Agenda packet — Ava Community Energy Board of Directors, March 18, 2026

Board of Directors Meeting
Wednesday, March 18, 2026
6:00 pm
In Person:

Board Room
Ava Community Energy
1999 Harrison St, Ste 2300
Oakland, CA 94612
Or from the following locations:
• Clipper Club - 5 Captain Dr. Emeryville, CA 94608
• 4917 Knowlson Terrace, Fremont, CA 94555
• 35653 Scarborough Dr Newark, CA 94560
• 1100 Webster St, 2nd Floor Conference Room, Oakland, CA 94607 • Larch Clover Community Center – 11157 West Larch Road, Tracy, CA 95376 • Stockton City Hall – 425 N El Dorado St., Stockton, CA 95202 • City of Union City's Administrative Offices, Council Conference Room - 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City, CA 94587
Via Zoom:
https://avaenergy-org.zoom.us/j/87023071843
Or join by phone:

Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 929 205 6099 or +1 301 715 8592 or 888 475 4499 (Toll Free) or 877 853 5257 (Toll Free)
Webinar ID: 870 2307 1843
Meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals who need special assistance or a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, or who have a disability and wish to request an alternative format for the meeting materials, should contact the Clerk of the Board at least 2 working days before the meeting at (510) 906- 0491 or [email protected].

If you have anything that you wish to be distributed to the Board of Directors, please email it to the clerk by 5:00 pm the day prior to the meeting.

Ava Community Energy
Board of Directors Page | 2

1. Welcome & Roll Call

2. Pledge of Allegiance

CONSENT AGENDA

4. Approval of Minutes from February 18, 2026

5. Contracts Entered Into (Informational Item)

6. Execute agreements to name US Bank as successor Trustee and Custodian for Ava’s existing energy prepayment financing transactions Staff recommendation to name US Bank as successor trustee and custodian

7. Execute Third Amendment to Reclaimed Wind, LLC Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement
Staff recommendation to extend the agreement deadline and revise Commercial Operation Date

REGULAR AGENDA

8. CEO Report

9. CAC Report

10.Board Member Conference Policy (Action Item)
Present for approval a policy, vetted by Executive Committee, to permit Ava to reimburse Directors for expenses related to two designated conferences

11.2026 California Legislative Position Recommendations (Action Item) Staff recommendation to support AB 1761 and SB 1138

12.2026 California Legislative Preview (Informational Item) 2026 California legislative preview
Ava Community Energy
Board of Directors Page | 3

13.Board Member and Staff Announcements including requests to place items on future Board of Directors Meeting Agendas

14.Adjourn
The next Ava Board of Directors meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 15, 2026 at 6pm.

Board Meeting Access Instructions
If you need help finding or accessing the building, please call our Ava representative who is stationed in the building lobby: 510-393-0492.

Directions
Directions via BART
If you are taking BART: the 19th Street station is the closest stop to our office and is about a 5 minute walk away. Use the 20th St / Thomas L. Berkeley Way station exit.

Directions via Bike
Bike riders wanting to park their bike inside the parking garage can enter through the main building lobby. Bike parking is available on the parking garage first level right in front of the garage elevators.

Directions to Parking Garage via Car
The entrance to the building’s attached garage is located on Harrison Street. If you’re driving northbound on Harrison Street, as soon as you cross 19th St. the garage entrance is 3/4 down on your left-hand side. If you’re heading east on Thomas L Berkeley Way/20th St.

Continue East then make a right turn on Harrison
Street, and the garage entrance is a quarter block up
on your right-hand side.

When you arrive, enter via the gate labeled “Public
Parkers”. There are four floors of the parking garage,
and you will need to take the elevator in the parking
garage to the first floor. The parking attendant or
an Ava representative will provide access into the
building lobby.

The parking garage entry gate will be open until 8pm
for CAC and BOD meetings. Attendees can exit the
parking garage until 11pm.

Note that the garage’s parking fee is $30 per use.

Street parking is widely available near the building
and free after 6pm.

Check-in at Security Desk
When you arrive at our building, please check in with the security desk in the lobby to get access to the elevators.

If you have questions or need assistance, an Ava representative will be stationed and identifiable in the lobby. They can be reached at: 510-393-0492.

Public Parkers entrance
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 2300, Oakland, CA 94612

Draft Minutes
Board of Directors Meeting
Wednesday, February 18, 2026
6:00 pm
In Person:

Board Room
Ava Community Energy
1999 Harrison St, Ste 2300
Oakland, CA 94612
Or from the following locations:
• Clipper Club - 5 Captain Dr. Emeryville, CA 94608
• 4917 Knowlson Terrace, Fremont, CA 94555
• 35653 Scarborough Dr Newark, CA 94560
• 1100 Webster St, 2nd Floor Conference Room, Oakland, CA 94607 • Larch Clover Community Center – 11157 West Larch Road, Tracy, CA 95376 • Stockton City Hall – 425 N El Dorado St., Stockton, CA 95202 Via Zoom:
https://avaenergy-org.zoom.us/j/87023071843
Or join by phone:

If you have anything that you wish to be distributed to the Board of Directors, please email it to the clerk by 5:00 pm the day prior to the meeting.

Ava Community Energy
Board of Directors Page | 2
(5:48) Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra was sworn in as the Alternate Member for the City of Berkeley.

1. (4:34) Welcome & Roll Call

Present: Members: Marquez (Alameda County), Lopez (Albany), Lunaparra (Berkeley), Morada (Dublin), Kaur (Emeryville), Keng (Fremont), Roche (Hayward), Barrientos (Livermore), Brown (Oakland), Balch (Pleasanton), Rickman (San Joaquin County), Fugazi (Stockton), Sakakihara (Union City), CAC Chair Souza (Community Advisory Committee), Vice-Chair Gonzalez (San Leandro) and Chair Andersen (Piedmont) Not Present: Members: Diallo (Lathrop), Del Catancio (Newark) and Nygard (Tracy) Alternate Member Lunaparra served as the representative for the City of Berkeley (Tregub).

Member Keng joined the meeting at 6:11 p.m.

Member Sakakihara joined the meeting at 7:00 p.m.

2. (5:20) Pledge of Allegiance
Chair Andersen led the body in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

3. Public Comment
This item is reserved for persons wishing to address the Board on any Ava-related matters that are not otherwise on this meeting agenda. Public comments on matters listed on the agenda shall be heard at the time the matter is called. As with all public comment, members of the public who wish to address the Board are customarily limited to two minutes per speaker and must complete an electronic speaker slip. The Board Chair may increase or decrease the time allotted to each speaker. (8:44) Public Comment – Jessica Tovar, representing the Local Clean Energy Alliance, condemned recent ICE raids and related violence against communities. Tovar urged the agency to ensure that public funds do not support activities that harm communities and instead prioritize investments in local clean energy.

CONSENT AGENDA

4. (11:01) Approval of Minutes from January 21, 2026

5. Contracts Entered Into (Informational Item)

6. FY 2025-2026 Q2 Treasurer’s Report
Update on Ava’s for FY 2026 Q2 cash position
Ava Community Energy
Board of Directors Page | 3

7. Contract Amendment to ESCA-PLD-Tracy, 9 LLC R-2026-1 Contract amendment to the DAC project ESCA-PLD-TRACY9, LLC

8. Contract Amendment to ESCA-PLD-Tracy, 16 LLC R-2026-2 Contract amendment to the DAC project ESCA-PLD-TRACY16, LLC Member Roche motioned to approve the Consent Calendar. Member Marquez seconded the motion, which was approved 13/0/0/0/5 (yes/no/abstain/recuse/not present)
Yes: Members: Marquez, Lopez, Lunaparra, Morada, Kaur, Roche, Barrientos, Brown, Balch, Rickman, Fugazi, Vice-Chair Gonzalez and Chair Andersen No: none
Abstain: none
Recuse: none
Not Present: Members: Keng, Diallo, Del Catancio, Nygard and Sakakihara

REGULAR AGENDA

9. (13:02) CEO Report
Howard Chang, CEO, presented the CEO Report. A written version of the report is available in the February 18, 2026 agenda packet.

Chair Andersen opened the public comment period and there were no speakers.

10.(26:36) CAC Report
CAC Chair Sousa presented the CAC Report. A written version of the report is available in the February 18, 2026 agenda packet.

Chair Andersen opened the public comment period and there were no speakers.

11.(32:37) Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Mid-Year Budget Review (Informational Item) Informational item presenting the mid-year performance of the current FY budget CEO Chang presented the Fiscal 25-26 Mid-Year Budget Review and answered questions from the Board.

Chair Andersen opened the public comment period and there were no speakers.

12.(1:17:19) Overview of large electric load growth trends and implications for Ava Community Energy (Informational Item)
Informational Item providing an overview of large electric load growth trends and implications for Ava Community Energy
Ava Community Energy
Board of Directors Page | 4
Arielle Romero Cox, Director of Strategic Load, introduced the item and answered questions from the Board.

Chair Andersen opened the public comment period and there were no speakers.

13.(1:57:58) SmartHome Battery Program Launch Update (Informational Item) Informational items presenting program development and status before program launch.

JP Ross, Vice President of Local Development, Electrification, and Innovation, introduced the item and answered questions from the committee. (2:25:56) Public Comment – Dohee Kim, representing the Local Clean Energy Alliance, congratulated staff and partners for a well-attended workshop on the Smart Home and Resilience Hub program and noted strong community interest in the solar and storage incentive program. She encouraged Ava and its outreach partners to provide clearer communications and education around the Virtual Power Plant option and ongoing incentives, while expressing interest in continued collaboration on solar contracting and financing opportunities for resilience hub sites.
(2:28:18) Public Comment – Jenna Rafia-Yuan spoke in support of Ava’s resilience hub and solar-and-storage incentive programs and urged continued collaboration with community partners to strengthen program design, engagement, and operational support for resilience hubs.

14.(2:33:34) Board Member and Staff Announcements including requests to place items on future Board of Directors Meeting Agendas
CEO Chang announced that applications for the Community Advisory Committee remain open, with Friday, February 20 as the final deadline.

Vice-Chair Gonzalez and Chief Customer Officer Annie Henderson commended the communications team for an effective customer email explaining 2026 electricity bill changes.

15.Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m.

The next Ava Board of Directors meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 18, 2026 at 6pm.
2/18/26 – Ava Board of Directors
AI Generated Courtesy Summary - not official minutes
This summary has not been reviewed for accuracy

1. Welcome & Roll Call
The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:02 PM on Wednesday, February 18, 2026. The meeting was held at Ava Community Energy headquarters, 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 2300, Oakland, California 94612, in the Altamonte Conference Room. Members of the public were informed they could submit a comment card or speaker card in person, or use the raise hand function or star 9 if attending by telephone or Zoom.

The Chair noted that a new alternate member from the City of Berkeley was joining the board and welcomed them.

2. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by the Chair. Following the Pledge, the new alternate member from the City of Berkeley was sworn into office.

Roll call was conducted. The following jurisdictions responded as present: Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Hayward, Livermore, Oakland, Pleasanton, San Joaquin County, Stockton, San Leandro, Piedmont, and Tracy/Union City. Fremont, Lathrop, and Newark were noted but responses were unclear in the record.

3. Public Comment
One member of the public spoke during the non-agenda public comment period. Jessica Guadalupe Tovar of the Local Clean Energy Alliance addressed the Board regarding ICE enforcement activities occurring nationally, stating that people of all backgrounds and citizenship statuses were being affected. She called on the Board and CAC members to honor their oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and urged that public funds not be used to advance activities she characterized as harmful to communities. She further urged Ava to invest in local clean power and stated that her organization is a social justice and racial justice organization that denounces ICE raids and their community impact. No additional public comments were received in person or online.

CONSENT AGENDA
4–8. Consent Agenda
The consent agenda included the approval of minutes from the January 21, 2026 board meeting, the Contracts Entered Into informational item, the FY 2025–2026 Q2 Treasurer's Report, a contract amendment to ESCA-PLD-Tracy, 9 LLC, and a contract amendment to ESCA-PLD-Tracy, 16 LLC. No board members pulled any items from the consent agenda, and no public comments were received on any consent agenda item.

Motion by Member Roche, seconded by Member Marquez, to approve the Consent Agenda (Items 4–8). The motion carried by roll call vote with all responding members voting in the affirmative.

9. CEO Report
CEO Howard Chang presented the CEO report, covering recent meetings, upcoming events, the unincorporated San Joaquin County enrollment, a recently published white paper on PG&E rate increases, and a local development update.

Subcommittee and Committee Updates: The Executive Committee meeting scheduled for February 4 was canceled; the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 4 at 3:00 PM.

The Finance, Administrative, and Procurement (FAP) Subcommittee last met on January 28, where members received a preview of the mid-year budget update and discussed the format of the contracts entered into document; its next meeting will be March 25 at 3:30 PM. The Marketing, Regulatory, and Legislative Subcommittee's next meeting is Friday, March 6. CEO Chang flagged that March will be a particularly busy month with all subcommittees, a regular board meeting, and CAC meetings occurring.

Unincorporated San Joaquin County Enrollment: CEO Chang reported that Ava will begin providing electricity generation service to approximately 60,000 customers in unincorporated San Joaquin County starting in May 2026, with most customers enrolling throughout the month based on their billing date. Customers with solar (NEM customers) will be enrolled closer to their true-up date, which may extend throughout the year. Ava is required by the CPUC to send four customer notifications — two prior to enrollment and two following enrollment. Mailers will be sent via mail and email where available, beginning in March 2026. CEO Chang expressed appreciation for the engagement of Supervisor Rickman, his staff, and county staff throughout the process. Marketing outreach efforts beginning in late February will include digital ads, billboards, streaming TV, print ads, targeted micro-campaigns, community partnerships with municipal partners and agricultural and business organizations, social media, newsletters, local press, and webinars and in-person presentations.

PG&E Rate White Paper: CEO Chang highlighted a recently published white paper by Ava's public policy team evaluating the drivers of PG&E's electricity rate increases. He noted that the bulk of cost increases have been on the delivery side of the bill, with approximately a 40 percent increase in PG&E delivery rates from 2019 to 2024, followed by a more modest decrease of approximately 16 percent from 2024 to 2026, largely driven by the generation side. The white paper is available online for public review and is intended to educate customers, policymakers, and legislators.

Local Development Update: CEO Chang noted that a standardized quarterly table highlighting the status of active local development programs was included in the report, to be updated every three months. He specifically highlighted the Critical Municipal Facilities (CMF) program, noting that construction has begun on some sites and permitting is underway on additional sites. He noted that the April deadline is tight but that things are generally on track, with the first project in Livermore having received its permits. He indicated that cities may be contacted for assistance in expediting the permitting process as needed.

Discussion: Member Roche raised a question regarding the electric bike rebate program in Hayward, noting that approximately 630 residents had received rebates but nearly half were having trouble redeeming them on time. She requested that staff reach out to the City of Hayward for more detail. CEO Chang confirmed staff would follow up. JP Ross, responding on behalf of staff, explained that Ava sends emails to voucher holders whose vouchers are approaching expiration and offers an opportunity to extend, and that a certain level of non-redemption is anticipated. He noted that understanding whether customers had already been offered and declined an extension would help inform next steps. Member Roche also noted that outreach through garbage bill inserts had driven increased program participation.

Member Murata congratulated CEO Chang on the omnichannel outreach approach for the San Joaquin County enrollment, calling the five areas of marketing activity outstanding. He asked how residents can provide feedback or commentary during the enrollment process.

CEO Chang confirmed that multiple channels are available, including email and a well-staffed call center that handles questions about the transition process, billing, rate options (including opting up to Renewable 100 or down to Bright Choice depending on jurisdiction), and the option to opt out and return to PG&E service. Member Murata also commended Ava for participating in the Dublin Saint Patrick's Day festival.

The Vice Chair asked whether the 49 percent electricity rate increase cited in the white paper, adjusted for inflation, meant that the increase was in addition to regular inflation.

CEO Chang confirmed that was correct — the increase was separate from and above standard inflation.

Member Marquez asked whether the quarterly local development table would also flag program challenges. CEO Chang confirmed that ad hoc updates on programs — whether requiring board action or offered as informational items — would be incorporated, citing the upcoming smart home battery program update later in the evening as an example.

No public comments were received on the CEO report.

10. CAC Report
CAC Chair Souza presented the report from the CAC meeting held the previous evening, February 17, 2026.

Ava National Ranking: CAC Chair Souza reported that the CAC was pleased to learn that Ava Community Energy had been rated third among the top green power providers in the United States by the National Labs of the Rockies (NREL), behind Clean Power Alliance and San Jose Clean Energy, as of December 2024. As of December 2024, Ava had risen to second place. Chair Souza extended congratulations to Ava and CEO Chang.

CAC Meeting Highlights: The CAC reviewed presentations on future infrastructure and rising demand, as well as a presentation on smart batteries. A public comment was received from Jessica Tovar of the Local Clean Energy Alliance regarding the impacts of climate change through torrential rains and heavier storms, and the social ties between energy burdens and debt. Another comment was received from a retired Ava customer who expressed concern about a solar true-up bill she did not understand; she was directed to the call center for assistance. The CAC emphasized the importance of energy affordability for all customers.

CCA 3.0 Transition: CAC Chair Souza reported that the CAC is exploring a transition from its Energy Affordability Ad Hoc Committee toward a new focus on what is being termed "CCA

3.0," which involves local ownership of power, reduced reliance on investor-owned utilities, and the development of software and physical infrastructure to better support the community. A meeting is planned in March with one of the originators of CCAs to discuss this potential transition. The Vice Chair asked for clarification on whether the Energy Affordability Subcommittee had been disbanded or whether members had been reassigned.

CAC Chair Souza explained that the Energy Affordability Ad Hoc had reached its goals and was winding down, and that CAC members had expressed interest in forming a new ad hoc focused on CCA 3.0 as a result.

Policy and Environmental Justice: The CAC requested updates on Ava's policies regarding ICE and its broader "no harm" policy, and Member Landry of the CAC inquired about the impact of federal electrification rollbacks from the current administration on Ava's operations.

No public comments were received on the CAC report.

11. Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Mid-Year Budget Review (Informational Item)
CEO Howard Chang presented the mid-year budget review, covering the period from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026, with extended forecasts for the second half of calendar year 2026 and an indicative outlook for calendar year 2027.

Context and Purpose: CEO Chang noted that the mid-year update was more substantive than in typical years due to significant discussions and board actions taken in November and December 2025 related to rate changes and financial headroom. The extended forecast was provided given the material changes and the structural deficit that Ava is managing through. Two primary drivers of the meaningful changes were rate adjustments and energy market volatility.

Rate Adjustments: CEO Chang explained that PG&E's final Annual Energy True-Up (AET) was released on December 31, 2025, just before 2026 rates took effect. The final rates came in approximately 12 percent higher than what had been indicated in the Air forecast released in October 2025, which had served as the basis for forecasts provided to the board in November and December. This was described as an abnormally large adjustment. The overall impact was approximately 1.3 cents per kilowatt-hour higher than forecasted — roughly split between Ava's generation portion (0.7 cents higher) and the PCIA (0.6 cents higher). As a result, the overall generation rate reduction for 2026 came in at approximately 20 percent versus a previously forecasted 29 percent, inclusive of PCIA. For Renewable 100 customers, the reduction was approximately 40 percent versus a previously forecasted 21 percent. For the average residential Bright Choice customer, the net impact is approximately 10 percent less per month compared to 2025; for the average Renewable 100 residential customer, approximately $8 less per month. CEO Chang noted that the updated rates provide Ava with slightly more operating headroom but that customers are not seeing quite the same savings that had been projected.

Energy Market Volatility: CEO Chang presented charts illustrating historical and forward energy price volatility, noting that between the FAP subcommittee meeting and the board meeting, energy costs had continued to swing by $15–20 million on an annual basis within a matter of weeks. Forward pricing for calendar year 2026 had softened from where rates were set, which improves Ava's headroom in 2026 but will create a ripple effect in 2027 through rate true-ups. A sensitivity analysis was shared showing that one standard deviation of energy price movement over the next six months translates to approximately $12.7 million in annual energy cost variance, and two standard deviations translates to approximately $25 million.

Full Fiscal Year Performance (July 2025–June 2026): Operating revenue was approximately $7.8 million higher than budget, though when accounting for the non-utilization of the Rate Stabilization Fund (RSF) — versus an assumed $35 million utilization in the budget — the improvement on an apples-to-apples basis is closer to $42 million. Cost of energy is expected to improve by approximately $19 million due to more favorable market conditions. Overhead expenses are expected to reduce costs by approximately $3.5 million.

Non-operating activity is expected to add approximately $13.9 million in net revenues, primarily from local development funding adjustments and interest rate movements.

Overall, net revenues are projected to increase by approximately $44.5 million, or approximately $80 million when accounting for the RSF utilization assumption in the original budget.

First Half of FY 2026 (July–December 2025): CEO Chang noted there were no material changes from the budget in this period, with the primary driver being softer-than-expected load due to mild summer temperatures, which produced both lower revenues and lower energy costs, resulting in only approximately a $5 million net variance.

Second Half of FY 2026 (January–June 2026): This period reflects the more meaningful changes. Revenue from electricity sales is forecast to be approximately $43.6 million higher than budget, driven by higher rates and the addition of San Joaquin County enrollment in May. The cost of energy is forecast to increase by approximately $4 million, primarily due to higher REC costs driven by increased market price benchmarks, partially offset by lower energy costs. Net revenues are expected to increase by approximately $39.5 million, or approximately $75 million excluding RSF utilization.

Second Half of Calendar Year 2026 Forecast: Compared to the December 2025 forecast, revenues from electricity sales are expected to be approximately $73.9 million higher, driven by changes in the value proposition and higher-than-expected 2026 rates. Cost of energy is forecast to decrease by approximately $42 million, driven by $14 million in lower energy prices, $11 million in additional RA capacity sales, and $17 million in reduced REC costs (partly from board-approved reductions and partly from lower market prices). Net revenues are expected to increase by approximately $114 million from December estimates, though a structural deficit of approximately $88 million remains for this period.

Calendar Year 2027 Outlook: CEO Chang noted that this forecast is indicative only and does not reflect board-approved budgets or directions on overhead, operating expenses, or local development funding. Maintaining the value proposition at its currently set level (0.5 percent discount on Bright Choice, 1.75 cents on Renewable 100), the forecast shows a net revenue deficit of approximately $40 million — compared to the prior forecast of $10–20 million — representing an approximately $100 million decline. Most of the change is driven by energy prices and the ripple effects of 2026 rate settings.

Rate Stabilization Fund: The current RSF balance stands at approximately $162.5 million.

After accounting for the approximately $88 million shortfall in the second half of calendar year 2026 and approximately $40 million in 2027, the projected RSF balance would be approximately $35–36 million, supplemented by the projected $44 million surplus from fiscal year 2026.

Discussion: Member Roche asked whether the bill credits that had been discussed previously would have been viable in light of the revised figures, expressing that the changes might not have been as severe as feared. CEO Chang acknowledged the question carefully, noting that multiple levers had been pulled in December simultaneously, and that it is difficult in hindsight to isolate any single decision. He noted that the December decisions were made in good faith under significant uncertainty and that the timing of the final AET — released December 31 — meant there was very little advance notice. He suggested that future decisions might benefit from waiting for final rate figures where possible.

Member Roche also asked whether overall customer bills were lower than in 2025. CEO Chang confirmed that on average, overall bills are projected to be lower — approximately 5 percent — taking into account both the reduction in generation rates and the increase in PG&E delivery rates, compared to the previously projected 10 percent reduction.

Member Balch asked for confirmation that the 2026 generation rate environment is roughly comparable to 2019 levels. CEO Chang confirmed this was the case, noting that the current Bright Choice discount of 0.5 percent is the lowest it has ever been, and that the discount tends to track with energy price levels. He further explained that when energy prices were rising from 2021 to 2025, historical hedges were in the money and Ava was able to build significant reserves; as prices soften in 2026, those same hedges — locked in at higher prices — are now out of the money, which is the primary driver of the structural deficit.

Member Balch also confirmed his understanding of the RSF balance and the projected fiscal year surplus, and emphasized that the RSF is one-time money that must be rebuilt over time to prepare for future market cycles. CEO Chang confirmed and noted that a 3-to-5-year financial forecast will be part of the upcoming budget process to provide long-term visibility.

Member Safrakihar commended the inclusion of the standard deviation sensitivity analysis and the 2027 indicative forecast, both provided in response to prior board requests. He asked for clarification on why certain slides cited both higher-than-expected 2026 rates as a revenue driver and lower energy costs as an expenditure driver within the same six-month windows. CEO Chang explained that the rate increase was on the AET-linked PCIA and overall rate settlement, while the lower energy cost referred specifically to brown power spot market prices, which had softened from where they were when rates were set. He further noted that REC cost dynamics are more complex, as market price benchmarks — which are historical averages of PG&E-reported transactions — came in higher than anticipated despite current transaction prices being lower.

CAC Chair Souza asked about the cumulative amount paid by all CCAs to PG&E under the PCIA since its inception, and whether the original investments have effectively been paid off. CEO Chang noted he did not have that number available but that the CCA trade association CalCCA does track aggregate amounts paid and the overall methodology. He clarified that the PCIA reflects ongoing annual costs — not one-time costs — for resources that generate electricity every year, so the concept of "paying off" does not fully apply to all components. He noted that Ava actively advocates through CalCCA for PCIA reform and greater transparency.

The Vice Chair asked for confirmation of the full fiscal year figures shown in the budget presentation, verifying that the projected $44.5 million surplus on the bottom line does not assume any RSF release, and that the current RSF balance of $162.5 million is the literal current balance with no prior release assumed. CEO Chang confirmed both.

The Chair asked whether any upcoming changes might provide better predictive capability for future rate-setting decisions. CEO Chang noted that Ava, via CalCCA, is actively sponsoring legislation to require greater transparency in PCIA reporting, which would enable more effective advocacy at the CPUC and better-informed decision-making by the board.

No public comments were received on this agenda item.

12. Overview of Large Electric Load Growth Trends and Implications for Ava Community Energy (Informational Item)
Ariel Romero Cox, Director of Strategic Load, introduced herself to the board, noting that she had joined Ava approximately two months prior after spending a decade at Silicon Valley Power, the municipal electric utility for the City of Santa Clara, where she managed the electrification program portfolio and key accounts team.

Statewide Load Growth Context: Romero Cox explained that California is undergoing a structural shift in energy demand projections. After approximately two decades of flat load growth, the California Energy Commission (CEC) is now projecting an increase in annual peak demand through 2045 of between 41 and 62 percent — nearly 20 gigawatts of load growth — driven primarily by electric vehicles, baseline consumption growth, and data centers. Of this projected growth, 5 gigawatts is specifically attributed to data centers. She noted that while data centers receive significant attention in the media, medium and heavy-duty electric vehicles are projected to be the largest contributor to peak load growth, followed by baseline consumption, with data centers ranking third for peak contribution.

However, she clarified that data centers are expected to contribute more to total annual energy consumption than to the peak, due to their flat, 24/7 load profile — analogous to long-haul truckers on a highway running continuously, rather than the rush-hour spike represented by EV charging.

California Data Center Market Dynamics: Romero Cox explained that California's advantages for data center development include proximity to major population and technology centers, access to a strong grid with existing infrastructure and capacity in certain areas, access to clean and renewable energy — which aligns with the sustainability commitments of large load customers — and strong capital investment in the technology sector. She noted that Northern Virginia remains the top data center market nationally, with Silicon Valley ranking in the middle tier for planned and executed projects. She also noted an industry trend toward larger facilities, with many new projects in the 100 to 200 megawatt range, and some in other states reaching one gigawatt in size, though those larger campuses are not expected in Ava's service territory given land costs.

Implications for Ava's Service Territory: Romero Cox described a "trickle-up" effect from the South Bay as capacity constraints — particularly around the Silicon Valley Power service territory and San Jose — are driving data center developers to explore Ava's service territory. One analysis identified a market potential of 530 to 700 megawatts through 2030 within Ava's territory, potentially representing five to seven new data center facilities. The internal project pipeline currently shows approximately 200 megawatts of potential large load development, encompassing both data centers and medium and heavy-duty electric vehicle infrastructure. She grounded the scale by noting that one megawatt of data center capacity running at 80 percent capacity serves the equivalent of approximately 1,300 average homes in Oakland.

Types of Data Centers: Romero Cox described four categories of data centers relevant to Ava's territory: edge data centers (sub-1-megawatt, latency-sensitive, dispersed in urban environments); enterprise data centers (1–5 megawatts, single-company owned for internal IT needs); colocation data centers (5–20 megawatts, housing multiple companies' equipment); and hyperscale/cloud data centers (20–100+ megawatts, often multi-building campuses). She noted that the 530–700 megawatt market potential encompasses all categories.

Ava's Approach to Pipeline Management: Romero Cox outlined Ava's approach as including direct developer engagement, coordination with city staff including economic development and planning departments, review of permit applications, and monitoring of PG&E's Rule 30 filings for interconnection applications and capacity inquiries. These inputs will be used to build an internal forecast, track credible projects, and align procurement planning.

Benefits and Risks: Romero Cox noted that PG&E has identified significant economic benefits associated with large load growth, including over 5,000 construction jobs and 500 permanent technology jobs per gigawatt of new data center load. Additional benefits include spreading fixed administrative costs across a larger customer base, enabling greater-scale clean energy procurement, and generating utility user tax revenue for member jurisdictions. She acknowledged trade-offs and risks, noting that the primary tool within Ava's scope for managing those risks is rate-setting, specifically through cost-of-service structures and potential large load tariffs or nonstandard rate agreements to ensure that customers driving the additional load bear the associated costs. She indicated that future proposals related to large load tariffs or nonstandard rate agreements would be brought back to the board as separate action items, and that today's presentation was strictly informational.

CEO Chang thanked Romero Cox, calling the presentation one of the most succinct he had seen on data centers, and emphasized that Ava is engaged on this issue from legislative, regulatory, and utility perspectives. He noted the importance of engaging board members and city staff around the economic development implications for member jurisdictions.

Discussion: Member Roche raised several concerns including the environmental impacts of data centers in Hayward, where she noted approximately four data centers are planned or operating, and public concerns about who receives power first in the event of a blackout or brownout. She asked how data centers in Ava's territory are proposing to procure renewable energy. Romero Cox explained that large load customers often enter their own PPAs for renewable energy and that a green tariff — including both a "bring your own PPA" option and a utility-procured REC option — is one mechanism that CCAs and utilities can use. CEO Chang noted that load prioritization during outages is primarily a PG&E distribution and lines-and-wires issue, that there is significant active policy discussion at the state and federal level around requirements for flexible load from data centers, and that the key focus is ensuring interconnection is managed so as not to create blackout conditions. Member Roche also raised concerns about the cost of transmission infrastructure being socialized onto the general rate base, and noted that a joint agency white paper on cost allocation issues is referenced in the board packet.

Member Safrakihar asked about load variability for smaller data centers. Romero Cox noted that the 530–700 megawatt market potential includes all sizes, and that in her experience, colocation and enterprise data centers have been the most prevalent type encountered in Ava's territory and in Silicon Valley.

Member Murata asked whether special districting by cities for large load areas is something Ava would work with cities on. Romero Cox clarified that zoning and special district decisions are within the cities' purview; Ava's role from a generation perspective would most likely be addressed through a large load tariff or nonstandard rate structure for qualifying loads, regardless of geography. She confirmed that Ava would partner with cities to ensure the appropriate service arrangements are in place.

Member Balch asked about the implications for Ava's procurement needs — specifically whether data center load raises demand across all hours, including nighttime, and whether there are opportunities to manage that load flexibly to avoid reliance on natural gas peaker plants. CEO Chang confirmed that data center load is generally flat and predictable, which has both benefits and challenges. He noted that meeting 24/7 carbon-free energy obligations is a challenge given California's predominantly solar-plus-storage resource mix, and that regional cooperation and wind resources from other states may play a role. He also noted the potential for demand flexibility and smart grid management, drawing a parallel to Ava's smart home charging and battery programs.

The Vice Chair shared that the Air Quality Management District had received an identical presentation that day and had noted that data center load can have significant variability — including the possibility of facilities being partially or fully decommissioned — which he had found surprising. Romero Cox confirmed that maintaining close relationships with large load customers — including annual check-ins and ongoing dialogue about load projections — was central to the success of Silicon Valley Power's program and will be central to Ava's approach.

CAC Chair Souza shared comments from the CAC meeting, expressing appreciation for the load growth charts, particular concern about the EV-driven load increase, interest in seeing a future slide addressing public concerns about AI and data centers' impact on electricity bills, and noting the CAC's ongoing concern about environmental and water impacts associated with data centers. She also relayed CAC members' interest in tariff structures that hold large demand customers responsible for proportionally more of the associated infrastructure costs.

No public comments were received on this agenda item.

13. SmartHome Battery Program Launch Update (Informational Item) JP Ross presented an update on the Smart Home Battery and Community Resilience Hub programs, covering program overview and goals, launch timing, installer and customer engagement, virtual power plant (VPP) integration, and the Resilience Hub initiative.

Program Overview: Ross reminded the Board that the program goal is to deploy approximately $15 million in upfront and ongoing incentives to support community resilience and battery deployment across the service territory. The expected outcome is approximately 21 megawatts of residential and community batteries integrated into a dependable virtual power plant (VPP). The $15 million is allocated as follows:
approximately $3.75 million for income-qualified or CARE/FERA residential customers, approximately $7.5 million for the general market smart home battery program, and approximately $3.75 million for community resilience hubs. All assets are intended to roll up into Ava's centralized Distributed Energy Resource Management System (DERMS), operated by Lunar.

Launch Timeline: The smart home battery program for newly installed solar and battery systems is expected to launch in early March 2026, pending completion of final user acceptance testing. The program will open to customers with existing solar and battery systems in April 2026, and to aggregators (third-party asset owners such as Sunrun who own dispatch rights under lease or PPA arrangements) in Q2–Q3 of 2026. The longer timeline for aggregators reflects the need for separate contracts with delivery terms and volume expectations. The Community Resilience Hub incentive program is expected to launch in the second half of 2026, following ongoing community outreach and technical assistance phases.

Installer and Customer Engagement: Ross described Ava's engagement with the installation community, including program design collaboration with CALSSA (the California Solar and Storage Association), completion of an initial installer informational webinar, and a training scheduled for the final week of February prior to the program launch. A certified installer process will be implemented, under which installers that complete training will be listed on Ava's website and will be able to receive incentive payments directly, allowing customers to pay less upfront on their contracts. Ross noted that ensuring installers accurately represent Ava and its programs is a key objective of the training process. Customer outreach will occur via social media, newsletters, sustainability staff at member cities, community-based organization (CBO) outreach, press releases, and search engine optimization and marketing (SEO/SEM) to increase Ava's visibility when customers search for solar and storage options in the service territory.

Virtual Power Plant Integration: Ross clarified the distinction between three models: a single home with solar and battery that can provide backup power when the grid goes out; a VPP aggregation of individual homes, centrally managed through Ava's DERMS, allowing dispatch of batteries to reduce wholesale energy procurement or inject energy at peak times — but where individual homes cannot share power with each other during an outage; and a community microgrid, where multiple buildings can disconnect from the grid and share power with each other. Ross was explicit that Ava's smart home battery, community resilience hub, and CMF programs are all single-site programs — not community microgrids — though there is centralized visibility and control of assets through the DERMS.

CEO Chang elaborated on two significant learning points from the program development process. First, many residential customers with solar and battery systems have not paid the additional cost — typically a few thousand dollars — required to configure their system to "island" and provide backup power during a grid outage. As a result, the resilience benefit for most residential customers is limited unless they explicitly opt to pay for that capability.

Second, integrating community resilience hub batteries into the DERMS platform presents significant market challenges: available battery providers have not agreed to the integration terms required, in part because the effort and cost of connecting individual community site batteries to the DERMS is prohibitive relative to the scale of the portfolio. CEO Chang stated that Ava is choosing to launch the program and learn iteratively rather than delay further.

Ross added that the program is launching with two battery suppliers that have committed to DERMS integration for the residential program, with additional suppliers expected to follow. He noted that even once a contract is signed with an OEM, it typically takes a couple of months to complete system integration, underscoring the maturity challenges in this market. For community resilience hubs specifically, VPP participation is not being required at launch, given the market barriers; the primary objective for resilience hubs remains backup power capability.

Community Resilience Hub Initiative: Ross outlined the three components of the resilience hub initiative: community outreach and site identification (through a grant to Emerald Cities Collaborative, which has already completed a first public awareness and enrollment workshop in January with over 60 attendees); a technical assistance program (administered by contractor NV5, with a separate $2 million budget, providing feasibility assessments and preliminary cost estimates across a range of resilience scenarios for potential sites); and the incentive program itself, expected to launch in the second half of 2026 once sites have met milestone thresholds to reserve funding. He noted that three to five sites have progressed to the feasibility assessment stage, with ten to twelve providing sufficient detail to assess geographic distribution. Early evidence suggests that most initial sites are owned by the operating CBO, which addresses earlier concerns about site control and ownership.

Discussion: Member Marquez asked how many resilience hubs are expected to come online in the initial phase. Ross estimated 15 to 25 sites based on the program's 500-kilowatt limit per site and an average battery size of 100–150 kilowatt-hours observed in the CMF program, though the actual number will depend on the average size of participating sites.

Member Marquez also asked about progress on land use and site control concerns raised in earlier discussions; Ross confirmed that early sites are generally owned by the operating CBOs, which has been a pleasant and positive early signal.

Member Balch offered several comments, drawing on lessons from the induction cooktop conversion program: the uniqueness of each home installation represents a complexity that staff appears to be managing proactively; the quality of installer representation is critical to Ava's brand and customer experience; DERMS cybersecurity and customer protection from unintended battery discharges during outages should be actively managed rather than addressed solely by contract; and the longer-term vision of enabling buildings to share power with neighbors is a worthy aspiration for future program evolution.

CAC Chair Souza shared feedback from the CAC meeting, including a question about whether resilience hub batteries must connect to the DERMS (Ross confirmed they currently are not required to), Member Pacheco's question about demand side modifiers and integration connection timelines (which can take 5–75 hours per connection), confirmation that CARE customers receive $500 per kilowatt-hour in incentives while general market customers receive $90 per kilowatt-hour, and confirmation from Ross that participation in the smart home battery program does not affect the NEM 2 status of existing solar customers who enroll new batteries.

Public comment on this agenda item was received from Yohee Kim, representing Emerald Cities Collaborative, who congratulated Ava's team and partner organizations on the January resilience hub workshop, noting that over 60 attendees were reached and 5 to 10 follow-up inquiries were received from interested organizations. She praised the VPP clarification provided during the presentation and requested that Ava provide a coherent communication strategy around VPP enrollment to support community outreach partners.

She also noted that Emerald Cities Collaborative and the Local Clean Energy Alliance are exploring solar contracting and financing options and are looking into operational staffing and programmatic funding support for potential resilience hub sites. A second public comment was received from Jenna, a college student and intern with the Local Clean Energy Alliance, who spoke about climate change as a public health threat and expressed support for Ava's Community Resilience Hub Initiative and Solar and Storage Incentive Program.

She urged Ava to continue meaningfully collaborating with community partners, promoting energy democracy, and providing financial support for the operational services that make community organizations trusted spaces during climate disasters.

14. Board Member and Staff Announcements Including Requests to Place Items on Future Board of Directors Meeting Agendas CEO Chang announced that applications for the CAC remain open, with Friday, February 20 as the final deadline. He encouraged board members to refer interested parties and submit information promptly.

The Vice Chair offered an extended commendation to Ava's communications team for the customer email sent regarding changes to electric bills in 2026. He praised the email's opening paragraph for immediately addressing customer concerns about bill complexity and high electricity costs, clearly communicating that Ava is lowering its generation rates by 15–20 percent depending on the plan, and explaining that PG&E's increased transmission and distribution rates make up the majority of the overall bill while Ava's rate decrease helps offset those increases — all within approximately 100 words. He called it effective and powerful communication. A staff member from the communications function (identified as Annie) added that the email was a collaborative effort across the agency, that it had been rolled out in batches to anticipate potential call center volume, that no unusual increase in call center volume had been observed, and that the email achieved a 55–60 percent open rate, which was described as exceptional.

Member Marquez asked whether the email content is housed on Ava's website and whether graphics from the campaign are being used on social media. The communications staff member confirmed that the detailed insight is available on the website and linked within the email, that newsletter content is also posted to the website, and that the "how to understand your bill" information is standard website content. She confirmed that social media graphics are being deployed.

15. Adjourn
There being no further business, the Chair adjourned the meeting at 8:36 PM. The next Ava Board of Directors meeting will be held on Wednesday, March 18, 2026 at 6:00 PM.

Consent Item 5
Consent Item 5
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: Howard Chang, Chief Executive Officer
Subject: Contracts Entered Into
Date: March 18, 2026
_____________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION
Accept the CEO’s report on contracts that Ava Community Energy has entered into, as required by the Administrative Procurement Policy, from February 13th, 2026 through March 13, 2026.

Consent Item 5
Counterparty
Name
Record Name Record
Type
Contract Purpose Contract
Value
Not To
Exceed
Expiration
Date
City State Ironclad
Id
BPcubed, Inc. March 2026 Purchase
Rider
Purchase
Rider
Support in conceiving,
managing, and executing a
comprehensive public relations
campaign for the CMF program
$20,000 $20,000 2027-03-
12 Sacramento California IC-2636
Chocolate
Soup, Inc.

March 2026 Purchase
Rider
Purchase
Rider
Purchase staff recognition
materials.
$7,500 $7,500 2027-09-
27 Waterloo Ontario IC-2645
DataEndure Master Services
Agreement:
2026020401BM01
Vendor
Purchase
Template
Procure IT security services. $36,885.60 $36,885.60 2027-02- 24 Santa Clara California IC-2523
DNV Energy,
USA, Inc.

March 2026 Amendment
to the Consulting
Services Agreement
Consulting
Services
Agreement
Contract Purpose: To support
Ava during the Engineering
Procurement and Construction
agreement negotiation phase;
Amendment Purpose: To extend
expiration date.

N/A N/A 2026-12-
31 Katy Texas IC-2615
LHi Group, Inc. Statement of Work -
Payrolling Assignment
Vendor
Purchase
Template
Onboarding of Judy Calle to
cover during employee maternity
leave.
$133,696 N/A 2026-12-
10 New York New
York
IC-2611
Maher
Accountancy
December 2025
Amendment to the
Consulting Services
Agreement
Consulting
Services
Agreement
Accounting services. $377,300 $1,554,200 2026-12-
31 San Rafael California IC-2253
Oakland Ballers
Baseball Club,
LLC
Marketing and
Sponsorship Agreement
Vendor
Purchase
Template
Sponsorship for Marketing
purposes
$75,000 $75,000 2026-12-
31 Oakland California IC-2327
Oakland Pro
Soccer, LLC
Oakland Roots and Soul
Sports Club Brand
Partnership Agreement
Vendor
Purchase
Template
Sponsorship of the Oakland
Roots and Oakland Soul Soccer
Clubs for the 2026 & 2027
Seasons
$375,000 $375,000 2027-12-
31 Alameda California IC-2334
Pete Donatello February 2026
Consulting Services
Agreement
Consulting
Services
Agreement
Temporary Asana Consultant $48,000 $48,000 2026-06-
30 San
Francisco
California IC-2564
Resero
Corporation
February 2026
Amendment to the
Consulting Services
Agreement
Consulting
Services
Agreement
Extend term, add Mason Wolfe
to listed staff, and adjust hourly
compensation rates
N/A N/A 2027-02-
27 Loomis California IC-2350
Sacramento
Municipal Utility
District (SMUD)
AMENDMENT 12 TO
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF
SERVICES Task Order
3 – Data Management
and Call Center
Services
Vendor
Purchase
Template
incorporates work done for the
Value Proposition such as
changes made to the webform,
email and IVR and also the opt
out fee removal.
$33,350 N/A No change Sacramento California IC-2495
The Energy
Authority, Inc.

July 2025 Consulting
Services Agreement and
Task Order 1
Consulting
Services
Agreement
RA Portfolio Management and
Regulatory/Compliance
$84,000 $84,000 2027-06-
30 Jacksonville Florida IC-295
Consent Item 5
Counterparty
Name
Record Name Record
Type
Contract Purpose Contract
Value
Not To
Exceed
Expiration
Date
City State Ironclad
Id
Yorke
Engineering,
LLC
February 2026
Consulting Services
Agreement
Consulting
Services
Agreement
Consultant support for CARB
audit process, third-party
verification of both the 2025 and
2026 GHG Emissions Reports.
$15,150 $15,150 2027-08-
31 San Juan
Capistrano
California IC-2590

Consent Item 6
Consent Item 6
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: Russell Mills, CFO
Subject: Approving a RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AVA

COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORIZING THE REPLACEMENT OF THE

TRUSTEE AND CUSTODIAN FOR CERTAIN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY

CHOICE FINANCING AUTHORITY CLEAN ENERGY PROJECT REVENUE BONDS WITH U.S. BANK, AND CERTAIN OTHER ACTIONS IN

CONNECTION THEREWITH
Date: March 18, 2026
__________________________________________________________________ Summary/Recommendation
This Staff Report proposes the Board authorize the execution and delivery of necessary agreements and notices to name U.S. Bank as successor trustee and custodian in connection with Ava’s five California Community Choice Finance Authority (“CCCFA”) Clean Energy Project revenue bond energy prepayment transactions to support operational visibility and cost efficiencies for the program. While this change is administrative in nature and not legally required, bond counsel has noted that obtaining authorization from governing bodies is a best practice for these changes that need investor notice.

Financial Impact
By shifting to US Bank, Ava expects to save up to $64,900 per year in annual fees related to trustee and custodial services for its five energy prepayment transactions (or roughly $13,000 per transaction). These fees are funded by Ava through the administrative fee payments it makes to CCCFA annually for each transaction.

Ava will incur bond counsel fees for drafting legal notices and amendments to transition to the successor trustee and custodian but expects these to be lower than the first-year fee savings Consent Item 6
from switching to the new bank. Ava will share these expenses with Silicon Valley Clean Energy (“SVCE”), who is also switching their prepays to utilize US Bank as trustee and custodian.

Analysis and Context
Energy prepayment transactions
Energy prepayment financings are unique financing structures that enable tax-exempt entities that sell power to end-use customers a mechanism to provide more affordable energy through savings received by the energy recipient for buying the power through long-term contracts.

These are complex transactions with several entities. At a minimum, an energy recipient (e.g.

Ava), a commodity supplier, a conduit bond issuer (e.g. CCCFA), and a third-party trustee and custodian are involved.

Ava has entered five energy prepayment transactions to date in conjunction with CCCFA, including two transactions that closed in 2025. Morgan Stanley serves as the commodity supplier in four transactions, while Goldman Sachs serves as the commodity supplier in the fifth.

Ava entered its first energy prepayment transaction in 2021, in a transaction that included SVCE, and used Bank of New York Mellon (“BNY”) as trustee and custodian. Ava then used BNY for the four that followed.

Role of Trustee and Custodian
The role of the trustee and custodian in energy prepayment transactions is to act as third-party administrator to maintain custody of the dedicated bank accounts for each transaction and to administer payments to bondholders and various counterparties. The trustee maintains a fiduciary duty to ensure that payments are made on time to avoid penalties and potential payment default. Appointment of a reputable trustee plays a critical role in mitigating risk and meeting compliance requirements with the agreements.

Ava performs certain administrative functions on behalf of CCCFA for its transactions, including ensuring that Ava and CCCFA’s contractual obligations are met. Ava interfaces with the trustee and custodian each month to review invoice documentation, process monthly payments and withdrawals, and review bank account balances and activity.

U.S. Bank as Successor Trustee and Custodian
Ava intends to name U.S. Bank to assume the following roles in each of its energy prepayment transactions:
• Trustee role in Trust Indentures, governing the terms of the bonds. • Custodian role in Master Custodial Agreements, overseeing payments between the commodity supplier and CCCFA.
• Custodian role in PPA Custodial Agreements, overseeing payments related to the underlying Ava power purchase agreements.

Consent Item 6
• Custodian role in Front-End Custodial Agreements, overseeing commodity swap payments facing CCCFA.
• Custodian role in Back-End Custodial Agreements, overseeing commodity swap payments facing the commodity supplier.

U.S. Bank is the leading municipal trustee and custodial service provider in the United States. It has deep experience in energy prepayment transactions and serves as trustee for many other CCA transactions. At year-end 2025, the U.S. Bank Global Trust group had over $9.2 trillion assets under management across 194,000 transactions. At such time, it the largest market share (45%) for trust services for U.S. municipal issuances, higher than the next four service providers combined.

In addition to the financial impact benefits above, Ava has decided to move to U.S. Bank for operational reasons, including:
• U.S. Bank offers a more robust web-based platform for downloading key transaction information not previously available with the legacy trustee/custodian. • Staff concerns with performance and latency of responsiveness with the legacy trustee/custodian.
• In general, using a single trustee/custodian to serve all transactions is more operationally efficient for staff than using multiple institutions and/or bifurcating the trustee/custodian roles within a single transaction.

In addition to entering new Custodial Agreements with U.S. Bank, a transition would require Ava and CCCFA to issue notices of termination for the existing Custodial Agreements. CCCFA would then enter a Tri-Party Agreement with BNY and US Bank to effectuate the change in roles under the Trust Indenture.

Attachments
A. Resolution
B. PowerPoint used for Executive Committee on March 4th, 2026 Attachment Consent Item 6A
RESOLUTION R-2026-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AVA

COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORIZING THE REPLACEMENT OF THE

TRUSTEE AND CUSTODIAN FOR CERTAIN CALIFORNIA

COMMUNITY CHOICE FINANCING AUTHORITY CLEAN ENERGY
PROJECT REVENUE BONDS WITH U.S. BANK, AND CERTAIN OTHER

ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
WHEREAS, Ava Community Energy (formerly East Bay Community Energy) (“Ava”) was formed as a community choice aggregation agency (“CCA”) on December 1, 2016, under the Joint Exercise of Power Act, California Government Code sections 6500 et seq. (the “Act”), among the County of Alameda, and the Cities of Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Fremont, Hayward, Livermore, Piedmont, Oakland, San Leandro, and Union City to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy-related climate change programs in all of the member jurisdictions. The cities of Newark and Pleasanton, located in Alameda County, along with the City of Tracy, located in San Joaquin County, were added as members of Ava and parties to the Joint Powers Agreement (as defined below) in March of 2020. The City of Stockton, located in San Joaquin County, was added as a member of Ava and party to the Joint Powers Agreement in 2022. The County of Alameda was added as a member of Ava and party to the Joint Powers Agreement in 2024. San Joaquin County was added as a member to Ava in July 2024;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Act, Ava and certain other California “community choice aggregators” entered into a joint powers agreement (the “Joint Powers Agreement”) pursuant to which the California Community Choice Financing Authority (the “Issuer”) was organized for the purpose, among other things, of entering into contracts and issuing bonds to assist Ava in financing the acquisition of supplies of clean energy; WHEREAS, the Issuer is authorized by its Joint Powers Agreement to acquire supplies of clean energy by any means and to issue revenue bonds to finance the cost of acquisition of such supplies, and is vested with all powers necessary to accomplish the purposes for which it was created; WHEREAS, the Issuer previously issued its (a) Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2021B-1 (Term Rate) and Series 2021B-2 (SIFMA Index Rate) (collectively, the “Series 2021B Bonds”), (b) Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2022A-1 (Term Rate) and Series 2022A-2 (SOFR Index Rate) (collectively, the “Series 2022A Bonds”), (c) Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2023E-1 (Term Rate) and Series 2023E-2 (SOFR Index Rate) (collectively, the “Series 2023E Bonds”), (d) Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2025C (Term Rate) (the “Series 2025C Bonds”), and (e) Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds, Series 2025E (Term Rate) (the “Series 2025E Bonds” and, collectively with the Series 2021B Bonds, the Series 2022A Bonds, the Series 2 2023E Bonds and the Series 2025C Bonds, the “Bonds”), the proceeds of which were applied to purchase certain quantities of clean energy on a prepaid basis which clean energy was sold to Ava (and, with respect to the Series 2021B Bonds, to another Project Participant);
WHEREAS, each series of Bonds was issued pursuant to an Indenture of Trust (collectively, the “Indentures”) between the Issuer and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (“BNYM”), as trustee (the “Trustee”); WHEREAS, each Indenture provides that, so long as no Event of Default, or an event which, with notice or passage of time, or both, would become an Event of Default, shall have occurred and be continuing, the Trustee may be removed at any time with 30 days’ prior written notice, with or without cause, by delivery of a written certificate of the Issuer to the Trustee, which removal shall not be effective until a successor Trustee has been appointed, and that at any time the Trustee is removed, a successor Trustee may be appointed by the Issuer; WHEREAS, Ava has determined that it is desirable to direct the Issuer to remove BNYM as Trustee and appoint U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association (“U.S. Bank”) as successor Trustee and Custodian under each Indenture (such transactions, collectively, the “Trustee Replacement”); WHEREAS, Ava has determined to authorize the officers of Ava to take all necessary action to accomplish the Trustee Replacement; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ava Board of
Directors, as follows:

Section 1. The Board hereby approves the Trustee Replacement.

Section 2. Any of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer or Chair of the Board (each an “Authorized Officer”) is hereby authorized and directed, for and in the name and on behalf of Ava, to execute and deliver any and all documents, instruments, agreements, amendments and certificates, including, without limitation, any requests, notices or directions with respect to the Trustee Replacement and any documents necessary to effect the replacement of BNYM with U.S. Bank under any other transaction documents executed with respect to the Bonds, the approval of such documents and certificates by an Authorized Officer to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof, and to take any and all actions which may be necessary or advisable, in the discretion of such Authorized Officers, to effectuate the actions which Ava has approved in this Resolution, for the Trustee Replacement, including any subsequent amendments, waivers or consents entered into or given under or in accordance with such documents.
3 Section 3. All actions heretofore taken by the Authorized Officers with respect to the Trustee Replacement are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved.

Section 4. An Authorized Officer may direct the payment to professionals that provided services to Ava in connection with the Trustee Replacement. These professional services include legal counsel, bond counsel, tax counsel, Municipal Financial Advisor, Swap Advisor, and any other consultant needed to complete the transactions contemplated herein for Ava. Payment to these professionals will be made pursuant to the terms of the applicable agreement executed with Ava.

Section 5. An Authorized Officer may direct the payment to additional vendors and/or parties to any documents entered into with respect to the Trustee Replacement to complete the Trustee Replacement. These vendors, if any, will be paid pursuant to an agreement for services rendered in completing the Trustee Replacement.

Section 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. 4 ADOPTED AND APPROVED at a regular meeting of the Ava Board of Directors on this 18th day of March, 2026.
______________________________________
Betsy Andersen, Chair
Attest:
___________________________________________
Adrian Bankhead, Clerk of the Board
Prepay Trustee Bank
Replacement
Rusty Mills
March 18, 2026
Attachment Consent Item 6B
Role of Trustee/Custodian in the Prepay Transactions
2 Ava has entered five energy prepayments in conjunction with CCCFA, including two transactions that closed in 2025.
▪ All five have Bank of New York Mellon (BNY) as Trustee. ▪ Started using BNY with first prepay in 2021 with SVCE – through Morgan Stanley Trustee and Custodial Services within the Prepay Structure ▪ Trustee acts as a third-party administrator to maintain custody of the dedicated accounts for each transaction and make payments to bondholders and various counterparties on a timely basis. ▪ Ava interfaces with the Trustee and Custodian each month to deliver invoices, review documentation, process monthly payments and withdrawals, and review account activity.

More efficient to use Single Custodial Bank
▪ In general, using a single Trustee / Custodian to serve all transactions is more operationally-efficient for staff than using multiple institutions and/or bifurcating the Trustee / Custodian roles within a single transaction.

Attachment Consent Item 6B
Ava Seeking Approval to Replace Trustee/Custodian
3 Ava staff has determined it beneficial to replace its legacy Trustee and Custodian, BNY from its role for all five prepays for operational and financial reasons and utilize US Bank. ▪ US Bank offers a more robust web-based platform for downloading key transaction information not previously available with the legacy Trustee / Custodian.
▪ Staff concerns with performance and latency of responsiveness with the legacy Trustee / Custodian. ▪ Ava expects to save up to $64,900 per year in trustee and custodial fees (or roughly $13,000 per transaction). • Ava will incur bond counsel expenses in drafting legal notices and amendments to transition to the successor Trustee and Custodian – less than $50k to be split with SVCE US Bank - the leading municipal trustee and custodial service providers in the United States • Deep experience in energy prepayment transactions; serves as trustee for almost all other CCA transactions. • At year-end 2025, the U.S. Bank Global Trust group had over $9.2 trillion assets under management across 194,000 transactions.
• Has the largest market share (45%) for trust services for U.S. municipal issuances.

Attachment Consent Item 6B
Next Steps
4 Bond Counsel has recommended that Staff seek an approving Resolution from our Board and from CCCFA’s Board
▪ SVCE concurrently seeking approval from its Board
▪ With Ava approval, CCCFA Board will have it agendized at their March 26th meeting for approval ▪ Notices will be filed to the investment community ahead of the substitution on May 1st Attachment Consent Item 6B

Consent Item 7
Consent Item 7
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: Matt Chiodo – Senior Analyst, Power Resources
Subject: Approving Resolution Authorizing the Chief Executive Officer to Execute a Third Amendment to the Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement with Reclaimed Wind, LLC
Date: March 18, 2026
__________________________________________________________________ Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Chief Executive Officer to execute a Third Amendment to the Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement with Reclaimed Wind, LLC (“Seller”).

Background
On February 12, 2024, Ava Community Energy (“Ava”) executed an Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement (the “Agreement”) with Reclaimed Wind, LLC (“Seller”) for 90.70 mega-watts (“MW”) of Resource Adequacy (“RA”) from a battery energy storage facility (“BESS”) that will be located in Alameda County (“Project”) and developed by Ignis. The Agreement is for

90.70 MW of Resource Adequacy (“RA”) from the Project for a 10-year term with a construction start deadline of July 1, 2026, and an original commercial operation date (“COD”) of December 1, 2026. The Project was evaluated during Ava’s 2023 Request for Offer (“RFO”) and was approved by Ava’s Board of Directors on January 17, 2024.

The Agreement structure has Ava receiving only RA from the project, but terms of the Agreement allow Ava and Seller to negotiate and execute a subsequent agreement for the full suite of products from the BESS, including RA, Energy, and Ancillary Services (“Secondary Agreement”). The deadline for the Secondary Agreement was April 30, 2025.

Consent Item 7
On April 15, 2025, Ava and Seller entered into a First Amendment to the Agreement to extend the Secondary Agreement deadline to October 31, 2025.

On October 31, 2025, Ava and Seller entered into a Second Amendment to the Agreement to extend the Secondary Agreement deadline to July 31, 2026.

In March 2026, the Seller approached Ava to initiate a Third Amendment to the Agreement to extend the Secondary Agreement deadline again and to revise the COD. The Third Amendment would amend the COD to December 31, 2027. The Project’s environmental review and permitting are being processed through the California Energy Commission’s (“CEC”) Application for Certification (“AFC”) process. An extension to the COD is needed because of delays related to the review and completion of the AFC.

The Project will be located in Ava’s service territory, providing local reliability benefits to customers and supporting regulatory reliability requirements.

Attachments
A. Resolution of the Board of Directors of Ava Community Energy Authority Authorizing the Chief Executive Officer to Execute a Third Amendment the Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement with Reclaimed Wind, LLC
Attachment Consent Item 7A
RESOLUTION NO. R-2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

OFFICER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE ENERGY

STORAGE RESOURCE ADEQUACY AGREEMENT WITH RECLAIMED WIND, LLC WHEREAS Ava Community Energy Authority (“Ava”) was formed as a community choice aggregation agency (“CCA”) on December 1, 2016, under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code sections 6500 et seq., among the County of Alameda, and the Cities of Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Fremont, Hayward, Livermore, Piedmont, Oakland, San Leandro, and Union City to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy-related climate change programs in all of the member jurisdictions. The Cities of Newark and Pleasanton, located in Alameda County, along with the City of Tracy, located in San Joaquin County, were added as members of Ava and parties to the Joint Powers Agreement (“JPA”) in March of 2020. The City of Stockton, located in San Joaquin County, was added as a member of Ava in September of 2022. The City of Lathrop, located in San Joaquin County, was added as a member to Ava in October of 2023. San Joaquin County was added as a member to Ava in July 2024. On October 24, 2023, Ava legally adopted the name Ava Community Energy Authority, where it had previously used the name East Bay Community Energy Authority since its inception; and
WHEREAS Ava executed an Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement (“Agreement”) with Reclaimed Wind, LLC (“Seller”) on February 12, 2024; and WHEREAS the Agreement is for 90.70 mega-watts of Resource Adequacy (RA) from a battery energy storage facility (BESS) with a Construction Start Deadline of July 1, 2026, and Commercial Operation Date Deadline of December 1, 2026; and WHEREAS on April 15, 2025, the First Amendment to the Agreement was executed to extend the Secondary Agreement Deadline to October 31, 2025; and WHEREAS on October 31, 2025, the Second Amendment to the Agreement was executed to extend the Secondary Agreement Deadline to July 31, 2026; and WHEREAS Ava staff is negotiating a Third Amendment to the Agreement with the Seller to extend the Secondary Agreement Deadline and the Commercial Operation Date to December 31, 2027.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Chief Executive Officer, in consultation with staff and legal counsel, is hereby authorized to execute a Third Amendment to the Energy Storage Resource Adequacy Agreement with Reclaimed Wind, LLC to extend the Secondary Agreement Deadline and the Commercial Operation Date to December 31, 2027.

Attachment Consent Item 7A
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of March, 2026.

Betsy Andersen, Chair
ATTEST:

Adrian Bankhead, Clerk of the Board
CEO Report Item 8
CEO Report Item 8
TO: Ava Community Energy Board of Directors
FROM: Howard Chang, Chief Executive Officer
SUBJECT: CEO Report (Informational Item)
DATE: March 18, 2026
________________________________________________________________________ Recommendation
Accept Chief Executive Officer (CEO) report on update items below.

Executive Committee Meeting
An Executive Committee Meeting was held on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. Members received updates about the Conference Sponsorship Policy for Board Members and a proposal to replace Ava’s legal Trustee / Custodian for its prepay transactions. The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 1, 2026 at 3 pm.

Marketing Regulatory and Legislative Subcommittee Meeting A Marketing Regulatory and Legislative Subcommittee Meeting was held on Friday, March 6, 2026. Members received updates about regulatory and legislative priorities and Ava’s outreach strategy. The next Marketing, Regulatory and Legislative Subcommittee meeting will be held on Friday, April 10, 2026 at 10 am.

Credit Rating
Ava had its “A” credit rating from Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) affirmed in late February. S&P noted various credit strengths in their report:
• Ava has a deep customer base, with residential customers responsible for about 40% of kilowatt-hour sales, enhancing revenue stability;
• Protective joint powers agreements with member communities, requiring a departing member to provide six months' notice, receive Ava board approval, and make the CCA whole for any costs incurred to serve that member signed prior to its departure, which we believe is a disincentive for a member community to terminate its membership in Ava;
• Diverse power supply arrangements with a variety of contract types, geographic locations, generation technologies, and storage capabilities; • Robust financial performance, including historical fixed-cost and imputed charge coverage (FCC) averaging 1.4x over the past three years, and strong liquidity at the end CEO Report Item 8
of fiscal 2025 with expected liquidity remaining healthy in each of the next five years after board approved rate changes to mitigate exposure to PCIA reform; and • Lack of debt, enhancing the CCA's financial flexibility.

S&P did acknowledge the challenging regulatory environment and exposure to further PCIA reform as a risk to Ava competitiveness. They also noted uncertainty on power procurement targets from changes to load profiles and the need to balance renewable mandates with the need for reliable baseload energy, as risks that Ava must operate through.

Unincorporated San Joaquin County Enrollment
Ava will begin providing electricity generation service to unincorporated San Joaquin County’s 60,000 customers starting in May 2026. Most customers will start service in May and will see Ava on their PG&E bill starting in June 2026. Customers with solar will be enrolled closer to their true-up date, with enrollment occurring throughout the year.

The first notification is being sent via letter and email throughout March. The second pre-enrollment notice will go out in April.

Ava’s outreach started at the end of February, starting with digital ads to raise awareness before notices go out. Additional marketing efforts during the enrollment period will include:
• Billboards, streaming TV, and print ads
• Targeted micro-campaigns to reach specific neighborhoods • Community partnerships with municipal partners, agricultural and business organizations, and other trusted community leaders
• Social media, newsletters, and local press
• Webinars and in-person presentations
Sample communications below:

Latino Times magazine ad for March issue
CEO Report Item 8
Digital ad creative running on Facebook, Instagram, and Google Key Federal Policy Updates
• Endangerment Finding Repeal: On February 12, the Trump Administration issued a final rule rescinding the Endangerment Finding, a 17-year-old Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determination that provides the legal justification for the federal government to regulate climate change-causing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The repeal concludes that the CAA gives the EPA authority to control only air pollution that causes direct health effects through local and regional exposure, thus precluding the EPA from limiting GHG emissions that pose more “indirect” harm at the global level in the upper atmosphere. The decision rescinds all existing federal GHG emission standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks, motorcycles, buses, medium-duty vehicles, and heavy-duty vehicles and engines.

Several groups have since sued the EPA over the repeal, setting up a likely lengthy court battle.
• Interim Prohibited Foreign Entity Guidance: On February 12, the U.S. Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released interim guidance relating to the Material Assistance and Prohibited Foreign Entity (PFE) provisions included in the energy tax credit changes from last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R.1). Although the guidance is not intended to be comprehensive, it begins to fill in more detail about how taxpayers can calculate whether a new energy project contains too much equipment or components from a PFE (known as a material assistance cost ratio, or MACR) to qualify for federal tax credits, including the clean energy investment and production tax credits (ITC and PTC). Key details include:
o A five-step process for calculating a project’s MACR and specific examples of how to do so under certain scenarios.
o Clarifies that while IRS works to release updated safe harbor tables, project owners must use existing 2023-2025 IRS safe harbor tables to identify the discrete manufactured products (MPs) and manufactured product components (MPCs) to include in a project’s MACR calculation, and that taxpayers should CEO Report Item 8
treat the MPs and MPCs identified in those tables as the “exclusive and exhaustive” list for safe-harbor purposes.
o Clarifies that a separate MACR must be calculated for network upgrades associated with a project seeking an ITC. If the network upgrade fails PFE compliance (too much material assistance from a PFE), the project itself can still claim an ITC but cannot include the network upgrade costs in the ITC calculation. o The agencies expect to publish further guidance later this year, including on what qualifies as a PFE and what constitutes “effective control” by a PFE. • SCOTUS Tariff Ruling: On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a significant portion of the import tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration since last January are unconstitutional. The ruling concludes that the President does not have the authority under a specific statute, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to impose tariffs without Congressional approval. This includes the tariffs the Administration imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China, and the “liberation day” tariffs it imposed on all countries. (It does not affect tariffs that were imposed through different statutes, such as those applied to imports of steel, aluminum, and copper.) In response, President Trump rescinded the tariffs imposed via the IEEPA and instead imposed a new, temporary 10% across-the-board tariff under a different statute. Neither the court ruling nor the Administration has addressed the question of tariff refunds for importers or consumers.

Ava in the Community - March
To raise awareness of Ava’s service, support our community, and connect customers to our offerings, Ava sponsors and staffs events throughout our service territory all year long.

Additionally, we also deliver presentations to community groups. Below is a list of upcoming events we’ll be attending between 3/18 and 4/15. Learn more at https://avaenergy.org/about-ava/meetings-events/events/ Date Event Type Location
3/17/2026 REXPO Conference Tabling Hilton Stockton
3/18/2026 Linden CMAC Presentation Unincorporated SJC
3/26/2026 Woodbridge CMAC Presentation Unincorporated SJC 3/27/2026
Annual Latina Business
Conference Tabling Wine & Roses in Lodi
3/28/2026 Newark Family Day Tabling
Newark Community
Park
3/28/2026
Oakland Roots vs Orange
County SC (Kids Night Out)
Sponsoring &
Tabling Oakland Coliseum
4/1/2026 Thornton CMAC Presentation Unincorporated SJC
4/2/2026
Taste of San Joaquin (Farm
Bureau) Sponsoring
Lodi Grape Festival
Grounds
CEO Report Item 8
4/3/2026
Habitat for Humanity Free
Furniture Giveaway
Sponsoring &
Tabling HFH Oakland ReStore
4/3/2026
Stockton Ports game
(Country Rodeo Night)
Sponsoring &
Tabling Banner Island Ball Park
4/17/2026
Stockton Ports game
(Disability Awareness Night)
Sponsoring &
Tabling Banner Island Ball park
4/18/2026 Fremont Earth Day Tabling
Fremont Downtown
Event Center
4/19/2026 Stockton Earth Day
Sponsoring &
Tabling Stockton Victory Park
4/25/2026 Ride 4aReason Sponsoring
Oakland Technical High
School
4/25/2026 Tracy Earth Day
Sponsoring &
Tabling Downtown Tracy
4/25/2026 Friends Outside
Sponsoring &
Tabling
Stockton Memorial Civic
Auditorium
4/25/2026
Berkeley Wild and Scenic
Festival and Home
Electrification Fair
Sponsoring &
Tabling David Brower Center
4/26/2026 Asparagus Festival
Sponsoring &
Tabling SJC Fairgrounds
4/28/2026
City of Berkeley Climate Corp
Fellows Meet and Greet Presentation City of Berkeley Office

Staff Report Item 10
Staff Report Item 10
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: John Perkins, Legal Director and Deputy General Counsel Subject: Implementing a policy governing reimbursement of Board Members for expenses related to attendance of designated conferences.

Date: March 18 Board Meeting
__________________________________________________________________ Summary/Recommendation
This Staff Report proposes the implementation of a policy to authorize limited reimbursement of conference registration fees and reasonable related expenses incurred by members of the Board of Directors when attendance is reasonably related to the mission, programs, or governance responsibilities of Ava in order to standardize Ava’s handling of reimbursement requests and ensure transparency and legal compliance.

Financial Impact
Ava will budget annually to account for estimated costs, which will differ year to year based on conference location and registration fees.

Analysis and Context
Staff proposes establishing an event reimbursement policy for the Board of Directors to provide a consistent response to requests by Directors for reimbursement for their attendance of industry events. This is a question that has arisen periodically from Directors, and the draft policy takes into consideration California Government Code section 53232.2, which requires a local agency to adopt a written policy governing the reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses incurred by elected or appointed officials in the performance of official duties.

Staff Report Item 10
The policy proposes pre-approval of only two events, both of which are materially relevant to Ava’s mission:
• CalCCA Annual Conference
• CAISO Stakeholder Symposium
Ava will reimburse reasonable travel expenses provided that costs are in alignment with those available from the U.S. Government Services Administration. Ava will provide an online portal for the submission of requests and supporting documentation such as receipts.

Committee Recommendation
The Executive Committee requested clarification that internet access be expressly included as a reasonable expense under the policy, and the policy has been updated to reflect this.

Attachments
A. Resolution
B. Draft Conference Expenditures Reimbursement Policy for Ava Directors Attachment Staff Report Item 10A
RESOLUTION NO. R-2026-xx

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY ADOPTING THE

CONFERENCE EXPENDITURES REIMBURSEMENT POLICY FOR AVA

DIRECTORS
WHEREAS Ava Community Energy Authority (“Ava”) was formed as a community choice aggregation agency (“CCA”) on December 1, 2016, under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code sections 6500 et seq., among the County of Alameda, and the Cities of Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Fremont, Hayward, Livermore, Piedmont, Oakland, San Leandro, and Union City to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy-related climate change programs in all of the member jurisdictions. The cities of Newark and Pleasanton, located in Alameda County, along with the City of Tracy, located in San Joaquin County, were added as members of Ava and parties to the Joint Powers Agreement (“JPA”) in March of 2020. The city of Stockton was added as a member to Ava in September of 2022. The city of Lathrop was added as a member to Ava in October of 2023. San Joaquin County was added as a member to Ava in July 2024. On October 24, 2023, Ava legally adopted the name Ava Community Energy Authority, where it had previously used the name East Bay Community Energy Authority since its inception.

WHEREAS members of the Board of Directors have previously inquired into reimbursements for conferences; and
WHEREAS California law requires that a policy be in place in order to provide such reimbursements;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Adopt the Conference Expenditures Reimbursement Policy for Ava Directors.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of March 2026.

Betsy Andersen, Chair
ATTEST:

Attachment Staff Report Item 10A
Adrian Bankhead, Clerk of the Board
Conference Expenditures Reimbursement Policy
for Ava Directors
Policy Number: 1
Approval Date: March 18, 2026
Agenda Item: Staff Report Item 10
Approved by Resolution: R-2026-__
Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to authorize limited reimbursement of conference registration fees and reasonable related expenses incurred by members of the Board of Directors (“Directors”) of Ava Community Energy Authority (“Ava”) when attendance is reasonably related to the mission, programs, or governance responsibilities of Ava, and to ensure transparency, accountability, and compliance with applicable California law.

Governance
This policy is adopted pursuant to California Government Code section 53232.2, which requires a local agency to adopt a written policy governing the reimbursement of actual and necessary expenses incurred by elected or appointed officials in the performance of official duties.

Scope
This policy applies to all members of the Board of Directors of Ava.

Eligible Events
Reimbursement may be provided exclusively for reimbursable expenses associated with the following events:
● CalCCA Annual Conference
● CAISO Stakeholder Symposium
Attachment Staff Report Item 10B
Reimbursable Expenses
Ava may reimburse only (i) conference registration fees, including mandatory materials included in the registration cost and (ii) reasonable costs of travel, lodging, internet, and meals subject to the requirements of this policy. A cost shall be deemed reasonable if it aligns with the costs available from the United States General Services Administration (https://www.gsa.gov/travel as of the date this policy was adopted).

Non-Reimbursable Expenses
Expenses that Ava will not reimburse include, but are not limited to:
● Personal expenses of any kind
● Expenses incurred by spouses, partners, family members, or guests Reimbursement Procedure
To receive reimbursement, the Director shall submit:
● A completed reimbursement request form and
● Itemized proof of payment, such as receipts or other suitably corroborating documentation.

Reimbursement requests must be submitted no later than 60 days following the conclusion of the event at this URL: https://ironcladapp.com/public-launch/695e9f36c027bc0e9f4b7ee5.

Budget and Fiscal Controls
All reimbursements under this policy are subject to:
● Availability of appropriated funds; and
● Compliance with Ava’s accounting and internal control procedures.

Nothing in this policy creates an entitlement to reimbursement.

Public Transparency
Reimbursements made pursuant to this policy shall be documented and disclosed in accordance with applicable open meeting, public records, and financial reporting laws.

Attachment Staff Report Item 10B
Staff Report Item 11
Staff Report Item 11
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: Sam Sadle, Principal Legislative Manager
Subject: Approval of Legislative positions for AB 1761 and SB 1138 Date: March 18, 2025
__________________________________________________________________ Summary/Recommendation
Ava staff has worked to implement the Board approved Legislative Program since the Legislative Program’s adoption in July of 2018. The Legislative Program provides a framework for the Ava legislative team to identify, assess, track, and (with Board approval) take advocacy-related action regarding proposed legislation. Furthermore, the Legislative Program guides staff in identifying which of the more than 1,800 bills per year that are introduced in Sacramento are important to Ava and relevant to our services.

Ava staff recommend adopting a “support” position on two bills that the statewide CCA trade association (CalCCA) is sponsoring. The bills are Assembly Bill 1761 (Rogers) and Senate Bill 1138 (Padilla). As detailed below, AB 1761 increases transparency of rate setting processes by requiring data disclosures from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs). SB 1138 facilitates affordability by allowing Ava and others to trade load obligations rather than spending additional money on resource adequacy under certain circumstances.

Financial Impact
• AB 1761 (Rogers) - Support: Unlikely to have a direct fiscal impact on Ava. • SB 1138 (Padilla) - Support: The effect of SB 1138 and the ensuing launch of a Resource Adequacy (RA) transactability scheme will provide some level of financial Staff Report Item 11
savings to Ava. Per analysis from CalCCA, if RA was transactable in summer of 2025, LSEs would have saved $182 million through a combination of a reduction in RA prices and avoidance of excess RA procurement. Ava’s share of that savings depends on a number of factors including Ava’s procurement strategy, RA prices, and broader CAISO marketplace dynamics.

Analysis and Context
• AB 1761 (Rogers) - Support: If passed, AB 1761 will require the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to ensure that all data relied on in any decision or ruling, or in any proposal or analysis provided by an investor-owned utility (IOU), PUC staff, or any other party, for the determination or application of a calculation methodology (e.g., for the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA)) be made available to LSEs (including Ava) and ratepayer advocates. The CCA trade association (CalCCA) is sponsoring AB 1761 and Ava staff worked directly with CalCCA to draft the initial proposal and ensure its introduction in the California Assembly. If approved, AB 1761 would support Ava’s affordability efforts by ensuring our staff would have access to all data relied upon by the PUC, PG&E, and other IOUs to calculate, e.g., the PCIA. This would allow Ava (and others) to review the data, ensure it is correct, and better plan for future changes to the PCIA and how to address its rate impacts on our customers. • SB 1138 (Padilla) - Support: If adopted, SB 1138 would require the PUC to permit LSEs to demonstrate compliance with Resource Adequacy (RA) requirements by selling to, or otherwise making transactions with, another LSE to meet not more than 25% of our compliance obligation, on a short-term basis, and to permit those transactions to be denominated in the same unit of time used to denominate RA compliance requirements.

CalCCA is sponsoring SB 1138 and Ava staff worked directly with CalCCA to draft the initial proposal and ensure its introduction in the California Senate. The proposal to allow for the trading of RA compliance products stems from the ongoing transition of RA compliance obligations from a monthly framework to a slice-of-day (hourly) framework.

As of today, adjustments to an LSE’s portfolio are limited to transacting product for the whole month even though obligations are now measured on an hourly basis. This mismatch means Ava must purchase more RA than we need to meet compliance obligations, creating artificial market scarcity and unnecessarily driving up RA demand (and prices). SB 1138 will allow Ava to trade RA obligations with other LSEs and will facilitate the efficient procurement of Resource Adequacy, driving down prices across California.

Committee Recommendation
This matter was discussed at the March 6 Marketing, Regulatory, and Legislative Subcommittee meeting.

Staff Report Item 11
Attachments
A. Resolution in support of AB 1761 and SB 1138
B. AB 1761 Legislative language
C. AB 1761 Fact sheet
D. SB 1138 Legislative language
E. SB 1138 Fact sheet
F. Presentation - “2026.03.18 Board Item XX 2026 California Legislative Position Recommendations”
Attachment Staff Report Item 11A
RESOLUTION NO. R-2026-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF THE AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF
AB 1761 (ROGERS) AND SB 1138 (PADILLA)
WHEREAS Ava Community Energy Authority (“Ava”) was formed as a community choice aggregation agency (“CCA”) on December 1, 2016, under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, California Government Code sections 6500 et seq., among the County of Alameda, and the Cities of Albany, Berkeley, Dublin, Emeryville, Fremont, Hayward, Livermore, Piedmont, Oakland, San Leandro, and Union City to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy-related climate change programs in all of the member jurisdictions. The cities of Newark and Pleasanton, located in Alameda County, along with the City of Tracy, located in San Joaquin County, were added as members of Ava and parties to the Joint Powers Agreement (“JPA”) in March of 2020. The city of Stockton was added as a member to Ava in September of 2022. The city of Lathrop was added as a member to Ava in October of 2023. San Joaquin County was added as a member to Ava in July 2024. On October 24, 2023, Ava legally adopted the name Ava Community Energy Authority, where it had previously used the name East Bay Community Energy Authority since its inception.

WHEREAS federal and state governments consider numerous legislative proposals throughout the year that can have either a beneficial or negative impact on Ava Community Energy and our customers;
WHEREAS Ava Community Energy’s Legislative Program was first adopted in 2019 and has been updated frequently since then;
WHEREAS Ava Community Energy seeks to advance policy positions on a variety of issues including rate affordability, transmission affordability, managing data center growth, utility scale decarbonization, industrial and large load decarbonization, distributed energy resources, transportation electrification, dynamic rates, among others;
WHEREAS the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment has a significant impact on Ava Community Energy’s forecasting and customer energy affordability, which AB 1761 will mitigate by ensuring better transparency into Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) costs;
WHEREAS the ongoing transition of Resource Adequacy compliance obligation from a monthly framework to a slice-of-day framework presents both challenges and opportunities, and SB 1138 will facilitate the efficient procurement of Resource Adequacy;
WHEREAS Ava Community Energy staff worked closely with CalCCA staff to draft AB 1761 and SB 1138 and identify legislative authors; Attachment Staff Report Item 11A
WHEREAS the CalCCA Board of Directors is in support of AB 1761 and SB 1138 and the organization serves as the official legislative “sponsor” of the bills; WHEREAS the state legislative session is already under way and bills are moving through the legislative process;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY AUTHORITY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The Board of Directors hereby expresses its support for Assembly Bill 1761 (Rogers) and Senate Bill 1138 (Padilla).

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 18th day of March, 2026.

Betsy Andersen, Chair
ATTEST:

Adrian Bankhead, Clerk of the Board
california legislature—2025–26 regular session
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1761
Introduced by Assembly Member Rogers
February 9, 2026
An act to add Section 365.4 to the Public Utilities Code, relating to electricity.
legislative counsel’s digest
AB 1761, as introduced, Rogers. Electricity: calculation methodology:
data disclosure.

Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law authorizes the commission to fix the rates and charges for every public utility and requires that those rates and charges be just and reasonable.

This bill would require the commission to ensure that all data relied on in any decision or ruling, or in any proposal or analysis provided by an electrical corporation, the commission’s staff, or any other party, for the determination or application of a calculation methodology for any charge imposed on customers of a load-serving entity to recover the cost of contracts or resources owned by an electrical corporation or any value derived from that calculation is made available to load-serving entities and ratepayer advocates on behalf of customers. The bill would require that data to meet specified requirements, including that it is made through a public disclosure, except for market-sensitive data, as provided.

Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.

Attachment Staff Report Item 11B
Because the above prohibition would be a part of the act, and because a violation of a commission action implementing the above prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.

State-mandated local program: yes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Section 365.4 is added to the Public Utilities line 2 Code, to read:
line 3 365.4. (a)  The commission shall ensure that all data relied on line 4 in any decision or ruling, or in any proposal or analysis provided line 5 by an electrical corporation, the commission’s staff, or any other line 6 party, for the determination or application of a calculation line 7 methodology for any charge imposed on customers of a line 8 load-serving entity, as defined in Section 380, to recover the cost line 9 of contracts or resources owned by an electrical corporation or any line 10 value derived from that calculation is made available to line 11 load-serving entities and ratepayer advocates on behalf of line 12 customers.
line 13 (b)  Data provided pursuant to subdivision (a) shall meet all of line 14 the following requirements:
line 15 (1)  It shall be made through a public disclosure, except for line 16 market-sensitive data, which shall be made through disclosure to line 17 a nonmarket participant reviewing representative pursuant to the line 18 terms of a reasonable, commission-approved nondisclosure line 19 agreement.
line 20 (2)  It shall be made available to load-serving entities and line 21 ratepayer advocates concurrent with any proposal or analyses from line 22 the electrical corporation, the commission’s staff, or any other line 23 party, or any commission adopted outcome. This requirement may line 24 be met through adoption of data sharing practices mutually agreed line 25 to by parties at the outset of a proceeding.
line 26 (3)  It shall be made available in native file format. 2 Attachment Staff Report Item 11B
line 1 SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to line 2 Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because line 3 the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school line 4 district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or line 5 infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty line 6 for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of line 7 the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within line 8 the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California line 9 Constitution.

O
3 Attachment Staff Report Item 11B
Assembly Bill 1761 – Improving Energy Bill Transparency Updated: February 18, 2026
Assemblymember Chris Rogers, 2
nd Assembly District
Bill Summary
AB 1761 improves transparency to how the Power Charge
Indifference Adjustment (PCIA), a charge on nearly all
energy bills, is calculated.

Background
Electricity bills in California are on the rise, in part due to challenging market conditions and outdated and
inefficient regulatory policies. Families and businesses are feeling the impact. Lawmakers and regulators need
practical, consumer-focused solutions that ensure
customers do not pay more than their fair share.

One tool to ensure customers receive energy bills that
are fair and accurate is increased transparency in how
PCIA charges are calculated. The PCIA is a fee
designed to ensure customers who leave utility
generation service, like customers of a Community
Choice Aggregator (CCA) or Energy Service
Provider (ESP), pay their portion of legacy power
costs. But since the PCIA was implemented, there has
been no consistent standard for what data must be
made available in any California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) process or proceeding where
the PCIA, or a related charge, is set.

Problem
CCAs, ESPs, and their customers must pay the PCIA
charge but often lack access to the data, assumptions, and methods used to set it. This transparency problem leads to disputes, inefficiencies, and unexpected rate impacts for customers. More specifically:
• Disclosures vary by utility and by CPUC
proceeding, resulting in repeated fights between
CCAs and Investor-Owned Utilities (IOUs) over
data access and increased administrative
inefficiencies as the CPUC resolves disputes on a
case-by-case basis.
• Utilities sometimes make mistakes. In a 2019
PG&E proceeding, CalCCA identified $73
million in errors (including a $16 million increase
for CCA customers). In a recent proceeding,
PG&E identified an accounting error that would
have cost CCA customers $217 million.
• In an ongoing PCIA Rulemaking, the
Commission withheld information on the
evidence underlying their proposal and the rate
impacts of a proposed change. The CPUC did not
respond to a Public Records Act request for the
information.

Without adequate transparency, CCAs and ESPs are
unable to verify the accuracy of the PCIA charges that
their customers must pay and cannot confidently forecast rates – both of which are affordability tools needed to protect customers from unexpected rate increases.

Solution
AB 1761 proposes amending the Public Utilities Code to
require the CPUC and IOUs to disclose all data used to
calculate PCIA costs, including cost inputs, forecasting assumptions, and methodologies. The bill would also
ensure that when parties make proposals in a proceeding to change the PCIA they provide all the underlying data informing that proposal. Sensitive information would
remain protected through Commission-approved
nondisclosure agreements – a practice already used to
protect sensitive information in other compliance areas.

Greater transparency allows CCAs and ESPs to better
advocate for their customers and assess proposals to
change the PCIA. It also can inform cost forecasts and
shield customers from sudden rate swings. It reduces
repeated fights over information, improves regulatory
efficiency, and encourages utilities to verify calculations since the underlying data would be open to review. Costs to implement the proposal are miniscule, as most of this information already exists, while the benefits for rate, accuracy, stability, and consumer protection are
substantial. This proposal strengthens confidence that
customers pay their fair share — and not more.

For More Information:

Logan Pitts, Legislative Director
[email protected]
(916) 319-2002
Support
California Community Choice Association-CalCCA(sponsor) Attachment Staff Report Item 11C
SENATE BILL No. 1138
Introduced by Senator Padilla
February 18, 2026
An act to amend Section 380 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to electricity.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 1138, as introduced, Padilla. Load-serving entities: resource adequacy requirements.

Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Existing law requires the commission, in consultation with the Independent System Operator, to establish resource adequacy requirements for all load-serving entities, as provided. Existing law defines load-serving entity, for that purpose, as an electrical corporation, electric service provider, or community choice aggregator. Existing law requires each load serving to be subject to the same requirements for resource adequacy, the renewables portfolio standard program, and the integrated resource planning process that apply to electrical corporations, as provided.

This bill would require the commission to permit a load-serving entity to demonstrate compliance with resource adequacy requirements by selling to, or otherwise making transactions with, another load-serving entity to meet not more than 25% of its compliance obligation, on a short-term basis, and to permit those transactions to be denominated in the same unit of time used to denominate resource adequacy compliance requirements.

Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime.

Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
Because the above provisions would be a part of the act, and because a violation of a commission action implementing the above prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.

State-mandated local program: yes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Section 380 of the Public Utilities Code is line 2 amended to read:
line 3 380. (a)  The commission, in consultation with the Independent line 4 System Operator, shall establish resource adequacy requirements line 5 for all load-serving entities.
line 6 (b)  In establishing resource adequacy requirements, the line 7 commission shall ensure the reliability of electrical service in line 8 California while advancing, to the extent possible, the state’s goals line 9 for clean energy, reducing air pollution, and reducing emissions line 10 of greenhouse gases. The resource adequacy program shall achieve line 11 all of the following objectives:
line 12 (1)  Facilitate the development of new generating, nongenerating, line 13 and hybrid capacity and the retention of existing generating, line 14 nongenerating, and hybrid capacity that is economical and needed line 15 for reliability and to achieve the state policy specified in Section line 16 454.53.
line 17 (2)  Establish new, or maintain existing, demand response line 18 products and tariffs that facilitate the economical dispatch and use line 19 of demand response that can either meet or reduce an electrical line 20 corporation’s resource adequacy requirements, as determined by line 21 the commission.
line 22 (3)  Equitably allocate the cost of generating capacity and line 23 demand response in a manner that prevents the shifting of costs line 24 between customer classes.
line 25 (4)  Minimize enforcement requirements and costs. line 26 (5)  Consideration of mitigation measures, if the commission line 27 determines they are needed, to reduce costs to ratepayers. 2 Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
line 1 (6)  Maximize the ability of community choice aggregators to line 2 determine the generation resources used to serve their customers. line 3 (c)  Each load-serving entity shall maintain physical generating line 4 capacity and electrical demand response adequate to meet its load line 5 requirements, including, but not limited to, peak demand and line 6 planning and operating reserves. The generating capacity or line 7 electrical demand response shall be deliverable to locations and line 8 at times as may be necessary to maintain electrical service system line 9 reliability, local area reliability, and flexibility. line 10 (d)  Each load-serving entity shall, at a minimum, meet the most line 11 recent minimum planning reserve and reliability criteria approved line 12 by the board of directors of the Western Systems Coordinating line 13 Council or the Western Electricity Coordinating Council. line 14 (e)  (1)  The commission shall implement and enforce the line 15 resource adequacy requirements established in accordance with line 16 this section in a nondiscriminatory manner. Each load-serving line 17 entity shall be subject to the same requirements for resource line 18 adequacy, the renewables portfolio standard program, and the line 19 integrated resource planning process pursuant to Section 454.52 line 20 that apply to electrical corporations pursuant to this section, or are line 21 otherwise required by law or by order or decision of the line 22 commission. The commission shall exercise its enforcement powers line 23 to ensure compliance by all load-serving entities. line 24 (2)  Notwithstanding subdivision (c), the commission shall permit line 25 a load-serving entity to demonstrate compliance with resource line 26 adequacy requirements by selling to, or otherwise making line 27 transactions with, another load-serving entity to meet not more line 28 than 25 percent of its compliance obligation, on a short-term basis, line 29 and shall permit those transactions to be denominated in the same line 30 unit of time used to denominate resource adequacy compliance line 31 requirements.
line 32 (f)  (1)  The commission shall require sufficient information, line 33 including, but not limited to, anticipated load, actual load, and line 34 measures undertaken by a load-serving entity to ensure resource line 35 adequacy, to be reported to enable the commission to determine line 36 compliance with the resource adequacy requirements established line 37 by the commission.
line 38 (2)  The commission shall calculate and publish annually on its line 39 internet website, in a new report or as part of another report, the line 40 percentage of each load-serving entity’s local and system resource 3 Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
line 1 adequacy requirements from the previous calendar year that was line 2 met with capacity from eligible renewable energy resources line 3 pursuant to the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program line 4 (Article 16 (commencing with Section 399.11)), other zero-carbon line 5 resources, including large hydroelectric and nuclear resources, or line 6 energy storage resources. In determining the percentage of each line 7 load-serving entity’s resource adequacy requirements, the line 8 commission shall include all directly owned or contracted resources line 9 and each load-serving entity’s allocation of any centrally procured line 10 resources or allocation of resources pursuant to any other line 11 mechanism that involves an assignment or allocation of resources line 12 purchased or owned by a single buyer, and shall exclude any share line 13 of a load-serving entity’s resources that were allocated to another line 14 load-serving entity.
line 15 (g)  An electrical corporation’s costs of meeting or reducing line 16 resource adequacy requirements, including, but not limited to, the line 17 costs associated with system reliability, local area reliability, or line 18 flexible resource adequacy, that are determined to be reasonable line 19 by the commission, or are otherwise recoverable under a line 20 procurement plan approved by the commission pursuant to Section line 21 454.5, shall be fully recoverable from those customers on whose line 22 behalf the costs are incurred, as determined by the commission, line 23 at the time the commitment to incur the cost is made, on a fully line 24 nonbypassable basis, as determined by the commission. The line 25 commission shall exclude any amounts authorized to be recovered line 26 pursuant to Section 366.2 when authorizing the amount of costs line 27 to be recovered from customers of a community choice aggregator line 28 or from customers that purchase electricity through a direct line 29 transaction pursuant to this subdivision.
line 30 (h)  The commission shall determine and authorize the most line 31 efficient and equitable means for achieving all of the following:
line 32 (1)  Meeting the objectives of this section.
line 33 (2)  Ensuring that investment is made in new generating capacity. line 34 (3)  Ensuring that existing generating capacity that is economical line 35 is retained to ensure reliability.
line 36 (4)  Ensuring that the resource adequacy program can reasonably line 37 maintain a standard measure of reliability, such as a line 38 one-day-in-10-year loss-of-load expectation or a similarly robust line 39 reliability metric adopted by the commission, and use it for line 40 planning purposes.
4 Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
line 1 (5)  Ensuring that the cost of generating capacity and demand line 2 response is allocated equitably.
line 3 (6)  Ensuring that community choice aggregators can determine line 4 the generation resources used to serve their customers. line 5 (7)  Ensuring that investments are made in new and existing line 6 demand response resources that are cost effective and help to line 7 achieve electrical grid reliability and the state’s goals for reducing line 8 emissions of greenhouse gases.
line 9 (8)  Minimizing the need for backstop procurement by the line 10 Independent System Operator.
line 11 (i)  In making the determination pursuant to subdivision (h), the line 12 commission may consider a centralized resource adequacy line 13 mechanism among other options.
line 14 (j)  The commission shall ensure appropriate valuation of both line 15 supply and load modifying demand response resources. The line 16 commission, in an existing or new proceeding, shall establish a line 17 mechanism to value load modifying demand response resources, line 18 including, but not limited to, the ability of demand response line 19 resources to help meet distribution needs and transmission system line 20 needs and to help reduce a load-serving entity’s resource adequacy line 21 obligation pursuant to this section. In determining this value, the line 22 commission shall consider how these resources further the state’s line 23 electrical grid reliability and the state’s goals for reducing line 24 emissions of greenhouse gases. The commission, Energy line 25 Commission, and Independent System Operator shall coordinate line 26 to jointly ensure that changes in demand caused by load modifying line 27 demand response are expeditiously and comprehensively reflected line 28 in the Energy Commission’s Integrated Energy Policy Report line 29 forecast and in planning proceedings and associated analyses, and line 30 shall encourage reflection of these changes in demand in the line 31 operation of the electrical grid.
line 32 (k)  For purposes of this section, “load-serving entity” means an line 33 electrical corporation, electric service provider, or community line 34 choice aggregator. “Load-serving entity” does not include any of line 35 the following:
line 36 (1)  A local publicly owned electric utility.
line 37 (2)  The State Water Resources Development System commonly line 38 known as the State Water Project.
line 39 (3)  Customer generation located on the customer’s site or line 40 providing electric electrical service through arrangements 5 Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
line 1 authorized by Section 218, if the customer generation, or the load line 2 it serves, meets one of the following criteria:
line 3 (A)  It takes standby service from the electrical corporation on line 4 a commission-approved rate schedule that provides for adequate line 5 backup planning and operating reserves for the standby customer line 6 class.
line 7 (B)  It is not physically interconnected to the electrical line 8 transmission or distribution grid, so that, if the customer generation line 9 fails, backup electricity is not supplied from the electrical grid. line 10 (C)  There is physical assurance that the load served by the line 11 customer generation will be curtailed concurrently and line 12 commensurately with an outage of the customer generation. line 13 SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to line 14 Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because line 15 the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school line 16 district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or line 17 infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty line 18 for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of line 19 the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within line 20 the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California line 21 Constitution.

O
6 Attachment Staff Report Item 11D
SB 1138 – Lowering the Cost of California’s Resource Adequacy (RA) Program Background
California’s Resource Adequacy (RA) program, which ensures there is enough electricity supply to meet customer demand, recently transitioned to a new “Slice-of-Day (SOD)” compliance framework, which requires load-serving entities (LSEs), such as community choice aggregators (CCAs), investor-owned utilities (IOUs) and energy service providers (ESPs), to procure enough RA to meet load obligations in each hour rather than monthly. While this aligns resources more precisely with load, under current rules, LSEs can only buy or sell RA products for the whole month even though obligations are unique to each hour.

Problem
The mismatch between the procurement obligations and transaction rules forces LSEs to purchase more RA than they need to meet their obligations, creating artificial market scarcity and unnecessarily driving up RA demand (and prices). It’s akin to having to buy a crate of oranges when you only need a few slices. These unnecessary costs fall directly on California ratepayers, totaling tens of millions of dollars annually.

Solution
At a time of rapidly rising costs in the electricity sector, policymakers should provide LSEs maximum flexibility in how they contribute their fair share to keep the overall system reliable. SB 1138 would lower the costs to consumers of California’s RA trading program by allowing LSEs to transact RA load obligations on an hourly basis to align with the new slice-of-day RA program.

Benefits
Enabling hourly load obligation trading:
 Promotes efficiency: LSEs with excess resources in one hour could trade with LSEs that are short, reducing the need to purchase additional RA.
 Delivers affordability: In 2025, hourly trading could have lowered RA costs for consumers by avoiding $105 million in excess RA purchases for summer 2025 and potentially saving an additional $77 million annually.
 Maintains LSE Responsibility: Creates a new procurement product rather than offering relief from meeting existing requirements
 Requires limited administrative oversight: Trades can be executed bilaterally with existing RA tracking tools, making the system administratively simple while maintaining each LSE’s full responsibility to meet obligations.

Attachment Staff Report Item 11E
Today’s RA rules make it difficult for CCAs to allocate resources efficiently, resulting in unnecessary costs and administrative hurdles. By allowing hourly transactions, CCAs can better match supply to local demand, reduce over-procurement, and protect customers from inflated electricity costs. The system becomes more transparent, predictable, and fair. These reforms could save tens of millions of dollars each year while maintaining reliability and supporting California’s clean energy goals.

Staff Contact
Name: Emily Zhou
Title: Legislative Aide
Email: [email protected]
Capitol Office: (916) 651 – 4018
Support
• California Community Choice Association (sponsor)
Attachment Staff Report Item 11E
2026 California Legislative
Position Recommendations
Sam Sadle – March 18, 2026
Attachment Staff Report Item 11F
Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA
)
2 Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) is Meant to Prevent Unintended Cost Shifts • The PCIA seeks to ensure departed customers neither impose nor receive unintended benefits bundled customers through evaluating the value of legacy utility resources relative to recent market values.

February 2025: Energy Division Report Asserts PCIA Calculation Methodology Needs Reform • CPUC staff asserts the way the PCIA’s RA market price benchmarks were calculated was flawed—resulting in a undesirably distorted valuation of legacy utility resources—and urgently needed reform.

February 2025 to May 2025: CPUC’s Undertakes Accelerated Rulemaking • After only two months of consideration, in May, CPUC staff proposes (and then in June the Board subsequently elects) to implement new RA market price benchmarks as part of the PCIA calculation that result in meaningful impacts for Ava and other CCA customer costs to the benefit of bundled customers.

KEY TAKEAWAY: Lack of Transparency
• Despite requests from Ava and other CCAs, in the proceeding and through Public Records Act requests, the CPUC has refused to share the information staff used to conclude that the previous methodology was flawed and that rapid change was needed. Absent legislative action, we do not expect this to change in the ongoing track 2 and 3 PCIA regulatory processes.
2025: What changed with the PCIA?
Attachment Staff Report Item 11F
Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA
)
3 AB 1761 Electricity: calculation methodology: data disclosures (Rogers):
• Official summary: This bill would require the commission [CPUC] to ensure that all data relied on in any decision or ruling, or in any proposal or analysis provided by an electrical corporation, the commission’s staff, or any other party, for the determination or application of a calculation methodology for any charge imposed on customers of a load-serving entity to recover the cost of contracts or resources owned by an electrical corporation or any value derived from that calculation is made available to load-serving entities and ratepayer advocates on behalf of customers. The bill would require that data to meet specified requirements, including that it is made through a public disclosure, except for market-sensitive data, as provided. (Emphasis added)
2026: Potential PCIA legislative action
Staff proposed action:

Support
AB 1761
(Rogers)
Support: Oppose:

Attachment Staff Report Item 11F
Resource Adequacy (RA)
4 CPUC transitions RA program to “Slice-of-Day”
• Prior to 2025, LSEs were required to procure sufficient RA capacity in order to demonstrate they were able to meet demand for the single highest demand hour each month
• Launched in 2025, the CPUC’s Slice of Day (“SOD”) RA program now requires LSEs to show available generating capacity to meet the highest demand for each hour on the day with the highest demand each month.

Compliance mismatch
• Under existing rules, LSEs are restricted in how they can transact with other entities to ensure compliance and are limited to transacting RA product for the whole month even though obligations are unique to each hour. • This mismatch means LSEs must purchase more RA than they need to meet their obligations, creating artificial market scarcity and unnecessarily driving up RA demand (and prices) CCA initiatives to allow hourly transactability to address mismatch in "Slice-of-Day" program • Regulatory approach: Since 2022, CalCCA and other parties have sought achieve hourly transactability through regulation. The CPUC refused to consider transactability until February 2026 when it released an assessment concluding that while it would provide cost savings for customers, the CPUC was ill-equipped to implement it. • 2025 legislative session: CalCCA pursued a strategy to insert RA transactability language into other energy legislative proposals and budget trailer bills. This was unsuccessful. 2025: Transition to ”Slice-of-Day” and unsuccessful regulatory and legislative strategy Attachment Staff Report Item 11F
5 SB 1138 Load-serving entities: resource adequacy requirements (Padilla):
• Official summary: This bill would require the commission to permit a load-serving entity to demonstrate compliance with resource adequacy requirements by selling to, or otherwise making transactions with, another load-serving entity to meet not more than 25% of its compliance obligation, on a short-term basis, and to permit those transactions to be denominated in the same unit of time used to denominate resource adequacy compliance requirements.
(Emphasis added)
2026: Potential RA transactability legislative action
Staff proposed action:

Support
SB 1138
(Padilla)
Support: Oppose:

Resource Adequacy (RA)
Attachment Staff Report Item 11F
Staff Report Item 12
Staff Report Item 12
To: Ava Community Energy Authority
From: Sam Sadle, Principal Legislative Manager
Subject: 2026 California Legislative Preview
Date: March 18 2026
_________________________________________________________________ Summary/Recommendation
This staff report provides the Board with an overview of the current state of play in the California legislature and previews future staff recommendations to be considered at the April Board meeting.

This is informational. No action is required.

Financial Impact
N/A
Analysis and Context
This presentation provides a summary of the current state of play in the California Legislature as it relates to legislative and budget proposals that may have an impact on Ava Community Energy and our Legislative Program. The presentation also provides frameworks through which to analyze the various proposals working through the legislature and background ahead of Board position proposals in April.

Attachments
A. Presentation entitled “2026.03.18 Board Item 12 2026 California Legislative Preview” 2026 California Legislative
Preview
Sam Sadle, Kendall Downie, Dominic Faria – March 18, 2026 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
2026 California Legislative Timeline
2 January
5: Legislature reconvenes
10: Governor submits
budget
February
20: Bill introduction
deadline
March April
24: Policy cmtes move
fiscal bills to fiscal cmtes
(1st chamber)
May
1: Policy cmtes move
non-fiscal bills to floor
(1st chamber)
29: Last day for bills to be
passed by 1st house
June
15: Budget bill must be
passed
July
2: Policy cmtes move bills
to fiscal cmtes or
floor (2nd chamber)
August
14: Fiscal cmtes move
bills to floor (2nd
chamber)
31: Last day for each
chamber to pass bills
September
30: Last day for Governor
to sign/veto bills
October November December We are here
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
3 2026 Bill Review
California legislators
proposed ~1,800 bills
Ava legislative team is
monitoring ~80 bills
"The purposes [of Ava]… include securing electrical energy supply for customers in participating jurisdictions, addressing climate change by reducing energy related greenhouse gas emissions, promoting electrical rate price stability, and fostering local economic benefits such as jobs creation, community energy programs and local power development. It is the intent of this Agreement to promote the development and use of a wide range of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency programs, including but not limited to State, regional and local solar and wind energy production." Ava Community Energy's Joint Powers Agreement
February 20 Ongoing
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
4 2026 Bill Review
Cross-functional analysis of
33 bills
(Internal, CalCCA, Board)
Ava legislative team is
monitoring ~80 bills
Making
Electricity More
Affordable
Protecting
Community
Choice
Accelerating
Decarbonization
Promoting Local
Development
Increasing Bill
Transparency
and
Understanding
Ava Community Energy's Legislative Program
Today Ongoing
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
5 2026 Bill Review
Cross-functional analysis of
33 bills
(Internal, CalCCA, Board)
Staff recommends Board take
a position on TBD bills

1. Directly impacts our operations or legislative program.

2. Supports the JPA's vision of an affordable, sustainable, and local energy ecosystem and has broad-based support.

3. Ava's perspective has specific resonance with key decisionmakers and could impact the legislative language or path forward.

Today April Board meeting
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Cost considerations
Making Electricity More Affordable
6 Rate affordability via PUC process and
consideration changes
Transmission and distribution
affordability via process
changes and faster timelines
AB 1975 – Schultz
Requires PUC to consider
maintenance costs when
approving infrastructure
spending
AB 2266 – Schultz
Requires PUC to set a
single RA value for all types
and duration of generation
contracts
AB 2463 – Petrie-Norris
Requires PUC to study IOU
return on equity and
propose how to link
earnings to outcomes
AB 2611 – Bains
Requires PUC to develop
rates that do not impose an
"unreasonable hardship" on
low-income communities
in hot climate zones
SB 924 – Hurtado
Requires PUC to consider
costs and affordability in
home weatherization
programs
AB 2111 – Papan
Energy agencies to
consider affordability and
wider range of future
scenarios for transmission
planning
Interconnection
AB 2239 – Carillo
Requires PUC to designate
“infrastructure-constrained
energization areas” to
expedite development and
interconnection
AB 2493 – Petrie-Norris
Requires IOUs to have an
interconnection auditor
AB 2516 – Petrie-Norris
Requires GOBiz to procure
critical grid infrastructure in
bulk and sell to utilities
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Create new data
center tariffs
Protecting Community Choice
7 Managing data center growth
AB 1577 – Bauer-Kahan
Requires monthly energy and water use
reporting from all data centers
AB 2383 – Zbur
Creates large load tariff (>20 MW) to
prevent costs shifts and require facilities
to pay for interconnection over 15 years
SB 886 – Padilla
Requires PUC to create large load
definition and tariff that prohibits costs
shifts, requires 50% onsite zero-carbon
storage, participation in demand response
(among other requirements)
SB 887 – Padilla
Subjects all data centers to CEQA unless
they install 100% zero-carbon energy
storage (4 hrs) and procure 100% zero-carbon generation (at least 75% net new) within 5 years (among other requirements)
SB 978 – Perez
Requires PUC to create large load tariff
(>75 mw) with upfront T&D upgrade
payments and require all backup
generation to be onsite solar paired with
backup batteries
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Accelerating Decarbonization
8 Supporting decarbonized utility-scale
generation
Supporting industrial and
large load decarbonization
AB 1156 – Wicks
Updates Solar-Use
Easement law to encourage
development of solar on
water-constrained farmland
AB 2464 – Wicks
Requires the PUC to study
clean firm zero-carbon
resources and what is
needed to achieve state’s
2045 goals
SB 1295 – Stern
Requires PUC to consider
procurement of an
additional 40 GW of storage
and allocate procurement
to LSEs
SB 943 – Becker
Directs PUC to develop new
TAC and NBC regimes that
encourage industrial
decarbonization and
electrification
SB 1168 – McNerney
Imposes a surcharge on all
gas generation used by data
centers and use funds to
support CARE/FERA
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Ebikes
Electric
vehicles
Portable
solar
Promoting Local Development
9 Distributed energy resources Transportation electrification SB 868 – Weiner
Exempts portable solar
generation (max output of
1,200 watts) from
interconnection
requirements
AB 1942 – Bauer-Kahan
Requires class 2 and 3
ebikes to be registered with
the DMV and plated
SB 1167 – Blakespear
Clarifies the definition of
ebikes and bans advertising
of non-eligible vehicles as
ebikes
SB 1215 – Cortese
Requires IOUs to 3x the
number of level 2 and 3
vehicle chargers in
multifamily housing and
recover costs as O&M
SB 1282 – Becker
Requires the Energy
Commission to study and
adopt Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G)
regulations
SB 222 – Weiner
Requires local
communities to adopt heat
pump water heater and
HVAC system permitting
streamlining
AB 2612 – Schultz
Requires the Building
Standards Commission to
adopt mandatory standards
for portable solar systems
Budget trailer – DSGS
Reallocates remaining
DEBA funding to DSGS
(~$20 million)
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Increasing Bill Understanding and Transparency
10 Dynamic rates
AB 1787 – Schultz
Requires IOUs to offer
dynamic pricing if smart
meter infrastructure is in
place
AB 710 – Irwin
Requires IOUs to offer
dynamic pricing and require
IOUs and POUs to plan for
smart meter rollout to all
customers
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Other
11 Brown Act updates PUC reform
SB 1187 – Durazo
Defines ”majority” for
purposes of open meetings
requirements
AB 2181 – Petrie-Norris
Requires Governor to
consider geographic
diversity in PUC
appointments
AB 13 – Ransom
Requires Governor to
consider diversity in PUC
appointments and PUC to
publish an annual
“affordability” report
IOU spending restrictions
SB 327 – McNerney
Prohibits IOUs from using
ratepayer funds for
advocacy activities related
to municipalization
20(!!!) spot or intent of legislature bills
AB 2396 – Harabedian
Spot bill – “Energy”
AB 1677 – Boerner
Intent of legislature to
reduce customer bills by
25%
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
What comes next? Bill review and positions
• One informational item:
o Present 2026 legislative preview to the
MRL, CAC, and Board for feedback
• One action item:
o Propose Support position for AB 1761
(Rogers) and SB 1138 (Padilla)
12 • Two action items:
o Propose annual updates to the Ava
Legislative Program
o Propose additional bill positions
(Support, Support If Amended,
Oppose Unless Amended, Oppose) to
MRL, ExCo, CAC, and Board
March Board meeting April Board meeting
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
What comes next? Legislative session
• April 24: First house policy committee
deadline (fiscal)
• May 1: First house policy committee deadline
(non-fiscal)
• May 15: First house Appropriations suspense
deadline
• May 29: First house passage deadline
13 First house
• July 2: Second house policy committee
deadline
• August 14: Second house Appropriations
suspense deadline
• Aug 31: Second house floor passage
deadline
• September 30: Veto/signature deadline
Second house
• May 14: Governor's budget revise
• June 15: Budget deadline
• May to August: Budget trailer and cleanup hearings
Budget
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Ava Monitored Bills
AB 13 Ransom (D) PUC membership and reporting
AB 34 Patterson (R) Extends the authority of POUs to count large hydro towards RPS AB 61 Pacheco (D) Require PAO to analyze ratepayer impacts of mandated programs AB 705 Boerner (D) Creates independent PUC audit office AB 706 Aguiar-Curry (D) Fire fuel reduction procurement program AB 710 Irwin (D) Dynamic pricing and advanced metering mandate AB 942 Calderon (D) Changes climate credit
AB 1016 Gonzalez (R) State certification exemption for geothermal power plants AB 1020 Schiavo (D) Requires IOUs to report taxpayer funding AB 1117 Schultz (D) Require IOUs to offer optional dynamic rate AB 1156 Wicks (D) Updates farmland solar-use easement statute AB 1553 Connolly (D) Spot bill -- CEQA reform
AB 1577 Bauer-Kahan (D) Data Center Monthly Reporting
AB 1677 Boerner (D) Require IOUs to cut rates by 25%
AB 1761 Rogers (D) PCIA data transparency
14 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Bills
AB 1774 Boerner (D) Spot bill -- IOU rates
AB 1787 Schultz (D) Require IOUs to offer a dynamic tariff if smart meter infrastructure is in place AB 1791 Sanchez (R)
Prohibits CARB from adopting regulations that would add more than 2 cents to a gallon of gas or $2,000 to a home
AB 1942 Bauer-Kahan (D) Restrictions on class 2 and class 3 ebikes AB 1975 Schultz (D) PUC to consider of maintenance costs for IOU structure siting decisions AB 1995 Patel (D) State Fire Marshal lithium battery working group AB 2057 DeMaio (R) Prohibits city and counties from implementing gas bans AB 2111 Papan (D) Transmission planning alignment with affordability and FERC Order 1920 AB 2175 Garcia (D) Removes advanced electricity storage from smart grid deployment objectives AB 2181 Petrie-Norris (D) Requires PUC commission diversity AB 2182 Irwin (D) Creates IOU run industrial decarbonization program AB 2234 Papan (D) CEQA exemptions for geothermal exploratory projects AB 2239 Carillo (D) Infrastructure-constrained energization areas and IOU energization timelines AB 2266 Schultz (D) RA valuation standardization
AB 2369 Rogers (D) Spot bill
15 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Bills
AB 2383 Zbur (D) Require creation of a large load customer class and rate schedule AB 2396 Harabedian (D) Spot bill
AB 2408 DeMaio (R) Require all PPPs be detailed on bill and an annual report to each ratepayer AB 2459 Wallis (R) Spot bill -- climate credit
AB 2463 Petrie-Norris (D) Require PUC to study IOU return on equity AB 2464 Wicks (D) Require PUC to study clean firm's role in 2045 goal AB 2493 Petrie-Norris (D) Require IOUs to have an interconnection auditor AB 2508 Hoover (R) Creates PPP vehicle to spend GGRF funds on EE programs run by RENs AB 2516 Petrie-Norris (D) California Grid Manufacturing Initiative AB 2518 Sharp-Collins (D) Spot bill -- utilities
AB 2554 Addis (D) Spot bill -- utilities
AB 2589 Irwin (D) Requires PUC to analyze OBBBA and adjust rates to reflect impacts AB 2611 Bains (D)
Require PUC to develop rates that do not impose an "unreasonable hardship" on low-income communities in hot climate zones
AB 2612 Schultz (D) Building standards for plug-in solar systems AB 2647 Calderon (D) Bans new nuclear power plants without fuel reprocessing capacity or adv tech 16 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Bills
AB 2688 Zbur (D) Spot bill – offshore wind
AB 2699 Zbur (D) Spot bill -- utilities
AB 2700 Gallagher (R) Spot bill -- rates and air pollution AB 2710 Bauer-Kahan (D) Intent of legislature to make changes in IOU bankruptcy processes AB 2748 Quirk-Silva (D) Revert EV regulations to 2022 state building code for BMR housing AB 2762 Boerner (D) Spot bill -- rates
SB 222 Weiner (D) Heat pump water heater and HVAC system permitting streamlining SB 327 McNerney (D)
Prohibits IOUs from using ratepayer funds for advocacy activities related to municipalization
SB 330 Padilla (D) Transmission infrastructure financing pilots SB 332 Wahab (D) Study breaking up IOUs
SB 453 Stern (D) Microgrid incentive program
SB 742 Perez (D) IOUs to remove unused transmission facilities SB 842 Stern (D) Report on firm zero-carbon resources
SB 868 Wiener (D) Plug-in solar interconnection exemption SB 875 Wiener (D) PG&E municipalization advancement 17
Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Bills
SB 886 Padilla (D) Large load cost shift prevention
SB 887 Padilla (D) Large load CEQA application
SB 905 Becker (D) Spot bill -- Non-bypassable charges
SB 913 Becker (D) Spot bill
SB 924 Hurtado (D) PUC to consider affordability when looking at home weatherization SB 925 McNerney (D) Spot bill -- Energy efficiency
SB 943 Becker (D) Industrial billing and NBC/TAC reform SB 978 Perez (D) Special tariff for large load customers SB 1035 Strickland (R) Suspend gas tax for one year
SB 1097 Weiner (D) Spot bill -- Energy permitting
SB 1138 Padilla (D) RA transactability
SB 1158 Stern (D)
Adds status of utility transmission upgrades and electrical grid infrastructure to Reliability Planning Assessment
SB 1167 Blakespear (D) Clarifies ebike definition and bans advertising of non-eligible bikes SB 1168 McNerney (D) Data center gas usage surcharge
SB 1187 Durazo (D) Brown Act meeting updates
SB 1215 Cortese (D) Require IOUs to 3x the number of multifamily level 2 and 3 chargers 18 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A
Full Universe of Bills
SB 1219 Strickland (R)
Requires PUC to consider discontinuation of nonperforming EE programs within 180 days
SB 1233 Allen (D) Spot bill -- rates
SB 1245 Stern (D) Intent of legislature to address cost containment of renewable integration into grid SB 1282 Becker (D) V2G standards
SB 1295 Stern (D)
Requires PUC to consider procurement of 40GW of storage and allocate procurement to LSEs
SB 1354 Archuleta (D) Spot bill -- renewable energy
Budget
Trailer Dept of Finance
Reallocates outstanding funding from the Distributed Energy Backup Assets (DEBA) program to the Demand Side Grid Support (DSGS) program 19 Attachment Staff Report Item 12A

Ava Community Energy Board of DirectorsMarch 18, 2026

Ava Community Energy Board of Directors
March 18, 2026