Chair Wolkowinsky called the meeting to order at 4:27 P.M.

AMY WOLKOWINSKY - CHAIR (Present)
MARY METZGER - VICE CHAIR (Present)
COMMISSIONER ELIJAH BORN (Present)
COMMISSIONER CAMERON CARLSON (Present)
COMMISSIONER KRISTEN KONKEL (Present)
COMMISSIONER TOM LAMMIE (Present)
COMMISSIONER RODGER SCURLOCK (Present)

Also Present: 
Blake Seals, Minute Taker 
Erin Young, Water Resources Section Director 
Diane Bridger, Sustainability Specialist 
Jamie Larson, Housing and Transportation 
Jenny Neiman, Climate Action Section Director 
Genevieve Pearthree, Senior Sustainability Planner 
Lee Williams, Water Services Director 
Sterling Solomon, City Attorney 
Austin Aslan, Councilmember 

Commissioner Lammie read the Land Acknowledgement.

No public comment was given.

Draft Minutes, November 2025   
 
Chair Wolkowinsky motioned to approve the minutes. Vice Chair Metzger seconded. All approved and the November minutes were approved. 

Erin Young presented on water supply planning. Mrs. Young provided a high-level overview of the presentation given to the City Council in October titled “Regional Water Supply Planning and Work with Bureau of Reclamation.” Mrs. Young briefly described the history of the partnerships and projects leading up to the present. She elaborated on the purchase of Red Gap Ranch in 2005 to secure its water supply as part of a regional water solution. Red Gap Ranch has not been heavily utilized since its acquisition, but it is available and its water has been used for wildfires. She described the limitations of occasional power shut-off impacting the production of water in the two municipal-sized wells on the site.  
 
Vice Chair Metzger inquired to clarify why forested land is not ideal for extracting ground water and if wildfires had an impact on operations, to which Mrs. Young replied that wildfires can damage equipment and infrastructure, and additionally typical monsoon activities on a burn scar can deposit sediment into Lake Mary, requiring additional maintenance to Lake Mary.  
 
Jenny Neiman noted the potential for the Red Gap Ranch site to be a renewable power resource.  
 
Vice Chair Metzger asked if there was a previous discussion on the issue of the usage of native lands for the water pipeline from the site to the City of Flagstaff. Mrs. Young responded there was a previous presentation of multiple options for pipeline alignments where one alignment did go through Hopi land. The current preference for alignment is with the I-40 corridor where the City of Flagstaff will work with the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) for the implementation of the pipeline.  
 
Mrs. Young then presented the Bureau of Reclamation’s presentation titled “Future of Regional Water Supply for Navajo Nation, Flagstaff, and Other Users”. It centered on the value-planning study conducted in July 2025, which was originally presented to City Council and the Water Services Division. She provided a brief overview of the purpose of a value study and possible next steps in the process. During the value-planning study, a group of people gathered at the Red Gap Ranch site, including City of Flagstaff staff, Navajo Nation members, amongst others to discuss the water resource options presented. Mrs. Young provided background on the challenges to water supply in the local area including, but not limited to, catastrophic climate conditions, limitations of using brackish groundwater, and significant economic development anticipated on the Navajo Nation in the I-40 corridor.   

Vice Chair Metzger and Mrs. Young briefly discussed future potential water right laws pertaining to the C aquifer. Sterling Solomon, City Attorney, added the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act was signed by Governor Hobbs, the Mayor of Flagstaff, and other parties. This agreement has the potential to become an Act which would impact factors of this project, such as where and how much water can be pumped from the C aquifer.  
 
Mrs. Young described the anticipated increase in future water demand, with wildfire risk playing a key role in the estimate. She highlighted potential City of Flagstaff opportunities such as collaborating with local indigenous groups and stakeholders and developing clean energy sources. Mrs. Young then segwayed into a description of the Functional Analysis - Red Gap Ranch FAST Diagram, which showcased the primary functions, scope of study, and the how and why aspects utilized to create regional water supply solutions. Those solutions were evaluated with weighted criteria evaluation to rank the solutions. The top alternative solution was pumping municipal wells at Red Gap Ranch (RGR) with treatment. Additionally, community criteria were ranked, with partner acceptability (22%) being the highest ranking. Vice Chair Metzger inquired if the meaning of partner acceptability meant working together in a positive direction, which Mrs. Young confirmed. Mrs. Young commented on the support the project has received from Senator Kelly and the governor's office.  

Commissioner Scurlock inquired if the aquifer at Red Gap Ranch was a prehistoric aquifer or if it was a recharged aquifer to which Mrs. Young stated the aquifer does have recharge capacity, but the water remains quite salty due to the local geology. Commissioner Scurlock then inquired if the City of Flagstaff has wells in the inner basin, which Mrs. Young confirmed. Mrs. Young said the current stage of the project is wrapping up the Value Planning Report. Water Services has begun working on a Project Management Plan with the Bureau of Reclamation prior to the beginning of the Appraisal Study. Mrs. Young anticipates the beginning of the Appraisal Study in a few months. She then went to explain anticipated growth in the demand on water resources. Commissioner Carlson asked if there have been any studies on ground water recharge rates to which Mrs. Young replied there have not been studies, but there is an alternative to send reclaim water to recharge the aquifer, though this alternative was not very highly rated.  

Chair Wolkowinsky summarized the previous discussion on whether the Commission will adopt a section of an avenue or participate in scheduled one-time cleanups in various locations. 
 
Vice Chair Metzger shared her concerns that if Sustainability Commission’s name is on signage in their adopted section, debris that collects there in between cleanups would reflect poorly on the Commission. 

Commissioner Carlson said the option to adopt a stream would be more appropriate for the Commission. Commissioner Born suggested adopting a section of the Flagstaff Urban Train System (FUTS), but Mrs. Bridger stated there are not FUTS sections available for adoption.  

Mx. Seals gave an overview of the requirements for the Stream Stewards program. Mx. Seals responded to a variety of questions posed by several Commissioners including Vice Chair Metzger, Commissioner Lammie, Chair Wolkowinsky. These questions included the following: 

• Is there a cost to adopt a section of stream? Mx. Seals replied it is a volunteer program.  

• How long is the time commitment to adopt? Mx. Seals responded only three cleanups a year are required with no minimum time limit defined for a cleanup, but each stream section has individual needs so the duration of a cleanup can vary.   

• Is there a sign listing the adopters of the stream section? Mx. Seals confirmed there is.  

• How long are the stream sections? Mx. Seals replied lengths vary but are roughly a quarter mile.  

Mx. Seals encouraged the Commission to reach out to Blake Commisso or Sanoma Boynton if they had further questions.  
 
Chair Wolkowinsky stated the Commission should define their goal with participating in volunteer opportunities. She highlighted more opportunity for casual engagement with community members at other volunteer events. Vice Chair Metzger noted that there is a lack of signage for the Commission when joining other volunteer events. Commissioner Lammie expressed support for joining in existing volunteer events. Chair Wolkowinsky suggested wearing shirts showcasing they are on the Sustainability Commission. Mx. Seals stated there are opportunities for partnership for many events the Sustainability Office hosts.  
 
Commissioner Carlson inquired on the role the Sustainability Commission can take in these volunteer events. Mrs. Neimann explained individuals can express their opinions, but it is important to clarify the individual is not speaking on behalf of the Commission.  
 
The Sustainability Commission opted to participate in existing volunteer opportunities.  
 
Commissioner Born requested to have Blake Commisso at future Commission meeting to discuss partnership opportunities.  

Genevieve Pearthree presented on the “Analysis of the Costs, Benefits, and Barriers to Building New Highly Energy-Efficient and All-Electric Residential Homes in Flagstaff, Arizona”. Mrs. Pearthree provided some background on the need for the study to be conducted. Commissioner Carlson inquired if there was a state law preventing the promotion of one fuel source over another which Mrs. Pearthree confirmed there is a law in effect, but the study was to inform decision making. She then clarified the key takeaways from the study, include that the topic is very nuanced and cost and benefits vary across multiple factors. Mrs. Pearthree went on to describe key concepts including beneficial electrification, air source heat pumps, cold climate air source heat pumps, ducted versus ductless heat pumps, and the three APS residential electricity plans. She described the modeling scenarios for single family and multifamily homes for comparison.  
 
The findings of the study indicated that, for single-family homes, a new all-electric and ductless build is the most cost-effective scenario compared with the base scenario of a mixed-fuel home. Commissioner Carlson inquired when Flagstaff has had –22 degree weather, as the cold climate heat pumps operate down to that temperature. The question sparked a discussion where Mrs. Pearthree clarified cold climate heat pumps are more efficient in colder weather compared to other types of heat pumps, thus being more suited for Flagstaff’s climate.  
 
The study also found that the scenario for multi-family homes that is least costly is installing an all-electric ductless heat pump compared to the mixed fuel base scenario.  
 
Mrs. Peartree stated the key capital cost takeaways, including: all-electric ductless systems had the lowest capital cost, all-electric ducted systems are likely to be more expensive than mixed-fuel scenarios, energy efficiency measures increased capital costs, and capital costs varied by home size and energy type. The consultant responsible for the study emphasized the comparative cost figures in the study were intended to be illustrative.  
 
Mrs. Pearthree then showed the monthly operational costs for a single-family home in each scenario based on the three APS plan types. The study found the lowest operational costs per month were for the all-electric, ductless, and high energy efficiency (HEE) single-family homes, utilizing the time of use (TOU) plus demand plan. In the case of multi-family homes, the study found the all-electric, ductless, HEE scenario with the TOU plus demand APS plan had the lowest monthly operational costs.  
 
Commissioner Born asked if the monthly operational cost prices in the table included air conditioning in the summer. Mrs. Pearthree said it did and that the study was modeled on Flagstaff’s weather patterns.  She noted that electrified homes have improved indoor air quality and detailed the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions for the scenarios that are electric and/or HEE, which prompted further clarifying discussion on the reduction of greenhouse gases in ducted versus non-ducted heat pumps. To end the presentation, Mrs. Pearthree clarified several public misconceptions in options for climate control in Flagstaff.  

Chair Wolkowinsky introduced the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) model plans library update. Jamie Larson and Genevieve Pearthree presented on the ADU library. Genevieve provided background information on what an ADU is and how they are beneficial. Both the Carbon Neutrality Plan (CNP) and Housing initiatives encourage the incorporation of ADUs. The Sustainability Office has developed an ADU plan library. Community surveys indicated an interest in ADU design plansand informed the office on barriers to installing an ADU. City staff did background research and issued a call to designers for model plans. 

Jamie explained the program goals:  

• Create an ADU Model Plans Library 

• Increase awareness of ADUs 

• Increase ADUs in Flagstaff by removing barriers 

• Connect homeowners and designers with benefits for both parties 

She also highlighted many benefits to both the community and to the designers. Ms. Larson then went on to discuss the sustainability features incorporated beyond the current codes that were included in the ADU designs. These additional sustainability requirements including Energy Star appliances, being solar-ready, and utilizing passive heating and cooling, amongst other requirements.  

The community voted on three designs to include in the plan. The top three of these designs were  “Cozy Cottage” by Brooke Whitehurst in first place, in second place was “Three Peaks” by Trevor Soper, and in third place was “Green Gables” by Allison O’Bryant. In addition to these community-selected designs, city staff selected several more. 

Commissioner Lammie asked if there had to be an existing home on a property or if multiple ADUscould be added to an existing lot. Mrs. Pearthree clarified that, to be considered an ADU, the property has to have an existing primary dwelling unit. She said in other locations there can be an opportunity to build multiple ADU-like structures if allowed by local zoning codes. Commissioner Scurlock inquired if there are codes regarding building within a certain distance from property lines, to which Mrs. Pearthree stated the property will be analyzed during the Building Plan Review Process to ensure codes are being met. 

Ms. Larson introduced the ADU Library website: Flagstaff ADU Model Plans Library. 

Commissioner Lammie asked if these ADUs are built on site or prefabricated. Mrs. Pearthree replied the ADUs are built on site, but city staff have been looking into the logistics of prefabrication.  

Jamie walked the Commission through the steps of the ADU model plan process to procure the installation of an ADU on a community member’s property. She then described the future possibilities of the ADUs, including Coconino County’s interest in incorporating those designs and analyzing plans against the City’s Townsite Overlay Standards.  

Commissioner Carlson inquired why the ADU Model plans are being analyzed against the City’s Townsite Overlay Standards, to which Mrs. Pearthree clarified the latter has additional standards. 

Ms. Larson stated there were many measures for outreach and engagement included through the process including press releases, social media, newsletter announcements, and additional upcoming engagement strategies.  

Commissioner Born asked why homeowners would opt to add an ADU to their property. Chair Wolkowinsky added ADUs create more housing, allow more flexibility with what can be done on a property, and can allow opportunities for additional income. Commissioner Lammie asked if any ADUs have been built which Ms. Pearthree responded none, as the library was launched earlier in the month of January. Commissioner Carlson continued the discussion by asking what cost and time savings can be expected by using the ADU Model Plan Library. Mrs. Pearthree replied an expected $500-$2000 can be expected in savings on the Building Plan, depending on the size of the ADU. She stated the designers for the ADU Model Plan Library have fixed fees compared to custom plan pricing being in the $5,000 range.  

Diane Bridger presented on the top 10 highlights for the Sustainability Office in 2025. Some highlights included: the office hosted 238 events, workshops, and presentations, interacted with 9,000 community members, and distributed $177,229 in preparedness resources to residents facing climate hazards.

Commissioner Scurlock said that the State of Arizona has an option to reduce one’s tax burden by donating to a qualified charitable organization. There is a total allowance of up to $800 in donations per individual with $400 allowable for school donations and $400 allowable for other charitable organizations, which are matched dollar-for-dollar in tax credit. If a community member qualifies, they can contribute directly from an IRA to a charitable organization without paying income tax. Commissioner Scurlock will send follow-up information to Diane Bridger for her to disperse to the Commission. This topic prompted a clarifying conversation with Vice Chair Metzger on if the tax credit is refundable with a tax return or not.  
 
Mrs. Bridger shared her successful kickoffs with the Flagstaff Sustainability Grant (FSG) awardees, and plans are in place. She said final reports from last year’s grant awardees were being delivered. 

Commissioner Carlson followed up from last year’s Commission retreat. He asked about the timeline to get informational presentations on the topic of railroad and water pollution. Mrs. Bridger responded the February Commission Meeting will host the CEO of Mountain Line operated in the City of Flagstaff as well as the CEO of Mountain Line operated in the City of Missoula, Montana to share information.  

1. Request to have Blake Commisso at a future meeting to discuss opportunities. 

2. Diane Bridger announced that, in place of the March Sustainability Commission meeting, there will be the annual Sustainability Showcase highlighting the completed projects from the 2024 grant awardees. This will take place at the Market of Dreams from 4:30-6:30 PM.  

3. Commissioner Carlson will explore further topics for the April meeting including water and air pollution. 

4. Commissioner Born requested continued updates on the Red Gap Ranch Project.  

Chair Wolkowinsky motioned to adjourn the meeting. All agreed and the meeting was adjourned at 6:26 P.M.