Kansas Citys STAR Certification Aaron Shroyer Dennis Murphey

Kansas City’s STAR Certification Aaron Shroyer Dennis Murphey City Council Business Session December 22, 2016

OVERVIEW • Background on STAR • Overview of KCMO’s Score • Implementation & Next Steps

STAR COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM The STAR Community Rating System (STAR) is the nation’s leading comprehensive framework and certification program for measuring local sustainability. STAR was built by and for local governments and the communities they serve.

ABOUT THE RATING SYSTEM • Nation’s first comprehensive framework and certification program for evaluating local sustainability, encompassing economic, environmental, and social performance measures. • Many different interpretations of sustainability; STAR’s definition is broad • Allows communities to credibly track their progress toward overall sustainability objectives and to allow communities to compare progress with each other. WHO DEVELOPED THE STAR COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM? • STAR was developed for local governments by local governments five years ago

CERTIFICATION PROCESS SIGN UP Local government signs up for a STAR subscription Receive access to Online Reporting Tool STAR provides trainings and resources REPORT Build team of staff and local partners to gather data Gather data based on requirements in Technical Guide Enter all submittal requirements into Online Tool Takes approximatel y 6 months-1 year GET VERIFIED Submit online application for verification STAR staff verifies all submittals for accuracy One chance to make changes or amend application STAR performs final verification ACHIEVE CERTIFICA -TION STAR awards certification Certification lasts for 3 years

THE STAR FRAMEWORK Example: Built Environment BROAD SUSTAINABILITY THEMES WITH COMMUNITY-LEVEL ASPIRATIONS 44 OBJECTIVES SUBCATEGORIES THAT MOVE THE COMMUNITY TOWARD THE GOAL 7 GOALS Example: Housing Affordability 108 OUTCOME MEASURES 408 ACTION MEASURES Example: Demonstrate that 10% of units built are dedicated as subsidized affordable housing Example: Require, incentivize, or subsidize creation of affordable housing 516 EVALUATION MEASURES USED TO ASSIGN POINTS

THE STAR COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM Goal Areas & Objectives are rated and evaluated in the online system, helping local leaders set goals and measure progress across all areas.

CERTIFICATION LEVELS Certified 3 -STAR Community (200 -399 points) Recognized for sustainability leadership Certified 4 -STAR Community (400 -599 points) Recognized for national excellence Certified 5 -STAR Community (600+ points) Recognized as top tier achiever in national sustainability

NEARLY 100 COMMUNITIES IN THE US AND CANADA ARE USING STAR. . . THAT’S OVER 40 MILLION PEOPLE. STAR-certified communities Communities using STAR or pursuing certification

Certified STAR Communities More than 50 US cities and counties have received a STAR Community Rating, including: 5 -STAR Community § Baltimore, MD § Cambridge, MA § Seattle, WA § Austin, TX § Evanston, IL § Las Vegas, NV § Raleigh, NC § Boise, ID § Iowa City, IA § Louisville, KY § Memphis, TN § Burlington, VT § Columbus, OH § Tucson, AZ § Tacoma, WA § Portland, OR § Washington, DC § Plano, TX 4 -STAR Community § Lawrence, KS § Dubuque, IA 3 -STAR Community § Albany, NY § Cleveland, OH § Las Cruces, NM § Riverside, CA § Atlanta, GA § Columbia, MO § Phoenix, AZ § St. Louis, MO § Beaverton, OR § Des Moines, IA § Riverside, CA § San Antonio, TX § Birmingham, AL § Fayetteville, AR § Fort Collins, CO § Wichita, KS § Houston, TX § Indianapolis, IN

STAR IN OTHER CITIES • To strengthen Business Plans or Sustainability Plans • To use as planning framework • To identify and implement best practices • To identify gaps and prioritize investment • To build strategic partnership in the community • To communicate and brand sustainability • To increase transparency • To demonstrate creditworthiness to bond agencies

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS KC Departments – Water Services – Planning – Neighborhoods & Housing Services – Public Works – City Manager’s Office – Mayor’s Office – Health – General Services – Municipal Court – Parks & Recreation – Human Relations – Human Resources – Police – Fire – Aviation Community Partners − Bridging the Gap − KC P&L − Heartland Conservation Alliance − Cultivate. KC − KC Food Circle − KC Healthy Kids − Bike. Walk. KC − MARC − EDCKC − HAKC − Show Me KC Schools − Connecting For Good − re. Start THANK YOU!

KANSAS CITY: A 4 -STAR COMMUNITY • Achieved 480 (out of 720) points • 11 th highest score (top 20 th percentile)

SCORE OVERVIEW Goal Built Environment Climate & Energy Economy & Jobs Education, Arts & Community Equity & Empowerment Health & Safety Natural Systems Innovation & Process TOTAL Approved Score 62. 1 63. 3 68. 8 59. 4 43. 0 62. 3 71. 8 50. 0 480. 7 Total Points Percentage Possible Achieved 100 62% 100 63% 100 69% 70 100 100 50 720 85% 43% 62% 72% 100% 67%

n io & oc es s Pr s em ty en t fe Sa ys t & at ur al S va t N ea lth er m w po ity s Jo b m un & y er g En om C Em H & & y om & KCMO Score by Goal Area Median by Goal Area 68. 8 63. 3 62. 362. 1 60. 3 57. 8 59. 4 48. 8 48. 1 43. 0 In no ui ty Eq rts n, A io uc at Ed Ec on e en t nm vi ro En at lim C ilt Bu KCMO SCORE IN CONTEXT 71. 8 56. 1 50. 0 32. 7 21. 7

SCORE OVERVIEW – BUILT ENVIRONMENT STAR Objective BE-1: Ambient Noise & Light BE-2: Community Water Systems BE-3: Compact & Complete Communities BE-4: Housing Affordability BE-5: Infill & Redevelopment BE-6: Public Spaces BE-7: Transportation Choices TOTAL Actual Score Maximum Score 1. 83 5 14. 37 15 5. 7 6. 71 20 15 5. 42 14. 57 10 15 13. 5 62. 1 20 100

SCORE ANALYSIS– BUILT ENVIRONMENT Strengths Areas of Opportunity • BE-2: Drinking water quality • BE-2: Secure water supply • BE-2: Safe stormwater management • BE-6: Acreage of parkland per resident • BE-6: Connectivity to trails • BE-6: Citizen satisfaction • BE-7: Transportation safety • BE-1: Setting and achieving targets for ambient light and noise • BE-3: Compact & Complete Communities • BE-4: Achieve housing production goals • BE-5: Increase and track amount of infill development • BE-7: Transportation mode split and affordability

SCORE OVERVIEW – CLIMATE & ENERGY STAR Objective Actual Score Maximum Score CE-1: Climate Adaptation CE-2: Greenhouse Gas Mitigation CE-3: Greening the Energy Supply CE-4: Industrial Sector Resource Efficiency CE-5: Resource Efficient Buildings CE-6: Resource Efficient Public Infrastructure CE-7: Waste Minimization TOTAL 0. 46 15 19. 64 20 7. 85 15 4. 67 10 12 15 3. 67 10 15 63. 3 15 100

SCORE ANALYSIS– CLIMATE & ENERGY Strengths Areas of Opportunity • CE-2: Reduction in citywide GHG emissions • CE-7: Solid waste shows progress towards a 100% reduction in total solid waste by 2050 • CE-1: Better preparing for vulnerability and threats associated with climate change • CE-3: Encourage increased ownership of green vehicles • CE-4: Decrease Energy & Water Use in the Industrial Sector • CE-5: Increase Energy & Water Efficiency in Buildings • CE-6: Increase Energy & Water Efficiency in Public Buildings

SCORE OVERVIEW – ECONOMY & JOBS STAR Objective Actual Score EJ-1: Business Retention & 18. 93 Development EJ-2: Green Market 10. 65 Development EJ-3: Local Economy 6. 59 EJ-4: Quality Jobs & Living 4. 26 Wages EJ-5: Targeted Industry 14. 47 Development EJ-6: Workforce Readiness 13. 92 TOTAL 68. 8 Maximum Score 20 15 15 100

SCORE ANALYSIS– ECONOMY & JOBS Strengths Areas of Opportunity • EJ-1: Increase in number of businesses and employment over time • EJ-2: Decrease GHG intensity over time • EJ-3: Increase in local bank deposits over time • EJ-5: Increase in number of businesses, total sales, and employment in Advance. KC target sectors • EJ-6: Increase in trained workforce and workforce mobility metrics • EJ-2: Increase Green-Certified Building Stock & Green Vehicles • EJ-3: Adopt economic localization plan with targets for local consumption and export • EJ-4: Median household incomes have not increased over time (in real dollars) • EJ-4: Only 65. 5% of households earn living wage

SCORE OVERVIEW – EDUCATION, ARTS & CULTURE STAR Objective EAC-1: Arts & Culture EAC-2: Community Cohesion EAC-3: Educational Opportunity & Attainment EAC-4: Historic Preservation EAC-5: Social & Cultural Diversity Actual Score 14. 42 Maximum Score 15 15 15 11. 57 20 8. 96 10 9. 4 10 TOTAL 59. 4 70

SCORE ANALYSIS– EDUCATION, ARTS & CULTURE Strengths Areas of Opportunity • EAC-1: Creative industries make • EAC-3: Reading proficiency and up 5. 12% of all KCMO graduation rates are improving businesses but are still low • EAC-2: Proximity of residents to community venues • EAC-4: KCMO has 21 historic districts and has increased local historic landmarks over time • EAC-5: KCMO has diverse community representation on boards and holds events in the community that celebrate diversity

SCORE OVERVIEW – EQUITY & EMPOWERMENT STAR Objective Actual Score Maximum Score EE-1: Civic Engagement EE-2: Civil & Human Rights EE-3: Environmental Justice EE-4: Equitable Services & Access EE-5: Human Services EE-6: Poverty Prevention & Alleviation TOTAL 8. 73 15 5 10 3. 34 15 2. 33 20 5. 44 20 18. 2 20 43 100

SCORE ANALYSIS– EQUITY & EMPOWERMENT Strengths Areas of Opportunity • EE-1: KC ranks 8 th among the 51 • EE-2: Resolution of Civil Rights largest MSAs for volunteerism complaints do not fall within the • EE-6: Reduction in poverty over locally adopted time frame time among African-Americans, • EE-3: Setting and achieving males, and Hispanic/Latinos targets for prioritized environmental justice sites • EE-4: Ensuring equitable access and proximity to community facilities, services, and infrastructure • EE-5: Reducing the percentage of people in priority populations who obtain priority human services

SCORE OVERVIEW – HEALTH & SAFETY STAR Objective Actual Score HS-1: Active Living 7. 1 HS-2: Community Health 12. 03 & Health System HS-3: Emergency 9. 79 Prevention & Response HS-4: Food Access & 11. 12 Nutrition HS-5: Indoor Air Quality 2. 96 HS-6: Natural & Human 5. 43 Hazards HS-7: Safe Communities 13. 89 TOTAL 62. 3 Maximum Score 15 20 15 15 15 100

SCORE ANALYSIS– HEALTH & SAFETY Strengths Areas of Opportunity • HS-3: Compliance with National Incident Management System (NIMS) • HS-4: Increase local fresh foods, increased access of low-income families to healthy food, increased proximity of residents to healthy food • HS-7: Low school violence rate citywide (2. 367 per 1, 000) • HS-1: Encourage physical activity among children and adults • HS-2: Improve morbidity/mortality, clinical care, and overall quality of health system • HS-5: Decrease the number of indoor air quality complaints • HS-6: Increase resilience to community-wide hazard threats • HS-7: Decrease the violent crime rate

SCORE OVERVIEW – NATURAL SYSTEMS STAR Objective NS-1: Green Infrastructure NS-2: Invasive Species NS-3: Natural Resource Protection NS-4: Outdoor Air Quality NS-5: Water in the Environment NS-6: Working Lands TOTAL Actual Score Maximum Score 17. 95 20 5. 8 10 8. 27 20 13. 59 15 17. 32 20 8. 87 71. 8 15 100

SCORE ANALYSIS – NATURAL SYSTEMS Strengths Areas of Opportunity • NS-1: Proximity of population to green infrastructure (>85%) • NS-2: Demonstrated progress towards targets for integrated pest management plan (EAB) • NS-4: Decrease in Air Quality Index days above 100 • NS-5: Amount of water withdrawn for human use does not exceed amount entering the system • NS-6: Increased the number of sustainable harvests over time • NS-3: Achieve targets for land preservation • NS-3: Achieve no-net-loss of wetlands, streams, and shoreline buffers • NS-3: Increase connectivity of regional natural systems • NS-5: Achieve rating based on EPA Biological Integrity reporting • NS-5: Demonstrate pollutant loadings are below Total Maximum Daily Load levels

OVERVIEW – INNOVATION & PROCESS STAR Objective Actual Score IP-1: Best Practices and Processes 10 IP-2: Exemplary Performance 10 IP-3: Local Innovation 25 IP-4: Regional Priorities 5 Description Received credit for public engagement, as well as innovative planning and codes Exemplary performance in volunteerism, acreage of parkland per capita, school violence rate, and proximity to community venues • Received credit for our score on the Arts Vibrancy Index • Created new Objective called “Smart & Connected Communities that detailed KCMO’s efforts in open data, smart city, and performance management • Received credit for the Mayor’s WE Initiative • Received credit for municipal reduction in GHG • Received credit for DB Demolition plan • Received credit for reducing investigation time for code enforcement violations Received credit for various climate adaption partnerships

SUSTAINABILITY DASHBOARD • kcmo. gov/greenstats

LESSONS LEARNED • • Importance of data Accessibility of data Metrics were cross-applicable Implementation in municipal operations versus community-wide • Importance and use of plans

HOW DOES KC WANT TO USE OUR RATING? • • Incorporate into Business Plan goals and targets Adopt metrics into KCStat Continue to track metrics on the Dashboard Assessment for how to improve score

QUESTIONS?