MCE Board of Directors Meeting
Thursday, March 19, 2026
6:30 p.m.
1125 Tamalpais Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901
2300 Clayton Road, Suite 1500, Concord, CA 94520
955 School Street, Napa, CA 94559, City Hall Committee Room (City of Napa) 675 Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 94533, First Floor Hearing Room (County of Solano) 405 Howard St, Suite 416, San Francisco, CA 94105 (City of Fairfield) Public comments may be made in person or remotely via the details below.
Remote Public Meeting Participation
Video Conference: https://t.ly/mIv5w
Phone: Dial (669) 900-9128, Meeting ID: 890 0487 7785, Passcode: 525690 Materials related to this agenda are available for physical inspection at MCE’s offices in San Rafael at 1125 Tamalpais Avenue, San Rafael, CA 94901 and in Concord at 2300 Clayton Road, Suite 1500, Concord, CA 94520.
DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you are a person with a disability who requires an accommodation or an alternative format, please contact MCE at (888) 632-3674 or [email protected] at least 72 hours before the meeting start time to ensure arrangements are made.
Agenda Page 1 of 2
1. Roll Call/Quorum
2. Board Announcements (Discussion)
3. Public Open Time (Discussion)
4. Report from Chief Executive Officer (Discussion)
5. Consent Calendar (Discussion/Action)
C.1. Approval of 2.19.26 Meeting Minutes
C.2. Approval of 3.16.26 Special Meeting Minutes
Agenda Page 2 of 2
C.3. Technical Committee Recommendation Regarding Term Limits C.4. Resolution 2026-01 Creating Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation Implementation
6. Fiscal Year 2026/27 Budget Approval Inclusive of Rate Reduction Effective, April 1, 2026 (Discussion/Action)
7. Draft MCE RFP Governance Assessment Services (Discussion/Action)
8. Board & Staff Matters (Discussion)
9. Adjourn
The Board of Directors may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on the agenda irrespective of how the items are described.
DRAFT
MCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES1
Thursday February 19, 2026
6:30 P.M.
Present: Stephanie Andre, City of Larkspur
Dion Bailey, City of Hercules
Eli Beckman, Town of Corte Madera
Mark Belotz, Town of Danville
Kari Birdseye, City of Benicia
Barbara Coler, Town of Fairfax
Cindy Darling, City of Walnut Creek
Joelle Gallagher, Alternate, County of Napa and Four Napa Cities/Town (American Canyon, Calistoga, St. Helena, and Yountville)
Jill Hoffman, City of Sausalito, arrived at 6:45pm
Kevin Jacobs, City of Novato
Robert Jweinat, Alternate, City of San Ramon
Arlene Kobata, City of Pittsburg
Tarrell Kullaway, Town of San Anselmo
Maika Llorens Gulati, City of San Rafael
Eduardo Martinez, City of Richmond
John McCormick, City of Lafayette
Aaron Meadows, City of Oakley
Devin Murphy, City of Pinole
Laura Nakamura, City of Concord
Beth Painter, City of Napa
Charles Palmares, City of Vallejo
Max Perrey, City of Mill Valley, joined at 6:38pm
Mary Sackett, County of Marin
Manveer Sandhu, City of Fairfield
Shanelle Scales-Preston, County of Contra Costa, Chair
Amanda Szakats, City of Pleasant Hill, joined at 7:23pm Graham Thiel, Town of Moraga, joined at 6:57pm
Sally Wilkinson, City of Belvedere, joined at 6:38pm
Absent: Monica Brown, County of Solano
C. William Kircher, Jr., Town of Ross
Patricia Ponce, City of San Pablo
Holli Thier, Town of Tiburon
Carolyn Wysinger, City of El Cerrito
Brianne Zorn, City of Martinez
1 Approval of the minutes is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
DRAFT
Staff
& Others: Jared Blanton, VP of Public Affairs
Kaladhar Bollampalli, Director of Power Systems and Analytics Jesica Brooks, Lead Board Clerk and Executive Assistant Vidhi Chawla, VP of Power Resources
Alice Havenar-Daughton, VP of Customer Programs
Vicken Kasarjian, Chief Operating Officer
Tanya Lomas, Board Clerk
Linda Lye, Senior Legal Counsel
Lindsay Meehan, Director of Human Resources
Catalina Murphy, General Counsel
Ashley Muth, Internal Operations Associate
Efren Oxlaj, Manager of Finance
Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations
Zae Perrin, VP of Customer Operations
Mike Rodriguez-Vargas, Internal Operations Assistant
Enyonam Senyo-Mensah, Manager of Internal Operations
Maira Strauss, Chief Financial Officer
Jamie Tuckey, Chief Customer Officer
Dawn Weisz, Chief Executive Officer
1. Roll Call
Chair Scales-Preston called the regular meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. with quorum established by roll call.
2. Board Announcements (Discussion)
There were comments from Director Sackett.
3. Public Open Time (Discussion)
Chair Scales-Preston opened the public comment period and there were comments made by members of the public Dan Segedin, Nick Pappas, and Jody Timms.
4. Report from Chief Executive Officer (Discussion)
CEO Weisz introduced this item and addressed questions from Board members.
Chair Scales-Preston opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
5. Consent Calendar (Discussion/Action)
DRAFT
C.1 Approval of 1.15.26 Meeting Minutes
C.2 Addition of Board Members to Committees
Chair Scales-Preston opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
Action: It was M/S/C (Llorens Gulati/Coler) to approve Consent Calendar items C.1 and C.2. Motion carried by roll call vote. 1-Abstain (Abstain:
Kullaway. Absent: Beckman, Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Szakats, Thiel, Thier, Wysinger and Zorn).2
6. Proposed MCE Rate Reduction, Effective April 1, 2026 (Discussion/Action)
3 Maira Strauss, Chief Financial Officer, and Kaladhar Bollampalli, Director of Power Systems and Analytics, introduced this item and addressed questions from Board members.
Chair Scales-Preston opened the public comment period and there were comments from members of the public Nick pappas, Susannah Saunders, Dan Segedin, Jody Timms, and Robert Miller.
Action 1: It was M/S/D (Llorens Gulati/ Sackett) to approve, for purposes of supporting budget planning, proposed Rate Reduction Option 2+ for a generation rate reduction of 2.05¢ with the temporary bill credit of $0.0062/kWh ending 12/31/26 along with $15 million for the MCE Cares Credit.
Motion does not carry. Nos-24 Yays-8 (Nos: Andre, Bailey, Beckman, Belotz, Birdseye, Darling, Gallagher, Hoffman, Jacobs, Jweinat, Kobata, Kullaway, Martinez, McCormick, Meadows, Murphy, Nakamura, Painter, Palmares, Sandhu, Scales-Preston, Szakats, Thiel and Wilkinson. Absent: Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Thier, Wysinger, and Zorn).
2This item is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
3 This item is a general administrative matter and requires a majority vote of the full MCE Board for a motion to carry. The Operating Rules and Regulations specify that adoption of the budget is a general administrative matter that requires a majority vote of the full membership of the Board (Article VI, Section 2). Rate revenue is a core assumption built into the budget, and MCE has historically included rates as part of a larger vote on the budget. Board action on rate setting is therefore being treated as Board action on the budget.
DRAFT
Action 2: It was M/S/D (Martinez/Andre) to approve, for purposes of supporting budget planning, proposed Rate Reduction Option 4 for a generation rate reduction of 3.51¢. Motion does not carry. Nos-20 Yays-12 (Nos: Bailey, Belotz, Birdseye, Coler, Darling, Gallagher, Jweinat, Kobata, Llorens Gulati, Meadows, McCormick, Murphy, Nakamura, Painter, Palmares, Sackett, Sandhu, Scales-Preston, Szakats, and Thiel. Absent: Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Their, Wysinger and Zorn).
Action 3: It was M/S/D (Wilkinson/Beckman) to approve, for purposes of supporting budget planning, proposed Rate Reduction Option 3 for a generation rate reduction of 3¢. Motion does not carry. Nos-17 Yays-15 (Nos: Bailey, Birdseye, Coler, Darling, Gallagher, Jweinat, Kobata, Llorens Gulati, Meadows, Murphy, Nakamura, Painter, Palmares, Sandhu Scales-Preston, Szakats, and Thiel. Absent: Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Their, Wysinger and Zorn).
Action 4: It was M/S/C (Painter/Gallagher) to approve, for purposes of supporting budget planning, proposed Rate Reduction Option 2+ for a generation rate reduction of 2.05¢ with the temporary bill credit of $0.0062/kWh ending 12/31/26, along with $10 million for the MCE Cares Credit. Motion carried by roll call vote. Nos-11 Yays-20 (Nos: Andre, Beckman, Belotz, Hoffman, Jacobs, Jweinat, Kullaway, Martinez, Meadows, Perrey, Wilkinson Absent: Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Sackett, Their, Wysinger and Zorn).
7. Proposed FY 2026/27 Budget Elements (Discussion/Action) Deferred to the next meeting.
8. Establish Ending Time for Board Meetings (Discussion/Action) Chair Scales-Preston introduced this item and addressed questions from Board members.
Chair Scales-Preston opened the public comment period and there was a comment from member of the public, Nick Pappas.
Action: It was M/S/C (Darling/Szakats) to approve a Board meeting end time of 10pm in the absence of items that require conclusion at that meeting, whereby to continue the meeting beyond 10pm, a majority vote of the members present would be required. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. (Absent: Brown, Kircher Jr., Ponce, Sackett, Their, Wysinger and Zorn).4
4 This item is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
DRAFT
11. Board & Staff Matters (Discussion)
There were no comments.
12. Adjournment
Chair Scales-Preston adjourned the meeting at 10:13 p.m. to the next scheduled Board Meeting on March 19, 2026.
___________________________________________
Shanelle Scales-Preston, Chair
Attest:
___________________________________________
Dawn Weisz, Secretary
DRAFT
MCE SPECIAL BOARD MEETING MINUTES1
Monday, March 16, 2026
12:00 P.M.
Present: Liz Alessio, County of Napa and Four Napa Cities/Towns (American Canyon, Calistoga, St. Helena, and Yountville) Stephanie Andre, City of Larkspur
Eli Beckman, Town of Corte Madera
Mark Belotz, Town of Danville
Barbara Coler, Town of Fairfax
Cindy Darling, City of Walnut Creek, Acting Chair
Kevin Jacobs, City of Novato
C. William Kircher, Jr., Town of Ross
Tarrell Kullaway, Town of San Anselmo
Eduardo Martinez, City of Richmond
John McCormick, City of Lafayette
Devin Murphy, City of Pinole
Laura Nakamura, City of Concord
Beth Painter, City of Napa
Mary Sackett, County of Marin
Manveer Sandhu, City of Fairfield, joined at 1:02pm
Shanelle Scales-Preston, County of Contra Costa
Amanda Szakats, City of Pleasant Hill
Sally Wilkinson, City of Belvedere
Brianne Zorn, City of Martinez, joined at 12:17pm
Absent: Dion Bailey, City of Hercules
Kari Birdseye, City of Benicia
Monica Brown, County of Solano
Jill Hoffman, City of Sausalito
Arlene Kobata, City of Pittsburg
Maika Llorens Gulati, City of San Rafael
Aaron Meadows, City of Oakley
Charles Palmares, City of Vallejo
Max Perrey, City of Mill Valley
Patricia Ponce, City of San Pablo
Graham Thiel, Town of Moraga
Holli Thier, Town of Tiburon
Sridhar Verose, City of San Ramon
Carolyn Wysinger, City of El Cerrito
1 Approval of the minutes is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
DRAFT
Staff
& Others: Jesica Brooks, Lead Board Clerk and Executive Assistant Vicken Kasarjian, Chief Operating Officer
Tanya Lomas, Board Clerk
Linda Lye, Senior Legal Counsel
Nathaniel Malcolm, Senior Commercial Counsel
Catalina Murphy, General Counsel
Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations
Vidhya Prabhakaran, Partner, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Mike Rodriguez-Vargas, Internal Operations Assistant
Enyonam Senyo-Mensah, Manager of Internal Operations
Jamie Tuckey, Chief Customer Officer
Dawn Weisz, Chief Executive Officer
1. Roll Call
Acting Chair Darling called the special meeting to order at 12:03 p.m. with quorum established by roll call.
2. Public Open Time (Discussion)
Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there was a comment from member of the public, Nick Pappas.
Begin Closed Session
Prior to entering closed session, General Counsel Murphy orally stated that the basis for the closed session is Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and 54956.9(e)(1). Acting Chair Darling opened the closed session at 12:10 p.m.
Return to Open session
Acting Chair Darling returned to open session at 1:25 p.m. General Counsel Murphy stated that there were no actions taken in closed session to report.
3. Adjournment
Acting Chair Darling adjourned the meeting at 1:33 p.m.
DRAFT
___________________________________________
Cindy Darling, Acting Chair
Attest:
___________________________________________
Dawn Weisz, Secretary
March 19, 2026
TO: MCE Board of Directors
FROM: Jesica Brooks, Lead Board Clerk and Executive Assistant RE: Technical Committee Recommendation Regarding Term Limits (Agenda Item #05 C.3)
ATTACHMENTS: A. December 4, 2024, Executive Committee Meeting Minutes B. April 17, 2025, Board of Directors Meeting Minutes
Dear MCE Board Members:
Summary and Background:
In April 2025, your Board adopted governance recommendations by the Executive Committee, including implementation of term limits for the Technical Committee Chair to two one-year terms.
Director Murphy was elected to his second term as Technical Committee Chair on April 4, 2025, and is therefore termed out as of April 3, 2026.
Technical Committee voted at its March 6, 2026, meeting to recommend to your Board that the Technical Committee Chair term limits be paused for one year in light of the pending governance assessment, and recommend that Director Murphy continue as Interim Chair of Technical Committee during that period.1
If your Board adopts Technical Committee’s recommendation, then term limits for the Technical Committee Chair would be suspended for one year and Director Murphy would continue as Interim Chair during that time. If your Board declines to adopt the recommendation, then term limits for the Technical Committee Chair remain in effect, Director Murphy will be termed out, and Technical Committee will need to select a new Chair at its upcoming April 3, 2026 committee meeting.
Fiscal Impacts: None.
Recommendation: The Technical Committee recommends that Technical Committee Chair term limits be paused for one year and that Director Murphy continue as Interim Chair during that period.2
1 This item was placed on the Technical Committee agenda at the request of a Director. 2 This item is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
MCE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, December 4, 2024
12:00 P.M.
Present: Eli Beckman, Town of Corte Madera
Cindy Darling, City of Walnut Creek, Acting Chair
Maika Llorens Gulati, San Rafael
Lisa Motoyama, Alternate, City of El Cerrito, joined at 12:28pm Devin Murphy, City of Pinole, joined at 12:22pm
Laura Nakamura, City of Concord
Mathew Salter, Town of Ross
Sally Wilkinson, City of Belvedere
Absent: Eduardo Martinez, City of Richmond
Max Perrey, City of Mill Valley, Chair
Shanelle Scales-Preston, City of Pittsburg
Staff
& Others: Jesica Brooks, Lead Board Clerk and Executive Assistant Vicken Kasarjian, Chief Operations Officer
Shaheen Khan, VP of Human Resources, Diversity, and Inclusion Caroline Lavenue, Legal Counsel
Tanya Lomas, Internal Operations Coordinator
Lindsay Meehan, Manager of Human Resources
Catalina Murphy, General Counsel
Ashley Muth, Internal Operations Coordinator
Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations
Enyonam Senyo-Mensah, Internal Operations Manager
Dan Settlemyer, Internal Operations Associate
Javier Montalbo, Customer Programs Manager
Carol Dorsett, Human Resources Specialist, Talent, Diversity, & Inclusion
Evelyn Reyes, Customer Programs Specialist
Maira Strauss, Director of Finance
Martin Bond, Senior Business Development Manager
Sol Phua, Customer Programs Specialist II
Nicole Busto, Director of Marketing
Efren Oxlaj, Finance Manager
Jackie Nunez, Senior Bilingual Communications Manager
Shyna Deepak, Communications Manager
Alice Havenar-Daughton, VP of Customer Programs
Jenn Green, Manager of Customer Programs
Jenna Tenney, Director of Communications & Community
Engagement
Alexandra McGee, VP of Strategic Initiatives
Zena Meyer, Finance Analyst
Jamie Tuckey, Chief Customer Officer
Dawn Weisz, Chief Executive Officer
Docusign Envelope ID: 4F89165E-59DB-4F30-8942-F4E8E099355B
1. Roll Call
Acting Chair Darling called the regular Executive Committee meeting to order at 12:01 p.m. with quorum established by roll call.
2. Board Announcements (Discussion)
There were no comments.
3. Public Open Time (Discussion)
Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
4. Report from Chief Executive Officer (Discussion)
CEO, Dawn Weisz, introduced this item and addressed questions from Committee members.
5. Consent Calendar (Discussion/Action)
C.1 Approval of 11.6.24 Meeting Minutes
C.2 Proposed Fifth Agreement with Strategic Energy Innovations Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
6. Revisiting MCE’s Committee Structure (Discussion/Action) Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations, presented this item and addressed questions from Committee members.
Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there were comments from member of the public Dan Segedin.
Action: It was M/S/C (Gulati/Nakamura) to approve Staff’s recommendation of no change to the current Committee Structure. Motion carried by roll call vote. 6-Yay, 2-No. (No: Salter, Wilkinson; Absent: Martinez, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
7. Streamlined Executive Committee Meetings (Discussion/Action) Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations, presented this item and addressed questions from Committee members.
Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
Action: It was M/S/C (Gulati/Beckman) to approve Consent Calendar C.1 and C.2. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. (Absent: Martinez, Motoyama, Murphy, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
Docusign Envelope ID: 4F89165E-59DB-4F30-8942-F4E8E099355B Action 1: It was M/S/C (Beckman/Gulati) to recommend to the Board of Directors:
i. Require one year of Board membership prior to joining the Executive Committee.
ii. Require one year of Executive Committee membership to be eligible to become Chair of the committee.
iii. Remove any member if the member community representative is absent for more than two meetings annually.
Motion does not carry. 4-yay, 4-no (No: Darling, Murphy, Motoyama, Murphy, Salter; Absent: Martinez, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
Action 2: It was M/S/C (Salter/Motoyama) to recommend to the Board of Directors:
i.Require 6 months of Board membership prior to joining the Executive Committee.
ii.Require one year of Executive Committee membership to be eligible to become Chair of the committee.
iii.Remove any member if the member community representative is absent for more than two meetings annually.
Motion carried by roll call vote. 7-yays, 1-no. (No: Murphy; Absent: Martinez, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
Action 3: It was M/S/C (Darling/Wilkinson) to hold two in-person meetings annually, alternating Primary Location between MCE’s San Rafael and Concord offices for every meeting, and to establish recommended best practices for deliberations: to allow one round of questions from each committee member, one round of comments from each committee member, then a call for action. Motion carried by roll call vote. 7-yays, 1-no. (No: Murphy; Absent: Martinez, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
Action 4: It was M/S/C (Beckman/Wilkinson) to limit the term of the Executive Committee Chair to two one-year terms and to forward a recommendation to the Board and Technical Committee to adopt the same. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. (Absent: Martinez, Perrey, and Scales-Preston).
8. Update on Attracting and Retaining MCE Staff (Discussion) Shaheen Khan, Vice President of Human Resources, Diversity, and Inclusion, presented this item and addressed questions from Committee members.
Acting Chair Darling opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
Docusign Envelope ID: 4F89165E-59DB-4F30-8942-F4E8E099355B Action: No action required.
After agenda item #08, Acting Chair Darling had to leave the meeting and passed facilitation to Director Beckman to continue the meeting.
9. Committee & Staff Matters (Discussion)
There were no comments
10. Adjournment
Acting Chair Beckman adjourned the meeting at 2:34 p.m. to the next scheduled Executive Committee Meeting on January 1, 2025.
___________________________________________
Cindy Darling, Acting Chair
Attest:
___________________________________________
Dawn Weisz, Secretary
Docusign Envelope ID: 4F89165E-59DB-4F30-8942-F4E8E099355B
MCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Thursday, April 17, 2025
6:30 P.M.
Present: Liz Alessio, The County of Napa and Four Napa Cities/Town (American Canyon, Calistoga, St. Helena, and Yountville)
Stephanie Andre, City of Larkspur
Eli Beckman, Town of Corte Madera
Mark Belotz, Town of Danville
Monica Brown, County of Solano
Barbara Coler, Town of Fairfax
Cindy Darling, City of Walnut Creek
Kevin Jacobs, City of Novato
Arlene Kobata, City of Pittsburg
Maika Llorens-Gulati, City of San Rafael
Satinder Malhi, Alternate, City of Martinez
Aaron Meadows, City of Oakley
Devin Murphy, City of Pinole
Laura Nakamura, City of Concord
Charles Palmares, City of Vallejo, joined at 6:55pm
Max Perrey, City of Mill Valley
Gabe Quinto, City of El Cerrito, Acting Chair
Mary Sackett, County of Marin
Mathew Salter, Town of Ross
Shanelle Scales-Preston, County of Contra Costa, joined at 7:35pm Amanda Szakats, City of Pleasant Hill
Graham Thiel, Town of Moraga
Holli Thier, Town of Tiburon
Sridhar Verose, City of San Ramon
Sally Wilkinson, City of Belvedere, joined at 6:43pm
Cesar Zepeda, City of Richmond
Brianne Zorn, City of Martinez
Absent: Dion Bailey, City of Hercules
Kari Birdseye, City of Benicia
Melissa Blaustein, City of Sausalito
Gina Dawson, City of Lafayette
Tarrell Kullaway, Town of San Anselmo
Elizabeth Pabon-Alvarado, City of San Pablo
Beth Painter, City of Napa
Manveer Sandhu, City of Fairfield
Staff
Docusign Envelope ID: 45A2F692-9DBB-4F67-A179-B1BFB2FAE5C3 & Others: Jared Blanton, VP of Public Affairs
Jesica Brooks, Lead Board Clerk and Executive Assistant Vidhi Chawla, VP of Power Resources
Shyna Deepak, Communications Manager
Vicken Kasarjian, Chief Operating Officer
Caroline Lavenue, Legal Counsel II
Tanya Lomas, Board Clerk Associate
Catalina Murphy, General Counsel
Ashley Muth, Internal Operations Coordinator
Tyler Noble, Municipal Capital Markets Group, Inc.
Efren Oxlaj, Finance Manager
Justine Parmelee, VP of Internal Operations
Mike Rodriguez-Vargas, Internal Operations Assistant
Enyonam Senyo-Mensah, Internal Operations Manager
Dan Settlemyer, Internal operations Associate
Maíra Strauss, VP of Finance and Treasurer
Lisa Strong, Internal Operations Intern
1. Roll Call
Acting Chair Quinto called the regular meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. with quorum established by roll call.
2. Board Announcements (Discussion)
Acting Chair Quinto opened the floor for board announcements, and there were no comments.
3. Public Open Time (Discussion)
Acting Chair Quinto opened the public comment period and there were comments made by Rebekah Collins and Isabelle Winstead.
4. Report from Chief Executive Officer (Discussion)
Vicken Kasarjian, COO introduced this item and addressed questions from Board members.
Acting Chair Quinto opened the public comment period and comments were made by Dion Bailey.
5. Consent Calendar (Discussion/Action)
C.1 Approval of 3.20.25 Meeting Minutes
C.2 Approved Contracts for Energy update
C.3 Board of Directors Voting Shares Update
C.4 Proposed Committee Governance Recommendations from the Executive Committee
C.5 Addition of Board Members to Committees
Docusign Envelope ID: 45A2F692-9DBB-4F67-A179-B1BFB2FAE5C3 Acting Chair Quinto opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
6. 2024 Charles F. McGlashan Advocacy Award Presentation (Discussion) Jared Blanton, VP of Public Affairs, presented the McGlashan Advocacy Award to The Greater Concord Chamber of Commerce, RCF Connects, and Andrew Bradley, Program Manager, City of St. Helena.
Acting Chair Quinto opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
Action: No action required.
7. Proposed Resolution 2025-02: Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Clean Energy Purchase Contract and Certain Other Documents in Connection with the Issuance of the California Community Choice Financing Authority Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds; and Certain Other Actions Required to Ensure the Reduction in the Costs of Renewable Energy Therewith (Discussion/Action) Vicken Kasarjian, COO and several MCE staff addressed questions from Board members.
Acting Chair Quinto opened the public comment period and there were no comments.
Action: It was M/S/C (Nakamura/Darling) to approve Resolution 2025-02:
Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Clean Energy Purchase Contract and Certain Other Documents in Connection with the Issuance of the California Community Choice Financing Authority Clean Energy Project Revenue Bonds; and Certain Other Actions Required to Ensure the Reduction in the Costs of Renewable Energy Therewith.
Motion carried by roll call vote. Yays-28; No-1; Abstain-1 (No: Wilkinson; Abstain: Their; Absent: Bailey, Birdseye, Blaustein, Dawson, Kullaway, Pabon-Alvarado, Painter, Sandhu).
8. Board & Staff Matters (Discussion)
There were comments made by Scales-Preston, Salter and Beckman.
9. Adjournment
Action: It was M/S/C (Perrey/Alessio) to approve Consent Calendar items C.1, C.2, C.3, C.4 and C.5. Motion carried by unanimous roll call (Absent:
Bailey, Birdseye, Blaustein, Dawson, Kullaway, Pabon-Alvarado, Painter, Palmares, Salter, Sandhu, Scales-Preston, Thier).
Docusign Envelope ID: 45A2F692-9DBB-4F67-A179-B1BFB2FAE5C3 Acting Chair Quinto adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. to the next scheduled Board Meeting on May 15, 2025.
___________________________________________
Shanelle Scales-Preston, Chair
Attest:
___________________________________________
Dawn Weisz, Secretary
Docusign Envelope ID: 45A2F692-9DBB-4F67-A179-B1BFB2FAE5C3 March 19, 2026
TO: MCE Board of Directors
FROM: Catalina Murphy, General Counsel
RE: Proposed Resolution No. 2026-01 Creating an Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation (Agenda Item #05 C.4) ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution No. 2026-01 Creating an Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation
B. Resolution No. 2020-04 Delegating Energy Procurement Dear MCE Board Members:
Summary and Background:
Resolution 2020-04 Delegating Energy Procurement (“Resolution 2020-04”) sets forth existing delegations regarding energy procurements. Resolution 2020-04 delegates to the CEO and Technical Committee Chair, jointly, authorization “after consultation with the appropriate Committee of the Board of Directors, to approve and execute contracts for Energy Procurement for terms of less than or equal to five years” (“one- to five- year energy procurements”). MCE’s implementation of the delegation for procurements less than or equal to five years has been the subject of discussion at meetings of the Board of Directors and the Technical Committee.
The proposed Resolution No. 2026-01 Creating an Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation (“Proposed Resolution”) would create an Interim Advisory Committee (“IAC” or “Interim Advisory Committee”) to advise on and facilitate MCE’s delegations as set forth in Resolution 2020-04. The Proposed Resolution would clarify that consultation with the IAC would constitute “consultation with the appropriate Committee of the Board of Directors” within the meaning of the delegation regarding one- to -five year energy procurements under Resolution 2020-04, with respect to procurements executed after the date of this Resolution. The Resolution would not affect the meaning of the term “consultation” for one- to five- year energy procurements executed prior to the date of this Resolution.
This Interim Advisory Committee would exist for the limited purpose described above and during the current period in which the Board has expressed an interest in reviewing governance issues and potentially revisiting delegations. The Interim Advisory Committee would sunset when the Board completes its governance assessment, revisits and/or clarifies Resolution 2020-04 or its successor, or modifies this Proposed Resolution, whichever comes first.
Fiscal Impacts:
None.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2026-01 Creating an Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation.
1 1
This item is a general administrative matter. Action requires a majority vote of board members present for a motion to carry.
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
MARIN CLEAN ENERGY CREATING AN INTERIM ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR
ENERGY PROCUREMENT DELEGATION
WHEREAS, Marin Clean Energy (“MCE”) is a joint powers authority established on December 19, 2008, and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.); and
WHEREAS, MCE members include the following communities: the County of Marin, the County of Contra Costa, the County of Napa, the County of Solano, the City of American Canyon, the City of Belvedere, the City of Benicia, the City of Calistoga, the City of Concord, the Town of Corte Madera, the Town of Danville, the City of El Cerrito, the Town of Fairfax, the City of Fairfield, the City of Hercules, the City of Lafayette, the City of Larkspur, the City of Martinez, the City of Mill Valley, the Town of Moraga, the City of Napa, the City of Novato, the City of Oakley, the City of Pinole, the City of Pittsburg, the City of Pleasant Hill, the City of San Ramon, the City of Richmond, the Town of Ross, the Town of San Anselmo, the City of San Pablo, the City of San Rafael, the City of Sausalito, the City of St. Helena, the Town of Tiburon, the City of Vallejo, the City of Walnut Creek, and the Town of Yountville; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 2020-04 sets forth energy procurement authority delegated by the Board of Directors; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 2020-04 defines "Energy Procurement" to mean all contracting, purchase and sale of energy and energy-related products for MCE, including but not limited to products related to electricity, capacity, energy efficiency, distributed energy resources, demand response, and storage; and
WHEREAS, Resolution 2020-04 delegates to the CEO and Technical Committee Chair, jointly, authorization “after consultation with the appropriate Committee of the Board of Directors, to approve and execute contracts for Energy Procurements for terms less than or equal to five years” (one- to five-year energy procurements); and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors is undertaking a governance assessment to examine governance issues which may include but are not limited to energy procurement delegations and has created an ad hoc governance committee to lead and support the governance assessment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the MCE Board of Directors as follows:
1. There is hereby created an Interim Advisory Committee for Energy Procurement Delegation (“Interim Advisory Committee” or “IAC”) for the purpose of advising on and facilitating MCE’s delegations, as set forth in Resolution 2020-04.
2. The IAC shall consist of Directors Barbara Coler, Cindy Darling, Devin Murphy, and Mary Sackett, and shall select its own Chair.
3. Consultation with the IAC constitutes “consultation with the appropriate Committee of the Board of Directors” within the meaning of the delegation regarding one- to -five year energy procurements under Resolution 2020-04, with respect to procurements executed after the date of this Resolution.
4. The IAC may provide advice on other energy procurement matters pertaining to Resolution 2020-04.
5. The IAC will sunset when the Board completes its governance assessment, revisits and/or clarifies the delegations set forth in Resolution 2020-04 or its successor, or modifies this Resolution, whichever comes first.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the MCE Board of Directors on this 19th day of March 2026, by the following vote:
AYES NOES ABSTAIN ABSENT
County of Marin
Contra Costa County
County of Napa
County of Solano
City of American Canyon
City of Belvedere
City of Benicia
City of Calistoga
City of Concord
Town of Corte Madera
Town of Danville
City of El Cerrito
Town of Fairfax
City of Fairfield
City of Hercules
City of Lafayette
City of Larkspur
City of Martinez
City of Mill Valley
Town of Moraga
City of Napa
City of Novato
City of Oakley
City of Pinole
City of Pittsburg
City of Pleasant Hill
City of San Ramon
City of Richmond
Town of Ross
Town of San Anselmo
City of San Pablo
City of San Rafael
City of Sausalito
City of St. Helena
Town of Tiburon
City of Vallejo
City of Walnut Creek
Town of Yountville
______________________________________
CHAIR, MCE
Attest:
___________________________________________
SECRETARY, MCE
RESOLUTION 2020-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
MARIN CLEAN ENERGY RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2018-03 AND
DELEGATING ENERGY PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, Marin Clean Energy (MCE) is a joint powers authority established on December 19, 2008, and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.); and
WHEREAS, MCE members include the following communities: the County of Marin, the County of Contra Costa, the County of Napa, the County of Solano, the City of American Canyon, the City of Belvedere, the City of Benicia, the City of Calistoga, the City of Concord, the Town of Corte Madera, the Town of Danville, the City of El Cerrito, the Town of Fairfax, the City of Lafayette, the City of Larkspur, the City of Martinez, the City of Mill Valley, the Town of Moraga, the City of Napa, the City of Novato, the City of Oakley, the City of Pinole, the City of Pittsburg, the City of Pleasant Hill, the City of San Ramon, the City of Richmond, the Town of Ross, the Town of San Anselmo, the City of San Pablo, the City of San Rafael, the City of Sausalito, the City of St. Helena, the Town of Tiburon, the City of Vallejo, the City of Walnut Creek, and the Town of Yountville; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2018-03 set forth energy procurement authority delegated by the Board of Directors; and
WHEREAS, the Board intends that this Resolution No. 2020-04 replaces Resolution No. 2018-03; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors, by this delegation of energy procurement and contracting authority as described herein, shall not be divested of any such authority, but shall retain and may exercise such authority at such times as it may deem necessary and proper, at its sole discretion; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors shall retain contracting authority over all contracts required by law to be approved by the Board, including but not limited to any contracts to borrow money or otherwise incur debt.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the MCE Board of Directors:
A. Resolution No. 2018-03 is hereby rescinded.
B. For purposes of this Resolution, "Energy Procurement" shall mean all contracting, purchase and sale of energy and energy-related products for MCE, including but not limited to products related to electricity, capacity, energy efficiency, distributed energy resources, demand response, and storage.
C. The Board of Directors hereby delegates the following contracting authority consistent with an approved resource plan and/or budget, as applicable, including
contracts that are consistent with the current fiscal year's budget but extend beyond the current fiscal year:
1. Delegation to the Technical Committee
The Technical Committee is hereby authorized to approve and direct the Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") and Technical Committee Chair to execute:
a. contracts for Energy Procurement as herein defined;
b. contracts for functions, programs or services related to Energy Procurement; and
c. contracts related to MCE ownership, leasing or development of energy generation projects and assets.
2. Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer and Technical Committee Chair, Jointly
The CEO and Technical Committee Chair, jointly, are hereby authorized, after consultation with the appropriate Committee of the Board of Directors, to approve and execute contracts for Energy Procurement for terms of less than or equal to five years. The CEO shall timely report to the Board of Directors all such executed contracts.
3. Delegation to the Chief Executive Officer
The CEO is hereby authorized to approve and execute:
a. contracts for Energy Procurement for terms of less than or equal to 12 months, which the CEO shall timely report to the Board of Directors; b. amendments or addenda to existing Energy Procurement contracts, regardless of the existing contract's price or total amount, which improve the terms of the contract to MCE's benefit without increasing the contract's not-to-exceed maximum dollar amount; and
c. in the event of an emergency or critical needs situation, such as exposure to volatile CAISO market conditions during extreme weather events, or a shortage in energy supply compared to load forecasted, short-term purchases, which includes transactions with existing counterparties in both written and oral format.
i. Oral transactions may only be executed with existing counterparties contractually enabled with MCE through an approved master agreement on a recorded telephone line where written receipts and voice recordings documenting such
transactions are provided to MCE.
ii. “Short-term purchases” for purposes hereof refers to Energy Procurement on the day-ahead energy market within the
forecasted 30 days.
iii. The CEO shall timely report any short-term purchases to the Board of Directors.
iv. The CEO may delegate authority to engage in short-term purchases under this subdivision to staff, including the Chief Operating Officer or Manager of Power Resources.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the MCE Board of Directors on this 19th day of November, 2020, by the following vote:
AYES NOES ABSTAIN ABSENT
County of Marin X
Contra Costa County X
County of Napa X
County of Solano X
City of American Canyon X
City of Belvedere X
City of Benicia X
City of Calistoga X
City of Concord X
Town of Corte Madera X
Town of Danville X
City of El Cerrito X
Town of Fairfax X
City of Lafayette X
City of Larkspur X
City of Martinez X
City of Mill Valley X
Town of Moraga X
City of Napa X
City of Novato X
City of Oakley X
City of Pinole X
City of Pittsburg X
City of Pleasant Hill X
City of San Ramon X
City of Richmond X
Town of Ross X
Town of San Anselmo X
City of San Pablo X
City of San Rafael X
City of Sausalito X
City of St. Helena X
Town of Tiburon X
City of Vallejo X
City of Walnut Creek X
Town of Yountville X
______________________________________
CHAIR, MCE
Attest:
___________________________________________
SECRETARY, MCE
March 19, 2026
TO: MCE Board of Directors
FROM: Maira Strauss, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer Efren Oxlaj, Manager of Finance
RE: Fiscal Year 2026/27 Budget Approval Inclusive of Rate Reduction Effective, April 1, 2026 (Agenda Item #06)
ATTACHMENTS: A. Presentation FY 2026/27 Proposed Budgets B. FY 2026/27 Proposed Operating Fund Budget
C. FY 2026/27 Proposed Program Development Fund Budget
D. FY 2026/27 Proposed Resiliency VPP Fund Budget
E. FY 2026/27 Proposed Energy Efficiency Program Fund Budget F. Update on Attracting and Retaining Staff 12.4.24
Dear MCE Board Members:
Summary:
This report presents the Proposed Budget for MCE’s Operating Fund, Program Development Fund, Resiliency Virtual Power Plant Fund, and Energy Efficiency Fund for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27.
Preliminary budget figures were reviewed in February by the Finance Committee, during Budget Workshop #2, and provided for the Board meeting. The figures here reflect the feedback received through those meetings. On March 2, 2026, MCE’s Executive Committee voted to recommend Board approval of the proposed budgets with no reductions to program expenditures.
Table 1: Summary of MCE’s proposed budget.
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Energy Revenue, Net $ 813,689,500 $ 621,291,000 $ (192,398,500) (23.6%) ORF Withdrawal 13,000,000 62,000,000 49,000,000 376.9%
Cost of Energy (765,542,000) (631,944,000) 133,598,000 (17.5%) Operating Expenses (50,249,000) (53,773,000) (3,524,000) 7.0% Non-Operating Revenues, Net 14,775,000 13,139,000 (1,636,000) (11.1%) Program Expenses (9,181,000) (9,120,000) 61,000 (0.7%)
Consolidated Change in Net Position 16,492,500 1,593,000 (14,899,500) (90.3%) On February 19, 2026, MCE’s Board voted to approve a proposed rate reduction to support budget planning. Consistent with Board direction, the budget is shaped by the 2.05-cent rate reduction, a
0.62-cent rate credit running April–December 2026, and $10 million for the MCE Cares Credit program. MCE’s consolidated change in net position is projected to total $1.6 million, a 90% decrease year-over-year.
Background:
MCE’s fiscal year runs from April 1 through March 31. Currently, MCE prepares four budgets, each reflecting anticipated expenses for the fiscal year. These are prepared on an accrual accounting basis in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) guidelines.
Operating Fund Budget
• Covers MCE's core functions including electricity sales, cost of energy, operating expenses, non-operating revenues/expenses, and capital outlay.
• Forecasts for energy revenue and cost of energy are developed with internal experts and external consultants.
Program Development Fund Budget
• Covers MCE’s transportation electrification programs that help customers adopt electric vehicles (EVs) and install charging stations at workplaces and multifamily residences. Other electrification programs are also supported.
• Supported by 50% of the Deep Green premium, grants, and additional transfers from the Operating Fund, subject to your Board’s approval.
Resiliency Virtual Power Plant Fund Budget
• Covers MCE’s virtual power plant efforts and customer energy storage pilots. • Supported by Board approved transfers from the Operating Fund and grants.
Energy Efficiency Fund Budget
• Covers the installation of energy efficient measures and retrofits for residential, commercial, industrial, and multifamily properties.
• Entirely funded by the California Public Utilities Commission for energy efficiency programs.
Operating Fund Budget
Energy Revenue, net: $621,291,000 (23.6% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Energy revenue, net is decreasing by $192 million or 23.6% year over year as a result of the proposed rate reduction and allocation towards MCE Cares Credit approved by your Board. Energy revenue captures income generated from sales of electricity to customers. Electricity consumption is forecasted based on MCE’s customer accounts, historical usage, weather patterns and applicable rates. Actual revenue may vary depending on future weather conditions, customer behavior, and broader economic trends. For FY 2026/27, forecasts reflect the mild summer conditions experienced over the past two years, resulting in a downward adjustment to expected load. Energy revenue is presented net of uncollectible amounts (1.2% of sales), MCE Cares Credit program, and assumes stable customer participation.
MCE Cares Credit: $10,000,000 (100% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) MCE offers stable, competitive rates and a variety of discount and assistance programs to support customers. Consistent with the Board’s direction at the February meeting and MCE’s long-standing commitment to energy affordability and accessibility, the proposed energy revenue figure is presented net of $10 million allocated to the MCE Cares Credit program.
The program provides monthly bill credits to income-qualified residential customers who qualify for the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) or Family Electric Rate Assistance (FERA) programs, as well as small businesses.
The program provides:
o $20 monthly bill credits for residential customers enrolled in CARE or FERA o $25 monthly bill credits for small commercial customers enrolled in the A-1 or B-1 electric rates
Eligible residential customers with arrears of $500 or more are automatically enrolled while funds remain available; all other eligible customers may proactively enroll. In the current fiscal year, the MCE Cares Credit program will fully utilize the $5 million budget and has provided bill relief to more than 30,000 customers. As funding levels declined over the course of the year, customers who had received 12 months or more of credits were phased out to allow additional eligible customers to receive support.
Staff estimates a $10 million allocation could support approximately 50,000 customers, depending on enrollment duration and participation mix. The estimate assumes reinstating past participants back into the program; continued automatic enrollment of income-qualified residential customers with arrears of $500 or more; an average residential-to-small-commercial participation mix consistent with current enrollment patterns of 97% residential and 3% small business; and average participation durations of 6–12 months depending on enrollment pathway. Self-enrollment rates are modeled based on historic monthly trends.
ORF Transfer: $62,000,000 (376.9% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Consistent with the Board’s direction at the February meeting, the upcoming FY will utilize $62 million from the Operating Reserve Fund (“Rate Stabilization Fund”). Your Board approved contributions of deferred revenue into the fund in previous years in accordance with Policy 16. The ORF currently holds $70 million of deferred income1 . This is income that
MCE did not recognize in previous fiscal years and can recognize in future fiscal years where net revenues are projected to be negative. By drawing on deferred revenue in years with lower energy margins, such as the upcoming fiscal year, MCE can maintain rate stability and mitigate abrupt changes in relative cost competitiveness resulting from PG&E rate changes.
Cost of Energy: $631,944,000 (17.5% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) The cost of energy represents the largest expense for MCE. This category includes costs for portfolio content category 1 (PCC1) renewable energy, market hedges, and carbon-free energy from large hydroelectric or asset-controlling suppliers. Resource adequacy and net CAISO costs are also included. Energy costs fluctuate based on market conditions, including CAISO electricity prices, hydro availability, renewable generation output, and congestion in CAISO markets. These factors can materially increase or decrease MCE’s procurement costs from year to year.
The cost of energy is projected to decline significantly year-over-year, driven by lower forward prices for renewable energy, resource adequacy, and hedge contracts. Because MCE procures a decreasing percentage of its energy needs through forward contracts over time, falling market prices and the expiration of older, higher-priced contracts allow new contracts to be secured at lower prices, thereby reducing the average cost of energy. This trend represents a reversal of the conditions experienced in the current fiscal year when rising market prices contributed to increases in MCE’s cost of energy.
Table 2: Cost of energy breakdown
• Hedge contract costs are declining as soft demand and ample supply keep CAISO prices low, which in turn drives down hedge prices.
1 Although the ORF balance is recorded as deferred income on MCE’s financial statements, this is strictly an accounting treatment. The underlying $70 million is actual cash that MCE already collected in prior years.
These funds remain available for liquidity needs and can be invested in accordance with MCE’s investment policy.
Cost of Energy
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Hedge Contracts $ 267,050,000 $ 225,028,000 (42,022,000)$ (15.7%) Renewable - Long Term PPAs 122,588,000 158,798,000 36,210,000 29.5% Renewable - Short Term 131,035,000 33,235,000 (97,800,000) (74.6%) Resource Adequacy 145,713,000 105,565,000 (40,148,000) (27.6%) Net CAISO Costs 85,084,000 88,104,000 3,020,000 3.5%
Carbon Free - Large Hydro/ACS 14,072,000 21,214,000 7,142,000 50.8% Total 765,542,000 631,944,000 (133,598,000) (17.5%)
• Net CAISO costs are seeing a modest increase year over year2 .
• Prices for renewable energy have fallen significantly from their 2024 peak resulting in lower total projected costs for this category.
o Costs associated with long-term PPAs are rising due to more contracts coming online, while short-term contract costs are falling significantly as market prices decline. Additionally, as long-term agreements come online, reliance on short-term purchases declines.
• Resource adequacy costs are declining as increased capacity supply from new battery storage resources over the past two years has driven prices down. • Carbon-free energy costs are rising because some 2026 deliveries were contracted at the higher price levels seen in 2024. Since MCE typically signs contracts one to three years ahead, changes in market prices may take time to show up in the budget.
Operating Expenses: $53,773,000 (7.0% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) This category represents the overhead costs essential to running MCE’s operations. Staff has actively worked to reduce these costs, scrutinizing each budget line, optimizing resources, making thoughtful adjustments, and tightening these categories as much as possible in response to the budgetary environment. A detailed breakdown of the individual line items is provided below.
Personnel: $32.7 million (10.8% increase from FY 2025/26 approved budget on a before-grant reimbursements basis)3
These costs would be offset by $4.1 million in grant funding, reducing the total staffing budget to $28.7 million, a 12.8% increase from FY 2025/26. MCE currently holds the majority of these grant funds at River City Bank. These funds are not subject to Federal funding freezes. Personnel costs represent approximately 4.2% of MCE’s Operating Budget to support MCE’s capacity, expertise, and competitive positioning. The increase captures cost-of-living adjustments, benefits cost increases, promotions, the full-year integration of costs for 11 new full-time positions added in the current fiscal year and the anticipated addition of 5 new full-time positions in the upcoming fiscal year.
For FY 2025/26, a total of 119 proposed positions were presented including 2 staff that were not full-time employees. As such, this has been revised to 117 to more clearly represent year-2 MCE pays a fixed price to the hedge supplier and receives a floating price in the CAISO market. The floating price is correlated with the CAISO market price that MCE pays for its load. The floating payments that MCE receives are included in the Net CAISO costs. Therefore, there is an inverse relationship between MCE’s cost of market hedges and its net CAISO costs. As MCE closes open positions, net CAISO costs typically decline while hedge costs tend to rise, assuming all other factors remain constant. 3 Reflects expected expenses MCE would incur in FY 2026/27 and not the full annualized costs of proposed new staff that would start throughout the year. MCE’s budget is prepared on an accrual basis to comply with GASB guidelines.
over-year comparisons. The total position count for FY 2026/27 is 118, representing a total net increase year over year of 1 position.
In FY 2025/26, there were 13 new positions. Of these 13 new positions, 2 were dissolved entirely, and 2 others were re-purposed into higher-level roles. Separately, there were 2 existing positions that were dissolved upon departure, accounting for a total of 4 positions that are no longer included in the FY 2026/27 Proposed budget. This reduces the existing positions in the current fiscal year from 117 to 113.
The FY 2026/27 budget proposal of 5 new positions in addition to the existing 113 positions equals a total of 118.
Reductions and cost containment measures include:
• $141,000 (100%) decrease in merit for the upcoming fiscal year compared with the current fiscal year budget. Merit adjustments have been eliminated and would take place at the beginning of the subsequent fiscal year.
• $100,000 (49.1%) decrease in promotions for the upcoming fiscal year compared with the current fiscal year budget
• $314,000 (16%) decrease in employer taxes resulting from the shift to actual state rates rather than averages in the forecast4
• $106,000 (5.2%) decrease in ancillary benefits (e.g., life insurance, short-term disability, retirement health savings)
• $508,000 (54.1%) decrease in certain benefit costs including vacation cashouts, workers compensation, non-voluntary employee departure costs, etc Key cost drivers include:
• $129,000 (4.3%) increase in medical, dental, and vision premiums • $506,000 (2.7%) increase in salaries reflecting the full-year salary impact of the 11 full-time positions added partway through the current fiscal year 4 In line with our ongoing commitment to optimization, we expanded our use of budgeting software to model personnel costs this year, allowing us to move from averages to actuals. Personnel costs were previously modeled in excel and relied on averages to calculate totals.
Item Number
Adjusted FY 2025/26 positions 117
Positions removed -4
Remaining positions entering FY 2026/27 113
New positions proposed for FY 2026/27 5
Total FY 2026/27 headcount 118
• $2,161,000 (11.5%) increase in salaries due to full-year salary impact of cost-of-living adjustments, performance-based merit of 1-5% and internal retention-supporting promotions (see Attachment F)
• $542,000 (2.9%) increase in partial-year salaries for anticipated 5 new full-time positions in the upcoming fiscal year based on expected start date • $1,110,000 (39.5%) increase in retirement and retention costs • $107,000 (2%) increase in Cost-of-Living Adjustments (based on U.S. Labor Bureau guidelines)
Personnel expenses in the FY 2026/27 proposed budget reflect MCE’s continued investment in the people who make our mission possible. As a community-driven public agency, our ability to deliver cleaner energy, advance equity, and build healthier, more resilient communities depends on the expertise, dedication, and integrity of our staff.
Growth in personnel costs is partially driven by targeted staffing in critical functions such as Power Resources, Finance, and Legal. These areas are essential to managing increasing regulatory requirements, navigating complex energy markets, strengthening financial oversight, and ensuring operational reliability. As the clean energy landscape evolves, so does the technical and regulatory complexity of the Agency’s work. MCE is strategically aligning staffing resources with our highest priorities to ensure we continue serving our communities responsibly and effectively.
Attracting and retaining talented professionals who are aligned with MCE’s values remains a key priority. While turnover increased to 13.5% in 2024, it declined to 7% in 2025 reflecting the positive impact of thoughtful investments in staffing levels (including retention-supporting promotions and performance-based merit increases of 1-5%), benefits, leadership development, and workplace culture. For instance, MCE was recognized for the third consecutive year by the San Francisco Chronicle as a Top Place to Work, with special recognition of MCE’s CEO who received their Leader of the Year award.
This acknowledgment, based on anonymous employee feedback collected through an independent third party, reinforces our commitment to fostering an inclusive, mission-driven workplace.
Retaining experienced and mission-aligned staff is essential to MCE’s continued operational strength and service for our communities. Vacancies in highly specialized areas such as Power Resources, Finance, and Legal can impact workload distribution, project timelines, and regulatory responsiveness across the agency. As the clean energy landscape evolves, MCE staff continue to manage increasing technical and regulatory complexity, including advanced battery scheduling, layered power contracts, expanded oversight requirements, public records requests, and growing Board and community engagement. These demands require deep expertise, collaboration, and continuity. Retention supports institutional knowledge, strengthens cross-functional effectiveness, and reduces the financial and productivity costs associated with recruitment, onboarding, and ramp-up time. In alignment with HR best practices, MCE remains focused on thoughtful workforce planning, internal career development pathways, and equitable compensation strategies to sustain the stability and expertise necessary to deliver reliable, affordable, and equitable clean energy to the communities we serve.
MCE continues to evaluate personnel-related expenses with fiscal responsibility in mind. In FY 2025/26, MCE transitioned from Kaiser PPO to Blue Shield PPO, resulting in a 5% saving, with a 4% increase in medical, dental, and vision costs compared to a projected 9% increase if we had stayed with Kaiser PPO. Additional cost containment measures included limiting promotions and scaling back the Board-approved internship program. These decisions were made thoughtfully, balancing financial stewardship with our responsibility to support staff.
Compensation and staffing levels are established through independent benchmarking, internal equity analysis, and a structured internal review and approval process.
This ensures MCE remains competitive in recruiting and retaining specialized talent while promoting fairness and transparency. Salaries are adjusted annually based on the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco Bay Area, alongside performance-based merit increases ranging from 1-5%. Beginning 2027, merit increases will shift to April 1 to align with the fiscal year, strengthening budget predictability and long-term financial planning.
Regular market reviews and equity analyses support our commitment to competitive compensation, pay equity, and bias mitigation. MCE’s approach reflects a balance between fiscal responsibility and recognizing that investing in our staff is fundamental to delivering reliable, affordable, and equitable clean energy to the communities we serve.
The forecasted personnel costs represent a strategic investment in sustaining MCE’s expertise, institutional knowledge, employee satisfaction, and long-term organizational health. To support increasing workload, regulatory complexity, and expanding Board and public engagement, the FY 2026/27 proposed budget includes five new positions across Power Resources, Finance, and Legal. These additions include a Power Resources Data Analyst and Power Resources Manager to strengthen portfolio management, contracting, compliance, and market operations; a Manager of Finance and Senior Strategic Finance Analyst to enhance risk management, financial analysis, reporting, and Board and Finance Committee support while expanding strategic leadership capacity; and a Grants Manager within Legal and Compliance to oversee a growing portfolio of grant-funded programs and heightened federal compliance requirements. Together, these positions are designed to preserve service, maintain strong fiscal oversight, and ensure MCE remains responsive, transparent, and well-positioned to meet the evolving needs of the communities we serve.
Data Manager: $5,434,000 (3.0% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) MCE’s data manager provides a wide range of billing services, including billing management for MCE’s customers, technical support for billing issues, and customer enrollment services.
The charges are based on a fixed fee per customer account. The proposed increase for next fiscal year would align the budget with the actual costs incurred this year, which have trended slightly upward following the enrollment of the city of Hercules in April 2025.
Technical and Scheduling Consultants: $1,588,000 (13.4% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
These consultants schedule energy resources into the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) and assist MCE in managing risk more effectively. They also collaborate with staff to create advanced load management strategies and forecast costs related to market and regulatory changes. As battery scheduling and hourly matching of load and supply increase complexity of scheduling, there are increasing demands in this space.
Technical services are primarily based on a fixed charge per MWh of electricity usage (load).
Scheduling services are based on contracted amounts. Staff is proposing a 13.4% increase to cover the costs of changing the scheduling services provider. This transition would involve a period of vendor overlap late in the fiscal year, along with one-time transition and setup costs.
Service Fees – PG&E: $2,608,000 (4.7% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) PG&E service fees consist of a fixed charge per customer account. The fees cover PG&E’s costs for processing customer data and coordinating billing for MCE accounts. All community choice aggregators (CCAs) in PG&E’s territory must pay this fee. This is a refinement from an earlier version of this staff report, which stated that fees had increased by 7 cents per account, from 35 cents to 42 cents. The amount has been adjusted downward to reflect the existing and continuing fee of 35 cents per account.
Legal and Policy Services: $1,427,000 (7% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) This line encompasses external legal and policy services that assist MCE in areas such as contract review for energy suppliers, non-energy vendors, regulatory proceedings, employment matters, and other agency functions. The decrease in costs reflects a downward adjustment to align with actual spending trends. Additionally, MCE continues to leverage its membership with the California Community Choice Association (CalCCA) to participate in joint regulatory proceedings, thus reducing the budget for external policy services.
Communication Services: $1,876,000 (15.6% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Communication costs cover a wide range of marketing and community engagement activities including advertising, printing, mailing customer notices, community events and sponsorships. The decrease reflects downward adjustments in large vendor contracts, particularly for marketing, in response to the tight budgetary environment. Similarly, staff has reduced the budget for sponsorship and industry membership, which should result in a smaller footprint at local events and other community-driven initiatives. This year over year decrease is intended to be a temporary reduction.
If desired by the Board, the Communications Services budget could be increased by $175,000 to avoid any decreased local community and industry events and sponsorship opportunities. With this additional amount, the budget allocated for this line item would be equal to the current fiscal year budget for similar expenditures.
Other Professional Services: $4,779,000 (0.5% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Other professional services cover external contractors that support MCE across a range of key business functions. This includes external services such as accounting, auditing, benefits administration, and information technology (IT). This category also includes costs associated with the development and maintenance of MCE’s customer relationship management (CRM) software and data analytics infrastructure. The CRM platform organizes and connects the various customer data sets available to MCE and serves as the single source of truth for all customer-facing teams. MCE’s data warehouse hosts comprehensive customer data, including hourly interval usage. The data analytics platform leverages the warehouse’s data to support critical analyses such as customer segmentation, rate setting, and forecasting.
Insights from these analyses help guide strategic decision making for MCE’s various customer programs and rate setting process.
Staff kept this line flat. However, the line is seeing a small uptick to account for the planned governance assessment requested by your Board.
General and Administrative: $5,492,000 (10.6% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
This category includes items such as load forecasting tools, software licenses for agency-wide tools, insurance, recruitment for open positions, membership dues for the California Community Choice Association (CalCCA) and other office expenses.
The proposed budget reflects expected annual increases to the CalCCA membership dues, increased prices for data analytics tools, higher recruitment expenses for the technical positions to be filled, and increased premiums for building and cyber insurance.
Occupancy: $417,000 (7.9% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) This category includes lease payments for the MCE’s Concord office. Maintenance costs for both the Concord and San Rafael office locations are also included. The proposed budget reflects a decrease due to the shift to a smaller office in Concord which comes with a lower monthly lease payment. Additionally, in response to the budgetary environment, staff is planning no major maintenance projects in the coming fiscal year.
Contingency: $1,500,000 (No change from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) The proposed budget represents a buffer to cover unexpected costs in the previous operating expenses line items. No change is being proposed at this time.
Non-Operating Revenues and Expenses
Grant Income: $5,018,000 (53.1% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) MCE receives grants from government and non-profit organizations to support certain activities connected to MCE’s mission. Grant income varies year to year as grants can be “one time” or can be provided to MCE under multiple year agreements. Some grants were completed in the current fiscal year, and others are starting or continuing in FY 2026/27.
Some grant activities require a ramp-up time that can be hard to predict, and this can cause year-to-year budget variation. The following grants or portions thereof are included in the $5,018,000 grant income line item in the proposed budget. • $3,951,000 - for the Disadvantaged Communities Green Tariff (DAC-GT) 5 program to
provide income-qualified, residential customers in disadvantaged communities with 100% renewable energy and a 20% bill discount. The amount is replenished annually.
Funded by the California Public Utilities Commission.
• $520,000 - for energy efficiency and electrification upgrades in single family homes in the Iron Triangle Neighborhood of Richmond under the Richmond Rising Grant Transformative Climate Communities from the Strategic Growth Council. • $435,000 - to support a participatory budgeting process in priority communities to guide the grant investment into EV charging stations and shared mobility options (Charged by Public Power). Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. • $76,000 - for EV charging installations in disadvantaged Contra Costa communities in partnership with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. Funded by the California Energy Commission.
• $35,000 - to support the Home Energy Savings program. Funded by Chevron Inc.
Investment Income: $14,139,000 (5.7% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Investment income captures interest and income from MCE’s fixed income portfolio. This line is decreasing against last year’s budget due to lower interest rates. Potential liquidation of 5 The DAC-GT program reimburses MCE for bill credits it provides to customers. Because bill credits reduce what the customer owes, they reduce incoming sales revenue. As such, a matching expense for this grant would not show up in the grant expense section when reviewing budget reports with actuals. However, for budgeting purposes, grant income matches grant expenses as MCE can only recognize income when there’s a matching expense. Grants are not additional income for the agency. investments throughout the fiscal year for working capital is also likely, in response to the revenue shortfall driven by the rate reduction. Staff is conservatively assuming an average annual yield of 2.5% on all of MCE’s holdings. MCE currently has about 43% of its cumulative position in a fixed income portfolio managed by Chandler Asset Management, about 41% in liquid money market funds, about 14% in CDARs issued by River City Bank, and about 3% in collateral at the California ISO. Staff continues to manage MCE’s investment resources by adhering to the Board approved Investment Policy.
Banking Fees and Financing Costs: $1,000,000 (344.4% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
This line captures banking fees associated with MCE’s credit facility with Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) which is due for renewal in early May. The increased proposed budget accounts for additional banking costs expected to meet the CPUC’s Financial Security Requirement (FSR)6
. The final security amount is still being determined, and actual costs could vary.
Grant Expenses: $5,018,000 (53.1% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Grant expenses match grant income, as revenue is recognized only when corresponding expenses are incurred. As a result, these transactions net to zero and do not contribute additional income to MCE’s bottom line.
Capital Expenditures
Staff is once again recommending $10,250,000 to implement a Remedial Action Scheme (RAS) that would help alleviate some of the curtailment and congestion of certain power supply projects which could result in savings of up to $20 million per year once implemented. Due to slow negotiations outside of our control, this potential investment has taken longer than expected. Lastly, $147,000 is proposed to implement building improvements and retrofits, such as improvements to ADA accessibility and computer server upgrades at the San Rafael office.
Please note that per accounting guidelines, investments in long-term assets reduces cash on hand but does not directly impact the change in net position (bottom line) when the purchase takes place.
Instead, the cost of the asset is spread over its useful life through depreciation.
Program Development Fund
Total Revenue and Other Sources: $8,208,000 (198% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
6 The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Financial Security Requirement (FSR) is a mandatory security posting for Community Choice Aggregators (CCAs) and Electric Service Providers (ESPs), ensuring funds are available to cover costs if customers are involuntarily returned to the incumbent utility service.
Total revenue includes a proposed transfer of $8 million from the Operating Fund which would cover the projected program spend and would eliminate the forecasted deficit of $1.15 million in the current fiscal year. The deficit is a result of increased spending on the EV Instant Rebate Program due to a spike in EV sales prior to the Federal Tax Credits expiring and several projects in the EV Charging Program closing out earlier than expected.
Approximately $2.3 million of the transfer is attributable to 50% of the deep green premium.
Additionally, $131,000 in grants from the Marin Community Foundation for electric vehicle (EV) charging at affordable housing are also included.
Transportation Electrification Programs: $5,984,000 (13% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
Transportation electrification programs include:
o Rebates for newly purchased and leased EVs for income-qualified residents. o Rebates for charging ports installed at workplaces and multifamily properties. o Outreach and education partnerships to increase access to electric transportation EV Instant Rebate Program
The EV Instant Rebate Program provides point of sale rebates for owned or leased, new or used electric vehicles for income-qualified customers. A majority (85%) of participating customers surveyed indicated they would not have purchased an EV without MCE’s rebate.
The combination of imposed tariffs and end of the Federal EV Tax Credits have resulted in a sharp drop nationally in EV adoption in October and November (reports of 30-40% nationwide), following a large spike from July-September. MCE’s EV Instant Rebates program has seen similar trends; however, it is important to mention that even with the drop off, sales in October and November were still higher than those months last year.
To accommodate the spike in EV sales and to avoid closing the program mid-summer, MCE added $1 mm to the EV Instant Rebate Program budget, utilizing funds that were otherwise underspent in the operating budget. Due to overwhelming demand, the program paused in late-November as all funds were exhausted.
The proposed budget would allow for 876 vehicle rebates in FY 2026/27 compared to 1,200 in FY 2025/26
EV Charging Program
The EV Charging Program provides funding for workplace or multifamily EV chargers.
The proposed budget for the EV charging rebate program represents a 33% increase over FY 2025/26. The budget increase reflects the close out of a significant number of projects in the current pipeline, an increase in the rebate level for L1 Charging and a higher level of customer project support.
Heat Pump Water Heater Incentives: $682,000 (26% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
These incentives help increase adoption of heat pump water heaters (HPWH). HPWHs can be two to three times more energy efficient than conventional gas water heaters leading to savings on utility bills and reduced carbon emissions.
While the overall Electrification Incentives budget is unchanged year over year, the allocation across sub-programs is shifting. The Emergency Water Heater Loaner program is closing, and the funding previously allocated to it is proposed to be reallocated to the enhanced electrification incentives within the Energy Efficiency programs, hence the 26% increase.
Community Housing Support: $260,000 (No change from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) Community Housing Support provides funding for ancillary expenses (such as wiring, panel upgrades or basic repairs) that are barriers to installing, operating, and/or maintaining all electric equipment. These grants are provided to sites that support community housing, including homeless shelters, farmworker housing, and homes or units occupied by low-income households. There is no change in the year over year proposed budget for these grants.
The transfer from the Operating Fund combined with the expected program spending outlined above would yield an ending fund balance of $0.
Board Options to Reduce Program Development Fund Transfer Staff recommends approval of the proposed Program Development Fund transfer to support the portfolio of customer programs included in the FY 2026/27 budget. These programs advance MCE’s mission to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support customers.
The following options were provided to the Executive Committee for consideration. These options are structured to generate savings while avoiding impacts to active grant agreements or existing customer commitments. On March 2, 2026, the Executive Committee recommended fully funding the proposed Program Development Fund transfer. • Option 1: Approve the Proposed Budget
o Proposed Transfer: $8,208,000
• Option 2: Reduce Funding for EV Instant Rebate Program o Savings: $1,797,000
o Revised Proposed Transfer: $6,280,000
o Program Impact: Approximately 438 fewer income-qualified customers would receive EV rebates in FY 2026/27.
• Option 3: Eliminate Funding for EV Instant Rebate Program o Savings: $3,595,000
o Revised Proposed Transfer: $4,483,000
o Program Impact: Up to 876 income-qualified customers would not receive rebates in FY 2026/27. Survey data indicates approximately 85% of participants would not have purchased an EV without MCE’s rebate.
• Option 4: Close EV Charging Program to New Applicants o Savings: $800,000
o Revised Proposed Transfer: $7,277,000
o Program Impact: No new charging projects would be accepted in FY 2026/27.
Existing reservations would be honored and would require multi-year close-out funding.
• Option 5: Eliminate Electrification Incentives (Heat Pump Water Heater Incentives and Community Housing Grants)
o Savings: $942,000
o Revised Proposed Transfer: $7,135,000
o Program Impact: Approximately 685 electrification measures would not be installed. This option may also impact MCE’s ability to fully expend CPUC energy efficiency funding.
Resiliency Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Fund
Your Board approved the creation of the Resiliency VPP Fund in 2019 in response to power outages which significantly impact the safety, health, and welfare of MCE’s customers, especially our vulnerable populations. Since then, the fund has expanded its scope to help scale MCE’s virtual power plants efforts.
Like the Program Development Fund, this fund is financed by a transfer from the Operating Fund.
Your Board has approved and transferred $9 million from the Operating Fund since its inception.
Portions of a $750,000 grant from the Marin Community Foundation have also been added to this fund over the last four years.
Total Revenue and Other Sources: $1,570,000 (7% increase from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
No transfer from the Operating Fund budget is needed at this time, however, the fund includes the following grants. Grant income is offset by an equivalent amount in expenses. • $1,200,000 - for integrating MCE’s existing Customer Programs into the virtual power plant (VPP) across MCE’s service area. Funded by the California Energy Commission (CEC).
• $270,000 - for Resiliency at critical facilities in Marin. Funded by the Marin Community Foundation.
• $100,000 - for solar paired with storage at critical facilities. Funded by a Federal Earmark.
CEC VPP Flex Grant Match: $1,000,000 (No change from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) The $1.2 million VPP grant from the CEC requires a $1 million commitment from MCE. This amount would fulfill the requirement and cover the costs of certain consultants and software licenses for the virtual power plant being developed.
MCE Sync: $927,000 (2.6% decrease from the FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) MCE Sync helps customers shift their EV charging from peak hours and encourages charging during solar daytime hours through MCE’s proprietary app. This program is partially supported by a grant from the California Energy Commission that was awarded to our implementer, EV. Energy, allowing MCE’s contributions to remain flat despite enrollment goals increasing.
Energy Storage Program: $137,000 (55.2% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) MCE’s Energy Storage Program facilitates the adoption of customer-owned energy storage systems paired with on-site solar. MCE offers significant financial support including rebates, monthly bill credits, and performance-based payments to reduce upfront and out-of-pocket costs. This program has been closed to new applicants since FY 2024/25 and the costs associated with it will decrease over time as the remaining projects in the pipeline close out.
Federal Earmark Match Expense: $100,000 (50.0% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget)
The Federal Earmark for Energy Storage requires MCE to provide matching funds, and this allocation would fulfill the match requirement for the fiscal year. Although there was funding in the FY 2025/26 budget for this program, it was based on forecasts for a program that had not yet launched. Due to contracting delays, no money was spent. The program has now launched successfully and is working on participation agreements with awardees. This is the budget that we anticipate spending this coming year.
Virtual Power Plant: $30,000 (82.5% decrease from FY 2025/26 Approved Budget) The VPP is beginning to transition away from a pilot to deployment across the larger service area through a combination of the CEC VPP Flex grant and MCE’s match commitment. This line captures additional VPP expenses not tied to the grant. The recommended budget would provide incentives for non-battery electric panel upgrades and would cover ad-hoc costs for storing VPP devices.
Change in Net Position
The change in net position is the bottom line and reflects all revenues minus all expenses.
Based on the proposed budgets presented, MCE’s consolidated change in net position, inclusive of program spending, would total $1.6 million, a 90% decrease from the current fiscal year.
Reserves and Liquidity
MCE’s reserve target is to have 60% of expected cost of energy and operating expenses. Reserves are accounted for as the Net Position in MCE’s financial statements. Based on the projections presented, MCE would end the fiscal year with a reserves level of $497 million, above the goal by 21 percentage points.
MCE’s liquidity target7
is to have 240 days of liquidity on hand. From a liquidity perspective, MCE would have sufficient cash to run the operations despite the revenue shortfall. Reserves were intentionally built to provide financial stability during periods of volatility and timing related impacts. 7 Days liquidity on hand is based on unrestricted cash and investments x 365/ (operating expenses + cost of energy, each for the current fiscal year). Projections are based on the forecasted net position minus proposed capital outlay.
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Consolidated Change in Net Position 16,492,500 1,593,000 (14,899,500) (90.3%) $497
$437 $412
$417
84% $496 $497
114% 121%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
$0
$150
$300
$450
$600
FY 2024/25 Audited Results FY 2025/26 Projection FY 2026/27 Proposed Millions $
Target vs Projected
Reserves Goal
Reserve Target $ Actual Reserves $ Reserves Actual (% of Target) Based on current projections, MCE would begin the year with 284 days of cash on hand. The revenue shortfall resulting from the rate reduction, temporary credit, and MCE Cares credit program would bring projected liquidity down to 263 days, 23 days above the FY 2026/27 target.
Additionally, complying with the CPUC’s FSR could further reduce liquidity by the amount MCE must allocate to meet the requirement.
Recommendation:
Approve the Fiscal Year 2026/27 proposed budgets inclusive of a 2.05-cent rate reduction effective April 1, 2026, and a temporary 0.62-cent rate credit running April–December 2026.8 Consider increasing the Communications Services budget by $175,000 to avoid any decrease in local community and industry events and sponsorship opportunities. 8 This item is an administrative matter as outlined in OR&R Article VI. Action requires a majority vote of the full membership of the Board for a motion to carry.
$545
$478 $451 $494
$566 $495
218
284
263
0 75
150
225
300
$0
$150
$300
$450
$600
FY 2024/25 Audited Results FY 2025/26 Projection FY 2026/27 Proposed Days
Millions $
Target vs Projected
Liquidity Goal
Liquidity Target $ Total Projected Liquidity $ Projected Days Liquidity on Hand Fiscal Year 2026/27
Budget Approval
Inclusive of Rate Reduction
Effective April 1, 2026
MCE Board of Directors
March 19, 2026
Context for FY 2026/27 Budget Setting
2 Looking Ahead (2027+)
• PCIA values expected to converge, eliminating the temporary distortion • MCE’s cost-of-service-based rates are projected to be below PG&E’s Based on Residential E-TOU-C and
MCE’s 2017 PCIA vintage
Future PG&E generation rates are
assumed to remain at 2026 levels,
while PCIA values for 2027 and
beyond rely on industry projections
10.00 15.00
20.00 2026 2027 2028 2029
¢/kWh
Generation Rate + PCIA Comparison
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 PG&E Projected FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget Overview
• The budget for FY 2026/27 is shaped by the following proposed rate reduction:
• The 2.05-cent (14% reduction) rate reduction effective 4/1/2026 • A 0.62-cent temporary rate credit running April–December 2026 • A $10 million allocation to the MCE Cares Credit program • The revenue shortfall is addressed by transferring $62 million from the Operating Reserve Fund • Cost of energy is decreasing significantly while operating expenses have been optimized to their lowest level possible
• Reserve and Liquidity goals are expected to be met
• The change in net position is projected at $1.6 million, a 90% decrease YoY Customers have been notified of the of the rate reduction. Example: our website displays the following:
• “MCE’s board will consider its annual Fiscal Year 2026–27 budget and this proposed rate change at its March 19, 2026, meeting. If approved, the proposed rate change would take effect April 1, 2026.” 3 FY 2025/26 Projected Budget
• Forecast for the current FY shows a change in net position of $79 million • Includes actuals through January plus projections for remaining 2 months • Energy revenue is down but energy costs have dropped even more sharply • Recall: $36.4mm in energy costs was shifted to the previous FY due to earlier than anticipated deliveries
• Other costs are trending below budget as a result of the 2025 mild summer weather and portfolio optimizations efforts
• Creates an opportunity to add funds to the Operating Reserve Fund 4 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2025/26
Projected Variance $ Variance %
Energy Revenue, Net $ 813,689,500 $ 766,141,000 $ (47,548,500) (5.8%) ORF Withdrawal 13,000,000 - (13,000,000) (100.0%)
Cost of Energy (765,542,000) (658,914,000) 106,628,000 (13.9%) Operating Expenses (50,249,000) (47,212,000) 3,037,000 (6.0%) Non-Operating Revenues, Net 14,775,000 27,671,000 12,896,000 87.3% Program Expenses (9,181,000) (8,644,000) 537,000 (5.8%) Consolidated Change in Net Position 16,492,500 79,042,000 62,549,500 379.3% Energy Revenue and ORF Withdrawal
5 $814
$621
$13
$62
$827
$683
$300
$500
$700
$900
FY 2025/26 Approved FY 2026/27 Proposed
Millions
Energy Revenue
Energy Revenue, net ORF Withdrawal
Figures are shown net of uncollectibles and
MCE Cares credit program
FY 2026/27 includes $10 million for MCE
Cares credit
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Energy Revenue, net $813,689,500 $621,291,000 $(192,398,500) (23.6%) ORF Withdrawal 13,000,000 62,000,000 49,000,000 376.9%
Total 826,689,500 683,291,000 (143,398,500) (17.3%)
Load forecast
incorporates the mild
summer weather
observed in the last two
years
$267
$123 $131 $146
$85
$14
$225
$159
$33
$106 $88
$21
35.6%
25.1%
5.3%
16.7%
13.9%
3.4% 0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
$0
$100
$200
$300
Hedge Contracts Renewable - Long
Term PPAs
Renewable - Short
Term
Resource Adequacy Net CAISO Costs Carbon Free - Large
Hydro/ACS
Millions
Cost of Energy Breakdown
FY 2025/26 Approved Budget FY 2026/27 Proposed Budget % Of total Cost of Energy
6 YoY decreases driven by lower forward
prices for renewable energy, resource
adequacy, and hedge contracts
Cost of Energy
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed
Variance $ Variance %
Hedge Contracts $ 267,050,000 $ 225,028,000 $(42,022,000) (15.7%) Renewable - Long Term PPAs 122,588,000 158,798,000 36,210,000 29.5% Renewable - Short Term 131,035,000 33,235,000 (97,800,000) (74.6%) Resource Adequacy 145,713,000 105,565,000 (40,148,000) (27.6%) Net CAISO Costs 85,084,000 88,104,000 3,020,000 3.5%
Carbon Free - Large Hydro/ACS 14,072,000 21,214,000 7,142,000 50.8% Total 765,542,000 631,944,000 (133,598,000) (17.5%)
Operating Expenses
7 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 50,249,000 53,773,000 3,524,000 7.0% • Captures overhead expenses MCE incurs to run the operations • Some expenses are beyond MCE’s control (tied to number of customer accounts or load) • Staff thoroughly reviewed each budget line and optimized resources to reduce costs Operating Expenses - Increases
8 Data Management:
• Increased billing activity after
City of Hercules enrollment
Technical & Scheduling Consultants:
• Potential changes to the
services MCE relies on
• Temporary vendor overlap +
one-time transition costs
General & Administrative:
• Higher software and data
platform costs driven by the
growth of AI
• Increased membership dues
for CalCCA
• Higher insurance and
recruitment expenses
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personnel 25,405,000 28,652,000 3,247,000 12.8%
Data Manager 5,276,000 5,434,000 158,000 3.0%
Technical and Scheduling Consultants 1,400,000 1,588,000 188,000 13.4% Service Fees - PG&E 2,738,000 2,608,000 (130,000) (4.7)% Legal and Policy Services 1,534,000 1,427,000 (107,000) (7.0%) Communication Services 2,223,000 1,876,000 (347,000) (15.6%) Other Professional Services 4,754,000 4,779,000 25,000 0.5% General and Administrative 4,966,000 5,492,000 526,000 10.6% Occupancy 453,000 417,000 (36,000) (7.9%)
Contingency 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 0.0%
Total Operating Expenses 50,249,000 53,773,000 3,524,000 7.0% Operating Expenses - Decreases
9 PG&E Service Fees:
• Shows decreases after revising
the fee from 42 cents to 35
cents
Legal and Policy Services:
• Downward adjustment to
better align with actual spend
Communication Services:
• Downward adjustments in
marketing and sponsorship
budgets in response to the
budgetary environment
Occupancy:
• No major maintenance
projects expected and
reduced rent resulting from
our move to a smaller office in
Concord
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personnel 25,405,000 28,652,000 3,247,000 12.8%
Data Manager 5,276,000 5,434,000 158,000 3.0%
Technical and Scheduling Consultants 1,400,000 1,588,000 188,000 13.4% Service Fees - PG&E 2,738,000 2,608,000 (130,000) (4.7)% Legal and Policy Services 1,534,000 1,427,000 (107,000) (7.0%) Communication Services 2,223,000 1,876,000 (347,000) (15.6%) Other Professional Services 4,754,000 4,779,000 25,000 0.5% General and Administrative 4,966,000 5,492,000 526,000 10.6% Occupancy 453,000 417,000 (36,000) (7.9%)
Contingency 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 0.0%
Total Operating Expenses 50,249,000 53,773,000 3,524,000 7.0% Impact of 5
Proposed
New Positions
01 05
02 04
03 Expansion of grants, procurement contract management, and power resource portfolios requires coordinated
oversight
Establishing dedicated capacity for strategic financial analysis, governance support, Finance Committee
support, and long-range planning
New federal funding and increasing regulatory
oversight driving more complex compliance and
reporting
Ensuring MCE can absorb new federal earmarks while
maintaining operational excellence and accountability
Building internal expertise to support complex
compliance, financial analysis, and power resource
work
Growth in Scale and Complexity of MCE’s Operations
Growth of Strategic Finance Function
Evolving External, Federal, and Regulatory
Requirements
Positioning MCE for Sustainable and Compliant
Growth
Strengthening In-House Technical and Subject
Matter Expertise
Power Resources:
Data Analyst
Power Resources Manager
Finance:
Manager of Finance
Senior Strategic Finance Analyst
Legal:
Grants Manager
10 Department Positions
2 6
5 8
9 11
10 12
16 16
18 2
2 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Strategic Iniatives
Human Resources
Finance
Internal Operations
Customer Operations
Technology and Analytics
Power Resources
Executives / Leadership Team
Customer Programs
Legal/Policy
Public Affairs
Department Full-Time Positions with Proposed New Positions FT Headcount Proposed New Hires
• Total FT approved positions (including unfilled positions) count going from 117 to 118. • Increase in personnel budget partially due to the annualized cost of 11 positions added in FY 2025/26, and partial cost for 5 proposed positions that are more technical or higher level than the positions they are repurposing, and an increase in benefits costs. *Correction: An earlier version
quoted 119 total FT for the current
FY. We adjusted to 117 as the
previous version counted two non-FT positions. FT Positions Count
Adjusted* FY 2025/26 positions 117
Positions removed -4
Positions entering FY 2026/27 113
New positions proposed for FY
2026/27 5
Total FY 2026/27 headcount 118
2025 Metrics (AB 2561 Compliance)
108 Current Full-Time Positions
5 Current Vacant Positions
In 2025
MCE had a
5.2%
Vacancy
Rate
1.3 Months (40.9 days) Average time to hire
2.5 Months (73.5 Days) Average time to fill
107% Retention
(Calculated by: (End of year FT headcount/Start of year Headcount) *100) as required by law)
Personnel – before grant reimbursements
13 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Salaries $ 18,800,000 $ 21,686,000 $ 2,887,000 15.4%
Benefits 10,717,000 11,027,000 310,000 2.9%
Total Personnel Costs 29,517,000 32,714,000 3,197,000 10.8% • Costs include medical, dental, vision benefits; employer taxes; ancillary benefits; retirement and retention; other (workers comp, PTO, etc.)
• For full-time, part-time, and temporary staff
Key factors contributing to year-over-year increase:
• Full-year impact of the 11 new positions added in FY 2025/26 • Most of which were hired mid-year and did not incur a full 12 months of cost in the current fiscal year • Full-year impact of COLA and merit adjustments (1-5%) made in January 2026 • Addition of 5 new full-time roles to meet operational needs CCAAverageFully LoadedPersonnelCost
Comparison CCA Fiscal Year Personnel Cost Positions Average Fully Loaded Personnel Cost CPA 25/26 $27,950,00 96 $291,146
AVA 25/26 $29,639,000 105 $282,276
SVCE 25/26 $18,870,000 67 $281,642
MCE Proposed
26/27
$32,714,000 (pre-grant offset)
$28,652,000 (post grant offset)
118 $277,237 (pre-grant offset)
$242,814 (post grant offset)
MCE 25/26 $29,600,000 (pre-grant offset)
$25,400,000 (post grant offset)
117 $252,991 (pre-grant offset)
$217,094 (post grant offset)
PCE 25/26 $16,391,740 67 $244,653
3CE 25/26 $14,260,774 59 $241,708
SDCP 25/26 $21,115,541 94 $244,633
SCP 25/26 $12,781,000 60 $213,017
MCE’s personnel costs are shown both pre- and post-grant. Comparative CCA personnel costs are based on adopted FY 2025/26 budgets and reflect post-grant amounts, where applicable grant offsets exist. 14 YoY Salary and Benefits Breakdown
15 Driver Impact
FY 25/26 Merit & COLA annualized +$1,734,000
FY 26/27 New FTEs (5) +542,000
FY 25/26 Filled Positions (11) annualized +506,000
FY 25/26 Promotions annualized +427,000
Eliminated Merit Increases (141,000)
Fewer planned promotions (33 20) (100,000)
Lower expected COLA (81,000)
Total Salary Impact +$2,887,000
Total Benefits Impact +$310,000
• Personnel cost changes reflect the full-year impact of previously Board approved positions filled during FY 2025/26 and merit adjustments approved by the Board in the prior fiscal year.
Personnel – after Grant Reimbursement
16 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Total Staffing Costs $ 29,517,000 $ 32,714,000 $ 3,197,000 10.8% Expected Grant Reimbursement (4,112,000) (4,061,000) 50,000 (1.2%) Personnel 25,405,000 28,652,000 3,247,000 12.8%
Information regarding grant reimbursements
• Anticipated modest reduction in grant reimbursements relative to the FY 2025/26 budget • Number in the budget is the cost after grant reimbursements • New Hires (5) salaries + benefits account for $819,000 variance Non-Operating Revenues, Net and Capital Outlay
17 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Non-Operating Revenues, Net $ 14,775,000 $ 13,139,000 $ (1,636,000) -11% Total Capital Expenditures,
Interfund Transfers & Other 18,391,000 18,474,000 83,000 0.5% Non-Operating Revenues
• Non-operating revenues come from interest and investment earnings on MCE’s cash and fixed-income portfolio • Presented net of banking fees, which are increasing to cover the fees with the security MCE must post to meet the CPUC’s Financial Security Requirement
Total Capital expenditures, Interfund Transfers and Other • $10.25mm for the RAS project
• $8mm transfer to the Program Development Fund
Program Development Fund
18 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
Transfer from Operating Fund and Deep Green Premium $2,392,000 $8,077,000 $5,685,000 238% Marin Community Foundation Grant 260,000 131,000 (129,000) (50%) Community Benefits Funds 100,000 0 (100,000) (100%)
TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES 2,752,000 $8,208,000 $5,456,000 198%
EXPENDITURES
Transportation Electrification Programs 5,310,000 5,984,000 674,000 13% Heat Pump Water Heater Incentives 540,000 682,000 142,000 26% Emergency Water Heater Loaner Program 142,000 0 (142,000) (100%) MCF - EV Charging at Affordable Housing 260,000 131,000 (129,000) (50%) Community Housing Support 260,000 260,000 0 0
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 6,512,000 7,057,000 545,000 8%
Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance 3,760,000 1,151,000 - - Fund Balance at Beginning of Period 3,760,000 (1,151,000) - - Fund Balance at End of Period 0 0 - -
Resiliency Virtual Power Plant (VPP) Fund
19 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
CEC VPP Flex Grant $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $ 0 0.0%
Federal Earmark Funding 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) Marin Community Foundation Grant 72,000 270,000 198,000 275.0% TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES 1,472,000 1,570,000 98,000 7%
EXPENDITURES
CEC VPP Flex Grant Expenses 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 0.0%
Energy Storage Program 306,000 137,000 (169,000) (55.2%) CEC VPP Flex Grant Match 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0.0%
MCE Sync 952,000 927,000 (25,000) (2.6%)
PeakFLEX 100,000 0 (100,000) (100.0%)
Federal Earmark - Energy Storage 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) MCF - Resiliency at Critical Facilities 72,000 270,000 198,000 275.0% Federal Earmark Match Expense 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) San Rafael Office Resiliency Buildout 200,000 0 (200,000) (100.0%) Virtual Power Plant 171,000 30,000 (141,000) (82.5%)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,401,000 3,764,000 (637,000) (14.5%) Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance (3,721,000) (2,194,000) - - Fund Balance at Beginning of Period 4,361,000 2,615,000 - - Fund Balance at End of Period 640,000 421,000 - -
Energy Efficiency Fund
20 FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
Public Purpose Energy Efficiency Program $ 18,761,000 $ 14,380,000 $ (4,381,000) (23.4%) Public Purpose Low Income Families and Tenants Pilot Program 800,000 0 (800,000) (100.0%) TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES 19,561,000 14,380,000 (5,181,000) (26.5%)
EXPENDITURES
Public Purpose Energy Efficiency Program 18,761,000 14,380,000 (4,381,000) (23.4%) Public Purpose Low Income Families and Tenants Pilot Program 800,000 0 (800,000) (100.0%) TOTAL EXPENDITURES 19,561,000 14,380,000 (5,181,000) (26.5%) BALANCE 0 0 - -
Program Budgets
21 Program FY 2026/27 Proposed
EV Instant Rebate Program $3,595,000
EV Charging Program $2,289,000
EV Education and Outreach $100,000
Energy Storage Program $137,000
MCE Sync $927,000
Heat Pump Water Heater Incentives $682,000
Community Housing Support $260,000
Virtual Power Plant $30,000
Matching Funds:
DOE Storage Grant Match Funds $100,000
VPP Flex Match Funds $1,000,000
Total 9,120,000
Options for Programs
The Executive Committee recommended option 1, that the Board fully fund the proposed Program Development Fund, on March 2, 2026.
22 Options Savings FY 2026/27
Proposed Transfer
1 Fully fund proposed Program Development
Fund
NA $8,077,000
2 Reduce funding for EV Instant Rebate Program $1,797,000 $6,280,000 3 Eliminate funding for EV Instant Rebate Program $3,595,000 $4,483,000 4 Close the EV Charging Program to new
applicants
$800,000 $7,277,000
5 Eliminate Electrification Incentives, Heat Pump
Water Heater Incentives & Community Housing
Support
$942,000 $7,135,000
Customer Program Funding Options
23 Option Budget Impact Program Impact
Close or scale back EV Instant
Rebate Program
Savings of up to $3,594,500 Up to 876 income-qualified customers will not receive a rebate for the purchase
of an EV. 85% of participants have
indicated via survey that they wouldn’t
have purchased an EV without MCE’s
rebate.
Close the EV Charging Program
to new applicants
Savings of around $800,000 Projects with existing reservations will still need to close out. Larger budget
impacts in the coming FYs if we stop
taking in new project reservations.
Eliminate Electrification
Incentives (Heat Pump Water
Heater Incentives & Community
Housing Support)
Savings of $942,000 685 electrification measures not installed in customer homes. Will also impact
MCE’s ability to spend down CPUC EE
funds.
Total Potential Savings (all options): Up to $5,336,500 FY 2026/27 Change in Net Position
24 The consolidated change in net position is projected to total $1.6 million, a 90% decrease year-over-year FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed Variance $ Variance %
Energy Revenue, Net $ 813,689,500 $ 621,291,000 $ (192,398,500) (23.6%) ORF Withdrawal 13,000,000 62,000,000 49,000,000 376.9%
Cost of Energy (765,542,000) (631,944,000) 133,598,000 (17.5%) Operating Expenses (50,249,000) (53,773,000) (3,524,000) 7.0% Non-Operating Revenues, Net 14,775,000 13,139,000 (1,636,000) (11.1%) Program Expenses (9,181,000) (9,120,000) 61,000 (0.7%)
Consolidated Change in Net Position 16,492,500 1,593,000 (14,899,500) (90.3%) Progress towards
Reserves and Liquidity
Goals
Reserves
26 $497
$437 $412
$417
$496 $497
84%
114% 121%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
140%
$0
$150
$300
$450
$600
FY 2024/25 Audited Results FY 2025/26 Projection FY 2026/27 Proposed Millions $
Target vs Projected
Reserves Goal
Reserve Target $ Actual Reserves $ Reserves Actual (% of Target) • Reserves target is met and surpassed
• Numbers are inclusive of cost of energy reductions and withdrawals from the ORF CCA Industry Days Liquidity on Hand
27 670
594
434
352 337 321
242 218
165 150
25 Average, 319
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Sonoma
Clean
Power
Silicon
Valley Clean
Energy
Peninsula
Clean
Energy
Pioneer
Community
Energy
AVA Valley Clean
Energy
Clean
Power SF
MCE Clean
Power
Alliance
San Diego
Community
Power
Clean
Energy
Alliance
Days
Days Liquidity on Hand
As of FY 2025/26 End
Metrics for peer CCAs based on ending net position and amounts in their rate stabilization fund, when applicable.
Liquidity
28 $545
$478 $451
$494
$566 $495
218
284
263
0 75
150
225
300
$0
$150
$300
$450
$600
FY 2024/25 Audited Results FY 2025/26 Projection FY 2026/27 Proposed Days
Millions $
Target vs Projected
Liquidity Goal
Liquidity Target $ Total Projected Liquidity $ Projected Days Liquidity on Hand • Liquidity target is met and surpassed.
• Actual results may be lower due to the CPUC’s Financial Security Requirement (FSR) which will require MCE to post security. Amounts are still being determined.
Recommendation
29 Approve the Fiscal Year 2026/27 proposed budgets inclusive of a
2.05-cent rate reduction effective April 1, 2026, and a temporary
0.62-cent rate credit running April–December 2026.
Consider increasing the Communications Services budget by $175,000 to avoid any decrease in local community and industry events and sponsorship opportunities.
Thank you!
mceCleanEnergy.org
[email protected]
B. Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2026/27
FY 2025/26
Forecast
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed
Approved vs
Proposed Variance
$
Approved vs
Proposed Variance
%
ENERGY REVENUE
Operating Revenues 783,190,000$ 831,238,000$ 638,933,000$ (192,305,000)$ (23.1%) Uncollectible Accounts (11,326,000) (12,469,000) (7,642,000) 4,827,000 (38.7%) Cost Relief Program (5,723,000) (5,000,000) (10,000,000) (5,000,000) 100.0% Bi-Directional Vehicle Charging Tariff - (79,500) - 79,500 (100.0%) Energy Revenue, net 766,141,000 813,689,500 621,291,000 (192,398,500) (23.6%) Transfer from Operating Reserve Fund - 13,000,000 62,000,000 49,000,000 376.9% Total Energy Revenue 766,141,000 826,689,500 683,291,000 (143,398,500) (17.3%)
ENERGY EXPENSES
Cost of Energy 658,914,000 765,542,000 631,944,000 (133,598,000) (17.5%) Net Electricity Revenue 107,227,000 61,148,000 51,347,000 (9,801,000) (16.0%)
OPERATING EXPENSES
Personnel 25,252,000 25,405,000 28,652,000 3,247,000 12.8% Data Manager 5,370,000 5,276,000 5,434,000 158,000 3.0% Technical and Scheduling Consultants 1,300,000 1,400,000 1,588,000 188,000 13.4% Service Fees - PG&E 2,579,000 2,738,000 2,608,000 (130,000) (4.7%) Legal and Policy Services 1,374,000 1,534,000 1,427,000 (107,000) (7.0%) Communication Services 2,270,000 2,223,000 1,876,000 (347,000) (15.6%) Other Professional Services 4,659,000 4,754,000 4,779,000 25,000 0.5% General and Administrative 4,145,000 4,966,000 5,492,000 526,000 10.6% Occupancy 263,000 453,000 417,000 (36,000) (7.9%)
Contingency - 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 0.0%
Total Operating Expenses 47,212,000 50,249,000 53,773,000 3,524,000 7.0% OPERATING INCOME 60,015,000 10,899,000 (2,426,000) (13,325,000) (122.3%)
NONOPERATING REVENUES
Grant Income 4,986,000 3,278,000 5,018,000 1,740,000 53.1% Other Income 693,000 - - - -
Investment Income 22,923,000 15,000,000 14,139,000 (861,000) (5.7%) Total Nonoperating Revenues 28,602,000 18,278,000 19,157,000 879,000 4.8%
NONOPERATING EXPENSES
Banking Fees and Financing Costs 261,000 225,000 1,000,000 775,000 344.4% Grant Expenses 670,000 3,278,000 5,018,000 1,740,000 53.1% Total Nonoperating Expenses 931,000 3,503,000 6,018,000 2,515,000 71.8% CHANGE IN NET POSITION* 87,686,000 25,674,000 10,713,000 (14,961,000) (58.3%) Budgeted Net Position Beginning of Period 416,863,000 416,863,000 504,549,000 87,686,000 21.0% Change in Net Position 87,686,000 25,674,000 10,713,000 (14,961,000) (58.3%) BUDGETED NET POSITION END OF PERIOD 504,549,000 442,537,000 515,262,000 72,725,000 16.4%
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, INTERFUND TRANSFERS & OTHER
Software Transmission Upgrade - 10,250,000 10,250,000 0 0.0% San Rafael Office Building Purchase 5,401,000 5,400,000 - (5,400,000) (100.0%) Office Improvements and Retrofits 349,000 349,000 147,000 (202,000) (57.9%) Transfer to Resiliency VPP Fund - - - - -
Transfer to Program Development Fund 2,392,000 2,392,000 8,077,000 5,685,000 237.7% TOTAL CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, INTERFUND TRANSFERS & OTHER 8,142,000 18,391,000 18,474,000 83,000 0.5% BUDGETED NET INCREASE IN OPERATING FUND BALANCE 79,544,000 7,283,000 (7,761,000) (15,044,000) (206.6%) *Change in net position before program expenses. See staff report for consolidated change in net position.
MCE Operating Fund
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2026/27
From April 1, 2026 through March 31, 2027
For comparison purposes, the FY 2026/27 Proposed budget is shown along the current year's Approved Budget. Actuals through January 2026 plus projections through March 31, 2026 are shown in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Forecast column.
FY 2025/26
Forecast
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance $
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
Transfer from Operating Fund and Deep Green
Premium
$2,392,000 $2,392,000 $8,077,000 $5,685,000 237.7%
Marin Community Foundation Grant 27,000 260,000 131,000 (129,000) -49.6% Community Benefits Funds 100,000 100,000 0 (100,000) -100.0% TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES $2,519,000 2,752,000 $8,208,000 $5,456,000 198.3%
EXPENDITURES
Transportation Electrification Programs 6,486,000 5,310,000 5,984,000 674,000 12.7% Heat Pump Water Heater Incentives 540,000 540,000 682,000 142,000 26.3% Emergency Water Heater Loaner Program 7,000 142,000 0 (142,000) -100.0% MCF - EV Charging at Affordable Housing 27,000 260,000 131,000 (129,000) -49.6% Community Housing Support 348,000 260,000 260,000 0 0.0% TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES 7,408,000 6,512,000 7,057,000 545,000 8.4% Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance (4,889,000) 3,760,000 1,151,000 - - Fund Balance at Beginning of Period* 3,738,000 3,760,000 (1,151,000) - - Fund Balance at End of Period (1,151,000) 0 0 - -
C. Proposed FY 2026/27 Program Development Fund Budget
For comparison purposes, the FY 2026/27 Proposed budget is shown along the current year's Approved Budget. Actuals through January 2026 plus projections through March 31, 2026 are shown in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Forecast column. *Beginning balance for FY 2025/26 Approved budget differs from FY 2025/26 Forecast due to delays in actual fund spending.
MCE
Program Development Fund
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2026/27
From April 1, 2026 through March 31, 2027
FY 2025/26
Forecast
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance $
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
CEC VPP Flex Grant $112,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $0 0.0% Federal Earkmark Funding 0 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) Marin Community Foundation Grant 203,000 72,000 270,000 198,000 275.0% Transfer from Operating Fund - - - 0 0.0%
TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES 315,000 1,472,000 1,570,000 98,000 7%
EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES
CEC VPP Flex Grant Expenses 112,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 0 0.0% Energy Storage Program 55,000 306,000 137,000 (169,000) (55.2%) CEC VPP Flex Grant Match 309,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 0.0% MCE Sync 800,000 952,000 927,000 (25,000) (2.6%)
PeakFLEX 0 100,000 0 (100,000) (100.0%)
Federal Earmark - Energy Storage 0 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) MCF - Resiliency at Critical Facilities 203,000 72,000 270,000 198,000 275.0% Federal Earmark Match Expense 85,000 200,000 100,000 (100,000) (50.0%) San Rafael Office Resiliency Buildout 0 200,000 0 (200,000) (100.0%) Virtual Power Plant 14,000 171,000 30,000 (141,000) (82.5%) TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES 1,578,000 4,401,000 3,764,000 (637,000) (14.5%) Net Increase (Decrease) in Fund Balance (1,263,000) (3,721,000) (2,194,000) - - Fund Balance at Beginning of Period* 3,878,000 4,361,000 2,615,000 - - Fund Balance at End of Period 2,615,000 640,000 421,000 - - D. Proposed FY 2026/27 Resilency VPP Fund Budget
For comparison purposes, the FY 2026/27 Proposed budget is shown along the current year's Approved Budget. Actuals through January 2026 plus projections through March 31, 2026 are shown in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Forecast column. *Beginning balance for FY 2025/26 Approved budget differs from FY 2025/26 Forecast due to delays in actual fund spending.
MCE
Resiliency VPP Fund
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2026/27
From April 1, 2026 through March 31, 2027
E. Proposed FY 2026/27 Energy Efficency Fund Budget
HBN
FY 2025/26
Forecast
FY 2025/26
Approved
FY 2026/27
Proposed
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance $
Approved vs
Proposed
Variance %
REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES
Public Purpose Energy Efficiency Program 10,162,608 $ 18,761,000$ 14,380,000$ (4,381,000) $ (23.4%) Public Purpose Low Income Families and Tenants Pilot Program 1,586,995 800,000 - (800,000) (100.0%) TOTAL REVENUE AND OTHER SOURCES 11,749,603 19,561,000 14,380,000 (5,181,000) (26.5%)
EXPENDITURE AND OTHER USES
Public Purpose Energy Efficiency Program 10,162,608 18,761,000 14,380,000 (4,381,000) (23.4%) Public Purpose Low Income Families and Tenants Pilot Program 1,586,995 800,000 - (800,000) (100.0%) TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER USES 11,749,603 19,561,000 14,380,000 (5,181,000) (26.5%) BALANCE 0 0 0 - -
MCE
Energy Efficiency Fund
Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2026/27
From April 1, 2026 through March 31, 2027
For comparison purposes, the FY 2026/27 Proposed budget is shown along the current year's Approved Budget. Actuals through January 2026 plus projections through March 31, 2026 are shown in the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Forecast column.
Update on
Attracting and
Retaining
MCE Staff
December 4, 2024
70% of staff who
left in the last two
years cited total
compensation as
the sole reason
for their
departure
• Competing with competitive industries such
as: Other CCAs, Tech, Finance, IOUs, and
regulatory bodies for top talent
• Limited talent pool for specialized skill sets
Energy Market – Challenges Attracting and Retaining Staff 2 Where Departing Staff
Left for in 2023 & 2024
Subsequent Employment
2023 & 2024
2 Retired
Other
Health
Private
Sector
Energy
Industry
PG&E CAISO
CPUC
CCAs
MCE Departing Staff Statistics
3 Number of Departed
Staff
13 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020
7 3 5 8
Manager and Above
(Includes Department
Heads)
Department Head
MCE and Industry Employee Turnover Rate
2 • MCE
• Energy Industry Average
11 6.3
3.4 7.45
13.54 7.5
9.3 10.9
14.4 15.4
7.5 9.3
10.9 14.4 15.4
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
AVERAGE TURN-OVER RATE (%)
4 Average Tenure at MCE vs Industry
5 3.1
3.8 4.3
7.7 6
4.9 6.6 6.9
6.4 2020 2022 2024
AVERAGE TENURE (YEARS)
• Utilities
• Local Governments
• MCE
Staff Size
6 Full-Time Staff Count
Total Head Count
Year
73 79 89 94 95
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
MCE
Benefits
7 d
Health and Wellness
Paid Time Off
Lifestyle
Retirement
Retention
MCE
Benefits • Comprehensive Medical, Dental, and Vision insurance • 15 Therapy sessions
• 15 Coaching sessions
• Wellness benefit
8 Health and Wellness
Paid Time Off
Retirement
Retention
Lifestyle
MCE
Benefits
9 d
Health and Wellness
• Vacation
• Personal Leave
• Sabbatical
• Sick Time and Bereavement Leave
• Administrative Shutdown
Paid Time Off
Retirement
Retention
Lifestyle
MCE
Benefits
10 d
Health and Wellness
• Commuter Benefit
• Life Insurance
• Dependent Care
• Hybrid Work
• Short-Term Disability Insurance
Paid Time Off
Retirement
Retention
Lifestyle
MCE
Benefits
11 Health and Wellness
• 401(a) employer contribution
• 457(b) employee contribution
• Health Retirement Account
Paid Time Off
Retirement
Retention
Lifestyle
MCE
Benefits
12 d
Health and Wellness
Paid Time Off
Retirement
• Agency Incentive
• 457(f)
Retention
Lifestyle
13 c Training and Development
13 Feedback at MCE
Annual Review
● Self-Evaluation
● Peer Review
● Upward Feedback
● Downward
Feedback
Quarter Review
● Upward
Feedback
● Downward
Feedback
Ongoing
● Check-ins
● Coaching
14 15
Intentional
In-person
Moments
• Onboarding • All-Staff
Meetings
• Cross-
Departmental
Workshops
• Staff Retreat
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum
Lorem ipsum 15
15 \
Thank you
mceCleanEnergy.org
[email protected]
March 19, 2026
TO: MCE Board of Directors
FROM: Supervisor Scales-Preston, MCE Board Chair, Representing Contra Costa County Supervisor Alessio, MCE Board Director, Representing the County of Napa Council Member Birdseye, MCE Board Director, Representing the City of Benicia Supervisor Sackett, MCE Board Director, Representing the County of Marin RE: Draft MCE RFP for Governance Assessment Services (Agenda Item #07) ATTACHMENT: Draft MCE RFP for Governance Assessment Services Dear Fellow Board Members:
As discussed during our last two Board meetings, the Ad Hoc Governance Assessment Committee has been working to draft a Request for Proposals (RFP) for an assessment of MCE’s governance structure. We thank Board members for their suggestions and feedback, which helped inform the draft RFP attached to this letter.
In speaking with firms and consultants, we have heard that an open-ended RFP is often preferable to a highly detailed or prescriptive one. Several advisors cautioned against approaching the assessment with a predetermined outcome, instead recommending that the selected consultant spend time engaging with stakeholders and understanding MCE’s structure and needs before proposing solutions.
If approved by the Board, we will ask MCE staff to post and distribute the RFP. Once it is posted, we would appreciate Board members helping to circulate it to interested and qualified parties.
Following the release of the RFP, we propose reconvening the Ad Hoc Governance Assessment Committee to review and rank proposals, conduct interviews with shortlisted consultants, and bring a recommended consultant back to the Board for approval of the contract.
We look forward to the full Board’s engagement in this process and to moving this effort forward.
Fiscal Impact:
Fiscal impact to be determined upon the selection of a consultant.
Recommendation:
Approve the Draft MCE RFP for Governance Assessment Services.
MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 1 Request for Proposals
Governance Assessment Services
March 23, 2026
MCE, a California Joint Powers Authority, seeks a qualified organization or individual (s) to assess MCE’s governance structure and practices and develop recommendations based upon the findings.
I. ABOUT MCE
MCE’s mission is to confront the climate crisis by eliminating fossil fuel greenhouse gas emissions, producing renewable energy, and creating equitable community benefits.
MCE is a not-for-profit public agency and the preferred electricity provider for more than 6000,000 customer accounts and 1.5 million residents and businesses across Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, and Solano counties. Setting the standard for clean energy in California since 2010, MCE leads with 60-100% renewable power at stable and competitive rates, providing energy for a 1200 MW peak load and significantly reducing greenhouse emissions and reinvesting millions in local programs. For information regarding MCE’s budget and policies, please visit the key documents page of our website: https://mcecleanenergy.org/key-documents/. Attached is the Joint Powers Agreement and Organizational Chart so proposers may see the current structure and legal framework.
MCE’s vision is to lead California to an equitable, clean, affordable, and reliable energy economy by serving as a model for community-based renewable energy, energy efficiency, and cutting-edge clean-tech products and programs.
MCE’s board is made up of 34 board members representing 38 member communities.
Additionally, each of these representatives may have an alternate, increasing that size. Board members are elected officials, serving as city/town council members or county supervisors.
They are appointed by their community to serve on the MCE board.
In addition to board meetings, MCE has three standing committees: an Executive Committee, a Finance Committee, and a Technical Committee. Overviews for these three committees are attached.
MCE was founded in 2008 and launched service in 2010 as California’s first Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) program. As of 2026, MCE is celebrating 16 years of operations, which the MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 2 MCE Board has recommended an assessment to identify existing best practices, barriers, and gaps to continue to improve MCE to achieve its mission, vision, and priorities.
II. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
A contract awarded as a result of this Request for Proposals will include the following proposed scope of work, subject to revision:
a. Consultant may be expected to:
i. Gather input from board members, board committees, staff, key stakeholders, and relevant external benchmarks.
ii. Evaluate governance components, including board structure, processes, people, resources, and operating culture.
iii. Evaluate communication protocols between board and staff. iv. Identify governing constraints (legal, political, representational). v. Develop findings and recommendations by identifying strengths, gaps, and actionable opportunities for improvement.
vi. Engage the board in reviewing preliminary findings and shaping recommendations prior to presentation to the full board. vii. Deliver findings that include comprehensive evaluation, implementation considerations, and a clear action plan.
b. Consultant may choose to propose a phased approach. If so, the proposal should include planned phases and associated time and costs. c. Consultant may also provide proposal for subsequent phase of this process, which may include:
i. Overall organizational review of the agency to look at structure and internal governance.
ii. Cost and timeline of this additional phase, outlined separately in the proposal.
III. REQUIRED CONTENT OF PROPOSALS
Proposals must include all of the following components in sufficient detail to allow MCE to evaluate the offer (using the criteria in Section IV):
a. Introduction/Cover Sheet. Briefly introduce the organization and summarize its most relevant experience in [the field or skills needed]
b. Examples of Work. Proposals should include specific examples of their work on similar projects with similar public agencies.
MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 3 c. Proposed Work Plan and Timeline: Describe the major tasks and estimated timeline required in order to complete the above noted Scope of Work. d. Price: Proposals should include pricing for any items in or related to the Scope of Work for which MCE would be billed.
e. Information and Resources Required from MCE: Please indicate what, if any, additional resources or information would be required from MCE in order to complete the Scope of Work.
f. Statement of Qualifications: Describe the organization’s specific qualifications which will enable it to develop workable solution(s) to address each point on the Scope of Work.
Attach copies of any relevant licenses and certifications. g. Breakdown of Proposed Labor Hours: Include an itemized estimate of total project hours, identifying the portion of work to be performed by consultants and the portion to be performed by other personnel or subcontractors.
h. References: Provide three business references that can attest to the organization’s work history and the general quality of work performed.
i. Contract Terms: Review MCE’s Standard Form Agreement (Attachment A) with your Legal department. If Respondent requires any deviations from MCE’s standard contract terms listed in Attachment A, Respondent must provide a redline with requested edits or list the terms where Respondent will require an edit with sufficient detail explaining the need for such an edit.
IV. EVALUATION CRITERIA
MCE will evaluate proposals using the following criteria:
Technical Expertise in Governance in Public Sector 20%
Technical Expertise in Energy Markets and/or Utilities 20% Approach and Methodology 15%
Successes with Other Agencies 10%
Organizational Capacity 10%
Innovation and Creativity 10%
Cost Competitiveness 10%
Completeness of application 5%
V. KEY DEADLINES AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 4 a. Notice of Interest: A notice of interest in submitting an offer is not required, however, it is useful for the evaluation process. No later than the deadline for submitting questions, all parties interested in responding to this RFP are encouraged, but not required, to notify MCE via email of the intent to submit a proposal. This notice creates no obligation to submit a proposal but will ensure that interested parties are copied on MCE’s responses to questions submitted by potential respondents. Notices must be sent to [email protected] and should include the company’s name and email contact information, referencing “MCE Governance Assessment Services RFP – Notice of Interest” in the subject line.
b. Deadline for Questions. Any questions related to the content of this RFO must be submitted to the Contracts Manager no later than April 15, 2026. c. Deadline for Responses. MCE Responses to all questions received will be sent to all respondents who submitted questions and/or provided a complete Notice of Interest via email by April 27, 2026
d. Submission Deadline. To be eligible for considerations, all responses must be submitted via the below Egnyte upload link, in either .pdf or .docx (Word) file format, no later than 4:00 p.m. PDT on April 30, 2026:
[Link]
Respondents must fill in the two required fields as follows before uploading documents:
Name:
Please list Company Name;
Email Address: List email address of the contact submitting the response.
Please leave the optional third field requesting company name blank; company name should be listed in the first required field titled “Name”.
Respondents may upload files until the deadline listed above. Any submissions received after the deadline will not be considered.
e. Selection of Contractor. Subject to the General Terms and Conditions below, MCE anticipates that the contractor selection process will be completed by June 30, 2026.
VI. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
a. MCE’s Reserved Rights. MCE may, at its sole discretion: withdraw this Request for Proposals at any time, and/or reject any or all offers or proposals submitted without MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 5 awarding a contract. Respondents are solely responsible for any costs or expenses incurred in connection with the preparation and submittal of an offer or proposal. b. Public Records. All documents submitted in response to this Request will become the property of MCE upon submittal, and will be subject to the provisions of the California Public Records Act and any other applicable disclosure laws. Upon submission, all proposals shall be treated as confidential until the selection process is completed. Once a contract is awarded, all proposals shall be deemed public record. MCE is required to comply with the California Public Records Act as it relates to the treatment of any information marked “confidential.” Respondents requesting that portions of its submittal should be exempt from disclosure must clearly identify those portions with the word “Confidential” printed on the lower right-hand corner of the page. Each page shall be clearly marked and separable from the proposal in order to facilitate public inspection of the non-confidential portion of the proposal. MCE will consider a respondent's request for an exemption from disclosure; however, if MCE receives a request for documents under the California Public Records Act, MCE will make a decision based upon applicable laws. Respondents should not over-designate material as confidential, and any requests or assertions by a respondent that the entire submittal, or significant portions thereof, are exempt from disclosure will not be honored. c. No Guarantee of Contract. MCE makes no guarantee that a contractor and/or firm submitting documents under this solicitation will result in a contract. The successful vendor, if any, will enter into an agreement for services based on MCE’s Standard Form Agreement, attached hereto as Attachment A. By submitting a response, you agree to abide by the terms included in the attached Agreement; however, MCE reserves the right to modify the terms based on the scope of work agreed to by MCE and the selected vendor.
d. Insurance. Selected vendors shall provide proof of insurance coverage meeting or exceeding the following minimum requirements prior to contracting with MCE:
Commercial General Liability ($2,000,000 per occurrence, $4,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury and property damage), Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance ($1,000,000), Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance (per statute), and Professional Liability Insurance ($1,000,000), as applicable.
VII. QUESTIONS
To promote accuracy and consistency of information provided to all participants, questions will only be accepted via email submitted to MCE Contracts Manager at [email protected] and the subject line of the email must read “MCE RFP MCE RFP 2026-XX for Governance Assessment Services March 23, 2026 Page 6 Governance Assessment Question. The deadline for submitting questions is Friday, April 10, 2026, at 4:00pm PDT.
MCE will provide a written response to the questions submitted via email by Monday, April 20, 2026, to all respondents who submitted questions and/or provided a complete Notice of Interest. MCE reserves the right to combine similar questions, rephrase questions, or decline to answer questions, at its sole discretion.
All questions must be submitted through the above process. No questions will be answered over the telephone or in person. Respondents may not have any contact regarding this procurement with any MCE official or staff from the time of issuance of this solicitation until the award of contract, other than through the process for submitting questions. Any contact in violation of these provisions will be grounds for disqualification.
Thank you for your interest!
Informational Reports
1. Legislative and Regulatory Update
2. Customer Accounts and Participation
March 19, 2026
TO: MCE Board of Directors
FROM: Sabrinna Soldavini, Vice President of Policy
RE: Legislative and Regulatory Updates
ATTACHMENT: Regulatory Packet with Filings since the February Board Meeting
Dear MCE Board Members:
Summary:
Below is a summary of the key activities at the state and federal legislatures and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), California Energy Commission (CEC), and the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) impacting Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and MCE.
I. California Legislature
The California bill introduction deadline was February 20th this year, and state legislators introduced close to 1,800 new bills in addition to more than 370 bills that are permitted to carry over from 2025. Among energy-related bills, affordability remains the top priority in Sacramento; legislators are paying particular attention to ensuring that the growth of data centers does not increase electricity costs for other customers. Legislators also introduced several bills intended to address the high cost and long timelines for building new transmission and interconnecting new electric generation.
Electrification continues to be a significant theme for state legislators as well, with several bills aimed at making it easier for different types of customers to electrify their homes, businesses, and vehicles. Staff will provide updates throughout the session on priority bills, including identifying specific bills that may be of particular interest to MCE member communities. a. Assembly Bill (AB) 1761 (Rogers) - PCIA Data Transparency As previously mentioned, CalCCA is sponsoring AB 1761, authored by Assemblymember Chris Rogers (D-Santa Rosa), that would improve access and transparency for data used to calculate the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) and other values derived from the PCIA calculation.
This transparency will enable two primary benefits. First, it will allow more parties to review complex data sets and calculation methodologies, which will increase the chance of catching any mistakes that could harm customers. Second, it will allow CCAs to better forecast our customers’ PCIA rates earlier and more accurately, which will allow more time for a CCA to consider whether and how it can reduce the PCIA burden on our customers.
MCE encourages member communities to consider adopting a formal support position on AB 1761. As of the drafting of this staff report, the bill has been introduced but has not yet been set for hearing. On February 23rd MCE’s Board Clerk circulated the author’s fact sheet on the bill, along with a support letter template in case it is helpful for member communities’ deliberative processes.
b. Senate Bill (SB) 1138 (Padilla) - Lowering Resource Adequacy Costs CalCCA is also sponsoring SB 1138, authored by Senator Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista), which will lower resource adequacy (RA) costs by aligning the rules for RA transactions with the rules for RA compliance.
As has been discussed at previous board meetings, the California Public Utilities Commission has recently changed the rules of its RA program. Previously, RA compliance was measured on a monthly basis, meaning that each load-serving entity (LSE) had to demonstrate that it had sufficient capacity under contract to meet its peak demand (plus a designated buffer amount) during each month of the year. The new rules require LSEs to demonstrate compliance on an hourly basis rather than a monthly basis.
However, the RA program is structured for LSEs to transact for RA on a monthly basis. This means that if an LSE needs additional capacity in just one or two hours out of a month, it must enter into a contract for the full month, rather than for only the hours it needs. As a result, LSEs like MCE are required to pay for more capacity than we need, and in hours where we don’t need it. It’s akin to having to buy a crate of oranges when you only need a few slices. This mismatch unnecessarily increases costs for all customers every year. CalCCA has estimated that in summer 2025 alone, California could have saved over $100 million if LSEs were able to transact on an hourly rather than monthly basis.
SB 1138 addresses this problem by allowing RA load obligation trading on an hourly basis rather than a monthly basis, whereby an LSE that is short in a particular subset of hours could transact that obligation to another LSE with sufficient capacity in those hours. It protects statewide reliability by leaving the overall RA compliance obligations untouched, and promotes affordability by fine-tuning the way LSEs are allowed to optimize their portfolios, address their obligations and eliminate wasteful spending. It will make California’s RA program more transparent, predictable, efficient, and fair.
MCE encourages member communities to consider adopting a formal support position on SB 1138. As of the drafting of this staff report, the bill has been introduced but has not yet been set for hearing. On March 3rd MCE’s Board Clerk circulated the author’s fact sheet on the bill, along with a support letter template in case it is helpful for member communities’ deliberative processes.
II. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
a. Integrated Resource Planning (IRP)
In January, the CPUC issued a Proposed Decision (PD) ordering load serving entities (LSEs) under the CPUC’s jurisdiction to procure an additional 6,000 MW of capacity to come online between 2029 and 2032. The CPUC proposes the additional procurement for reliability purposes due in part to projected load growth from data centers and electrification – including transportation electrification.
MCE worked with CalCCA to file comments in response to the PD in early February, asking the Commission to modify the PD to: 1) reassess the need to account for load forecast uncertainty; remove the 50 percent restriction on storage procurement; 3) increase compliance pathways that provide LSEs more ways to cost-effectively comply; 4) provide necessary clarity for LSE’s as it relates to resource’s NQC and compliance value; and 5) clarify how the procurement order impacts the magnitude of procurement considered by the Department of Water Resources.
In late February the CPUC issued a final Decision with the following revisions: 1) LSEs are required to procure 2000 MW of capacity each in 2030, 2031, and 2032; 2) Allows for flexible compliance provisions in case of delays outside of an LSE’s control and/or unreasonably high costs; 3) Removes 50 percent restriction on storage procurement and instead requires that at least one-quarter of the procurement by 2032 must come from resources that have attributes that align with clean firm resources and/or long-duration storage resources; 4) Clarifies compliance provisions for co-located energy storage resources; and 5) Sets deadlines for CPUC staff to publish studies that finalize how resources will count towards the compliance requirements.
For MCE, the Decision requires 180 MW of incremental procurement on top of existing compliance requirements, with 60 MW each in 2030, 2031, and 2032. MCE can utilize any excess resources already under contract that are above currently mandated CPUC requirements, however, the requirement on resource types and timing of resource accreditation studies may introduce further complexities.
Fiscal Impacts: MCE will be required to enter new procurement contracts for resources to come online between 2029 and 2032. The exact magnitude and cost of this procurement will depend on the final amount of incremental procurement required as well as future market/contract prices. MCE’s procurement team will continue to provide updates as applicable.
a. Resource Adequacy (RA) Proceeding
On February 23, 2026, The CPUC released its report on hourly load obligation transactability within the SOD framework. The report advocates against implementing a transactability program, finding the potential gains do not outweigh the added complexity and risk of unintended consequences of hourly load obligation trading. MCE believes that this report severely misses the point that transactability is intended to address—affordability.
MCE worked with CalCCA, who filed its initial rebuttal of the ED Report, along with CalCCA’s proposals on Transactability Issues, on March 3, 2026. Comments focus on the need for an hourly load obligation trading system, as well as ways to optimize trading and validation processes to minimize administrative burden to the CPUC. MCE plans will work with CalCCA to file additional comments to refute the report on March 16, 2026.
MCE also worked with CalCCA to file Opening Comments on Track 1 proposals in the RA proceeding on March 6, 2026. Key recommendations include furthering CalCCA’s proposal for separate data center load forecasts; accounting for the reliability value of energy-only resources, storage, and long-duration energy storage resources, and; rejecting proposals that would predetermine bidding and revenue allocations related to reliability capacity.
These proposals work to address affordability concerns for CCAs and LSEs in general.
Fiscal Impact: There is no direct fiscal impact on MCE at this time. c. California Climate Credit
In February 2026, the CPUC released a PD which proposes to pause the April 2026 distribution of the California Climate Credit. As this issue was not raised earlier in the proceeding (R.25-07-013), MCE worked with CalCCA to submitted comments in March 2026 requesting the Proposed PD be withdrawn – thus removing consideration of pausing the April Climate Credit. CalCCA’s comments oppose the PD on procedural, customer confusion, and affordability grounds. In addition to the lack of notice provided about the change, removing the credit risks last-minute customer confusion among those who were anticipating the credit. Additionally, there are affordability concerns for those in winter-peaking regions of the state, and challenges to IOUs who have already printed mailers explaining the Climate Credit.
In addition to the comments on the PD, CalCCA submitted another set of comments in early March 2026 that respond to the questions posed by the proceeding’s Scoping Memo and Ruling. These comments highlight the need for changes to the Climate Credit to be informed by analysis, rather than holistic approaches. The comments also reiterate the importance of prioritizing the credit’s affordability impacts and the need to improve customer understanding and awareness.
Fiscal Impact: There is no direct fiscal impact to MCE at this time. However, if the PD is approved, MCE (and all customers throughout the state) will not receive their climate credit in April – resulting in higher bills.
d. Transportation Electrification
In February 2026, MCE and a coalition of other CCAs (Ava Community Energy, Peninsula Clean Energy, San Jose Clean Energy, and Sonoma Clean Power) jointly filed a protest of PG&E’s Advice Letter 7822-E which outlines PG&E’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) Implementation Plan. The protest explains that PG&E’s LCFS plan lacks the required details to ensure just, reasonable, and competitively neutral program implementation that includes coordination with CCAs operating electric vehicle (EV) programs that involve the same customers and load.
While the CCAs support PG&E’s efforts to support the growth of EV adoption, the protest argues that PG&E failed to provide details around dual enrollment with CCA programs, and PG&E incorrectly suggested that dual participation policy would fall within Demand Response Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR). Given there is no clear timeline for addressing dual participation in that proceeding, it is unreasonable to defer a critical program detail to a separate proceeding. PG&E also fails to show how its Residential Optimized Charging program will be marketed in a competitively neutral manner and fails to include Level 1 charging without a reasoned analysis.
In response to the Joint CCA’s Protest, PG&E filed a response to the protest on February 26, 2026. PG&E’s response continues to shift focus to the Demand Response OIR, and indicates their marketing and program requirements will be clear that customers have the choice to participate in CCA-managed programs. They also disagree with including Level 1 charging for multi-family housing. Looking ahead, MCE will continue to meet with Energy Division on these issues, ensuring that CCA-managed TE programs are appropriately marketed and receive competitive neutrality from IOUs.
Fiscal Impact: There is no direct impact to MCE at this time. b. Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA)
In February 2025, the CPUC issued an OIR to update Energy Resource Recovery Account (ERRA) and Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA) policies and processes. Per law, the CPUC is required to ensure “indifference” and prevent cost shifts between bundled and unbundled customers. This entails the Investor-Owned Utilities (IOUs), such as Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) recovering electricity costs from CCA customers that were incurred on their behalf before they departed PG&E service, and reducing those costs by the value of benefits that remain with PG&E customers. To facilitate this process, the Commission established the PCIA, a charge paid by all customers on the PG&E side of the bill.
In this proceeding, the CPUC is evaluating potential changes to the methodology of calculating the PCIA through three tracks.
Track 1:
Track 1 considered interim changes to the calculation of the Resource adequacy (RA) Market Price Benchmark (MPB), one of the inputs used to calculate the PCIA, on an expedited basis.
The Commission voted out a Decision in Track 1 in 2025 that changed the calculation of the RA MPB and allowed the IOUs to apply this change to rates retroactively.
CalCCA filed an Application for Rehearing (AfR) followed by a Petition for Writ of Review (or appeal) on the Track 1 Decision in January 2026. The appeal argues that the Commission violated the indifference principle and acted illegally by approving retroactive application of the methodology and did so by relying on insufficient evidence. As part of this strategy, CalCCA also filed an AfR on Commission Decisions in the 2026 ERRA cases implemented these changes.
Track 2:
In January 2026, the Commission issued a Scoping Memo for Track 2 of this proceeding to consider the following issue: All 3 IOUs purchase resources and their associated Renewable Energy Certificates (REC) and bank a portion of them to use for compliance with the Renewable Procurement Standard (RPS) program at a later time. Customers that departed IOU service should receive value for the resources and RECs that they paid for. The Commission is currently evaluating how the IOUs should value RECs that they banked prior to 2019 and convey that value to departed customers.
In early March, CalCCA filed Opening Testimony in this proceeding. Customers that departed IOU service after the IOUs purchased and banked RECs prior to 2019 do not receive any value when IOUs use those RECs for current bundled customer compliance.
CalCCA argued that this goes against the indifference principle that unbundled customers need to receive value for resources or attributes that they paid for. The current methodology values the RECs at $0 and therefore shifts costs onto unbundled customers. CalCCA proposed that the IOUs should be required to value any pre-2019 banked RECs at the current RPS MPB and credit to the appropriate PCIA vintage. As an alternative, the IOUs should be required to allocate those RECs to the appropriate LSE and that LSEs' RPS compliance obligation should be reduced accordingly.
Track 3
The Commission issued a Scoping Memo in Track 3 of this proceeding in February 2026 to consider additional PCIA related issues, including data access and timelines for the proceeding.
MCE will continue to actively engage in this proceeding through 2026 and provide updates as they become available.
Fiscal Impacts: There are no immediate fiscal impacts to MCE. The PCIA is a charge on the PG&E side of the bill, but changes to the PCIA impact MCE customers’ overall bill and MCE’s rate competitiveness.
II. California Energy Commission (CEC)
a. Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR)
In late February, the CEC published its 2025 updates to the California Energy Demand forecasts. The IEPR forecast is foundational for procurement and system planning in the state and is used in the CPUC’s forecasting process for the Resource Adequacy and Integrated Resource Planning programs. The CEC also updated its 2024 edition of the demand forecast, which may be considered in the current IRP cycle.
In February 2026, the CEC sent its request to open a new docket for the 2026 IEPR Update for the Electricity and Gas Demand Forecast (26-IEPR-03). CalCCA met with CEC staff in March 2026, to discuss its priorities for the 2026 IEPR process, including CCA input into the load forecasting process, RA allocation, inaccurate opt-out assumptions, and known loads.
MCE will continue working with CalCCA to support proposals in the new IEPR process that enhance transparency and CCA input in the demand forecasts.
Fiscal Impacts: There is no direct fiscal impact on MCE at this time.
MCE Customer Accounts and Participation, as of February 1, 2026 Month over Month Change: January 1 - January 31, 2026
Account Summary Residential Non-Residential
January 1 -
January 31 2025
Year over Year
Change
Total Year over
Year
% Year over
Year
Res
Partic.
MCE
Non-Res
Net New
Enrollment* Opt Outs Opt Outs Δ Total Account Δ
Total
Account % Δ
Contra Costa Concord 52,109 47,112 4,852 90.40% 42,241 90% 4,871 95% 632 21 20 1 334 0.2% Contra Costa Contra Costa Co. 71,069 63,153 7,779 88.90% 57,834 89% 5,319 88% 778 41 31 10 522 0.1% Contra Costa Danville 18,035 16,146 1,834 89.50% 14,594 90% 1,552 92% 173 6 9 -3 108 0.0% Contra Costa El Cerrito 12,035 11,013 999 91.50% 10,307 92% 706 92% 119 9 4 5 49 0.2% Contra Costa Hercules 10,043 9,021 993 91.80% 8,468 90% 553 91% 99 25 0 25 10,043 - Contra Costa Lafayette 11,298 10,204 1,070 90.30% 9,167 91% 1,037 90% 109 4 3 1 84 0.2% Contra Costa Martinez 16,854 15,241 1,566 90.40% 13,888 90% 1,353 96% 187 11 11 0 94 0.1% Contra Costa Moraga 6,442 5,784 644 89.80% 5,410 90% 374 91% 59 3 2 1 15 0.1% Contra Costa Oakley 15,994 13,267 2,705 82.90% 12,385 82% 882 92% 119 9 14 -5 188 0.3% Contra Costa Pinole 8,037 7,317 684 91.00% 6,640 91% 677 93% 43 7 5 2 24 -0.1% Contra Costa Pittsburg 25,847 23,050 2,733 89.20% 21,352 89% 1,698 92% 414 11 20 -9 171 0.1% Contra Costa Pleasant Hill 16,184 14,643 1,493 90.50% 13,155 90% 1,488 94% 174 1 8 -7 23 0.0% Contra Costa Richmond 43,653 36,549 7,011 83.70% 33,384 84% 3,165 88% 531 24 33 -9 307 0.5% Contra Costa San Pablo 10,671 9,349 1,304 87.60% 8,570 87% 779 91% 141 8 8 0 238 0.3% Contra Costa San Ramon 32,584 29,802 2,667 91.50% 27,661 91% 2,141 96% 345 8 10 -2 105 0.2% Contra Costa Walnut Creek 38,128 34,385 3,616 90.20% 31,457 90% 2,928 92% 472 10 14 -4 101 0.2% Marin Belvedere 1,121 944 175 84.20% 858 84% 86 90% 13 2 0 2 5 1.1% Marin Corte Madera 4,918 4,213 679 85.70% 3,555 85% 658 91% 37 2 0 2 24 0.3% Marin Fairfax 3,690 3,159 528 85.60% 2,925 85% 234 88% 40 - 4 -4 11 0.6% Marin Larkspur 6,942 5,884 1,038 84.80% 5,244 85% 640 84% 76 2 1 1 33 0.2% Marin Marin Co. 30,137 24,536 5,546 81.40% 22,222 81% 2,314 86% 248 12 0 12 135 0.7% Marin Mill Valley 6,763 5,856 894 86.60% 5,231 87% 625 88% 51 3 2 1 37 0.7% Marin Novato 23,973 18,306 5,598 76.40% 15,984 76% 2,322 81% 208 20 7 13 45 0.6% Marin Ross 978 801 176 81.90% 708 81% 93 89% 11 - 0 0 4 1.0% Marin San Anselmo 5,975 5,110 851 85.50% 4,621 85% 489 88% 42 7 2 5 16 0.6% Marin San Rafael 27,674 22,917 4,697 82.80% 19,140 82% 3,777 86% 284 12 10 2 118 0.6% Marin Sausalito 5,082 4,428 639 87.10% 3,672 88% 756 87% 65 1 1 0 35 0.7% Marin Tiburon 4,549 3,806 739 83.70% 3,457 83% 349 87% 42 1 3 -2 39 0.7% Napa American Canyon 7,220 6,253 954 86.60% 5,593 86% 660 92% 59 1 8 -7 173 0.1% Napa Calistoga 2,564 2,385 173 93.00% 2,019 93% 366 96% 27 1 0 1 224 0.5% Napa Napa 34,413 30,774 3,409 89.40% 27,451 90% 3,323 94% 459 11 18 -7 304 0.2% Napa Napa Co. 15,719 13,899 1,748 88.40% 10,048 88% 3,851 91% 92 3 5 -2 55 0.1% Napa St. Helena 3,489 3,227 243 92.50% 2,527 92% 700 95% 48 - 0 0 43 0.0% Napa Yountville 1,181 1,066 111 90.30% 893 90% 173 95% 11 1 0 1 3 -0.1% Solano Benicia 12,980 10,444 2,500 80.50% 9,006 80% 1,438 86% 123 5 7 -2 64 0.6% Solano Fairfield 44,471 38,685 5,664 87.00% 35,016 87% 3,669 93% 574 27 49 -22 510 0.2% Solano Solano Co. 10,772 9,075 1,665 84.20% 6,421 83% 2,654 87% 459 3 13 -10 87 0.1% Solano Vallejo 47,897 42,055 5,745 87.80% 38,663 88% 3,392 93% 615 50 75 -25 384 0.1% Contra Costa All 388,983 346,036 41,950 89.00% 316,513 89% 29,523 92% 4,395 198 192 6 2,363 0.2% Marin All 121,802 99,960 21,560 82.10% 87,617 82% 12,343 85% 1,117 62 30 32 502 0.6% Napa All 64,586 57,604 6,638 89.20% 48,531 89% 9,073 93% 1,063 17 31 -14 802 0.2% Solano All 116,120 100,259 15,574 86.30% 89,106 86% 11,153 91% 1,771 85 144 -59 1,045 0.2% Grand Total 691,491 603,859 85,722 87.3% 541,767 87.3% 62,092 90.3% 8,346 362 397 -35 14,755 2.4% *Net New Enrollment equals the total amount of Move-Ins and New Accounts minus Move Outs and Closed Accounts *Includes net
gain from
Hercules
Current Month +/- January
1-January 31 2026
Non-Res
County Jurisdiction Total MCE PG&E MCE Res Partic. Opt Outs MCE
Share