AGENDA
ENERGY & GREEN ISSUES STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING
Goleta City Hall
130 Cremona Drive, Suite B
Goleta, California
Wednesday, August 19, 2026
2:00 - 3:30 PM
Conference Room # 1
Luz Reyes-Martín, Councilmember
James Kyriaco, Councilmember
Robert Nisbet, City Manager
Peter Imhof, Planning and Environmental Review Director Dana Murray, Sustainability Manager
Angeline Foshay, Sustainability Analyst
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OPTIONS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION WILL BE IN PERSON OR ONLINE VIA ZOOM
If you wish to make a general public comment or to comment on a specific agenda item, the following methods are available:
Distribution to the Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee - Submit your comment via email up to Wednesday, August 19 at 10:00 AM prior to the Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee meeting. Please submit your comment to Dana Murray at:
[email protected]. Your comment will be placed into the record and distributed appropriately.
Please register for the Energy / Green Issues Standing Committee Meeting on August 19, 2026, 2:00 PM PT at:
ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION:
Zoom Registration Link;
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_SS8ffnYuS3aRmKvxnu7P8w Zoom Webinar ID: 874 4331 3252
For Audio Participation:
One tap mobile: +1 408-638-0968,,87443313252# or +1 669-444- 9171,, 87443313252#
Or dial: US: +1 408 638 0968 or +1 669 444 9171 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 205 0468 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 719 359 4580 or +1 309 205 3325 or +1 312 626 6799
Webinar ID: 874 4331 3252
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. You will be connected to audio using your computer's microphone and speakers (VoIP). A headset is recommended.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AGENDA
I. Public Comment
II. Biodiversity Resolution
III. EV Charging Fee Analysis – City Hall
IV. Program Updates
A. OPC Grant
B. Reach Codes
C. Heat Pump Permit Fee Waiver Program
VII. Future Topics
Note: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, (including assisted listening devices), please contact Deborah Lopez, City Clerk, at (805) 961-7505 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. Notification helps to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting.
DATE: August 13, 2026
TO: Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee
FROM: Peter Imhof, Planning and Environmental Review Director CONTACT: Dana Murray, Sustainability Manager
Angeline Foshay, Sustainability Management Analyst
Jason Scott-Sheets, CivicSpark Fellow
SUBJECT: Background Information for the August 19, 2026 Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee (“Green Committee”) Meeting (please see attached agenda)
ITEM I: PUBLIC COMMENT
ITEM II: BIODIVERSITY RESOLUTION
Background:
California has identified biodiversity protection as a key priority through statewide initiatives, such as Executive Order N-82-20, which establishes a goal to conserve 30 percent of lands and coastal waters by 2030 (“30x30”). These initiatives recognize biodiversity as essential to climate resilience, ecosystem function, and community wellbeing.
The City of Goleta is located within the California Floristic Province, a globally recognized area of significance for biodiversity. The region supports diverse terrestrial and marine ecosystems, including coastal sage scrub, wetlands, oak woodlands, and kelp forests that provide critical ecological functions and support numerous native and sensitive species.
These ecosystems also provide direct benefits to the community, including greenhouse gas reductions, climate resilience, wildfire risk reduction, water quality protection, and recreational opportunities. These natural systems face increasing pressure from climate change, habitat fragmentation, invasive species, and development - underscoring the importance of coordinated local conservation and restoration efforts.
The Santa Barbara Botanic Garden chairs a regional Biodiversity Working Group, composed of 55 organizations from Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties. The group has developed a shared Community Vision and Policy Platform for Biodiversity on the Central Coast and is building regional support for enhanced biodiversity and native plants. As part of this effort, the Biodiversity Working Group has asked multiple jurisdictions in the region to pass resolutions in support for biodiversity protection and restoration.
Discussion:
Local jurisdictions including the County of Santa Barbara, City of Santa Barbara, and the City of Carpinteria passed biodiversity resolutions at their City Councils in April and May 2026. While the City of Goleta did acknowledge the importance of biodiversity through an Earth Month Proclamation in April 2026, the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden and partnering organizations have requested that the City consider adopting a resolution focused on biodiversity.
The proposed resolution for the City of Goleta would be similar to other local jurisdictions’ resolutions, affirming the City’s commitment to protecting and restoring biodiversity and aligning local efforts with state and regional conservation goals. It would establish policy direction and support voluntary, partnership-based approaches and would not impose new regulatory requirements.
The Resolution would be drafted to:
• Recognize the ecological significance of the south Central Coast region; • Support the conservation and restoration of native habitats and green infrastructure;
• Encourage integration of biodiversity considerations into City planning and development practices;
• Promote partnerships with tribal governments, conservation organizations, educational institutions, and public agencies; and
• Direct staff to identify funding opportunities and potential actions to advance local biodiversity goals.
Biodiversity protection complements the City’s climate mitigation and adaptation strategies by supporting carbon sequestration, improving ecosystem resilience, and reducing climate-related risks. The Resolution also aligns with the City’s broader efforts to support environmental and community vitality, including habitat restoration, improved urban forestry, creek and watershed restoration, and coastal resource protection.
Recommendation:
That the Green Committee recommend that City Council adopt a Resolution affirming the City of Goleta’s Commitment to Biodiversity Protection and Restoration.
Next Steps:
Should the Green Committee recommend the City adopt a Biodiversity Resolution, staff would draft the resolution and bring it forward to the City Council for consideration and adoption.
ITEM III. ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING FEE ANALYSIS
Background:
The City Hall EV charging stations opened for public use on January 23, 2025, comprised of 17 Level 2 PowerFlex chargers with 208-volt to 240-volt 40-amp plugs. The Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee received a report on the operation and use of the chargers during their inaugural year on March 4, 2026. The report evaluated the chargers on metrics including overall usage, environmental impacts, and operational performance.
During their first year, usage of the chargers grew steadily, particularly by the general public. They enabled a level of EV travel mileage that mitigated significant levels of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and they suffered almost no disruption in service from maintenance or functionality issues, including no instances of congestion where usage and demand outstripped availability.
The inaugural report, however, did not include a full analysis of the EV chargers’ fiscal performance. During the presentation of the initial usage report, it was determined that a more complete evaluation of the fiscal impact of the EV chargers’ collected revenue and electricity service costs would be provided as an update at the next Committee meeting.
The EV chargers’ fiscal performance was assessed for the months of March 2025 to March 2026. January and February of 2025 were omitted from the analysis because the chargers were only in operation for the final week of January. Additionally, during these months, the City offered a policy of free EV charging for City staff, until its revocation in March. This twelve-month period reflects the most consistent first year of the chargers’ standard fiscal performance and is generally representative of their operation for the foreseeable future.
The City currently employs a “time-of-use” (TOU) fee structure, which establishes different rates for charging at different times of the day. Currently there are two rates for charging fees: the peak hours rate is applied between 4:00 PM and 9:00 PM at $.40 per kilowatt hour (/kWh), and an off-peak rate of $.25/kWh is applied during all other hours.
A higher rate for peak hours was recommended to account for generally higher prices for electricity during that time. The policy goals of encouraging EV adoption and usage, along with providing affordable charging options for EV drivers, informed the decision to set the initial off-peak charging rate at $.25/kWh. The electricity providers Southern California Edison (SCE) and Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) also use TOU pricing structures in providing service for the stations. These plans set different rates for different times of the day, with further variation on a seasonal basis (summer and winter).
Discussion:
From March 2025 to March 2026, the City Hall EV chargers collected $19,487.67 in revenue. The monthly amount collected generally grew over this period, largely reflecting the growing number of charging sessions completed each month. The cost of operating the EV chargers during this period was $23,962.75. Monthly utility payments trended upwards over the course of the year, beginning at $831.44 in March 2025 and reaching $2,679.66 in March 2026. This growth in expenses aligns with the increasing consumption of energy to complete a rising number of sessions throughout this period along with overall time spent charging.
The City has maintained a policy of providing “free” charging for vehicles in the municipal fleet. Over this twelve-month period, charging sessions performed by fleet vehicles reached a valuation of $1,834.98. A total of 261 sessions were completed during this window. The number of sessions has grown significantly as more electric and hybrid models have been added to the fleet, which currently includes five fully electric or hybrid electric vehicles.
As a result of the difference between revenues collected and utility payments, and factoring in charging costs by fleet vehicles, the City’s EV chargers currently operate at an overall annual deficit. During the twelve-month assessment period, the deficit reached a total of $2,640.09, or an average of $220 per month for public EV charging. The gap
between revenues and expenses was greatest during the summer months of June, July, and August, coinciding with higher summer electricity rates. The most notable change in the utility TOU pricing plans occurs in the switch from the winter rate structure (September—May) to the summer (June—August), when the lower-priced “super offpeak” rate is replaced with a more expensive “on-peak” rate. In the case of SCE, this summer rate is nearly four times higher ($.28/kWh versus $.08/kWh), while 3CE’s onpeak rate is about nine times greater than its winter off-peak ($.36/kWh versus $.04/kWh).
Addressing the current gap between collected revenues and energy expenses will require adjusting the City’s current rate structure. The City can change EV charger rates once per year through a contract amendment, according to our contract with PowerFlex.
According to available data for local EV charging services in Goleta, the average price for EV charging is around $.34/kWh, a higher rate than the City’s current off-peak price of $.25/kWh. Adjusting this price would have the greatest impact on collected revenues, as a majority of charging at the City Hall chargers occurs during this time period.
Staff researched the rate structures currently employed by several other local and regional neighboring jurisdictions. Some cities have set charging fees at similar levels to Goleta’s daytime $.25/kWh. Numerous others currently charge rates more comparable to Goleta’s local average of $.34/kWh, ranging between $.30/kWh and $.40/kWh. An increase of the City’s off-peak rate would reduce or eliminate the deficit in operating costs for the charging stations. It would bring the rate structure into closer alignment with the prices of electricity under the SCE and 3CE TOU programs, while maintaining the City’s rates at the lower end of the local average. Such an adjustment would also bring the City’s pricing into parity with several other jurisdictions currently operating comparable EV service projects of their own.
Based on available data, an off-peak charging rate of $.30/kWh would have resulted in an estimated $27,198.36 collected revenue during this twelve-month period. This total exceeds the utility expenses incurred during that time, indicating that an off-peak rate increase to $.30/kWh would potentially erase the financial deficit and create a small return for the City.
Further, a modest positive return could help the City build an equipment and maintenance reserve for EV chargers over time, which has been recommended by the City’s Finance Department. The EV chargers at City Hall are currently under a three-year warranty which covers hardware replacement/repair with the City paying for labor, after which the City will need to pay for both the hardware and the labor for repairs and replacement as needed. While Sustainability has a $5,000 line item in the annual budget for EV charger maintenance, the Finance and General Service Departments have requested ~$6,000 revenue per year for an equipment reserve and ~$5,000 revenue per year for a maintenance reserve be built into the EV charger fees. To date, one of the 17 EV chargers has needed repairs, with the cost to the City for labor at around $1,500 and warranty covering the hardware replacement. Staff has identified a $5,000 maintenance reserve budget per year. To calculate the equipment reserve, staff took the purchased value of each EV charger at $1,835 multiplied by 17, then divided by their useful life of seven years. This equates to about $4,500 for an equipment reserve. Based on these reserve estimates, the City should build a reserve of about $9,500 per year for charger maintenance and equipment.
Should the Green Committee recommend building additional reserve funds for EV chargers, staff has provided some estimated calculations for multiple off-peak rate scenarios from $.30-$.40/kWh (when the chargers are most used) based on data from the first year of EV charger usage and existing/known electricity rates. The City could also consider raising the on-peak rates from $.40 to a higher rate, such as $.42 or $.45/kWh, which are reflected in Tables 1 and 2. These increases to EV charger rates aim to capture the true cost of electricity use by the public at the chargers and build revenue for equipment and maintenance reserves, while balancing a fee to the public that is on par with other EV charger fees in the region.
The estimates for potential revenue have been calculated with several assumptions about electricity rates and the effect a rate increase would have on usage going forward. Setting a higher charging rate could potentially build this fund more quickly, though aforementioned limitations on knowledge of future electricity prices and usage patterns make predictions uncertain. Please see the tables below to evaluate potential estimated revenue scenarios based on different increases to EV charger fees. The first table shows multiple off-peak rate estimates with a new on-peak rate of $.42/kWh, and the second table shows multiple off-peak rate estimates with a new on-peak rate of $.45/kWh. As a note, both tables of estimates are based on public usage and fleet charging using the past year’s usage data. Net revenue is calculated by subtracting Fleet Charging Costs from Utility Costs and then subtracting that result from the Collected Revenue (combined Off-Peak and On-Peak revenues).
Table 1: EV Charger Rate Scenarios (fixed on-peak rate at $.42/kWh) $.30 Off-Peak $.33 Off-Peak $.35 Off-Peak $.37 Off-Peak $.40 Off-Peak Off-Peak
Revenue $ 21,867.30 $ 24,054.03 $ 25,511.85 $ 26,969.67 $ 29,156.40 On-Peak
Revenue $ 5,331.06 $ 5,331.06 $ 5,331.06 $ 5,331.06 $ 5,331.06 Fleet Charging
Costs $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 Collected
Revenue $ 27,198.36 $ 29,385.09 $ 30,842.91 $ 32,300.73 $ 34,487.46 Utility Costs $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 Net Revenue $ 5,070.59 $ 7,257.32 $ 8,715.14 $ 10,172.96 $ 12,359.69 Table 2: EV Charger Rate Scenarios (fixed on-peak rate at $.45/kWh) $.30 Off-Peak $.33 Off-Peak $.35 Off-Peak $.37 Off-Peak $.40 Off-Peak Off-Peak
Revenue $ 21,867.30 $ 24,054.03 $ 25,511.85 $ 26,969.67 $ 29,156.40 On-Peak
Revenue $ 5,711.85 $ 5,711.85 $ 5,711.85 $ 5,711.85 $ 5,711.85 Fleet Charging
Costs $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 $ 1,834.98 Collected
Revenue $ 27,579.15 $ 29,765.88 $ 31,223.70 $ 32,681.52 $ 34,868.25
Utility Costs $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 $ 23,962.75 Net Revenue $ 5,451.38 $ 7,638.11 $ 9,095.93 $ 10,553.75 $ 12,740.48 The City could also consider whether to implement an idling fee for users who leave their vehicles connected to stations after completing their charging. This is a policy employed by some charger operators to discourage idle charging behavior and generate revenue from it. This behavior can become problematic if it creates congestion with active demand and leads to disrupted services with fewer users and sessions completed. The inaugural year assessment found that users at the City Hall chargers spent 34% of their time connected to stations in idle states. Implementing idling fees is not recommended at this stage, as it is not yet needed for behavior change and this policy is not a sustainable source of long-term revenue, as collections are reduced as users modify their behavior and reduce idling time. Despite the amount of time users spent idling, demand congestion has not been an issue in operating the chargers. All seventeen stations were only in use simultaneously on one occasion during this period, meaning that there is almost always at least one charger available for a new user at any given time. As demand changes over time, staff can reassess whether idling fees would be appropriate for the City Hall site.
Recommendation:
That the Green Committee consider recommending that staff bring forward an EV Charger fee increase to City Council for adoption. Staff recommends that the Green Committee consider recommending raising the off-peak rate to $.35/kWh, and on-peak to $.45/kWh. Increasing the fees will right-size the revenue to more closely match the cost of electricity for the EV chargers, and allow the City to build equipment and maintenance reserves for anticipated charger repairs and replacement as needed.
Next Steps:
Staff will work towards finalizing a recommendation on adjusting the City’s rate structure to address the chargers’ current financial deficit and calculate building in a reserve fund for maintenance and potential future replacement of the units. Once completed, the recommendation will be taken to City Council for approval. Future updates to the charger fees will be evaluated on an annual basis as a part of the established user fee analysis process.
ITEM IV. PROGRAM UPDATES
A. OPC Grant – Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Analysis & Adaptation Plan Background: In 2021, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) into law. SB 1 directs the state to provide funding to local and regional governments to develop sea level rise (SLR) adaptation plans and implementation projects. Under the California Natural Resources Agency, the California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) is a cabinet-level state body that works jointly with state and federal agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), tribes, and the public to ensure that California maintains healthy, resilient, and productive ocean and coastal ecosystems.
OPC’s SB 1 SLR Adaptation Grant Program (SB 1 Grant Program) aims to provide funding for coastal communities to develop consistent SLR adaptation plans and projects
to build resilience to SLR along the entire coast of California and San Francisco Bay. The SB 1 Grant Program is part of California Climate Investments, a statewide initiative that puts billions of Cap-and-Invest, formerly known as Cap-and-Trade, dollars to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening the economy, and improving public health and the environment — particularly in disadvantaged communities. The SB 1 Grant Program is also supported by Proposition 4 (the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024).
On March 4, 2026, the City Council’s Green Committee discussed staff preparation of a grant proposal for SB 1 funding and provided support for the City to move forward with submission of the grant application. The OPC grant aligns with and supports Planning & Environmental Review’s adopted Fiscal Year 2026-27 Annual Work Program and Sustainability’s planned work on the SLR study and is aligned with several of the City’s Strategic Goals.
Update: On March 20, 2026, the City of Goleta submitted a grant proposal for SB 1 funding for a multi-phase project to develop Climate Ready Goleta: SLR Vulnerability Analysis & SLR Adaptation Plan. The grant proposal submission to the OPC included preparation of a thorough grant proposal, letters of support from eight (8) organizations/universities/local governments, and detailed responses to OPC staff’s follow-up questions.
Through this grant, the City proposes to (1) develop an SLR Vulnerability Analysis (VA) to identify compound hazards using best available science, as outlined in the 2024 State of CA SLR Guidance document; (2) develop a long-term SLR Adaptation Plan (AP) with phased adaptation pathways up to 2100 with clear timelines, thresholds, and triggers to ensure long-term coastal resilience in the face of SLR and compounding coastal hazards; and (3) include meaningful and diverse community engagement throughout the planning process. Climate Ready Goleta will inform a future Local Coastal Program (LCP) amendment that will bring the jurisdiction into SB 272 compliance. This initiative will increase the City’s preparedness for climate change and compounding coastal events, such as SLR, high tides, storm surges, precipitation, groundwater inundation, and coastal erosion.
On June 16, 2026, the California Ocean Protection Council unanimously approved funding the City of Goleta’s grant proposal of up to $550,000 for "Climate Ready Goleta:
Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Analysis & Adaptation Plan.” On July 21, 2026, the Goleta City Council adopted a Resolution approving the execution of grant funds from the OPC through the SB 1 Sea Level Rise Adaptation Grant Program and approved a budget appropriation of $550,000 in both state grant revenue and expenditures in the California Natural Resources Agency Fund (Fund 307). The California Natural Resources Agency has been delegated responsibility for the administration of this grant program, establishing necessary procedures. Those procedures require a resolution certifying the approval by the potential grantee’s governing board prior to execution of the grant agreement. Adoption of the resolution on July 21 satisfies this requirement and appointed the City Manager, or designee, as the City's agent to negotiate and execute the grant agreement and all related documents. No further Council action is required to execute the agreement with OPC.
Next Steps: Prior to disbursement of funds, OPC requires the City to submit a detailed work plan, schedule, staff requirements, budget, and the names of any contractors for review and approval by the OPC Executive Director. Staff is currently working on development of those grant documents.
The grant period is two years after the contract is executed with OPC, with the grant period likely from about October 2026 through September 2028. At the conclusion of the grant, staff will bring the final documents (SLR Vulnerability Analysis & SLR Adaptation Plan) to City Council for adoption. Staff also anticipates bringing the SLR Vulnerability Analysis to the Green Committee and, later, the City Council, as a study session midway through the grant.
B. Reach Codes
Background: Per current state law, cities and counties can make amendments to the CA Building Code, known as “Reach Codes,” to address local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions, and the adoption of local amendments requires specific findings in adopting ordinances, which must be filed with the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). Local government Reach Codes expire with each Building Code cycle (every three years). Recent changes in state law and policy for residential buildings have constrained the ability of local jurisdictions to adopt new amendments to the CA Building Code for residential buildings, an effort that was closely monitored by cities and counties across the state for the 2025 legislative session. Signed into law on June 30, 2025, AB 130 added restrictions to amendments (Reach Codes) to the residential code cycle for the next six years in an effort to streamline permitting for housing production.
One of the five limited pathways that AB 130 allows for residential Reach Code adoption after October 1, 2025 is if “the changes or modifications are substantially equivalent to changes or modifications that were previously filed by the local jurisdiction and were in effect as of September 30, 2025.” This justification was used to support the re-adoption and implementation of the City’s EV Reach Code. As of March 2026, the City’s EV Reach Code (Ord. 25-12), amending Title 15, Chapter 12 Green Building Code (CALGreen) has been filed with the CBSC, was accepted, and is actively in effect. Staff are implementing the policy in the development review and building permit process.
Re-adopting the City’s Energy Performance Reach Code, however, is more complicated.
Since re-adoption of the Energy Performance Reach Code amends the Energy Code, there is an additional state agency that reviews and approves/rejects Reach Codes; additionally, the way the Energy Code calculates the energy performance of new buildings changed in the new Building Code cycle. While pursuing development of an Energy Performance Reach Code to “re-adopt” in 2026, recent feedback staff received from CBSC staff has indicated that the “substantially equivalent” exception would not properly apply to an updated version of the City’s Energy Performance Reach Code, prompting staff to look into alternative justifications for an updated policy.
Update: Progress on developing and presenting an updated Energy Performance Reach Code for the 2025 code cycle has been significantly delayed by several factors outside the City’s control. The primary delay is due to the availability of the state’s costeffectiveness studies, which are provided by the state after the start of each new code cycle. As the Energy Performance Reach Code would amend the Energy Code and
ultimately need approval from the California Energy Commission (CEC), adopting and implementing this policy requires cost-effectiveness studies to justify any improved energy efficiency targets above the base code. While the single-family residential studies are available, the state is still working on finalizing the cost-effectiveness studies for multifamily and non-residential building types. Feedback from the state and utility consultants anticipate that the cost-effectiveness studies for the remaining building types should be finalized by the end of September, at the earliest. Once the studies are released, staff and consultants can identify the “reach” efficiency targets for each respective building type that would also meet the required thresholds of cost effectiveness. Although staff is aiming to emulate the City’s previous Energy Performance Reach Code, the new efficiency targets identified will not be the exact same as the City’s previous ordinance as the State base code’s efficiency has increased and there have been changes in how the state is measuring energy efficiency in some building types.
Staff and consultants with Southern California Edison and Central Coast Community Energy have been preemptively preparing ordinance materials with City staff in expectation for the final studies, while monitoring the progress of other jurisdictions in their Reach Code processes and state agency reviews. While a few ordinances such as Goleta’s EV Reach Code have been approved using the “substantially equivalent” justification, there has been little movement using any of the other exceptions provided to local governments by AB 130. The most common justification that jurisdictions are using for their proposed new Reach Codes is an exception that their Reach Codes are “adopted to align with a general plan approved on or before June 10, 2025, and that permits mixedfuel residential construction consistent with federal law while also incentivizing all-electric construction as part of an adopted greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy.” At the time of this memo, there have been no Reach Codes submitted to the CBSC utilizing this exception that have been approved or denied, as state staff are continuing to evaluate other jurisdictions’ ordinance compliance with AB 130.
Consultants working with staff are confident that existing language in Goleta’s General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Strategic Energy Plan provide sufficient justification to support adoption and approval by the CBSC. That said, the lack of movement at the state level for approval of Reach Codes using this exception may further delay any efforts that the City may make once the ordinance is developed and submitted to the CBSC.
Next Steps: Staff will continue to monitor the status of other jurisdictions which have submitted Reach Codes to CBSC and develop an Energy Performance Reach Code with the support of the City’s utilities and technical consultants, as close to the City’s previous Energy Performance Reach Code as possible. Once the state cost-effectiveness studies are released, staff will finish drafting the Energy Performance Reach Code and work with the City Attorney’s office to review the ordinance for compliance with AB 130, then finalize and present an updated Energy Performance Reach Code ordinance to City Council for consideration and adoption.
Should City Council adopt the Energy Performance Reach Code, staff would then submit the ordinance to the CBSC and CEC for review and approval. It is unknown how long state review could take, as some jurisdictions have had Reach Codes held up under state review for the past nine months. During that review time, the City would not have an Energy Performance Reach Code in effect, and any new development permitted during this time would only need to meet the State’s Building and Energy Code standards,
effectively locking in higher GHG emissions from those developments. To date, the state has not approved or denied any local Reach Codes amending the Energy Code in 2026.
Staff anticipates further clarity from the CBSC and state agencies regarding Reach Code approvals and finalizing necessary staff packet materials this fall.
C. Heat Pump Permit Fee Waiver Program
Background: The passage of California Senate Bill 32 in 2016 established the goal to reduce GHG emissions statewide to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, and further to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. One of the keys to achieving these goals lies in taking significant steps to decarbonize the state’s building sector through electrification of buildings and appliances. As a potential method to contribute locally to these policies, staff presented information about permit fee waiver programs for electric heat pumps to the Green Committee in January 2024. The Committee gave a recommendation for staff to create a pilot program waiving permit fees for heat pump projects. On June 3, 2025, staff presented to City Council the program “Existing Building Electrification: Develop & Implement Heat Pump Permit Fee Waiver Program,” where City Council voted to unanimously approve a permit fee waiver program with an estimated cost of $10,000 for the first year. The initiative would waive the fees for permits to install electric heat pumps at time-of-replacement in residential buildings during a pilot program phase starting in fiscal year 25/26, as a method to incentivize building electrification and as a supplement to electrification rebates and incentives.
Update: Sustainability staff successfully worked with members of the Building and Planning Divisions to implement updates to the City’s permit tracking system over the past year, allowing applicants to clearly identify projects involving electric heat pump appliances and enabling staff to track the necessary data to waive the fees involved. The program officially launched in May 2026.
To get the word out about the program, staff conducted a virtual lunch-and-learn webinar “Electrify Goleta: Heat Pumps and Electrification Incentives” for the Goleta community in partnership with 3CE and the Tri-County Regional Energy Network (3C-REN) on May 20, 2026, highlighting the program features, heat pump technology, the benefits of electrification, and additional incentive programs offered by other organizations which can be combined with the City’s permit fee waiver. Staff further collaborated with 3C-REN, Santa Barbara Clean Energy, and other community partners to host a Santa Barbara Contractor Power Hour event on March 20, 2026, providing an in-person informational session on building electrification and a networking opportunity for local contractors to connect with local government staff and each other. Organizations including 3CE, 3CREN, and the Community Environmental Council have incorporated the City’s program into their available resources, materials, and outreach on local electrification, highlighting the program’s launch in public communications and actively referring inquiries to leverage the incentive and learn more from Goleta’s sustainability resources. At the time of the program’s presentation to City Council, estimates suggested that Goleta had previously permitted between 5-10 heat pump projects in a year. As the program enters its third month of operation, staff have already reviewed and approved ten permit applications for electric heat pump appliances.
Next Steps: Staff will continue to review and approve permit fee waivers for qualifying permit applications to install electric heat pump water heater and HVAC systems. Staff
will also continue to research and leverage opportunities to promote awareness of the program through individual and collaborative initiatives, including topical engagement events for the community.
Opportunities to reach contractor audiences as major stakeholders and movers in implementing building electrification activity and applying for permits will be a focus.
Connections made through activities such as the Contractor Power Hour will be leveraged to identify future options to engage this group directly and effectively to promote awareness of the permit fee waiver incentive. Further direct marketing strategies will be developed for contractors operating within the City, including opportunities to collaborate with and support professional organizations and associations engaging contractors on electrification. Staff will also continue to research and remain informed on developments in electrification regulations, technology, and workforce trends to more effectively conduct outreach and communicate on policy.
ITEM VI. FUTURE TOPICS
Input from Committee on Topics of Interest: discussion and provide direction to staff regarding topics of interest relating to sustainability to be introduced to and explored by the Committee.
To: City of Goleta Energy & Green Issues Committee
From: Dana Murray, Sustainability Manager & Jason Scott-Sheets, CivicSpark Fellow Date: July 2026
Subject: City Hall EV Charging Fiscal Assessment (2025-2026) City of Goleta City Hall Chargers—Fiscal Assessment (2025-2026) EV Charger Report Background
The Energy & Green Issues Standing Committee received a report on the performance of City Hall’s electric vehicle (EV) chargers during their inaugural year of operation at the Committee meeting on March 4, 2026. The chargers became operational on January 23, 2025 and are open for use by City staff, the municipal fleet, and the public. After one year of service, sufficient data was available to assess the chargers’ performance and evaluate their progress in achieving the project’s stated policy goals: to advance the City’s budgetary and Strategic Plan priorities of transitioning towards clean energy; to contribute to California’s policy goals of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by encouraging the use of EVs; and to provide an affordable charging option for EV drivers in Goleta.
The inaugural report evaluated the chargers based on several different metrics, including overall usage, environmental impact, and performance. In summary, usage of the chargers grew steadily throughout the year, particularly among members of the public; the miles of EV travel they enabled mitigated a significant level of GHG emissions into the atmosphere; and the charging stations suffered almost no disruption in service from maintenance or functionality issues, while never experiencing an instance of congestion where usage and demand outstripped their availability.
The inaugural report did not fully include a discussion of the fiscal performance of the chargers. The assessment did point out the revenue they had collected during that period; however, the necessary data involving the payments made to utilities for the cost of operating the stations was not available in time to incorporate into the analysis. It was determined that a more complete evaluation of the fiscal impact weighing their collected revenue and service costs would be provided as an update in a future Committee meeting.
The EV chargers’ financial performance was assessed for the months of March 2025 to March 2026. January and February of 2025 were omitted from the analysis because the chargers were only in operation for the final week of January. Additionally, during these months the City was operating a Council policy of free charging for City staff, until its revocation in March. This 12-month period reflects the most consistent first year of the chargers’ standard fiscal performance, and the most representative of their operation for the foreseeable future.
City Hall’s EV chargers opened for service on January 23, 2025. They include 17 Level 2 PowerFlex chargers with 208-volt to 240-volt 40 amp plugs, capable of adding 14-35 miles of travel per hour of charge. Southern California Edison (SCE) provided infrastructure work estimated at around $250,000 through its Charge Ready Infrastructure & Rebate Program, while Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District (SBACPD) awarded the City a $22,000 Clean Air Infrastructure Program grant. Together with around $11,000 from Central Coast Community Energy’s (3CE) Charge Your Fleet rebate program, these funds effectively covered the cost of the EV charger project for the City.
EV Charger Revenues
Figure 1: Monthly revenue collected by the EV chargers grew as usage increased Drivers who utilize the City Hall EV chargers make payments for the electricity to PowerFlex, the company contracted to install and operate the stations. PowerFlex then remunerates that amount back to the City each month. From March 2025 to March 2026, the City Hall EV chargers collected $19,487.67 in revenue. The monthly amount collected generally grew over this period, from $541.10 in March 2025 to $2,235.02 in March 2026.
This reflects the growth in the number of charging sessions completed each month, which rose from 169 sessions in March 2025 to 534 sessions in March 2026.
Recommended by the Council’s Green Committee, and approved by the City Council, the City currently employs a “time-of-use” (TOU) fee structure which establishes different rates for charging at different times of the day. Currently there are two rates for charging fees: the $-
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
$2,000.00
$2,500.00
Revenue
EV Charger Collected Revenue
peak hours rate is applied between 4:00 PM and 9:00 PM at $.40/kWh, and an off-peak rate of $.25/kWh is applied during all other hours. A higher rate for peak hours was recommended to account for generally higher prices for electricity during that time. The policy goals of encouraging EV adoption and usage, along with providing affordable charging options for EV drivers, informed the decision to set the initial off-peak charging rate at $.25/kWh.
Figure 2: Fleet vehicle charging increased significantly as more vehicles were acquired The City has maintained a policy of providing free charging for EVs in the municipal fleet.
Over this 12-month period, charging sessions performed by fleet vehicles reached a valuation of $1,834.98. A total of 261 fleet EV charging sessions were completed during this window. The number of sessions has grown significantly as more electric and hybrid models have been added to the fleet, from an initial three sessions in March 2025 to a high of 52 sessions in February 2026. As of March 2026, the City fleet operates five fully electric or hybrid plug-in vehicles: two Ford Escapes, one Chevy Silverado, one Chevy Equinox, and one Chevy Bolt.
EV Charger Costs
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 Fleet Sessions
EV Charger Fleet Vehicle Usage
Figure 3: Utility costs to operate the EV chargers also grew as usage increased The cost of operating the EV chargers during this period was $23,962.75. Monthly utility payments trended upwards over the course of the year, beginning at $831.44 in March 2025 and reaching $2,679.66 in March 2026. This growth in expenses aligns with the increasing consumption of energy to complete a growing number of sessions throughout this period along with overall time spent charging.
City Hall’s EV chargers are operated on time-of-use (TOU) pricing structures with Southern California Edison (SCE) and Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), charging an amount per kilowatt hour of power provided ($/kWh). Expenses with 3CE cover power generation, while charges from SCE are mainly for power transmission. These plans set different rates for different times of the day, with further variation on a seasonal basis (summer and winter). The most notable change occurs in the switch from the winter rate structure (September—May) to the summer (June—August), when the lower-priced “super off-peak” rate is replaced with a more expensive “on-peak” rate. In the case of SCE, this summer rate is nearly four times higher ($.28/kWh versus $.08/kWh), while 3CE’s on-peak rate is about nine times greater than its winter off-peak ($.36/kWh versus $.04/kWh). The rates in these structures also get changed periodically over time. The mid-peak rate from SCE in March 2025, for example, was at $.29/kWh, and by March 2026 the utility was charging the City $.31/kWh for mid-peak hours.
$0.00
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
$2,000.00
$2,500.00
$3,000.00
EV Charger Monthly Costs
Figure 4: Utility costs exceeded collected revenue overall to create an annual deficit Following the first year of the EV charger operation, the fiscal analysis shows a difference between revenues collected and utility payments, with the City’s EV chargers currently operate at an overall annual deficit. During the 12-month assessment period, the deficit reached a total of $2,640.09, or an average of $220 per month. The gap between revenues and expenses was greatest during the summer months of June, July, and August 2025, coinciding with the higher summer rate structures.
Discussion:
Under the terms of the City’s contract with PowerFlex, the City can adjust EV charging rates once per calendar year. Now that the EV chargers have operated for one year, and their performance and fiscal impact have been analyzed, the City has the opportunity to adjust the EV charger rates. Should the City choose to pursue balancing the EV chargers’ fiscal performance or push further to make the chargers a net positive revenue generator, an adjustment to the City’s rate structure will be required. Staff recommends setting a new rate that will advance the City’s preferred fiscal outcome while preserving the Council’s policy goals.
A viable option is to raise the City’s off-peak demand rate of $.25/kWh while maintaining the on-peak rate of $.40/kWh. According to available data for EV charging services and options in the Goleta area, the average local price for EV charging around all public nonmunicipal EV chargers in the City is around $.34/kWh, which is higher than the City’s current off-peak price, but lower than the City’s on-peak pricing. A substantial majority of EV charging at City Hall’s chargers occurs during the off-peak rate period, meaning an $-
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
$2,000.00
$2,500.00
$3,000.00
March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
'26
Feb
'26
March
'26
EV Charger Monthly Balance
Collected Revenue Utility Payment
adjustment to this price will yield a greater overall impact than a change to the on-peak policy.
Staff conducted research on other municipal EV charger rates around the state and found that some cities such as Palo Alto and San Diego have set charging rates similar to Goleta’s at about $.25/kWh, but many more set rates more comparable to the City’s local average of $.34/kWh, ranging between $.30/kWh and $.40/kWh. The City of Santa Barbara currently implements an off-peak rate of $.37/kWh for EV charging, rising to $.49/kWh for a mid-peak rate. County of Santa Barbara chargers use a variety of rates, with available information indicating the lowest rate is $.41/kWh.
The City may also want to consider implementing an idling fee for users who leave their vehicles connected to stations beyond the point where they have completed charging. This is a policy employed by some charger operators to discourage idle charging behavior and generate revenue from users who continue with it. Idle parking at EV chargers can become problematic if it creates congestion with active demand and leads to disrupted services with fewer users and sessions completed. The inaugural year assessment found that users at the Goleta City Hall chargers spent 34% of their time connected to stations in idle states.
However, despite the amount of time users spent in idling states thus far, idling fees are currently unnecessary for deterrent, as congestion of demand for EV charging has not been a consistent or even common issue. All 17 EV charging stations have only been in use at the same time on one occasion (March 17, 2026), meaning that there is nearly always at least one charger available for use at a given time.
Recommendation:
Given the current cost of electricity and the examples of other municipal EV charger rates, staff recommends increasing the City’s off-peak rate to $.30/kWh. This would bring the City’s EV charger rate structure into closer alignment with the prices of electricity under the SCE and 3CE time-of-use programs, while maintaining the City’s EV charger rates at the lower end of the local average. Such an adjustment would also bring the City’s pricing into parity with other jurisdictions currently operating comparable publicly available municipal EV chargers. Keeping the City’s EV charging rate below local alternatives will further continue to support the policy objective of providing a more affordable EV charging option to drivers in and around Goleta.
Instituting an idle charging fee is not a recommended policy action at this stage. While such fees may collect additional revenue, they are not a sustainable or long-term source, as they decrease as users adapt their behavior to reduce idling time. Additionally, idling may be difficult to avoid for users at this location, such as those who work in the office park and may have scheduled employment obligations that prevent them from disconnecting their vehicles promptly when charging is completed. Lastly, there is not a need to institute idling fees as the EV chargers are not congested. The City could revisit charging idling fees in future years if congestion changes.