so the City can help take steps in order to fill educational gaps. Members Maya Mazin Jenna Mu Kiara Yoon Anika Agrawal Impact ●Clay Sustains Family Day event with 100+ participants ●Presented to 200+ students through Zero Waste Presentation @ Fletcher ●Reached 300+ youth with zero waste education through Zero Waste Survey, tabling at Teen Arts Council’s Clothing Swap, and more! MAIN INITIATIVES Zero Waste Presentation at Fletcher Presented to 200+ students at Fletcher Middle School about what zero waste it and how to engage in it. Zero Waste Survey Surveyed 220+ local students on what they believe zero waste is, whether they had access to compost/recycling bins at home, if they composted/recycled at home, and previous zero waste education. Responses are currently being analyzed to understand gaps in zero waste education and access in Palo Alto and surrounding areas, guiding future education work for next term. The team is actively working on writing a paper analyzing how socioeconomic factors correlate to access and beliefs about sustainability. Our literature review suggests that education is a consistently strong predictor of pro-environmental attitudes. Extremely low- and high-income individuals displayed disregard for sustainability while middle-income individuals correlated to pro-environmental mindsets. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 14 of 62 ELECTRIFICATION SUBCOMMITTEE Summary YCAB’s Electrification Subcommittee has focused on educating students and families about the importance of electrifying buildings and homes for sustainability. Members Aiden, Chanew, Elsa, and Will have tabled at elementary schools and events with an interactive activity teaching the benefits of electricity compared to gas. We have also provided handouts for students to take home to their families with a worksheet that prompts students to learn about electrification in their own home, as well as additional information on Palo Alto’s electrification programs for parents to learn from. We have reached 100+ students and their families at four elementary schools. In the future, the Electrification Subcommittee hopes to educate middle school students, high school students, and the broader Palo Alto community about the importance of electrification. We thank Sustainability Program Administrator Olivia Trevino for her insight and support on our work this term. Members Aiden Miao Chanew Kim Elsa Lagerblad Will Stover Impact ● Taught 100+ students at 4 elementary schools about the importance of electrification ● Distributed handouts for families to learn about the City ’s electrification programs Main Initiatives Activities at elementary schools Tabled at Duveneck, Juana Briones, Nixon, and Palo Verde during lunch. Led an interactive activity where students guessed objects inside a box based on feel, and connected each object to an aspect of electrification such as efficiency or safety. For example, a lightbulb is safer than a candle. Broke down the complex topic of electrification into something kids could understand. Activity Sheet and Handout Designed activity sheet to guide students through learning about electrification at their own home. Included information and links to Palo Alto’s electrification programs for parents to see. Distributed 100+ sheets. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 15 of 62 MOBILITY SUBCOMMITTEE Summary Last term, the Mobility Subcommittee surveyed 220+ Palo Alto students from 10 Palo Alto middle and high schools to assess youth transit needs. This term, we used that information for recommendations for safer streets and improved bike and pedestrian corridors with the City and the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), specifically focusing on improving biking accessibility with the new San Antonio Road Area Plan through a formal YCAB recommendation. In an effort to educate youth about public transportation in the city, we’ve also given a presentation to 150+ students at Hausner Jewish Day Middle School and created a three minute video demonstrating how to use VTA buses and Caltrain which will be distributed across PAUSD and several private schools in Palo Alto the following term. Members Aiden Miao Caitlin Hopkins Elsa Lagerblad Jenna Mu Will Stover Impact ● Presented to 150+ students at Hausner Middle School and received 30+ Youth Clipper Card signups from the QR code distributed ● Formal written recommendation for San Antonio Road Area Plan ● “Palo Alto Public Transport 101” Video: how to use VTA buses and Caltrain presented to 200+ students at Castilleja ● Led education and engagement at 3 PAUSD middle and high school bike repair events ● Aided Safe Routes to School Program with bike repair workshops at PAUSD middle and elementary schools Main Initiatives Presentation at Hausner Presented to 150+ students at Hausner Middle School about the climate benefits of public transportation, local transport options, and the Youth Clipper Card, and answered questions about accessibility and how to use transport. Handed out informational flyers and received 30+ Youth Clipper Card signups from the QR code distributed. San Antonio Road Area Plan Used last term’s Youth Transportation Survey data to inform this term’s City recommendations for the San Antonio Road Area Plan in a formal written recommendation, urging the plan to adopt protected bike lanes in the area. “Palo Alto Public Transport 101” Video Scripted and filmed a short video on how to use VTA buses and Caltrain to get from Palo Alto Transit Center to Cal Ave Farmer ’s Market, encouraging and teaching youth how to use local public transit. Presented to 200+ at Castilleja. Will work with PAUSD and local private schools to screen video at schools across Palo Alto next term. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 16 of 62 ADAPTATION SUBCOMMITTEE Summary This year we transitioned from the Water Subcommittee to the Adaptation Subcommittee to account for broader adaptation and climate resilience initiatives. The team explored an educational campaign to warn against pet tick sprays polluting water, pushed forward a rain barrel program at PAUSD schools, and helped organize a group tour of the Wastewater Treatment plant and the Clay Sustains Family Day succulent event. Members Anika Agrawal Donovan Carlson Kiara Yoon Alida Cuttriss Chanew Kim Caitlin Hopkins Jenna Mu Impact ●Collaborated with Zero Waste to host succulent planting activity at Clay Sustains Family Day event at Palo Alto Art Center ●Explored rain barrels and water education programs Main Initiatives Clay Sustains Family Day event The Clay Sustains Family Day event was an event hosted by the Art Center focused on environmentalism and upcycling. We co-hosted a succulent planting activity with the Zero Waste Subcommittee for 100+ Palo Alto families, encouraging best practices for keeping succulents and plants at home and creating a culture of environmentalism for even the youngest of Palo Altans. Rain Barrels Although we faced challenges acquiring and implementing barrels at school due to finances and logistics, we will build on our learnings from this term to hopefully finish this project next term. Flea/Tick Spray We explored the possibility of limiting the usage of flea and tick spray after learning about the adverse impact of flea and tick spray on the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, but we decided to not further the project due to lack of feasibility. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 17 of 62 MEDIA SUBCOMMITTEE Summary The Media Subcommittee works to engage with the Palo Alto community, particularly youth, through social media and printed infographics. We create both digital and physical media to further YCAB’s goals. Members Donovan Carlson Maya Mazin Kiara Yoon Impact ● Thousands of views across platforms inspiring the next generation of climate activists ● Updating the climate and larger city community about YCAB’s actions Main Initiatives Newsletter and Instagram Posts Wrote and designed Meet the Team social media post, subcommittee updates, and event recap posts with the goal to inspire Palo Alto youth about climate action. Posters and Physical Media Designed and printed 10+ posters, pamphlets, and physical media publicizing YCAB events and initiatives. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 18 of 62 IMAGE GALLERY Planting activity at the Zero Waste and Adaptation succulent planting event. YCAB booth at the Earth Day Festival, including a poster from the Mediateam. Electrification and Zero Waste teaching students at Duveneck. Palo Verde students learning from the Electrification activity. The Mobility team presents about public transportation to Hausner Middle School. Item 1. Attachment A - Youth Climate Action Board 2025- 2026 Annual Report Item 1.: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 19 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: Public Works Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2605-6429 TITLE Recommendation to City Council to Accept the RWQCP Biosolids Facility Plan Update as Part of the Long Range Facilities Plan Update and Adopt a Park Dedication Ordinance for a Portion of the Measure E Site; CEQA Status – Not a Project RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Climate Action and Sustainability Committee recommend that City Council: 1. Accept the Biosolids Facility Plan Update, prepared by Carollo Engineers, Inc., as a component of the Regional Water Quality Control Plant Long Range Facilities Plan Update; 2. Adopt a Park Dedication Ordinance to dedicate approximately 7.7 acres of the Measure E site at Byxbee Park as parkland; and 3. Direct staff to: a. Continue dewatered solids hauling and offsite processing in the near term under existing contracts; b. Reserve the approximately 2.4-acre flat, uncapped portion of the Measure E site for potential future biosolids processing; and c. Monitor viable regional partnership opportunities, including the City of San Jose’s proposed public-private partnership facility. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Biosolids Facility Plan Update (BFP-U), prepared by Carollo Engineers, Inc.,1 evaluates near- and long-term biosolids management strategies for RWQCP wastewater treatment solids residuals over a 30-year planning horizon (2025–2055). These solids must be treated and managed, either onsite or off-site, in accordance with federal and state regulations to protect public health and the environment before they can be reused, disposed of, or destroyed. Six alternatives were carried forward from an initial screening of approximately 15 onsite and seven offsite alternatives: the Baseline (offsite dewatering and hauling); an Offsite Partnership 1 Carollo Engineers. Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facility Plan Update (Draft), 2026; https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/public-works/rwqcp/contracts/bfp-u-draft-2026-jul-24.pdf Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 20 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 with the City of San Jose; and four onsite options (Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion (MAD); MAD with Thermal Hydrolysis Process; Thermal Belt Drying; and Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis). The Baseline ranks highest under current conditions. Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis offers potential net negative GHG emissions and Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals”) reduction, but at significantly higher cost and technological risk. • Near-Term (2026–2030): Continue offsite hauling and processing under existing contracts (through March 2029). Implement near-term thickening improvements and operational optimizations at the RWQCP. Monitor biosolids regulations regarding PFAS, offsite market costs, offsite partnership opportunities, and emerging technologies. Reserve the approximately 2.4-acre flat, uncapped portion of the Measure E site for potential future onsite biosolids facilities. • Mid-Term (2031–2040): Renew offsite contracts (5-year term; March 2034) and conduct a BFP-U reassessment approximately two years prior to the next contract renewal (approximately 2032) to determine if receiving location of hauled solids should be changed. If a viable regional partnership (e.g., the City of San Jose’s proposed public- private partnership facility) becomes available, evaluate and pursue if warranted. • Long-Term (2041–2055): Plan, design, construct, and transition to onsite solids processing if triggered by regulatory, market, or financial drivers. Consider implementing Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion (MAD) with combined heat and power onsite if offsite costs approach approximately $350 per wet ton, or if regulatory or market changes require the onsite production of Class B biosolids. If future biosolids PFAS regulations necessitate treatment, evaluate onsite PFAS-removal technologies, such as Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis, as they become commercially proven. Since PFAS-removal technologies are not yet well proven, continue to closely monitor technology and regulatory developments. Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 21 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 BACKGROUND 3 directing staff to retire the aging multiple-hearth furnace incinerators and to prepare a Biosolids Facility Plan (BFP). Following the recommendations from the 2014 BFP,4 Phase I (Sludge Dewatering and Truck Loadout Facility) was commissioned in 2019, enabling incinerator decommissioning, which eliminated the plant’s largest GHG source. The City did not proceed with the originally recommended Phase II construction of the thermal hydrolysis process with mesophilic anaerobic digestion and digester gas-fueled combined heat and power (CHP) due to high capital costs and implementation complexity discovered during design. 5 Since 2019, dewatered solids cake has been hauled offsite for processing at Lystek International’s Solano County facility and Synagro’s Central Valley Composting facility under contracts currently in place through March 2029. 6 In June 2024, City Council approved a contract with Carollo Engineers, Inc. (Contract No. C24189086) to prepare the Long Range Facilities Plan Update (LRFP-U).7 The LRFP-U includes the BFP-U, which evaluates near- and long-term biosolids management strategies and potential facility siting options within the existing plant boundary, the 2.4-acre Measure E site, or offsite alternatives. 3 City Council, July 2, 2012; Agenda Item #7; SR 2914, 4 CH2MHill (Now Jacobs). Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facility Plan, 2014; 5 Woodard & Curran. Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facility Plan Update, 2019; 6 City Council, April 3, 2023; Agenda Item #12; SR #2302-0942, https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=82279&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto 7 City Council, June 10, 2024; Agenda Item #6, SR#2405-2993, https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=82887&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 22 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 Measure E site at Byxbee Park as parkland while reserving the 2.4-acre portion of the Measure E site for potential future biosolids processing based on evaluations from the BFP-U.13 On May 5, 2025, City Council approved the 2025 Council Priority Objectives.14 The Council Priority Area Climate Action & Adaptation, and Natural Environment Protection included a Council Priority Objective, CA 13 Develop an updated Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facility Plan. Complete initial work to develop plan, including consideration of PFAS pollutants and the Measure E site, and review with a Council committee in advance of Council acceptance of the plan in late 2025 or early 2026. The BFP-U directly addresses 2025 Council Priority Objective CA 13 and is also included in the 2026 Council Values Supported Objective, Advance recommendations for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facility Plan. ANALYSIS The draft BFP-U Report, provides a strategic implementation roadmap through 2055, incorporating recent plant upgrades, regulatory changes, technological advances, and community input. Alternatives Evaluated Six alternatives were carried forward from an initial screening of approximately 15 onsite and 7 offsite alternatives: Two offsite Alternatives: Alternative 1 – Baseline (Dewatering and Offsite Hauling): Continuation of current operations, hauling dewatered cake to Synagro’s Central Valley Composting facility and/or Lystek’s Solano County facility. Alternative 2 – Offsite Partnership: Hauling to a potential public-private partnership facility under development by the City of San Jose; technology and availability remain uncertain. Four Onsite Alternatives sited within the existing plant boundary and the 2.4-acre portion of the Measure E site: Alternative 3 – Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion (MAD): Onsite anaerobic digestion with combined heat and power (CHP) utilizing biogas, producing Class B biosolids. Alternative 4 – MAD with Thermal Hydrolysis Process (MAD+THP): Enhanced onsite digestion using high-pressure steam pre-treatment, producing Class A biosolids; digester gas-fueled combined heat and power (CHP). Alternative 5 – Thermal Belt Drying: Onsite natural-gas thermal drying, producing Class A dried biosolids with significant volume reduction. Alternative 6 – Thermal Belt Drying with Pyrolysis: Onsite drying followed by pyrolysis to produce biochar with energy recovery; the only alternative with demonstrated 13 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting, June 23, 2026; SR#2604-6271, 14 City Council, May 5, 2025; Agenda Item #8; SR #2504-4466, https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=83379&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 23 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 potential for PFAS reduction in the solids byproduct (biochar) and projected net negative GHG emissions. The biosolids alternatives description and site layout of the onsite alternatives are summarized in Attachment B. Evaluation Criteria and Community Engagement Evaluation criteria and weights were developed through a structured process that included an RWQCP staff survey, two public Biosolids Input Workshops (May and July 2025), and a public meeting (February 24, 2026). Table 1 summarizes the eight evaluation criteria, descriptions, initial weighting factors originally proposed, and the final weighting factors that incorporated feedback from the public workshops and meetings. Table 1: Evaluation Criteria and Weighting Factors Category Criterion Initial Weight Final Weight Financial 1) Net Present Value (NPV)25%25% 2) Proven Technology Performance 11%10% 3) Global Environmental Impacts 14%17% 4) Footprint, Site Impacts, and Constructability 9%7% 5) Treatment Plant Process Impacts 11%9% 6) Operations and Maintenance Impacts 14%14% 7) Local Community and Environmental Impacts 6%8% Non- Financial 8) Regulatory and Program Resilience 10%10% Total 100%100% Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Climate Action and Sustainability Lens The BFP-U estimated GHG emissions using the Biosolids Emissions Assessment Model (BEAM, November 2024), accounting for Scope 1, 2, and major Scope 3 emissions. The estimate included negative emissions from carbon sequestration and emissions reduction from displacement of synthetic fertilizer resulting from beneficial use of biosolids in agriculture. Key findings from the projected Year 2055 annual GHG emissions and offsets are: Baseline, Offsite Partnership, MAD, and MAD+THP produce comparable net GHG emissions (approximately 950–1,800 MT CO₂e/yr), primarily from nitrous oxide emissions from composting, partially offset by negative emissions from carbon sequestration and displacement of synthetic fertilizer. Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 24 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 Thermal Belt Drying generates the highest emissions (~2,800 MT CO₂e/yr) due to natural gas combustion, inconsistent with the City’s fossil fuel use reduction goals. Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis is the only alternative projected to achieve net negative GHG emissions (approximately −5,300 MT CO₂e/yr) through biochar carbon sequestration; it is also the only alternative with demonstrated PFAS removal potential. However, pyrolysis is an emerging biosolids management technology with very limited full-scale municipal operating history compared to more established treatment processes, resulting in greater uncertainty regarding long-term performance, operational reliability, and lifecycle costs. Because the RWQCP purchases zero-GHG electricity, the net GHG benefit of onsite biogas generation under MAD alternatives is effectively zero under current electricity purchasing arrangements. Energy Use and Potential Biogas Energy Recovery As part of criterion #3, global environmental impacts, the BFP-U evaluated energy use and potential biogas energy recovery amongst the six alternatives. The alternatives differ substantially in their reliance on electricity and fossil fuels: The Baseline and Offsite Partnership alternatives require no new onsite energy- consuming processes, with no additional natural gas or electricity demand beyond what is needed to address increased solids loading with time. MAD and MAD+THP generate digester gas (biogas) that fuels combined heat and power (CHP) systems (1.6 MW and 1.9 MW, respectively), offsetting a portion of the plant’s grid electricity use and contributing to their lower projected operations and maintenance (O&M) costs. As noted above, the GHG benefit of CHP is effectively zero under the City’s zero-GHG emissions electricity purchasing arrangements. Thermal Belt Drying requires a significant amount of natural gas combustion for drying, with the anticipated natural gas demand expected to surpass the existing natural gas infrastructure supply capacity to the RWQCP. Thus, this alternative requires and includes the costs for upsizing the RWQCP’s gas supply line. No onsite energy recovery is included. Electric drying was considered as an alternative to natural gas or propane- fueled thermal drying. However, electric drying is not recommended at this time because the technology is not well established, requires many more units, has higher costs, and demands a larger footprint. Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis also uses natural gas for drying, but heat recovered from the pyrolysis process (pyrogas) reduces gas demand by approximately half. The alternative remains a net energy user and would still require the same RWQCP gas supply line upgrade. Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 25 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 Recommended Biosolids Management Strategies Alternative 1) and Offsite Partnership (Alternative 2) alternatives ranked highest across all evaluation criteria and sensitivity analyses. Both of these two offsite alternatives scored significantly higher than any onsite alternative (4.1 and 4.0, respectively), driven primarily by superior Net Present Value cost (25% weight) and O&M Impacts (14% weight) performance, reflecting the lower capital and O&M costs of continued offsite management. Among the four onsite alternatives, MAD (Alternative 3) scored highest (3.0) on cost-effectiveness, proven technology, and environmental impacts. Near-Term (2026–2030): Continue Baseline operations under existing contracts (through March 2029). Implement near-term thickening improvements and operational optimizations. Reserve space on the Measure E site for potential future onsite facilities. Monitor PFAS regulations, offsite costs, offsite partnership opportunities, and emerging technologies. Mid-Term (2031–2040): Renew offsite contracts and conduct a BFP-U reassessment approximately two years prior to the next renewal (~2032). If a viable regional partnership (e.g., San Jose facility) becomes available, evaluate and pursue if warranted. Long-Term (2041–2055): Implement onsite solids processing if triggered by regulatory, market, or financial drivers. Consider implementing MAD with CHP if offsite management costs approach $350/wet ton or if regulatory or market drivers require onsite production of Class B biosolids. If PFAS limits are established and PFAS removal technologies have become well proven, consider implementing a biosolids management technology such as Thermal Drying with Pyrolysis. Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 26 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 Wildlife Corridor Feasibility Assessment and Measure E Site Recommendations 17 while retaining long-term flexibility to adapt to potential future regulations. 17 City Council, March 9, 2026; Agenda Item #11; SR #2602-6021, Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 27 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 looking recommendation. This approach preserves essential operational flexibility while permanently dedicating most of the Measure E site to parkland and habitat enhancement. 19 Continuing the near-term Baseline preserves the GHG reductions achieved through the 2019 incinerator decommissioning and avoids the high-emission trajectory of natural gas-intensive drying (Alternative 5, approximately 2,800 MT CO₂e/yr). The near-term Baseline also avoids the significant natural gas supply commitments and infrastructure upgrades that onsite thermal drying alternatives would require, consistent with the City's long-term goal of reducing fossil fuel reliance. The evaluation framework, which incorporates GHG emissions, local environmental impacts (Baylands, wildlife/habitat, sea level rise), and regulatory resilience (particularly regarding potential future PFAS regulations), advances S/CAP goals for natural environment protection and coastal resilience. Reserving the 2.4-acre Measure E site preserves the option to adopt emerging technologies such as pyrolysis, positioning the City to pursue net-negative GHG outcomes while complying with tightening regulatory targets. The multi-stage public engagement process (two community workshops in 2025 and a public meeting in 2026) is also directly aligned with the 2026–2027 S/CAP Work Plan’s communications and engagement items. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 19 City of Palo Alto 2026-2027 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Work Plan, Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 28 of 62 1 0 1 0 5 The City held two Biosolids Input Workshops (May 20 and July 1, 2025) and a public meeting (February 24, 2026) to present findings and solicit community input on GHG emissions, emerging technologies, PFAS reduction, sea level rise, long-term flexibility, and the Measure E site. Development of the BFP-U has been reviewed regularly with the RWQCP partner agencies at quarterly parters meetings. Partner agency representatives have been supportive of the recommended implementation approach. Staff also presented findings to the Parks and Recreation Commission on June 23, 2026. Project updates are shared through the RWQCP Capital Improvement Program website, Uplift Local, and the Sustainability e-Newsletter. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ATTACHMENTS APPROVED BY: Item 2. Item 2 Late Packet Report Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 29 of 62 NOT YET ADOPTED 1 162_20260615_ts24 Ordinance No. _ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Dedicating a Portion of the Area Commonly Known as the Measure E Site as Parkland The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Findings and Improvements. The City Council finds and declares that: (a) Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and section 22.08.004 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code specify that land intended to be used for park purposes can be dedicated for such use by ordinance. (b) The Measure E site is approximately 10 acres in size. It is bordered by the City’s Byxbee Park, Emily Renzel Wetlands, and the Regional Water Quality Control Plant. (c) The Measure E site was formerly part of Byxbee Park. The site was un-dedicated by a vote of the people on November 8, 2011 pursuant to the measure being placed on the ballot by Resolution 9195 (passed August 1, 2011). The terms of the ballot measure allow the site to be used only for a processing facility for yard trimmings, food waste and other organic materials. The measure allows the site to be re-dedicated after 10 years. No processing facility was ever built. (d) The City intends to re-dedicate a portion of the Measure E site through this ordinance. The specific area to be dedicated is as described in Exhibit A-31 to this Ordinance. The approximate area is 7.70 acres. (e) Upon adoption of this ordinance, the portion of the Measure E site shall become part of Byxbee Park. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby dedicates the specific portion of the Measure E site as described in Exhibit A-31 to this Ordinance pursuant to Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and section 22.08.004 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Section 22.08.450 is hereby added to Chapter 22.08 (Park dedications) to read as follows: 22.08.450 Addition to Byxbee Park (Portion of former Measure E Site) That certain parcel of land as delineated and described in Exhibit A-31, which is a portion of the area known as the Measure E site, is hereby reserved for park, playground, recreation or conservation purposes. Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 30 of 62 NOT YET ADOPTED 2 162_20260615_ts24 SECTION 4. Exhibit A-31 of this ordinance shall be codified as Exhibit A-31 to the Exhibits for Title 22. SECTION 5. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not a project within the meaning of CEQA. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Assistant City Attorney City Manager Director of Community Services Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 31 of 62 NOT YET ADOPTED 3 162_20260615_ts24 Exhibit A-31 Addition to Byxbee Park (Portion of Measure E Site) – Legal Description (see following pages) Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 32 of 62 "F:\20Projects\20087 Palo Alto RWQCP Advanced Treatment System\Working Documents\Survey Office\Legal Descriptions\2026 Project\Measure E Rededicated Area.docx" PAGE 1 OF 2 EXHIBIT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM ROBERT J. BAHR AND MAURICE R. LEDOYEN TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, RECORDED DECEMBER 21, 1959, IN BOOK 4642 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY AT PAGE 490, SAID POINT LYING ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF EMBARCADERO ROAD (86.00 FEET IN WIDTH), SAID POINT ALSO LYING ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM GRACE ROSS SEALE TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, RECORDED JULY 11, 1933, IN BOOK 658 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY AT PAGE 23 THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM GRACE ROSS SEALE SOUTH 45° 05' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 479.99 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM GRACE ROSS SEALE TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, RECORDED FEBRUARY 15, 1936, IN BOOK 764 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY AT PAGE 51; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE LAST MENTIONED DEED SOUTH 22°32'30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 184.72 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM ALFRED SEALE AND GRACE ROSS SEALE TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO, RECORDED OCTOBER 14, 1932, IN BOOK 623 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY AT PAGE 572; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH, A DISTANCE OF 9.60 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 51°37'00” WEST, A DISTANCE OF 179.07 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF EMBARCADERO WAY (50.00 FEET IN WIDTH); THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION SOUTH 38°23'00” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 713.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED PARCEL DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 623 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY AT PAGE 572; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE EAST, A DISTANCE OF 110.36 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT PARKLAND EXCLUSION AS SAID EXCLUSION IS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT A-2 OF SECTION 22.08.020 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE, SAID POINT ALSO BEARING EAST 415.54 FEET FROM A FOUR BY FOUR FENCE POST AS SHOWN ON THAT RECORD OF SURVEY FILED WITH THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDER ON AUGUST 15, 1969 IN BOOK 258 AT PAGES 4 AND 5 OF SAID COUNTY RECORDS; PRE L I M I N A R Y Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 33 of 62 "F:\20Projects\20087 Palo Alto RWQCP Advanced Treatment System\Working Documents\Survey Office\Legal Descriptions\2026 Project\Measure E Rededicated Area.docx" PAGE 2 OF 2 THENCE SOUTH 37° 47' 30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 209.06 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°36’55” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 28.12 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 12°23’20” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 34.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 8°02’59” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 47.90 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43°30’20” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 120.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°45’20” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 139.57 FEET; THENCE NORTH 46°00’05” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 189.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°38’50” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 169.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42°40’51” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 517.42 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 49°17’08” WEST, A DISTANCE OF 652.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 54°17’43” WEST, A DISTANCE OF 180.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 42°36’55” WEST, A DISTANCE OF 248.36 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 7.70 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD. ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF IS THE PLAT TITLED “EXHIBIT B.” THIS DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS’ ACT. __________________________ KEVIN J. GENASCI, PLS 8660 JUNE 11, 2026 PRE L I M I N A R Y Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 34 of 62 S37°47'30"E 209.06' S42°36'55"E 28.12'N12°23'20"E 34.05' N8°02'59"E 47.90' N43°30'20"E 120.73' N47°45'20"E 139.57' N46°00'05"E 189.73' N44°38'50"E 169.97' 110.36' S38 ° 2 3 ' 0 0 " E 7 1 3 . 3 9 ' S51°37'00"W 179.07' S22°32'30"E 184.72' S45 ° 0 5 ' 0 0 " E 4 7 9 . 9 9 ' S0°00'00"W 9.60' N90°00'00"E 415.54' S42 ° 4 0 ' 5 1 " E 5 1 7 . 4 2 ' S49 ° 1 7 ' 0 8 " W 6 5 2 . 2 0 ' N54°17'43"W 180.61' N42°36'55"W 248.36' JOB NO. DRAWN DESIGN DATE 20087 KJG 05/18/2026 SHEET SCALE: 1 AS SHOWN OF:3 4 2 8 B r o o k s i d e R o a d , S t o c k t o n , C a l i f o r n i a 9 5 2 1 9 2 0 9 -9 4 3 -2 0 2 1 w w w .s i e g f r i e d e n g .c o m F x : 2 0 9 -9 4 2 -0 2 1 4 CIVIL STRUCTURAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SURVEYING PLANNING ATHLETIC FACILITY DESIGN GEOTECHNICAL SRS 250' SCALE: 1"=250' 125'0' LEGEND: APN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER O.R. OFFICIAL RECORDS P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING S.C.C.R. SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS 1 EXHIBIT "B" EM B A R C A D E R O W A Y REDEDICATED AREA OF MEASURE "E" 7.70 AC± PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT P.O.C. (E. CORNER 4642 O.R. 490, S.C.C.R.) P.O.B. PRE L I M I N A R Y Item 2. Attachment A - Ordinance Re-Dedicating a Portion of the Measure E site as Dedicated Parkland Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 35 of 62 Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout Biosolids Facility Plan Update (BFP-U) www.paloalto.gov Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 36 of 62 6 Biosolids Alternatives Advanced to Detailed Evaluation Alt 3 - MAD Alt 4 - MAD with THP Alt 5 - Thermal Drying Alt 6 - Drying + Pyrolysis++Alt 2 - Offsite Partnership (Hauling for off- site treatment at San Jose Regional Facility) 4 Onsite Alternatives Alt 1 - Baseline (Continued hauling for off-site treatment at Lystek/Synagro) MAD: Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion THP: Thermal Hydrolysis Process 2 Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 37 of 62 Offsite Alternatives 3 Baseline: Continue Current Practice •Sludge hauling contract with Synagro WWT, Inc. •Offsite treatment at 2 regional facilities: •Synagro Central Valley Composting Facility •Lystek Solano County Facility Offsite Partnership (if available): Biosolids Facility at the San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility •To be delivered via a Public-Private Partnership (P3), which may accept biosolids from regional agencies •Private partner to process biosolids into fertilizer product using commercially proven technology (to be determined) •May require additional treatment at RWQCP to meet minimum quality requirements Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 38 of 62 Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion (MAD) 4 What is MAD? •Similar to our digestive systems, MAD uses natural microbes, in the absence of oxygen, to break down organic waste at moderate temperatures (~35°C). The result? Digester gas and Biosolids! Challenges Higher capital cost than current operation More complex to operate and maintain than current operation Produces ammonia-rich sidestream Engine Generators Class B Biosolids Off-site Hauling to Beneficial Agricultural Reuse Wastewater Solids Mesophilic Anaerobic Digesters Digester Gas Sidestream to RWQCP Influent Belt Filter Presses Benefits One of the most used processes to treat wastewater solids Relatively easy to operate and maintain Produces Class B biosolids, that can be used in agriculture Produces energy-rich digester gas, used to generate electricity Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 39 of 62 1.Digestion 2.Digested Sludge Storage Tank 3.Digested Sludge Transfer Pump Station 4.Digester Gas Conditioning 5.Cogeneration & Boiler Building 6.Flare 7.Sidestream Treatment 8.Intermediate Sludge Transfer Pump Station MAD – Sited at Measure E 5 7 2 3 5 4 6 8 1 1 1 1 Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 40 of 62 MAD with Thermal Hydrolysis Process (THP) 6 What’s different from MAD? •Before digestion, solids are broken down using Thermal Hydrolysis Process (THP). THP “pressure-cooks” the solids, making them easier for microbes to digest – leading to more digester gas production. Challenges Higher capital cost than current operation Much more complex to operate and maintain than MAD Produces more ammonia-rich sidestream than MAD Potential safety concerns related to high temperature, high pressure, and steam Benefits Produces more digester gas than MAD Produces drier biosolids, reducing hauling costs Produces Class A biosolids, which can be used without restrictions Steam Boilers Class ABiosolids Pre-THP Screening and Dewatering Thermal Hydrolysis Process Post-Dewatering(Belt Filter Presses) Digester Gas Wastewater Solids Mesophilic Anaerobic Digesters Off-site Hauling to Beneficial Agricultural Reuse Steam Sidestream to RWQCP Influent Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 41 of 62 MAD + THP – Sited at Measure E 7 1.Screening & Pre- Dewatering 2.THP (Cambi) 3.Digestion 4.Digested Sludge Storage Tank 5.Digested Sludge Transfer Pump Station 6.Digester Gas Conditioning 7.Cogeneration & Boiler Building 8.Flare 9.Sidestream Treatment 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 3 33 3 Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 42 of 62 Thermal Drying 8 How does it work? •Dewatered solids are fed to a dryer and heated using either direct hot air or indirect heating. Water is evaporated, producing a Class A biosolids product that is approximately 90% dry matter and suitable for beneficial reuse. Challenges Overall system, including extensive exhaust treatment, is much more complex to operate and maintain than current operation Highest natural gas use High capital cost Potential operational and odor issues if drying undigested solids Potential safety concerns related to high temperature and dust Benefits Well-established process for treating wastewater solids Drastically reduces the amount of product, resulting in minimal hauling costs and truck traffic Produces Class A biosolids, which can be used without restrictions Does not produce ammonia-rich sidestream Dried Cake Belt Filter Presses Thermal Dryer Natural Gas Wastewater Solids Off-site Hauling to Beneficial Agricultural Reuse Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 43 of 62 Thermal Drying – Sited Onsite 9 1.Cake Transfer Station 2.Thermal Belt Drying 2 1 Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 44 of 62 Drying + Pyrolysis 10 How does it work? •Solids are first dried and then heated in a pyrolysis unit at 900- 1,500°F with no oxygen. This converts the solids into biochar, a product similar to small bits of barbecue charcoal, that can be used in agriculture or other uses like concrete additive. Challenges Very few installations at WWTPs, with history of operational issues that impact reliability Highest operations and maintenance complexity Highest capital cost High natural gas use Potential operational and odor issues if drying undigested solids Potential safety concerns related to high temperature and dust Less nutrients in biochar relative to other biosolids products Short-chain PFAS may not be reduced in biochar and PFAS may end up in exhaust or condensate Benefits Drastically reduces the amount of product (biochar), resulting in minimal hauling costs and truck traffic May remove PFAS from the biochar Produces biochar and syngas Does not produce ammonia-rich sidestream Biochar Belt Filter Presses Thermal Dryer Pyrolysis Natural Gas Wastewater Solids Off-site Hauling to Beneficial Agricultural Reuse Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 45 of 62 Drying + Pyrolysis – Sited Onsite 11 1.Thermal Drying 2.Pyrolysis 1.Cake Transfer Station 2.Thermal Drying 3.Pyrolysis 32 1 Item 2. Attachment B - Biosolids Alternatives Description and Site Layout of the Onsite Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 46 of 62 Attachment C: Evaluation Criteria Scores of Biosolids Management Alternatives (Higher is Better) Notes: Baseline: Dewatering and Off-site Hauling MAD: Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion THP: Thermal Hydrolysis Process Reference: Biosolids Facility Plan Update Draft Report: Technical Memorandum 2.3 – Biosolids Alternatives Screening and Evaluation Item 2. Attachment C - Evaluation Criteria Scores of Biosolids Management Alternatives Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 47 of 62 Strategic Biosolids Management Roadmap The strategic roadmap supports the City in addressing current needs, while preserving flexibility to adapt to future regulatory or market drivers by implementing alternative solids management pathways. Item 2. Attachment D - Strategic Biosolids Management Roadmap Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 48 of 62 479 . 9 7 ' 18 4 . 7 2 ' 9.60' 181. 3 8 ' 713 . 7 6 ' 110.47' 799. 2 8 ' 102 5 . 1 1 ' 633 . 7 2 ' 652 . 2 0 ' 180. 6 1 ' 276 . 4 8 ' 209 . 0 6 ' REVISIONS DateNo.Description Job No. Date Drawn by Proj Mgr SHEET: 5/20/2026 1OF: PROJECT SHEET TITLE PALO ALTO WQCP/MEASURE "E" EMBARCADERO RD, PALO ALTO, CA KJG SRS 20087 SITE PLAN 200' SCALE: 1"=200' 100'0' 1 EMB A R C A D E R O R D EM B A R C A D E R O W A Y CITY OF PALO ALTO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT SLOPED, CAPPED AREA OF MEASURE "E" 7.70 AC± LEGEND: APN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER LINE FLAGGED IN FIELD SITE NOT TO SCALE VICINITY MAP 2.42 AC± DRAFT Item 2.Attachment E - Updated RWQCPSurvey Map Item 2.: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 49 of 62 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Staff Report From: City Manager Report Type: ACTION ITEMS Lead Department: Public Works Meeting Date: August 7, 2026 Report #:2606-6481 TITLE Preliminary Review of the 2025 Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Overview of Scope 3 Emissions; CEQA Status - Not a Project RECOMMENDATION This is a discussion item; no action or recommendation is requested. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City has made significant strides in implementing the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) to meet its sustainability goals, including reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 80% below 1990 levels and achieving carbon neutrality by 2030. Preliminary calculations show that by 2025, Palo Alto had reduced total citywide GHG emissions by 49.1% from the 1990 baseline, despite a 20.5% population increase during the same period. This is a slight emissions increase from 2024, when GHG emissions reductions were 50.2%. For municipal operations, preliminary calculations show that in 2025 the City emitted a total of 15,023 MT CO2e, a roughly 62.9% reduction from the 2005 baseline, although an equivalent comparison cannot be made due to significant changes in methodology. BACKGROUND Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 50 of 62 In June 2023, City Council adopted the 2022 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP),4 certified the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report Addendum: Update to the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan,5 and accepted the 2023-2025 S/CAP Work Plan.6 The S/CAP aligns with several goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Implementation Plan, as well as the City Council Value of “Climate Leadership and Environmental Stewardship”.7 The 2025 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory calculates Palo Alto Citywide and Municipal GHG emissions for calendar year 2025. Preliminary calculations show that, due to various City-led initiatives, programs, and activities focused on sustainability and climate action, by the end of 2025 Palo Alto had reduced total citywide emissions by 49.1% from the 1990 baseline, despite a 20.5% population increase during the same period. Due to changes in methodology, it is not possible to make an equivalent comparison of the 2025 Municipal GHG Inventory with previous inventories. However, by the end of 2025, the City reduced total municipal GHG emissions by roughly 62.9% from the 2005 baseline. A full GHG Inventory analysis will be provided at a City Council meeting later this fall. ANALYSIS The City is committed to a sustainable future. The City owns, operates, and maintains a full- service utilities portfolio that provides electric, natural gas, fiber, water, refuse, and wastewater services to residents and businesses in Palo Alto. Palo Alto’s continued leadership in advancing sustainability commitments has succeeded mainly because of ongoing collaboration among community stakeholders, City departments, and the City Council. One way the City tracks its progress on achieving the goals of the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) is through a comprehensive accounting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in a GHG Inventory. GHG inventories calculate, quantify, and assess community-associated emissions and their sources. Generation-Based Greenhouse Gas Inventory There are two types of GHG emissions inventories: 1.Generation-based GHG inventory – This measurement method helps a community understand its level of emissions based on community energy use. It includes 1) direct consumption of energy, 2) consumption of energy via the electrical grid, and 3) 4 2022 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan; https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/sustainability/reports/2022-scap-report_final.pdf 5 Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report Addendum: Update to the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan, 2023; https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas- minutes/city-council-agendas-minutes/2023/2023comprehensive-plan-environmental-impact-report-addendum- update-to-the-scap.pdf 6 2023-2025 S/CAP Workplan, 2023; https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/sustainability/reports/2023-2025-scap-work-plan_final.pdf 7 2030 Comprehensive Plan; https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development- Services/Housing-Policies-Projects/2030-Comprehensive-Plan Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 51 of 62 emissions from the treatment/decomposition of waste. This is the industry-accepted methodology for quantifying community GHG emissions, with emissions reported by emission source category.8 2.Consumption-based GHG inventory – This measurement method helps a community understand its level of emissions based on consumption. It offers an alternative, more holistic approach to quantifying emissions from a community’s activities and the consumption of goods and services (including food, clothing, electronic equipment, etc.) 8 There are two reporting frameworks commonly used by cities: the U.S. Community Protocol and the Global Protocol for Communities (GPC). Palo Alto uses the GPC framework. Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 52 of 62 by city residents, with emissions reported by consumption category. It includes emissions associated with production, transportation, and disposal of products and services consumed by a community over a given period. Like most cities, Palo Alto completes a generation-based GHG inventory. In 2014, the World Resources Institute, C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40), and ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) partnered to create a global standard protocol for generation-based GHG inventories.11 The Global Protocol for Community-Scale GHG Emissions Inventories (GPC) provides a robust framework for accounting and reporting city-wide GHG emissions for a generation-based inventory. The GPC Protocol is the official protocol specified by the Global Covenant of Mayors and defines what emissions must be reported and how. For generation-based GHG inventories, GHG emissions from community activities are classified into three main sectors: •Stationary Energy (e.g., building electricity consumption, fugitive natural gas emissions) •Transportation (e.g., on-road passenger vehicles, off-road equipment) •Waste (e.g., solid waste disposal, wastewater treatment and discharge) Activities within a city can generate GHG emissions both inside and outside the city boundary. The GPC groups emissions into three categories based on where they occur: Scope 1: GHG emissions from sources located within the city boundary, such as stationary fuel consumption. Scope 2: GHG emissions occurring due to the use of grid-supplied electricity, heat, steam, and/or cooling within the city boundary. Scope 3: All other GHG emissions that occur outside the city boundary because of activities taking place within the city boundary. Figure 1. shows the sources and boundaries of GHG emissions for a generation-based inventory. 11 Formerly the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, renamed in 2003 to ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability. Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 53 of 62 Figure 1. Sources and Boundaries of GHG emissions for a Generation Based Inventory. Palo Alto’s first generation-based citywide inventory was completed for 2005 and then extrapolated for 1990 (the baseline year). Beginning in 2010, new citywide GHG inventories were completed annually, enabling Palo Alto to track progress over time. Palo Alto’s 2025 Citywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory The 2025 Palo Alto Citywide GHG inventory follows the calculation and reporting standards outlined in the GPC BASIC reporting level.13 This inventory follows the city-inducted framework in the GPC protocol, which totals GHG emissions attributable to activities taking place within the geographic boundary of the city.14 Preliminary calculations show that in 2025, Palo Alto emitted an estimated 406,607 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) from the residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, waste, water, and municipal sectors. Compared with the 1990 base-year emissions, these emissions represent a 49.1% decrease in total community emissions, despite a 20.5% population increase during the same period. Emissions in 2025 equated to 6.0 MT CO2e per capita. The California Air Resource Board’s 2017 Scoping Plan Update recommends a goal for local governments of 6 MT CO2e per capita by 13 GPC Executive Summary; https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/2022-12/GPC_Executive_Summary_1.pdf 14 GPC Protocol; https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/GHGP_GPC_0.pdf Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 54 of 62 2030 and 2 MT CO2e per capita by 2050.17 To achieve an 80% reduction in GHG emissions, Citywide GHG Emissions need to be 160,000 MT CO2e. Figure 2: 2025 Palo Alto Citywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector 2e), are attributed to Transportation and Mobile Sources. The main driver of these emissions is fuel combustion from internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, specifically passenger vehicles (72% of all transportation emissions), commercial vehicles (17% of all transportation emissions), and buses (2% of all transportation emissions). Since electricity in the City is carbon-neutral, there are no GHG emissions attributed to passenger, commercial, or bus electric vehicles (EVs). Off-road vehicles and equipment account for 8% of all Transportation and Mobile Sources GHG emissions, while Aviation Fuel accounts for 1%. Additionally, since Caltrain fully electrified the line serving Palo Alto in 2025 and now powers it with 100% renewable electricity, there are no GHG emissions associated with commuter rail. 17 California Air Resources Board 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D Local Actions, November 2022; https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-sp-appendix-d-local-actions.pdf Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 55 of 62 The second major contributor to GHG emissions is stationary combustion and the leakage of natural gas (methane). Together, these account for 33% (134,123 MT CO2e) of communitywide GHG emissions. About 43% of total Natural Gas (Methane) GHG emissions are attributed to residential natural gas combustion, 48% is attributed to commercial natural gas combustion, and 6% is attributed to industrial natural gas combustion. Natural gas leakage from distribution infrastructure occurs upstream of individual gas meters and is associated with community-wide gas use. Therefore, it is included in the inventory. Natural gas leakage accounts for 3% of total Natural Gas (Methane) GHG emissions. Figure 3: Palo Alto Citywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector, 1990 and 2019-2025 Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 56 of 62 incorporates more recent vehicle registration data from the Department of Motor Vehicles. This update reflects accuracy improvements rather than an actual increase in per-mile GHG emissions. Another factor to note is that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data for 2025 are not available; however, VMT data will be available for 2026. City staff and external experts calculated a preliminary estimate of 2025 VMT by scaling 2023 per capita VMT (the most recent year VMT data is available) based on 2025 population for passenger vehicles and service population for commercial vehicles and buses. This estimate reflects demographic growth and may not capture actual VMT trends. Table 1: Palo Alto Residential Registered Electric Vehicles (EVs) Residential Registered Vehicles 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2,762 3,253 3,550 4,142 5,062 6,475 7,929 11,599 1,038 1,194 1,301 1,357 1,434 1,544 1,744 1,844 3,800 4,447 4,851 5,499 6,496 8,019 9,673 13,443 57,340 55,911 50,004 50,192 49,963 50,000*50,000*52,170* 6.7%8%9.7%10.7%13%16%19.3%26.9% 24%43%52%55% 2e in 2024 due to diesel combustion, are reported as zero in 2025. Off-road diesel emissions increased by 5%, while off- road gasoline decreased by 2%, and aviation fuel emissions increased by 4% compared to 2024. Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 57 of 62 Natural Gas (Methane) combustion emissions increased by 2.2% in 2025 compared to 2024, driven by an 8.1% increase in commercial natural gas emissions. Residential natural gas GHG emissions decreased by 1.5% and industrial natural gas emissions decreased by 11.6% compared to 2024. These fluctuations reflect variability in natural gas consumption driven by weather conditions, energy efficiency improvements, occupant behavior, and community growth. Overall, Natural Gas (Methane) emissions were 31.9% below 1990 levels. Figure 4 shows historical trends in residential natural gas (methane) GHG emissions. Figure 4. Palo Alto Residential Natural Gas (Methane) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Table 2: Progress in Electrifying Gas Appliances & All Electric Homes through City Programs City Electrification Program 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 58 of 62 Operation (LGO) Protocol,19 which aligns with the Global Protocol for Community-Scale GHG Emissions Inventories (GPC) local government operations protocol.20 Buildings and other facilities: Electricity use, natural gas combustion, water-energy consumption Streetlights and Traffic Signals: Electricity use City vehicle and equipment fleet: On- and off-road mobile combustion and electricity use from electric vehicles (EVs) Wastewater facilities (e.g., wastewater treatment and discharge): Indirect nitrous oxide emissions, process nitrous oxide emissions, electricity use, natural gas combustion Indirect emissions: Employee commuting, landfilled solid waste generation 2e from municipal operations, a 3% increase over 2024. GHG emissions from Palo Alto’s municipal operations are from five main sectors: Buildings and Other Facilities, Streetlights and Traffic Signals, Wastewater Facilities, City Vehicles and Equipment, and Indirect Emissions. Since the methodology has changed significantly for certain sectors since the first Municipal GHG Inventory was conducted in 2005, it is no longer possible to do an equivalent comparison with previous Municipal GHG inventories. However, the methodologies for Buildings and Other Facilities, Streetlights and Traffic Signals, and City Vehicles and Equipment are sufficiently similar to allow rough comparisons across these sectors. By the end of 2025, the City reduced total municipal GHG emissions by roughly 62.9% from the 2005 baseline. 19 LGO Protocol Rulebook. Available at: https://icleiusa.org/resources/local-government-operations-lgo-protocol/ 20 GPC Inventories for local government operations. Appendix B. Available at: https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/GPC_Full_MASTER_RW_v7.pdf Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 59 of 62 nitrate. Elevated ammonia concentrations in the discharge are expected to continue until all four aeration basins are renovated and the system stabilizes. Once the system is fully optimized, N₂O emissions should decrease significantly. Based on the current schedule, startup is anticipated in 2027, material improvement is expected in 2028, and the full benefit should be realized around 2030. Table 3: Electric Vehicles in City of Palo Alto Fleet Palo Alto Fleet Electric Vehicles (EVs) (# of vehicles)2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 60 of 62 distribution, and disposal of the goods and services consumed. A consumption-based emissions inventory can lead to insights about where local consumption gives rise to emissions outside a city’s borders and suggests additional opportunities for reducing emissions. 23 In particular, this framework needs to address how to account for the embodied emissions in the food, goods, and services the community purchases that are not covered by generation-based GHG inventories. 24 For example, if a community consumes one million tons of cement each year, and producing and transporting each ton of cement releases 1 ton of CO2, the community’s consumption-based emissions inventory would include 1 million tons of CO2 associated with cement consumption, regardless of whether that cement was produced inside or outside the community’s jurisdictional boundaries. 25 23 Executive Department State of California. (2019). Executive Order B-55-18 to Achieve Carbon Neutrality. https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/9.10.18-Executive-Order.pdf. 24 Stockholm Environment Institute Consumption Based Emissions Inventory Guidebook. https://sustainableconsumption.usdn.org/climate/cbei-guidebook/overview 25 Stockholm Environment Institute Consumption Based Emissions Inventory Guidebook. https://sustainableconsumption.usdn.org/climate/cbei-guidebook/overview Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 61 of 62 income households. In addition, most emissions associated with different goods and services can occur at different life-cycle phases. For instance, for food, most emissions are associated with production, whereas for appliances, most of the emissions result from use. These distinctions can be important when considering and prioritizing policy interventions. FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ATTACHMENTS APPROVED BY: Item 3. Item 3 Late Packet Report Item 3.: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 62 of 62