[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
GREEN CITIES: MAYORAL INITIATIVES TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING POLLUTION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
AND GLOBAL WARMING
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 19, 2007
__________
Serial No. 110-8
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on
Energy Independence and Global Warming
globalwarming.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
58-083 WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY INDEPENDENCE
AND GLOBAL WARMING
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Chairman
EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,
JAY INSLEE, Washington Wisconsin, Ranking Member
JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona
HILDA L. SOLIS, California GREG WALDEN, Oregon
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
South Dakota JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma
EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
JOHN J. HALL, New York
JERRY McNERNEY, California
------
Professional Staff
David Moulton, Staff Director
Aliya Brodsky, Chief Clerk
Thomas Weimer, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hon. Edward J. Markey, a Representative in Congress from the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, opening statement............... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., a Representative in Congress
from the State of Wisconsin, opening statement................. 5
Hon. Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Oregon, opening statement................................... 6
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver II, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Missouri,............................................. 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Hon. Jerry McNerney, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, opening statement............................... 8
Hon. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, a Representative in Congress from
the State of South Dakota, opening statement................... 8
Witnesses
Ms. Pegeen Hanrahan, Mayor, Gainesville.......................... 10
Prepared Statement........................................... 13
Answers to submitted questions............................... 56
Mr. Tom Potter, Mayor, Portland, Oregon.......................... 19
Prepared Statement........................................... 22
Answers to submitted questions............................... 65
Mr. Richard M. Daley, Mayor, Chicago, Illinois................... 27
Prepared Statement........................................... 30
HEARING ON GREEN CITIES: MAYORAL INITIATIVES TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING
POLLUTION
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 2007
House of Representatives,
Select Committee on Energy Independence
and Global Warming,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:00 p.m., in Room
2247 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward J. Markey, Jr.
[chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Markey, Sensenbrenner, Blumenauer,
Cleaver, Miller, Hall, Solis, Inslee, McNerney, and Herseth
Sandlin.
The Chairman. Good morning. Good afternoon. Welcome. As Tip
O'Neill used to say, all politics is local, although he
probably picked that up from Mayor Daley's father. Today we
will hear from three of the nation's greenest mayors about
local solutions and the role cities can play in reducing the
nation's oil imports and global warming pollution.
Cities are both a cause and a solution to global warming.
Worldwide cities comprise two percent of land mass but account
for 78 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. As city
populations continue to increase, so will emissions.
While two-thirds of urban residents currently live in
cities of less than a million people, mega cities with a
population of more than ten million are increasing. In 1975,
there were five. By 1995, there were 15. And by 2015, there are
expected to be 26 of those cities worldwide.
While those numbers indicate an increasing responsibility
for global warming pollution, cities are taking bold measures
to reverse policies and actions that contribute to global
warming.
Though President Bush rejected the Kyoto treaty and the
United States' requirement to reduce seven percent greenhouse
gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2012, 529 mayors have pledged
to do so.
As Congress debates auto efficiency standards, cities are
already converting transit and municipal fleets to use hybrid
energy, natural gas, or biodiesel fuel.
Two weeks ago, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, our nation's chief environmental minister,
refused to concede before this Committee that carbon dioxide is
a danger to the public health.
Meanwhile, cities have been guided by science. For example,
a 2004 Harvard Medical School study has linked climate change
to the childhood asthma epidemic among inner city youth.
As a result of this and other factors, cities are already
promoting transit-oriented development, planning to reduce
sprawl, and supporting mass transit and bicycle paths to reduce
global warming pollution. These bold actions have occurred
because leaders and residents of these cities realize the
importance of these actions.
Furthermore, many U.S. mayors are not content to effectuate
change in their cities alone. They are partnering with national
and international organizations to discuss the best practices
that are available.
The three witnesses before us today are all signatories to
the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Council on Climate Protection.
The Council on Climate Protection providers mayors the tools
they need to carry out their mission to meet or beat the Kyoto
protocol targets in their own communities through actions
ranging from: one, anti-sprawl land use policies, urban forest
reforestation, restoration projects, and public information
campaigns; two, urging their state governments and the federal
government to meet or beat the greenhouse emission reduction
target suggested for the United States in the Kyoto protocol;
and, three, urging the U.S. Congress to pass greenhouse gas
reduction legislation and establishing national emissions
trading systems.
The mayors invited to speak before the Committee today
represent a myriad of approaches to reducing the global warming
pollution locally. Their cities range in populations and
geographic location.
Gainesville, Florida's tree cover and conservation policies
protect infrastructure and land from hurricanes increasing in
number and intensity. The city is also maximizing its public
utility to run efficiently.
Portland was the first U.S. city to adopt a local global
warming policy. And it is the first city to meet the reduction
goal of the Kyoto treaty. Portland's location in the Pacific
Flyway means that the city must give special attention to the
critical resting, feeding, and nesting habitat for migratory
birds.
And Chicago's dense urban population requires flexible
planning and urban forestry, as evidenced by the green rooftops
throughout Chicago. The city has also linked training with
their environmental goals. Chicago's Department of Environment
created the Chicago Center for Green Technology, Green Tech U.,
to train people in green building practices.
I am pleased to have these mayors before us today. It is a
special treat. My time for an opening statement has expired. I
turn to recognize the gentleman from Wisconsin, the ranking
member of the Committee, Mr. Sensenbrenner.
[The statement of Mr. Markey follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.002
Mr. Sensenbrenner. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Last week I gave a speech to the Energy Efficiency Forum,
where I said that as Congress searches for solutions to global
warming, we should be mindful of what works and what doesn't.
I noted that President Bush's emphasis on voluntary
reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, which helped the U.S.
reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by 1.2 percent last year,
was proving more effective than many European countries'
efforts to reduce greenhouse gases under the Kyoto treaty.
From the early indications, it seems that the Kyoto treaty
isn't working. Many European countries are far off their
emission goals. Unfortunately, meeting the targets set forth in
the Kyoto treaty isn't as easy as it sounds, as shown by some
of the testimony we will receive today from mayors across the
country.
The testimony of Gainesville, Florida mayor, Hanrahan,
shows how exceedingly difficult it is to meet the Kyoto
treaty's goal of reducing greenhouse gases by seven percent
from 1990 levels. Gainesville has introduced several
initiatives to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions but is
still on path to exceed its target by one million tons, or 36
percent.
The headline in yesterday's Chicago Tribune--and, for the
record, I got mine on the online version, rather than by buying
a tree that the Chicago Tribune bought to print the thing up--
suggested Mayor Daley of Chicago is also finding it difficult
to meet the city's green goals. The Tribune article said that
the Chicago city government is falling well short of its goals
of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Since Chicago is one of nine city, state, or county
governments participating in the voluntary Chicago climate
exchange, the article notes that Chicago taxpayers could soon
be forced to buy greenhouse gas allowances.
I am not criticizing either Chicago or Gainesville for
their efforts. I led the congressional delegation to the Kyoto
treaty negotiations in 1997. And I said back then, as I
continue to say today, that the Kyoto treaty set forth
unrealistic goals. In January, the Institute for Local Self-
Reliance, a Minneapolis-based nonprofit, released a survey of
ten Kyoto cities in the U.S. And there are difficulties in
meeting the emissions reductions that at least 500 mayors have
endorsed by signing onto the U.S. Conference of Mayor's climate
protection agreement.
The report estimated that most of these cities will fail to
meet the goals. The report also notes that many greenhouse gas
reduction initiatives are funded from state and federal
sources. If cities, counties, and states want to take efforts
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, that's great. But residents
of these local governments should not expect a free ride in the
cost of making the reductions. After all, it is a lot easier to
say you are reducing emissions than to actually pay for the
reductions.
To paraphrase former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis
Brandeis, state and local governments can be laboratories for
democracy and policy. As Congress searches for what works in
global warming policy, we should closely examine what is
working in the states and cities across the country but also
what isn't.
With that in mind, I am interested in hearing more from
Portland. Portland has been working on greenhouse gas
reductions for more than a decade. And Mayor Potter is able to
claim actual reductions from the city's 1990 levels while still
showing economic growth. However, with all of its successes,
Portland still isn't meeting the Kyoto goal.
I am sure Mayor Potter has several ideas about what works
and what doesn't. Specifically I am interested in hearing from
him about what role land management policy played in achieving
the results. I am also interested in hearing the economic
growth Portland experienced during that period. I believe that
any global warming policy has to protect jobs and the economy.
And I would like to know more about how Portland was able to
achieve this balance.
In reading the testimony for today's hearing, I see many
references to technological initiatives that could be very
promising. As I have said before, advancing technology must be
a key principle for any global warming policy.
And I am pleased to see city mayors looking for
technological solutions. By implementing a new technology in
their cities, these mayors are giving all of us a chance to see
what works and what doesn't. And I think Congress should pay
close attention to the results.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. I will give you this microphone. I will ask
the staff, if they could, to please try to find someone who can
see if they can make the other microphones operative.
The gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Perhaps limiting the Committee to one microphone might have
ancillary benefits. I am sure Mayor Daley wants to do that with
his city council.
I appreciate very much your scheduling this hearing and
bringing people together from the front lines. As I mentioned
to the Chairman, I hope this doesn't make him think that he is
off the hook to schedule a hearing in Portland, where we can
watch it on the ground.
Before making my opening comment, I do want to make a
reference to Mr. Walden, who, Mayor Potter, was sorry is not
here. He had a death in the family and had to go back. And he
wishes that he were here to greet you in person.
Mr. Chairman, your point about the focus for the problems
that relate to global warming in the urban environment I think
are very important. We are now witnessing for the first time in
human history half the world's population living in cities. And
the growth that is going to occur between now and 2050, two and
a half billion people will be concentrated in these urbanized
areas. And what we have here today are some examples of some
leadership that has been exercised around the country that will
help us understand how we cope with this.
I obviously have a soft spot in heart for Portland, having
a chance to have done a lot of the work with Mayor Potter in
the past and having harassed the Committee a little bit about
these items, I really appreciate the chance to have somebody
referencing it on the ground.
Chicago really hasn't gotten the attention I think that it
deserves for its leadership with the Metropolis 2020, with the
work that Mayor Daley has done, not just in his city but with
the metropolitan initiative. And I look forward to hearing what
is going on in Gainesville.
Mr. Chairman, I hope that we will be able in the course of
the testimony and the interaction with our witnesses to focus
because I do agree with what our ranking member said. It is
difficult to do. But I think the experience we found in our
community is it actually can have positive effects. It actually
brings young people, well-educated and interested, to come to a
community like that. And the focus I think ought to be on how
the federal government partners with our friends so we can
achieve this difficult task together.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair recognizes the
gentle lady
Ms. Miller. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I will
forego any opening statement. I just want to welcome the
witnesses. I am delighted to have all of them here. And I want
to recognize Mayor Daley's great work on the Great Lakes. And I
appreciate them coming. And I will forego an opening statement.
The Chairman. The Chair recognizes the gentle lady from
California, Ms. Solis.
Ms. Solis. Thank you, Chairman Markey. And thank the
witnesses for being here also.
I am not going to read my statement. I will submit it for
the record.
But just to tell you that in a diverse district that I
represent, two of my cities that have well over 70 percent
minority population--one is Chinese, one is Hispanic--they have
decided to be partners in sustainable growth. And they want to
know how the federal government can become bigger partners in
this. So I am dying to hear what you have to say and look
forward to that and would just ask that my statement be
submitted for the record.
The Chairman. Great. The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Kansas City, the former mayor of Kansas City, Mr. Cleaver.
Mr. Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In the interest of time, I will forego my opening statement
except to welcome the people who serve on center stage in the
American drama: the mayors.
One of the things we have heard, you know, both at home and
abroad, is that America is not doing anything with regard to
global warming. And that is not true. The federal government is
not doing anything with regard to climate change, but the
mayors of our country, representing 65 million people, are, in
fact, on the front line. And you have already moved to respond
to the Kyoto agreement by reducing greenhouse gas emissions 7
percent by 2020. So I just want to commend you and thank you
for being here.
The Chairman. Okay. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California, Mr. McNerney.
Mr. McNerney. I just want to welcome the mayors. I think
the cities in this country are showing tremendous leadership.
And they have a lot to offer. Cities like Los Angeles, Chicago
are tremendous sources of greenhouse gases. And the buildings
in these cities and the buildings across America produce more
greenhouse gas my understanding is than the transportation. So
there is a tremendous opportunity. Leadership can be taken and
found. And if you guys run with this, it will really put us
forward.
So I really look forward to hearing you. I welcome you to
this hearing. And I will reserve the balance of my time.
The Chairman. Great. The Chair recognizes the gentle lady
from South Dakota, Ms. Herseth Sandlin.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having
the hearing. I, too, will be brief.
I want to welcome our witnesses today. I have learned a
tremendous amount in representing a sparsely populated state,
like South Dakota, from my good friend, Mr. Cleaver, former
mayor of a major metropolitan area, learning of his initiatives
and look forward to hearing from his colleagues in the
initiatives that you are undertaking to address greenhouse gas
emissions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cleaver follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.003
The Chairman. Great. So that concludes opening statements
from the members of the Select Committee. So we will now turn
to our extremely distinguished panel. We will begin with mayor
Pegeen Hanrahan, the Mayor of the City of Gainesville. She was
reelected mayor in March of 2007. She is a registered
professional engineer and holds a Master's degree in
environmental engineering from the University of Florida. So
you couldn't have a better prepared mayor to take on these
challenges.
We welcome you, Madam Mayor. Whenever you are ready, please
begin.
Ms. Hanrahan. Thank you so much, Chairman Markey and
members of the Select Committee.
STATEMENTS OF PEGEEN HANRAHAN, MAYOR, GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA; TOM
POTTER, MAYOR, PORTLAND, OREGON; AND RICHARD M. DALEY, MAYOR,
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
STATEMENT OF PEGEEN HANRAHAN
Ms. Hanrahan. It is a great honor to be here. I want to
address the three questions that you asked in the invitation.
First, what got Gainesville interested in the issue of global
warming and what caused us to take it on? Second, what are we
doing to try to impact our greenhouse gas emissions? And then,
third, how can our federal government help?
Gainesville you may know is most distinguished as the home
of the University of Florida, which has about 50,000 students,
is the fourth largest university in the nation. And we are the
12th largest in terms of research dollars.
We are our state's land grant university. And as such, we
have very prestigious programs in agriculture, engineering,
life sciences, and other areas of primary research that tell us
about the actual occurrence of global climate change and, maybe
more importantly, what we can actually do to change it.
We are also fortunate to be a public power community.
Gainesville Regional Utilities serves about 89,000 residential
and commercial customers. We are the fifth largest public
utility in Florida. And we offer electric. We have two electric
generating stations, one primarily goal, one primarily natural
gas. We have water waste, water telecommunications, and also
natural gas.
So a number of years ago, about four years ago, we got
concerned about our energy supply future and how we were going
to meet our growing needs.
As you know, Florida is a very strong growth state. And
what we first were brought by our staff is what would you call
a clean coal technology. But as we looked further into the
issue, both our citizens and our elected officials became
concerned about not only the environmental cost of moving
forward with that option but also the economic cost.
So today, in fact, we are looking at other alternatives,
including biomass-based alternatives. We visited many other
communities to look at their options in that area. And we are
excited by the technological advances, including things like
plasma arc technology, which I saw demonstrated at Georgia Tech
University. We are a very forestry-rich area. So there is a lot
of waste wood.
We are also first seeking to maximize our opportunities
with respect to energy efficiency. But I will get back to that
in just a moment.
A second major motivator was, of course, the impacts of
major storms. Although Gainesville is an inland community, we
were very severely hit by Hurricanes Jean and Francis in 2004.
We lost 70 percent of our electrical grid.
And, as you I am sure realize, there has been a great
insurance crisis in the State of Florida. My husband's home
community of Pensacola lost about 16,000 homes, either
community or through severe damage. And then, of course, with
our coastal areas, the sea level rise threat is quite
substantial.
This also impacts our agricultural situation. We are the
nation's fifth largest agricultural state.
So, in summary, we are concerned about our pocketbook, our
sense of security, and the very food that we eat.
So what are we doing? Through our public utility, we are
offering residential incentives for upgrading air conditioning,
repairing leaks in air ducts, heat recovery units for electric
water heaters, solar water heaters, a number of programs
specifically for low-income residents, including low-interest
loans, and we actually have high school students going door to
door in lower-income neighborhoods, switching out light bulbs.
We also have substantial benefits for our commercial
customers, including rebates of up to 40,000 per location for
up to 50 percent of the project costs. And these work very
nicely with the state and federal benefits that are provided
for. We also have a landfill gas to energy project, where we
gather the methane from a closed county landfill. We repowered
an older steam generating plant. We have green building
programs and so on.
I do want to address some of the statements. It is true
that we are a signatory to the Conference of Mayors climate
protection agreement and that we are not currently on track to
fully meet that 7 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2012.
Energy use is rising across the United States, and
Gainesville is no different. However, I would say, even if we
continue our current fuel mix, we are only 36.8 percent below
goal. If we make the changes that we are talking about, we will
I think be able to meet it.
I do want to close by saying we do support the energy and
environment block grants in terms of what Congress can do to
assist us. We are very fond of CDBG. And that is a nice program
that addresses the local needs. We also support clean renewable
energy bonding program. The American Public Power Association
is suggesting some changes to that.
The federal government can help with programs related to
transit. We are a very strong transit community. We had a
million and a half passengers a year in '96, when I was first
elected. We have over nine million today. Transit can work if
it is done properly and land policy related to conservation
easements, agricultural easements, transfer of development
rights, and so on.
I will close. I know my time has concluded. But I also do
want to state that I am very impressed by your willingness to
take this on and engage in this debate. And I am very happy to
answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Hanrahan follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.009
The Chairman. I thank you, Madam Mayor, very much.
Our second witness is Mayor Tom Potter of the City of
Portland, Oregon. Congressman Blumenauer has been bragging
about you and your city to the Committee here since its
inception. And we are very lucky to have you here in town so
that you can testify in Washington as we are considering this
omnibus energy bill and the roles that cities play and maybe
the help that Congress should give to the cities in the years
ahead. Mayor Potter for 38 years has been the police chief, a
community leader, civil rights activist. He was elected mayor
in 2004.
Welcome, Mr. Mayor. Whenever you are ready, please begin.
Mr. Potter. Thank you, Chairman Markey and also to the
members of the Committee.
STATEMENT OF TOM POTTER
Mr. Potter. My name is Tom Potter. I am the mayor of
Portland, Oregon. I want to thank you for the invitation to
testify today about the great progress we have made in Portland
on reducing emissions and lowering energy dependence while at
the same time making our community and our economy stronger.
I am proud of what we have accomplished in Portland to
address global warming. And I believe we offer not only an
example to follow but real hope in a situation that I believe
is truly dire.
Portland has been dealing head on with global warming since
1993, when we created a global warming action plan that was the
first of its kind by any U.S. city. Since that plan was
adopted, we have reduced local greenhouse gas emissions to one
percent below our 1990 level. I believe we are the only city in
the United States that can make that statement.
But the real lesson for others is that we have not only
been able to make our city and our planet healthier. We have
also been able to do it in a way that has been good for our
economy, good for job growth. Portland knows firsthand that we
can combat global warming while keeping our country strong and
growing.
Even as Portland's population was growing 16 percent, we
were able to reduce our per capita emissions while adding jobs
and growing wages three times faster than inflation.
These results are a combination of good public policy and
real dedication by our citizens and our businesses. And to
nurture this culture, the city has made some bold policy moves,
the most fundamental of which was effective planning for
growth.
Oregon law says that all cities must increase density in
the urban core while preserving farmland outside the city. The
idea is to keep the city compact, mix jobs with housing, and
encourage development near transit; in other words, build in
place that keeps people close to their jobs and recreation.
This has not only been smart environmentally but has also had
the social and economic benefit of keeping Portland's downtown
alive, vibrant, and growing.
Where many American cities are losing their downtown,
Portland's has become a highly coveted place to live, work, and
play. Portland also has focused early on innovative
transportation policies. Congressman Blumenauer, a member of
this Committee, has been leading this effort for nearly 30
years.
Our choice in the '70s and '80s to use federal
transportation dollars to build light rail systems, instead of
freeways, is a corner of Portland's success, a cornerstone. A
planned highway to Mount Hood that would have destroyed
neighborhoods was shelved in favor of spending those dollars on
a light rail system that people from around the world come to
study.
Congressman Blumenauer, thank you again for your
leadership. Today we have a world-class transit system that
includes both light rail and modern streetcar service. The
number of people riding transit has increased 85 percent since
1990.
While helping the environment, the economic bonus is that
the long rail lines, we have seen literally billions of dollars
of new development and investment, housing, and retail located
primarily based on its proximity to public transportation. This
synergy between transportation and land use has created a
vibrant community for people to work, live, and play.
We have also worked hard to build demand for varied
transportation choices. For instance, five percent of all trips
in Portland are by bicycling. That has quadrupled in the last
ten years. We are now putting in double-wide bike lanes to
accommodate bike traffic.
This is partly because we have built the infrastructure
that makes people feel safe on their bikes. Portland has over
275 miles of bike lanes, paths, and designated bicycle routes.
Portland has also a program called SmartTrips. We go into
neighborhoods and talk to folks, asking them to start with a
small change, shifting one car to two cars a week, instead of
five. Residents can order transit, bike, and walking maps from
the city. And those things are delivered to them within a few
days. And I might add it is delivered by bicycle.
This program really works. In one neighborhood alone, we
have reduced car travel by 19 million miles in one year. We are
now in our fifth neighborhood. And each person has consistently
shifted about ten percent of their drive-alone trips just by
getting solid information and a little encouragement.
Because they are biking and walking and they are taking
transit, Portlanders drive seven percent fewer miles per capita
than they did in 1993. They use nine percent less gasoline per
capita.
We are also looking hard at the buildings that we live and
work in. Since 1987, the City of Portland has worked with
landlords and building owners to weatherize more than 44,000
apartment units. The families who live in those buildings now
save $4 million each year on their utility bills.
Portland has a green building policy that says any city
building has to meet LEED gold standards and any private sector
project getting public funds has to meet LEED silver standards.
That is why Portland has more LEED-certified buildings than any
other city in North America.
City hall has been leading by example. We save about $2.6
million a year on energy efficiency. For instance, we have
changed all of our traffic signals to LEDs. We have retimed
traffic flights. We have replaced our car fleets with hybrids
and smart cars. Our diesel vehicles are 20 percent bio and 99
percent biodiesel. Parking meters are solar-powered. Drinking
water systems include turbines to generate power and many other
things.
In Portland, we know from experience that doing good by the
planet can do good by the economy as well.
I want also to say that I believe that the federal
government can be of great assistance to local communities. You
can help prime the pump. Create the demand, and the results
will follow. And I think Portland has borne that out.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Potter follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.014
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, very much.
Our first witness represents a small city. Mayor Potter
represents a city of about 560,000, about the size of the City
of Boston, just about the identical population. And now we have
the mayor of Chicago.
And I just want to say about you, Mr. Mayor, that when this
Committee traveled to Berlin to meet with Chancellor Merkel
three weeks ago about her initiative on climate change, meeting
with Speaker Pelosi with her, it was clear that she intended on
that being at the top of the agenda, Chancellor Merkel, for the
summit of the G-8 next week.
I was watching NBC television Nightly News on the night
that she was advancing that issue. And it was the lead story on
NBC that night. Brian Williams then cut back, and he's in
Chicago. And who did he interview to talk about the American
perspective on climate change? It was Mayor Daley for the next
three or four minutes live.
That was an indication, Mr. Mayor, of how you are viewed in
our country and around the world on these issues. As a leading
mayor on this issue, we welcome you and are honored to have you
here today.
Mr. Daley. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD DALEY
Mr. Daley. Good afternoon, Chairman Markey and members of
the Committee. I thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you this afternoon. My name is Richard M. Daley. I am mayor of
the City of Chicago. I am pleased that the Committee is holding
this hearing to learn about the mayor's initiative to reduce
global warming.
I am very proud to sit with Mayor Potter and Mayor
Hanrahan, who are great mayors, in regards to the environmental
movement. We are here to do our part, not just to point
fingers. Mayors learn from one another. From the two mayors
here, I learned quite a bit about the environmental movement.
We are really seeking the federal government to become a
partner, look at creativity, look at what has really happened
to decision-making in local government, how we can really
improve environmental improvements to our cities, to the
country, and to the world.
The City of Chicago has been a leader on environmental
issues for some time. Protecting the environment is very
important, also makes economic sense and improves the quality
of life. Our actions are making Chicago a much more attractive
place to live, new business, and it helps reduce the cost of
living and operating. Chicago businesses and residents are
following our lead and are eager to do more.
Our programs are achieving a range of environmental
benefits, including reduction in greenhouse gas emissions,
mitigation of possible future impacts of climate change.
Our municipal operations site, our environmental agenda
ensures that all 40 city departments incorporate environmental
initiatives in the day-to-day municipal activities.
We now have over three million square feet of green roofs,
either installed or under construction, more than any other
city in North America. Every public building in Chicago will
now be LEED-certified by the U.S. Building Council. We have
retrofitted more than 15 million square feet of city-owned
office space, saving more than 4 million a year. We are buying
five percent of our power from renewable sources. We are
retrofitting our municipal fleet with cleaner vehicles and
cleaner fuels.
We have installed a rain tunnel at McCormick Place
Convention Center that will return 55 million gallons of water
per year into Lake Michigan, instead of sending this water into
our sewage system.
We are also actively engaging the private sector and
homeowners. Our local efforts, green efforts; permits for green
technology; educating developers, architects, and engineers;
launching a waste to profit network, which recognized that a
company's waste is another company's raw materials; developing
a green business strategy to help green existing products,
practices attract new green industry and technology into our
city; distributing thousands of rain barrels built by an ex-
offender program; forming conservation clubs in all of the
Chicago public high schools to encourage young people to
improve their own neighborhood environments.
Some of our work has been done in partnerships with the
federal agencies and congressional support. We are very
grateful for the continuing partnership and support we receive
from the federal government.
We know there is much more to do, especially when we begin
to understand more about climate exchange. We are developing a
comprehensive climate change strategy. We want to know how
climate change is expected to impact city operations and
infrastructure. We want to make good decisions for Chicago's
future.
So far our research predicts a hotter and dryer climate
along with more storms, which may require changes in the way we
currently manage all of our operations. With energy and
transportation as the largest producer of greenhouse gases, new
federal policies in these areas will be very, very important to
urban communities.
In particular, federal efforts to accomplish the following
would be beneficial: increase investments in public
transportation, very simple;--nothing is more important to the
environment than a vibrant public transportation system and not
just in the big cities but throughout the metropolitan areas--
increase fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks; provide
more federal tax incentives to encourage energy conservation,
energy efficiency, and renewable energy; invest in alternative
energy technologies and fuel research; build a more resilient
economy, one that is better able to compete in international
markets; and, of course, lead by example.
Local government also needs more federal resources so that
can continue to invest in local initiatives called creativity.
Many great ideas already exist, but most local governments
simply lack the resource to implement them.
We strongly encourage this Committee to support the Energy
and Environmental Block Grant of 2007, H.R. 2447. This act was
developed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, is modeled after
the successful Community Development Block Grant program. It
would give grants to local governments to make real
improvements dealing with the environment.
I encourage the Committee to evaluate how cities could be
rewarded for investing local resources and projects that
achieve concrete reductions in greenhouse gases.
In summary, Chicago and the other cities will continue to
push forward on environmental initiatives. We have done that.
Cities which are home to the vast majority of American
population--and it is growing--are leading the way in
addressing environmental challenges and must continue to do so
on behalf of their residents.
I thank you for the opportunity for me to testify. I look
forward to working with each and every one of you on behalf of
the environmental movement. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Daley follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.020
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, very much.
We will now turn to questions from the Select Committee
members. We will first recognize the gentleman from Oregon, Mr.
Blumenauer.
Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
appreciate your courtesy.
I was struck, Mayor Daley, with your phrase a moment ago
about ``lead by example.'' Clearly we have three very specific
examples from cities that are leading by example. And I wonder
if you have some thoughts or observations about how the federal
government aside from being there with resources, transit, and
so forth--are there other areas that occur to you that the
federal government could lead by example in your communities in
terms of our stewardship?
Mr. Daley. Well, construction of every federal building,
every post office, every federal building in America if they
are led by example in regards to energy, in regards to the type
of material they are building, the cost of energy inside, water
retention. They are exempted from all local laws. So we can do
everything we want. But that one building doesn't even follow
many times the local codes in regards to building codes or
environmental movement.
And so I think the mayors here, we lead by example. We did
this before the word ``global warming'' was on everyone's
docket. Most of these cities have been doing it for many, many
years, as Mayor Potter pointed out in regards to his city.
Mr. Blumenauer. Either of you have other thoughts about
what we should be doing?
I will say, Mayor Daley, I did introduce legislation to
require the post office to obey local land use laws, zoning
codes, and building requirements.
Mr. Daley. Are they?
Mr. Blumenauer. And that actually almost made it into the
postal reform. But I couldn't agree with you more.
Other examples that----
Ms. Hanrahan. I will just echo Mayor Daley's comments that
certainly when a federal facility is built in your community,
you would like to see that facility really be a shining
example.
And, for some reason, post offices do sort of hit mayors.
We have a beautiful downtown post office that was, of course,
abandoned. And we have a '70s era post office. And now it is
sort of out by the interstate.
I just came from a meeting with my own congresswoman,
Corrine Brown. And she is working on an expansion to our VA
hospital. Right next door to our VA hospital is an expansion of
our Shands Cancer Hospital, which we are doing a joint project
with them on combined heat and power. And that will
dramatically reduce the impacts of their energy use. Hospitals,
of course, have very high energy reliability standards and so
on. It is also a LEED-certified building, so excellent example.
Mr. Blumenauer. Mayor Potter?
Mr. Potter. When I think about the difference between
cities and the federal government, obviously you folks have a
very different role from the cities, but your role can be very
helpful to the cities in how you formulate your policies, how
you encourage local communities to begin to develop
technologies that will make them more sustainable.
For me, the biggest role that the federal government could
possibly have beyond the money is that by establishing those
standards, by creating in the marketplace a demand for change I
think can be of the most value to communities across our
country.
Mr. Blumenauer. I really appreciate that. And I hope, Mr.
Chairman, this is something we can consider for the federal
government to set a standard for the vehicles that it
purchases, for the building codes that we are going to honor,
and hopefully at least meet what you have, if not do them in a
higher standard.
Mayor Potter, one of the things we are working on in the
Ways and Means Committee now and bringing forward is energy tax
legislation to promote use of energy efficiency and renewable
energy. It is very likely, taking a page from the mayors, that
the bill will include some green tax credit bonds or some
funding mechanism for community programs and initiatives as
well as for loans and grants to consumers who want to make
energy efficiency improvements to their homes or install new
generating capacity.
Is this something that the cities are poised to move on,
that you have the infrastructure that you could take advantage
of that quickly if it were to be enacted?
Mr. Potter. Yes. You know, currently the City of Portland
does provide tax benefits to companies who do green building,
but we could do it on a much larger scale. We could be more
innovative in the types of green building that is going on in
our country. And there is a huge range of activity going on. I
think that through these green tax credit bonds, that we could
really begin to help not just shape public policy but public
thinking about what is the best use for money when money is
lean or when we have extra.
How do we begin to shape public thinking in a way that
begins to result in better policies?
Mr. Blumenauer. Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired.
May I make just one request of the witnesses because embedded
in their testimony was the economic impact? My sense is that in
each of them, their experiences, this has had a positive
economic impact. And I just wondered if they might be able to
supply the Committee----
The Chairman. Sure.
Mr. Blumenauer [continuing]. With information about the
economic impact of their energy-efficient initiatives. Thank
you, sir.
The Chairman. And we will include your answers in the
record, but you might get a chance with some of the other
members to put it in your verbal testimony.
The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair recognizes the
gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Sensenbrenner.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I, too, believe in leading by example. And I noticed in
yesterday's Chicago Tribune the lead story says, ``Daley City
Not So Green.'' And in reading the story and looking at the
sidebar, I noticed that the carbon emissions in the City of
Chicago between 2003 and 2004 were reduced by 65,000 tons.
Between '04 and '05, there was an increase of 234,000 tons and
from '05 to '06 a further increase of 8,000 tons.
Mayor Daley, can you explain why there was this big
increase in emissions between 2004 and 2005?
Mr. Daley. Well, I can't get into the particulars, but one
thing, we are sitting down with the Tribune, trying to find out
where they got these figures from because we have been a member
of the Chicago climate exchange since it was formed. It is a
voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas emission reduction
platform.
The city has met its reduction goals every year since
becoming a member of that exchange within the rules and
regulations established by the climate exchange. The city is
committed to purchase 20 percent of our electricity from
renewable energy sources by 2010. We purchased renewable energy
credits equivalent to five percent of the city's electricity in
2006. The required 60,000 credits for renewable energy were
obtained through the purchase of landfill gases. So we are
doing everything possible.
I think there are some discrepancies in there. I mean, that
is why we are sitting down with the person who did the study.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Well, I know my eyes are getting a
little weak, but underneath the sidebar that contains the
figures that I quoted to you, it says the source is the City of
Chicago.
And apparently the city officials would only discuss their
participation in the exchange by e-mail. Don't you allow your
city officials to verbally answer questions? That might be part
of the source of the problem.
Mr. Daley. I don't know. I will find out for you.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Okay.
Mr. Daley. But this has nothing to do with what we are here
for. It deals with the whole environmental movement. It is not
just global warming.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Well, we know, reclaiming my time, I
guess I would beg to differ with you because I think that the
Chairman selected each of the three of you to talk about how
your cities have been reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
And what appeared in the front page of the major newspaper
in your city, Mayor Daley, indicates that there has been a ten
percent increase in emissions over a period of time when you
had promised there would be a four percent reduction. And I
think this shows how difficult it is to meet these kinds of
targets.
Mr. Daley. It is difficult. It is challenging. But,
remember, you can't believe everything that you read in the
newspaper about any public official.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Well, you know, we run that risk as
well, but, you know, as you know, disputing a newspaper is
sometimes like getting in an argument with a drunk. And I kind
of would like to know whether the smell that is emanating from
the Chicago Tribune is based on fact or based on pique. And I
would like to get an answer particularly on why there has been
this big increase in emissions between 2004 and 2005.
The other question that I would like to ask you before my
time runs out is the Tribune article says that in a June 1
response to questions about Chicago's participation in the
exchange, an Environment Department spokesman wrote that the
city had just purchased credits worth 60,000 megawatt hours of
wind power, which is enough to meet half of your renewable
energy pledge. Six days later the department official said that
the deal had fallen through over a price dispute.
Now, one of the things we are looking at is cap and trade.
And this is kind of a cap and trade on the municipal level. Can
you give me some details about the price dispute that caused
this deal to fall through?
Mr. Daley. Well, appropriately in regards to the price, we
thought it was a little too high for us. And we decided to
renegotiate it, like anything else. You just don't make a
decision that would not benefit the citizens or the
environment, especially the cost factor.
So, like anything else, we are still in negotiations.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. But aren't these credits supposed to be
based on market forces, meaning if there is more supply than
demand, the price goes down and if there is more demand than
supply, the price goes up?
And I would kind of like to know why you thought they were
charging the city too much and why you felt that way.
Mr. Daley. Well, we just felt in regards to our
negotiations--this took place over a number of months and
years, too. This did not come up in the last week or two weeks.
So, appropriately, in negotiations, you are going to differ
on different items. And you are not going to sign an agreement.
So then, in turn, you go back to negotiations, which we have
had with the supplier.
Mr. Sensenbrenner. Thank you very much. My time is up.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired. And I am
sure that the mayors who are here would say that dealing with
global warming is a long-term commitment and any one year is
just obviously part of a long-term commitment to reducing those
greenhouse gases and the policies put in place aimed at that
goal.
Let me turn and recognize the gentle lady from California,
Ms. Solis.
Ms. Solis. Thank you.
Well, I want to thank you for coming, the mayors. You have
some very good information that I want to take back to my city,
Los Angeles.
Some of the challenges that we face, particularly for a
place like Los Angeles, is how do you include those under-
served communities, the communities of color? And I would like
each of you, if you can, to just touch on that, what you are
doing and what we as a federal government can do to help with
that.
One notion that is very important also is our youth. How do
we get them involved in this new technology? If you have any
ideas, please share them.
Ms. Hanrahan. I will be happy to start because this is a
particular focus in Gainesville. Gainesville, as I mentioned,
is a university community, but we also have a pretty
substantial poverty-stricken population. And there is a real
disconnect.
A lot of the payback in the capital investment goes to the
person paying the utilities, but the person making the
investment is oftentimes not that individual, especially for
lower-income people.
So we are trying to break through that by working, for
example, with our lending institutions so that we can guarantee
loans so that the person who is paying the utilities can
perhaps upgrade their equipment.
I mentioned the low-income children going door to door
replacing light bulbs. That has been a really fun project and
having some substantial results.
And then we have a whole house program where we go in and
actually replace equipment on an experimental basis to see how
much we can do. We also have our churches very much involved.
Our African American leadership is very excited.
I just want to close by saying we aren't doing this--I
mean, this is one of those things that isn't easy, but it is
important. If it were easy, we would have done it by now. It is
very similar to the '60s, when we had the goal to reach the
moon. It's the same kind of a challenge.
Ms. Solis. Specifically you mentioned you have a 50,000-
student population. And my question is, is there any thought
given to training from the university for these communities in
these types of jobs perhaps?
Ms. Hanrahan. We do have some student groups that are, for
example, changing out all of the lighting in the off-campus
student housing. And they are able to do a very detailed study
on the basis of that.
We haven't connected the university students with the lower
income population yet, but that is an excellent idea.
Mr. Potter. One of the programs in Portland that we have,
we work with Portland State University, which is the largest
university system in the State of Oregon. And they have a
program called Capstone. Before any young person graduates from
PSU, they have to perform community service. And so we have
them working, for instance, as interns in the mayor's office
but also working with the Office of Sustainable Development and
assisting them in developing and being some of the foot power
in that system.
Last year we created a Children and Youth Bill of Rights
that guarantees young people certain things, to include a roof
over their heads, full good meals and caring adults in their
lives. The city council is using that document as one of our
policy documents when we make decisions on how to allocate
funds.
We also have done a visioning project last year going out
and asking the community how they view Portland. And we
specifically went to the under-represented communities. We have
a large immigrant population in Portland. And the percentage
that we have of the under-represented is higher in proportion
to the other parts of the population, which didn't make
necessarily the other parts of the population very happy. But
the fact is that we heard things that we had not heard before.
So we are working to do things such as reduce home
ownership gap. For instance, African Americans in Portland have
a 39 percent home ownership while whites have 61 percent.
Those are the kinds of things that you can hear when you go
out and listen to the community.
Mr. Daley. In Chicago, we are establishing a better
science program in elementary schools, which is very deficient
if you look at public schools in America, at the same time
bring ownership into the school system with conservation
clauses, both in elementary and high school. You have to get
the young people thinking about their own school, about their
own home, about their own block in regards to the environment.
And so that is one major initiative we are doing.
And also an example is just hiring ex-offenders dealing
with our rebuilding rain barrels for many of our bungalows and
tube flats all over the city in the conservation of water to be
used for purposes for lawns and other things. That is an
example of getting the community involved. But with the younger
people, you need good programs.
Ms. Solis. Thank you. I raised this issue because we are
contemplating introducing legislation that can possibly help
provide a career path, streams to vocational education,
community colleges, and the private sector, and to figure out
how we get that youth population plus retaining because we are
going to keep jobs here. That is the other exciting thing, that
we don't have to outsource these jobs. They can stay here in
our cities and in our communities. So I would at one point like
to hear feedback on that.
The Chairman. The gentle lady's time has expired. The
Chair recognizes the gentle lady from Michigan, Ms. Miller.
Ms. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I again want to thank the witnesses for all coming. I was
very interested to hear all of your various comments. I
actually started my political career not as a mayor but as a
township supervisor of a town of about 30,000. So I have a
little bit of understanding and sensitivity to the job that you
have at the local level. And you really are very much on the
leading edge of things.
But I can't miss this opportunity to ask a question of the
mayor of Chicago because he and I had the honor of being the
keynoters last year at the Great Lakes Day here on the Hill.
And I applaud his work on the Great Lakes.
Let me ask you, Mr. Mayor, if I could. As you are very
familiar, the Great Lakes are fully one-fifth of the freshwater
supply of the entire planet. All of us in the Great Lakes Basin
are very, very concerned about diversion of the Great Lakes to
the very hot, dry, thirsty Southwest, our other areas of the
nation. And we certainly don't want that to happen.
You know, we are struggling about this whole issue of
climate change, how much of it is manmade, if it is manmade how
much of it is just cyclical weather patterns, what have you.
And, in particular, I guess my question goes to the lake levels
in the Great Lakes.
For instance, I am aware of the Chicago Diversionary Canal.
You know these numbers better than I do. I have heard there are
about 300,000 gallons per minute when they open that canal up
to flush down in the Mississippi River.
And as we look at the lake levels in both Huron and
Michigan, the experts are telling us that those lake levels are
lower than the other lake levels for a number of reasons. They
do cite that. Of course, they say less precipitation and the
snow melt, et cetera, but they are also citing--actually, a
foremost coastal engineering firm is now theorizing that
because of a very extensive dredging that happened in the St.
Claire River as it meets the bottom of Lake Huron, in
subsequent dredging and erosion, that is like a bathtub effect
has happened there and that we are diverting I don't know how
many millions and billions of gallons of water just over the
Niagara because of that.
My point is here do you have any comment on some of the
various things that are happening that really are manmade as
well----
Mr. Daley. Right.
Ms. Miller [continuing]. That are impacting our ability to
ship freight and all of these kinds of things on the lakes?
Mr. Daley. One of the issues had been a deep tunnel, which
they have built a number of deep tunnels, in regards to
stormwater. And one of the things, they are very seldom now
open, the locks are open very seldom, even in difficult storms.
One thing we are doing is water conservation.
You have to have the green roofs. You have to have new
technology in regards to retrofitting older buildings, what
type of alleys you are building dealing with rainwater,
basically not allowing the rainwater to get into the sewer
system.
That is one thing we have found out dealing with parks,
open space, mandating stormwater to developments in the city,
in the metropolitan area as well because the metropolitan area
grows. They seek more and more water in regards to their usage.
And, like anything else, the St. Lawrence Seaway and the
Great Lakes, Canadian-U.S. mayors had a new conference put
together. And we are doing best practices.
An example, we had asked the federal government, which is
very challenging, to tell us how much money they are spending
on what projects, the entire federal government, in the Great
Lakes. And, truthfully, we are still waiting. It is very, very
challenging for them to figure this out.
And because if they are doing something up in Ontario or
Lake Superior or Lake Michigan, that is going to have an effect
on all of the Great Lakes and all the tributaries. And that is
one thing the mayors from Canada and the United States want to
know, both from the Canadian government, U.S. government, what
money they are spending, where they are spending it, for what
purpose, and what long-term effect we have on the Great Lakes.
All the tributaries are very, very important in regards to
the Great Lakes Basin, United States. And many times we are
putting those cities involved in the Great Lakes initiative.
So even a city down in Kentucky or southern Illinois, along
the Mississippi, we bring them in to the Great Lakes initiative
in regards to, most important, conservation.
Ms. Miller. I appreciate that. I would like to ask a
question of the other three of you because I think all of you
had mentioned about various things you were doing in regard to
your municipal fleets and what you are doing with your vehicles
there about higher fuel efficiency.
As you might imagine, coming from Michigan, I am very
interested in the domestic auto industry, who is being asked to
compete on the global marketplace. Now the federal government
is going to be looking at higher CAFE standards, et cetera.
Yet, at the same time, you have a government like Japan
that is heavily invested in lithium ion batteries, not only for
their vehicles but for all the electronics that they make. And,
yet, we are being asked to compete, although our federal
government does not pay for that kind of R&D, and other kinds
of things that happen with the domestic auto industry as well.
I mean, the Japanese government is paying for their health
care. Yet, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are all paying for our health
care.
So I am just wondering. Do you have any comment on whether
or not the federal government should be investing more to
assist the domestic auto industry that may assist all of you in
upgrading your municipal vehicle fleets?
Ms. Hanrahan. Well, I will just quickly respond that we
were very excited when Ford came out with the Escape Hybrid
because we have historically had a policy of purchasing
American cars, which was in conflict with the fact that the
hybrids were predominantly coming from the Japanese market. So
as we see Ford and others leading now that Saturn has a hybrid
as well, that opens a lot of opportunities for those parts of
our municipal government that do require heavier service
vehicles. I mean, not everything can be done from a Prius, nor
should it be.
We have also looked at biodiesel. Our county converted
their fleet to biodiesel. And, actually--and I am not familiar
with the details of it, but the fleet manager actually found
that there were some other benefits associated with the
temperature of the diesel or something along those lines.
And then certainly the flex fuel vehicles, which, again,
many American cars are flex fuel vehicles and that provides at
least an alternative.
Mr. Potter. Being a former police chief, I can tell you
that the power is important for police cars. And I think that
we could use some assistance in how to take some of the
biofuels and increase the ability to be able to fuel the
American police cars so that they can keep up with the person
they are chasing.
But also we use in Portland the hybrid and the biodiesel
cars as staff cars because most police cars aren't really
patrol cars. They are really staff and support cars.
Mr. Daley. And in Chicago, we have one of the oldest Ford
plants, which they retrofitted a number of years ago. They
recently built a Ford supplier plant that hires a couple of
thousand people. They built an environmental park. We are very
conscious of how important the industry is to my city or to the
Midwest is extremely important.
At the same time, they have been working very closely with
us on fuel efficiency and the purchase of cars and all of that.
So that we are cognizant. At the same time, I believe the
federal government should assist the U.S. automobile industry
in regards to new technology and assist them as quickly as
possible.
Ms. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired. The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Kansas City, Mr. Cleaver.
Mr. Cleaver. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My city is a city of 322 square miles, which is huge. You
can put St. Louis inside our city limits three times, to give
you an example of how large it is. We have one service station
that provides E85. And the only reason we have that is because
during my time as mayor, President Bill Clinton ordered the GSA
to convert its fleet to flex fuel vehicles.
We have now in 2007 11 million flex fuel vehicles in the
United States. We have 170,000 service stations in the United
States, but only 1,200 of them provide E85 or flex fuel. And so
that is a discouraging factor, I think, in people getting the
flex fuel vehicles.
Is there something that we can do to assist you, the cities
in getting more flex fuel service stations in order to, of
course, increase the number of automobiles with alternative
fuels that are riding up and down your streets?
Mr. Potter. Well, if I could address that? I think this
whole issue about how we begin to increase more sustainable
practices requires us to consider that we are in a capitalist
society that creates supply and demand. And our job, I believe,
in government is to create the demand.
In September in Portland, it will go into effect that all
gas stations in the City of Portland will have to carry
biofuels in addition to petroleum-based fuels. So that is our
effort to try to create that.
What is equally as important is that we are using the
farmers in eastern Oregon to help grow the grains that will
eventually become the biofuel. So we keep our money in Oregon,
instead of sending it off to the OPEC nations.
Ms. Hanrahan. And I will just follow up on that because I
was about to say exactly the same thing. One of our U.S.
senators, Senator Martinez, who is, of course, also a former
mayor, held a summit in Gainesville about the whole issue of
biomass and how we can do farm-to-fuel types of projects.
And when I walk into a room and I see the agricultural
industry and the environmental communities and even oil
companies all sort of singing off the same song sheet, I say,
``Wow. Here is an opportunity.''
As I mentioned, Florida is a huge agricultural state. Our
own area is a huge forestry area. I don't know the specific
answer to your question, but I think it clearly represents an
incredible technological opportunity for this nation and for
those states particularly that do have strong farm interests.
Mr. Daley. Of course, Illinois is an agricultural state,
very important. Like anything else, you are sitting with the
agonists here in the business community, with government in the
purchase power example of suburban and larger cities or State
of Illinois in the purchase of vehicles, which are better fuel
management or greener fuel. And that is what we are really
looking for. And everybody is striving for that.
It is amazing across the partisan lines. It is both
suburban areas and the cities and the state working together in
regards to their fleets.
Mr. Cleaver. This won't surprise either of you. I have
been in contact over the last couple of months with Tom Cochran
with regard to issues surrounding cities. We have a situation
where every six years we have this transportation bill. And the
dollars continue to pile higher with regards to transportation.
But we are looking at the same time at a reduction of the
dollars that are pumped into UMTA, the Urban Mass Transit
Administration, which at one point, in fact, when Portland got
its system off the ground, St. Louis, Dallas, Atlanta, there
were large grants from UMTA.
I support--it is going to be a surprise to you--a block
grant, but I am wondering whether or not you think that now is
the time for some kind of transition from the Herculean amount
of dollars we are pumping into the Department of Transportation
to maybe put more money into UMTA or create some kind of a
block grant program through transportation dollars to help the
cities, particularly in light of the fact that the federal
government is still denying the science, you know, that global
warming is not real.
So in lieu of the federal government, what area do you
believe that a block grant would be most productive, coming out
of transportation, maybe UMTA, or maybe even, you know, another
kind of block grant through HUD?
Mr. Potter. I think the most effective use is to--if we
are going to get rid of the greenhouse gases, we are going to
have to go to one of the major contributors' vehicles. I think
if we can begin to change from petroleum-based to biofuels,
that will be a huge step, not only in terms of beginning to
clean up the atmosphere but creating an entirely different
economy based here in the United States, rather than overseas.
Mr. Daley. One thing I found out, it seemed like
businesses need better public transportation, whether in the
city or suburban collar counties. And one thing we are
listening, business support in regards to a system that needs
funding from the federal government, that can be clean, safe,
on time, and friendly. And that is an alternative. Really, it
is an environmental movement.
It has never been looked at that way. It has always been
``Okay. We have the highway system. There are lobbyists''
versus public transportation, usually mayors or in some way in
regards to needed public transportation.
But I think it is getting bigger than that. It is necessary
for businesses to exist in many communities if they don't have
public transportation.
And that is where I think the debate will be in the future,
especially in the collar counties and the growing areas, the
metropolitan areas. They can't move on weekends and at night
and during the day. It is overcrowded with cars. So there is
where the debate has to come, and I think it is slowly moving
in that direction.
Mr. Cleaver. Thank you.
Ms. Hanrahan. And just a very brief comment. We very much
admire the light rail systems we see in cities like Portland
and Salt Lake. Most of America's cities are small cities. And
light rail is probably not an appropriate solution.
But certainly we have benefitted by the support for our
transit system, which, as I said, has increased from a million
and a half passengers a year in '96 to over 9 million today.
And we have done that through partnerships, particularly with
our largest employers and the University of Florida, that they
provide fare-free passes. And that has really dramatically
changed the way that those riders use the system.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair
recognizes the gentlelady from South Dakota, Ms. Herseth
Sandlin.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And building
on the questions of Mrs. Miller and Mr. Cleaver, of course, it
is music to my ears representing South Dakota and where we are
trying to get our biofuels. Of course, we would really like to
get our wind generating electricity to get to Chicago, Mayor
Daley. So perhaps we can visit more about that.
Going to the municipal fleet again and the number of E85
pumps that are available across the country in different
regions and different cities, could you talk perhaps--I think,
Mayor Potter, did you say that there is a requirement that just
passed in Portland that every service station within the city
limits has to carry a biofuel? And is that biodiesel? Is that
E85? What blend are we talking about there?
Mr. Potter. Yes. In September, it will be a requirement
that they carry biofuels. And it will be probably the B85 or
the B15. We are very interested in increasing the percentage of
biofuels mixed in diesel. And, of course, that is a technology
issue.
And that is one of the things that I think that there,
again, the federal government can help with, is how do we
provide the kind of technology that can use this because, as
you know, in the wintertime, biofuels tend to thicken. And so
they use the diesel to thin it with.
And so by using the technology--and I have seen some of the
technology in terms of having the biofuel container heated so
that you always keep the fluid warm and, thus, not as viscose
as would be otherwise.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. So the requirement in September is
for diesel, a blend of diesel. It is not necessarily for an
ethanol blend of 85 percent. That is one of the areas that we
have focused on here in Washington, this whole chicken and the
egg issue.
And I think that Detroit has actually made a significant
commitment in ramping up its manufacture of flex fuel vehicles.
The problem is as that demand increases, we still have service
stations that are talking about how cost-prohibitive it can be,
especially in urban areas, because you do need another tank.
And so when they have got a demand of premium, regular
unleaded, I am just wondering if any of you have pursued or
talked with your convenience store owners about what they would
like to see either at the municipal level, any incentives you
have discussed as Washington undertakes a discussion about
incentives that we can offer to service station owners in
addition to perhaps requirements at some point, especially for
those that are licensed by or, I should say, have leases with
some of the larger oil companies.
Mr. Daley. State law regularly requires them to use
ethanol as a mix, ten percent mix, in the wintertime. So there
are certain months that it is required to be in all gases in
Oregon. So we do use ethanol. It's the other biofuels that we
have not really capitalized on.
The State of Illinois is working--of course, ethanol is
really important for us as well in Illinois. Presently the
state has not mandated. They are presently working with
operators, whether in the city or throughout the state, in
regards to sitting down with them and saying, ``What is cost-
effective?''; how they can put it in, especially if they are
independent operators. And more so in the city they are not.
They are owned by major companies. But in the suburbs and down
state, they are mostly independent operators.
And that is one issue that they had come up with, the cost
factor of the alternative energies in these gas stations.
Ms. Hanrahan. I was just going to say the best luck we
have had is when we see a rebuild, a complete rebuild of a
station. And then they are more able to be flexible in that.
But one other just interesting note is that--and this may
be just the sort of thing you see in college towns, but there
is actually a biodiesel co-op that has come up. And people are
bringing it in. And you see vehicles that have a sticker on
them that says, ``This vehicle run by biodiesel.''
I think this is one of the areas that the people are
actually ahead of the government.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you. One last question. Your
public transportation vehicles, I think, Mayor Daley, in
Chicago, you have got hydrogen-fueled buses. Is that the same
in terms of either diesel or, again, an ethanol blend? Is that
state law that even the public transportation vehicles then
would--well, I guess you would have to fill up with an E10
blend if that is required during the colder months. But can you
talk about your public transportation systems and the use of
any renewable energy sources?
Mr. Potter. Well, the public transportation in Portland,
TriMet, also uses hybrid buses. And so there is a percentage of
buses, and I don't know what percentage. But there is a
significant percentage of buses that are actually hybrid.
Mr. Daley. In the Chicago Transit Authority, that is what
they are looking for in regards to getting off the diesel, in
regards to hybrid buses.
Ms. Hanrahan. And I will just share we actually purchased
one of the Ballard buses. And, unfortunately,--this sort of
speaks to some of the challenges that we are facing--it didn't
work well. And then the company had problems and so on.
I will say that one of the challenges that we have with our
transit system is, of course, the federal support is primarily
for the rolling stock, for the capital. And so we end up, we
are running it on a shoestring, to be honest, relative to the
size of the passenger ship.
So we haven't done as much as we would like to do in that
area, I think primarily on a cost basis. So if we could look at
more funding for operating versus just capital, I think that
would be an incentive.
Mr. Daley. I think you have to be careful what plan you
decide to do because you get a company and they start building
them and, all of a sudden, in three years they are not there,
they are not in existence. So I think many cities are following
by example what other cities are doing, not only the United
States but throughout the world, especially in Europe.
Ms. Herseth Sandlin. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I
yield back.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired. The Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Washington State, Mr. Inslee.
Mr. Inslee. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
This is a real delight for me.
Mayor Potter, Mayor Daley, you will be pleased to know
there is a book coming out this fall about clean energy. It is
called ``Apollo's Fire.'' And your two cities are prominently
featured in it because of your great leadership. And I didn't
know about the great work of Mayor Hanrahan. I will tell
everybody about it. We appreciate it, appreciate you coming
here.
Mayor Potter, I remember--I was writing this book--talking
to a fellow who was working in a computer company in Portland.
He was a young entrepreneur. He had looked at various cities,
where to go to start his company. And he focused on Portland.
I asked him why. He said, ``Because they get it when it
comes to the environment, having a great business environment
with good public transportation, great amenities'' because he
said it became a focus of his ability to draw talent,
intellectual talent, into his company. And he looked at your
environmental policy as actually a tremendous economic driver.
And I just wonder if you want to comment. Is that a common
experience or just the dreams of one software fellow?
Mr. Potter. I hope that guy was with a company called Free
Geek that takes old computers and reconditions them and gives
them to low-income families and schools. Maybe that is his
program. I am not sure.
Mr. Inslee. I think it was a different one. You have got at
least two good companies there.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Potter. The fact is that Portland is really fortunate.
We are one of several cities in the United States where that
18- to 35-year-old demographic is actually growing. Nationally
that age grouping is dropping.
So there are more young people coming to Portland. Part of
it is because of those very kind of innovative low-threshold
kinds of opportunities. That is, you know, you can come and try
things out that people in other cities may not give you that
opportunity. So we are really proud of that.
The other one is our tolerance, which I think also fits
into that, that we accept people and we accept their ideas. We
understand that with diversity brings new ideas and new ways of
thinking.
Mr. Inslee. I appreciate that. I want to ask you about
building efficiency. When we look at this, I think a good way
to think of efficiency and conservation is the first fuel. And
it is usually the cheapest way to get inexpensive energy is not
to waste it.
I want to ask you about building codes. The American
Society of Architects believes that we can have essentially the
building residential building and commercial that is 60 percent
less energy-intensive than the buildings we are building today
by the year 2010 and 80 percent less energy-intensive by 2020.
Now, those are really ambitious numbers. They kind of are
stunning to me. But these are, you know, the architects telling
us we can do this.
One of the things we are thinking about is a way to work
with the cities on building codes, both incentives and perhaps
some mandates to move forward on building code requirements on
energy intensity. And I just wonder if you can tell us about
what your experience has been. Is that something we should
think about? If so, how?
Mr. Daley. Well, as a mayor, one thing I think all mayors
are always against is mandating from the federal government,
``Do as I say,'' not ``Do as I do.'' And so if you mandate it,
make sure that every federal building, every federal contract
is mandated. Mandates are only one way. It goes downhill. We
are in the bottom. And so make sure that the federal government
and all of your contracts are mandated first and foremost and
see how it works.
We don't want to be your guinea pigs for your philosophy
and for your programs. We would rather see the federal
government work it first because what we have done, a lot of us
have done, the environmental changes. And some of it works,
some of it doesn't. And we have to explain to our taxpayers
what happens.
When you mandate it, then you move us in one direction. And
many times we lack the creativity, where if we had the
flexibility, the funding, the technology for it, that gives us
a little opportunity to be much more creative on a local level.
Ms. Hanrahan. And I will just follow up on that. And the
discussion about South Dakota actually made me think. You know,
there is probably very little similar between South Dakota and
Florida in terms of climate, in terms of population density,
and probably in terms of building style.
That having been said, the only places that you are really
seeing dramatic or substantial, I want to say, decreases in per
capita energy use are those places that have much stronger
building codes, most notably the State of California.
There are some municipalities being visited, like Austin,
Texas and Burlington, Vermont and perhaps these other fine
cities as well. I think we clearly have to work with our
building trades and with groups like the AIA. The American
Institute of Architects have said that 50 percent of all
greenhouse gases are coming from buildings. So we have to
address it.
And, again, I think that there is a market demand for it,
and we are seeing that.
Mr. Inslee. Thank you.
The Chairman. Great. The gentleman's time has expired. The
Chair recognizes the gentleman from the State of New York, Mr.
Hall.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you all, our
illustrious panel.
Yesterday morning I was honored to address the Westchester,
New York County Task Force on Global Warming and Energy Policy.
In Westchester County, they have an entire fleet of hybrid
buses that they are very happy with. So if you would like any
information on that, I would be happy to get it for you.
Mayor Daley, I understand that you have a fleet of Escape
Hybrids that the city has purchased that, at least according to
one internet site I found, are being retrofitted to be plug-in
hybrids.
Mr. Daley. Yes.
Mr. Hall. Can you tell us about that, how the process is
going?
Mr. Daley. Well, again, it is experimental. When you do
these things, you can't move your whole fleet to one
alternative source. If you do, it could be a mistake. And so we
are trying to, of course, review it and test it and find out
how well it does.
Mr. Hall. I have myself, made the same decision that Mayor
Hanrahan made, which was to buy an American hybrid, although I
could have gotten better mileage by going with a Japanese one.
But I want to support--this was my personal investment--the
evolving auto industry in the United States as they try to move
into energy efficiency more aggressively.
So my Mercury hybrid, which is a Ford product, I would like
to be able to follow on your footsteps. If you have success
with it, I may be sending my car to Chicago to be turned into a
plug-in.
As you may have heard, Mayor Bloomberg in New York City has
come forward with a very aggressive package for sustainable New
York. It has a lot of interesting components. One of them,
which is the more controversial element of his plan, is
congestion pricing, charging those who drive in certain areas
of the city a fee to reduce traffic and cut tailpipe emissions
and to use that to fund capital improvements for mass transit.
At the risk of asking you to pass judgment on another
mayor's proposal, what do you think of this type of
arrangement? And are you considering any similar approach?
Mr. Daley. Well, I think that London has had it, a certain
segment of London has had it.
Like anything else, what we need, instead of going on that,
we need funding the mass transit to make sure it is clean,
safe, on time, and friendly 24 hours 7 days a week. And if you
do that, then basically you don't have to do the other issue,
dealing with eliminating cars out of downtown areas, because we
have huge parking fees because, of course, parking fees
generate money for local government.
And, like anything else, it is extremely important. You
have a huge business community there. And I focus. If other
cities want to try that, fine. They should be able to try that.
London is doing part of it. New York wants to do that. But let
them try it and figure out how well they do.
But, again, we can't lose sight of investments in capital
and operating of transit. And the cost is tremendous when we
try to build a rail system in a city or suburban area. And that
is one of the issues.
Mr. Hall. If I could just jump in and take it from there? I
am sorry. I only have five minutes. Perhaps the other mayors
would expound from there. In terms of improving and augmenting
mass transit, which you all have done, what types of
interactions did you have with surrounding localities, suburb,
exurb, and communities? And to what extent is that type of
coordination vital to a successful expansion of mass transit?
Mr. Potter. Well, I believe that we are becoming so
intertwined economically, socially, and otherwise with our
surrounding communities.
I don't really think it is just Portland in the suburbs in
terms of what works and how we work together. So I meet
regularly with the other mayors to discuss how we can create
synergy because our transportation systems run through all of
those communities. And so when we build light rail in Portland,
it goes to the suburbs. And, conversely, when folks move to the
suburbs, they come into the city for their entertainment and
dining out experiences. So that interrelationship to us is
really important.
For me, in terms of how we begin to address that problem,
we have got to give people more choices, and to me, choices
that are alternative to the vehicle.
So we have talked about public transportation, but one of
the areas also is the use of pedestrian and bicycles. There is
a movement around the country in terms of walkable cities and
walkable communities. I think that is really important but also
because Portland is really committed to bicycling.
And we are seeing such a tremendous increase in the use of
bikes. We can actually get people out of their vehicles and
onto their feet or on a bicycle and that the net effect is much
better, not only for our environment. We have a host of
industries in the Portland area that deal specifically with
sports and bicycling. We have some of the major manufacturers
of bikes, plus sports gear.
Mr. Hall. And so a healthier population, too.
Mr. Potter. Well, we are working on that part.
Mr. Hall. Mayor Hanrahan, would you like to?
Ms. Hanrahan. We have some small, very small, towns around
us, in the 5,000 to 7,000 range and some of them particularly
with large employers. We have a Wal-Mart distribution center in
one of our adjacent cities that has established a co-funding
for a route that comes through Gainesville and to some of our
more disadvantaged areas and takes people to jobs.
Again, they are not as happy as they would like to be with
the ridership, but park and rides and those types of things are
certainly things that we are working on with our adjacent
municipalities.
Mr. Hall. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair
will recognize himself.
Let me ask you, Mr. Daley. The Center for Green Technology
that you have in Chicago, could you explain that to us, why you
formed it?
Mr. Daley. Well, basically----
The Chairman. How successful is it? And, can other cities
adopt it?
Mr. Daley. Yes, it is very successful with regards to
educating the public in a green building and educating
especially architects, developers, and engineers, and
contractors and subcontractors in regards to green technology
and holding seminars for each one of the professionals and also
for the community in regards to the building code. And that is
one thing you have to sit down, both with management and with
unions sitting down and retrofitting the building code in
regards to green technology.
One of the things we found out with a number of sessions is
that we have a green permit system. You get your permits much
quicker than the other way. And that has helped us tremendously
in business, residential, all types of developments in regards
to the city of Chicago.
The Chairman. So what would you have to do to qualify for a
green permit?
Mr. Daley. Well, you have to follow the green technology
code. And then, in turn, you have to commit so much to energy,
so much to water, and so much to the type of construction
material, everything else.
Once you identify that, you go with your architect or
engineer. Then we certify that. And it moves very quickly. You
will get your permit within weeks.
The Chairman. As opposed to?
Mr. Daley. Months, months and months.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. That is good government at its best.
Mr. Daley. Much better, much more effective.
The Chairman. Now, can you talk to us about green alleys?
Mr. Daley. That is one thing we have done in regards to
water. Usually the alleys are mostly paved with concrete. And,
in turn, what happens is it has to go in the sewer system. And
one thing we are using is the system where they use in the
Netherlands and other places, other cities, is where we are
holding the water and letting the water slowly settle into the
ground.
And because we have a combined waster and sewer system, you
have to divert water out of the combined water and sewer
system. You have to move the water away from that. Whether it
is the alleys, whether it is the streets, or whether it is the
rain barrels, whether it is the stormwater management system
for any development, they have to apply for it. And you have to
do that.
I really believe water would be--more like the oil crisis
we are in today, we will be in a water crisis very shortly.
The Chairman. So Speaker Pelosi in taking over leadership
of the House of Representatives in January created only one
select committee for her first two years, this Select Committee
on Energy Independence and Global Warming. And she named
Congressman Cleaver as the former mayor of Kansas City to the
panel because she wanted to focus on the cities. So we are
going to be deliberating a block grant program for the cities.
And you mentioned it in your opening testimony.
Could you tell us? Make the case for why the Congress
should spend billions of dollars to help the cities in their
planning and execution of the greening of those communities?
Mr. Daley. Well, if you listen to it, it is not only
mayors, myself, but it is the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, which
comprises about 75 percent of the population in Illinois, are
firmly behind the block grant concept.
It deals with creativity. It deals with getting us money so
that we know what works. And we are going to follow other
mayors. We are going to talk to mayors in the metropolitan
area, in my area. We are going to talk to other mayors
throughout the country, what works and doesn't work, so this
block grant can come to us that we can show by example, we can
do more by example, and then allow the private sector to follow
in regards to the environmental changes that we want to make in
cities. And I think it is important that we lead by example.
I started building green roofs. The city did it first. I
didn't mandate the private sector to do it. It would just be
another mandate. And the private sector, ``Why are you
mandating it? Why don't you do it if you believe in it?''
And so I think the mayors here, not only here at the panel
but throughout the country, lead by example. And that would
really move us into this whole environmental change we can
adapt so quickly if we get the flexibility of a block grant.
You need flexibility. If you don't have the flexibility,
you need flexibility with accountability, which is really
important.
The Chairman. Now I would like to follow up on the point
that Congressman Inslee was making just in terms of the image
of being a green city and how it helps you. Can you elaborate
on that?
Mr. Daley. Well, here, the City of Chicago, industrial
base, we have the stockyards. We have had the large tanning
factories. We have had a river that was destroyed many, many
years ago. We have had huge industrial bases. And we are
basically retrofitting them.
As Mayor Potter pointed out in his city, we have a lot of
green technology businesses coming in dealing with engineers,
contractors, suppliers, manufacturers of green technology.
We have a whole green technology section of this city that
young people are moving their business in. They start out with
three or four or five people. And, all of a sudden, you turn
around, they have got 25-40 people working in the green
technology field.
And also we take money from the tax and financing districts
and put money into these companies so they can purchase old
manufacturing property or buildings and then retrofit them for
them.
From our viewpoint, it makes economic sense. We are making
money. We are saving jobs in companies. We are building more
jobs in communities. At the same time, environmentally people
get it. And it makes economic and financial sense for the City
of Chicago investing in green technology.
The Chairman. And, again, there is an argument that is
constantly made that there is a tension between the economy and
jobs and going green, that you have to pay a huge price for
that. Could you deal with that, Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Potter. I think it is the next wave. And I believe
that, as global warming becomes more and more of an issue,
people are going to be looking for alternatives to what we are
currently doing.
And so one of the things that I think that the federal
government can be very useful and good at would be providing
more information on what works and doesn't work around our
country.
I have with me a floppy disk from 1993. And it is a 360-
kilobyte floppy. This contains all the information that the
City of Portland had in 1993 on global warming. And now this
could hardly hold a conversation about what occurred this
afternoon in this room.
So I think that the government--and I have seen it when I
was in police work--can be a real conduit for providing
information out into communities about what works, doesn't
work, and encouraging change through the interaction between
communities.
The Chairman. This has been a great hearing. I know the
members really appreciate it. It is at the top of the list of
the priorities that Speaker Pelosi has to put the cities front
and center, to help the cities, for us to actually learn from
their example so that we implement nationally what you at the
city level have been doing. And if she said it once, she said
it 100 times to us as a Committee and that she wants us to
focus on this.
What I would like to ask each of you to do is just give us
your one-minute summation of what it is that you want us to
know about the cities and their work in greening our
communities so we can remember that as we go through this very,
very complex but I think ultimately achievable energy bill and
cap and trade climate change legislation that we will be
considering this year. We will begin with you, Mayor Hanrahan.
Ms. Hanrahan. Certainly. And I will just follow up where
we have left off. I think this represents perhaps one of the
most rich technological and economic opportunities that we have
faced in a long time in this nation.
Speaking as someone who is an engineer and all but one of
my siblings are engineers, my father is a chemist, I believe we
have the capability in this nation to do this. That is what
distinguishes the United States from the rest of the world. And
that is what distinguishes the cities you are hearing from
today. We are innovation-based cities. We are innovation-based
economies. And that is the promise. This is something that
draws in young people.
As elected officials, we all know the degree to which young
people are not necessarily engaged in much of our civic
discourse today. And in a situation where the most talented
minds can live anywhere, they want to live in places where they
have a high quality of life.
Gainesville was number one in Frommer's cities rated and
ranked this year. We are very high in Richard Florida's
Creative Cities. And it is because of these types of efforts.
The idea that this is bad for our economy I think is really,
frankly, laughable.
I want to thank you again for the opportunity. And I
congratulate you on your work.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mayor Potter.
Mr. Potter. You know, the fact that people are still
saying that in order to be green, we have to pay more, I think
it is very obvious not just by today's session but around this
country. Cities are the laboratories for change. And we are
seeing change occur on a rapid scale.
I think that if the federal government were to really get
behind a significant shift to sustainability, it would leverage
the effect of what local communities could do by many factors.
So I am a strong supporter that we need to work in tandem.
We need to leverage the understanding. And we need to build on
that and provide other communities the opportunities and the
incentives to make their communities more sustainable.
The Chairman. Mayor Daley.
Mr. Daley. You could bring mayors and county officials,
Democrats, Republicans, independents around the country. And
they would really make a presentation about their creativity
and what they have accomplished.
I got a letter from Mayor Gene Marks from Northbrook,
Northwest suburban area. And he leads the way in the
environmental movement, I would say, affluent community. But
changes are taking place. And I think the federal government
can learn a lot from thousands of your mayors and county
officials all over the country, the changes they have done. And
what we need is basically leadership from the federal
government and assistance in a block grant with technology and
a willingness to become a true partner.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank each of you. We
can't tell you how honored we are to have you with us today and
how much it is going to help to guide us over these next couple
of months in listening to you and trying to make sure it is
built into federal law before the end of this year. Thank you
all very much.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:54 p.m., the foregoing matter was
concluded.]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T8063A.038