ID Start time Completion time
Name: Agenda Item Number
or Non-Agenda Public
Comment
Please use this portion to submit your written public comment. 1 4/26/22 11:38:49 4/26/22 12:10:59
John Bryant Smith Jr Non-Agenda Public
Comment
Thank you for taking on SDCP Board responsibility in addition to the multitude of other duties associated with your elected office. There is excitement about the opportunity that SDCP presents for community members to influence the local electricity marketplace in a positive manner. As background, my name is John Smith. I am a San Diego native born in Hillcrest, raised in Imperial Beach and have been residing in La Jolla most my adult life. I am a 1985 UCSD Systems Engineering graduate, a clean energy entrepreneur, a consumer advocate and to a lesser extent, a climate activist. As a goal, the hope is to contribute towards the shared vision of SDCP becoming a more competitively priced provider of clean energy. Towards this end, a significant amount of research has been done documenting the history of SDGE electricity price increases and comparing the rates offered by other utilities. Additionally, a review of the plethora of information posted on the SDCP website is ongoing and nearly complete. As directors of the Joint Power Authority overseeing the Community Choice Aggregation program, your responsibility includes providing strategic guidance and organizational course correction as needed. At monthly meetings, conducted per the Brown Act and following Roberts Rules of Order, the public has an opportunity to interact directly with the board and committee members. This public interaction is generally highly constrained and limited to providing brief oral or written communications, three minutes or 400 words maximum. More extensive communication with the board is available using [email protected]. It was stated at a recent meeting that the public is welcome to communicate directly with SDCP team members via email as well, using the following format: [email protected]. SDCP has been publicly sharing two visions with respect to setting rates. One vision is to introduce healthy marketplace competition against the former SDGE monopoly to deliver better prices for its constituents. The alternate vision is to act as an oligopoly and set rates at essentially the same unaffordable level as SDGE, reaping potential windfall profits for reinvestment in the community, ostensibly vice Sempra shareholders. Note: SDGE theoretically does not profit on electricity generation. Any clarifications or corrections the board would care to make, especially with respect to the rate setting philosophy, would be valued. In practice thus far, the latter appears to be the vision. Additional comments on the January 2022 board meeting will be provided in a separate correspondence. 2 4/27/22 14:32:20 4/27/22 14:35:21
Dave Peterson Non-Agenda Public
Comment
4 slides for discusion during the public comment were transmitted via the link 3 4/28/22 16:27:09 4/28/22 16:28:25
Maya Steinberg Item 3 Hello Chair Mosca and board members, my name is Maya Steinberg and I am a San Diego resident and am excited to be a new SDCP customer. I urge you to pull item #3 and instead consider in-house legal counsel. If you must move forward with Best Best & Krieger, I hope you will consider setting a limit to their agreement, since offering a blank check to a law firm does not seem like a wise decision for SDCP or its customers. Thank you for your time. 4 4/28/22 16:28:41 4/28/22 16:29:26
Karinna Gonzalez Item 3 Good evening Chair Mosca, my name is Karinna Gonzalez and I am a resident of Chula Vista. Community choice energy programs are under a lot of scrutiny right now because of overspending by a handful of programs. I encourage the board to pull item 3 for tonight and instead explore hiring an in-house counsel. If the board would like to move forward with this engagement letter, then I encourage you to include a do not exceed clause with a set dollar amount, to avoid potential over spending.
5 4/28/22 16:20:01 4/28/22 16:37:33
Tara Hammond Item 3 Good evening Chair Mosca and board members, this is Tara Hammond, vice chair of the SDCP Community Advisory Committee, commenting on behalf of Hammond Climate Solutions and as a future SDCP account. I am asking you to please pull item 3 from the agenda tonight and instead, seek hiring in-house legal counsel, which is presumably less expensive. SDCP continues to hire excellent staff members, and having an in-house legal team means counsel that is a part of the SDCP team, aligning with SDCP’s culture and values, which is so important. If you decide to proceed approving BBK’s engagement letter tonight, I urge you to include a “not to exceed” clause.
Not including this clause seems irresponsible, and it would be happening at a critical time when thousands of San Diego and Chula Vista residents are trying to understand what Community Choice Energy and SDCP are all about.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation out there, and many residents are hesitant to trust SDCP after being burned by SDG&E too many times, so showing how SDCP is so much different and is accountable to its customers as well as the community is so imperative. Thanks for your time and consideration. 6 4/28/22 16:54:34 4/28/22 16:59:14
Joyce Lane Item 3 I ask the board to pull this item and consider hiring in house counsel to provide legal advice to San Diego Community Power going forward. If the board chooses to take approve this item, I would ask that you set a "not to exceed" limit on expenditures. Such a provision provides an important check. Thank you.
Public Discussion—BOD
April 28, 2022
A similar version of these slides was submitted to the CAC April 8 A CAC member suggested that they might be more appropriate for the Board of Directors (BOD)
These slides recommend four Changes/Additions to the “Example Evaluation Summery” Chart, Page 17, February 11, 2022, CAC Presentation 369 Words
Dave Peterson
Retired Engineer
Planning Chart: Four Recommended Changes
• Change Column 4 heading to “MW(S or W) and add MWh to specify Energy source and energy storage parameters
• Example : Viking project entry would be: 100(S) and 150/600 • Add a numerical score for each column and sum the scores for total value • Add a column for percent of major components Made in the USA, in the free world and Not Made in China
• Add a new Column 5 with a heading of “mtCO2”
• The entry would be the value of metric tons of CO2 per MWh that will be emitted annually for Natural Gas Make Up required for wind outages, clouds and unscheduled maintainence.
• See Next Chart page 3
4/28/2022
2 4/28/2022 3
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
1/1/2014 2/1/2014 3/1/2014 4/1/2014 5/1/2014 6/1/2014 7/1/2014 8/1/2014 9/1/2014 10/1/2014 11/1/2014 12/1/2014 1/1/2015 Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) Wind Production (GWh) • MISO allocates power in 15 Midcontinent States, has a CF of 0.44 @ 240 GWh (Blue & Red Bar) • A 50 MW wind farm with MISO winds would have a Capacity Factor of roughly .44. • A 30MW cutoff (Green Bar, Right Axis) would have a CF of .71 and lose about 6% of the energy • The midcontinent is 900 to 2000 miles away, transmission line costs need to be included if SDCP uses midcontinent winds.
DM
50 40
30 20
10 0
4/28/2022 4
ROM Metric Tons of CO2 (mtCO2) Estimate, 50 MW Wind Farm with MISO Winds Item Reference Result Units
A B C D E
1 Peak Daily 11-20-2014 2014 MISO data 240.00 GWh
2 Total Annual MISO Wind MWh 2014 MISO data 38920 MWh
3 MISO Average Daily Output 38290/365 106.63 GWh
4 MISO Wind Capacity Factor 106.6/240 0.44 CF
5 MISO 2014 less than 150 MWh Sheet Calculaion 36508 MWh 6 Capacity Factor for 150 MWh 106.6/150 0.71 CF
7 Capacity Factor of Make up 1-.071 0.29 CF
8 Annual 30 MW Farm output 30*24*365*.71 186,588 MWh
9 Make up needed for .29 CF 30*24*365*.29 76,212 MWh
10 Convert to mtCO2-EPA factor 0.709 mt/MWh 54,034 mtCO2 Wind Electrical Energy Data from MISO 2014 Excel Spreadsheet 50 MW Wind Farm Equivalence Calculations
• Filling In the energy required below 30 MW would generate roughly 54,000 mtCO2 annually, 540,000 over a ten-year life
• Similar calculations for a hypothetical 90 MW Solar Battery Project located near Jacumba using 2015 CAISO solar data would result in 126 mtCO2 added annually