Kenebrew, Jerice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Stevenson, Garrett
Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:37 AM
Kenebrew, Jerice
FW: Public Comment - MSC Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan SoW From: Wesley Reutimann
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 6:38 AM
To: Stevenson, Garrett <[email protected]>; Hampton, Tyron <[email protected]>; Williams, Felicia <[email protected]>; Jones, Justin <[email protected]>; Lyon, Jason <[email protected]>
Cc: Kristin Chew Reutimann
Subject: Public Comment - MSC Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan SoW ^] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear Municipal Service Committee Members,
As Pasadena residents who remain deeply disappointed by the City's heavy reliance on coal and other fossil fuels for electricity generation, we urge you to strengthen the proposed Scope of Work for E3.
It is imperative that the follow-up plan requested by City Council model scenarios to optimally achieve the City's 2030 carbon free goal. On February 20th PASADENA 100 submitted a letter outlining opportunities to strengthen the Scope of Work.
We respectfully request that the Municipal Services Committee:
1. Direct PWP staff to revise the Scope of Work to achieve the Council's original direction.
2. Ensure there are regular opportunities for the public to provide feedback on the development of the Optimized Plan in the months ahead.
Thank you for your service to the community,
The Reutimann Family
1 Kenebrew, Jerice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Stevenson, Garrett
Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:36 AM
Kenebrew, Jerice
FW: MSC 2/27 - Public Comment - Agenda Item #1 - PASADENA 100 022624_P100 comments Scope ofWork.pdf
From: Sam Berndt
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2024 8:58 PM
To: Stevenson, Garrett <[email protected]>; Williams, Felicia <[email protected]>; Lyon, Jason <[email protected]>; Jones, Justin <[email protected]>; Hampton, Tyron <[email protected]>
Cc: Cynthia Cannady
Subject: MSC 2/27 - Public Comment - Agenda Item #1 - PASADENA 100 ^\] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Please find attached PASADENA 100's comments regarding Agenda Item #1 for MSC's Meeting on 2/27.
Thanks,
Sam Berndt
On behalf of PASADENA 100
1 PASADENA 100
Comments on MSC Agenda Item #1
February 27, 2024
1. The Scope of Work ignores the City Council's direction to prepare an Optimized Plan.
The City Council unanimously voted on December 11, 2023 to require the City Manager to:
"1) Prepare an Optimized Plan to achieve zero carbon goals by 2030"; and "2) Hire a 3rd party outside consultant that is a green energy expert to assist staff in preparation of the Optimized In stark contrast to the City Council's clear direction, the agenda documents refer to an entirely different consultancy project to:
"comprehensively outline the various concurrent workstreams and studies undertaken by the city and PWP to provide a holistic understanding of how these initiatives align with the broader energy objectives of the city." (E3 Draft Outline) "elucidate the interconnectedness of these planning processes, demonstrating how they mutually support each other and contribute to ongoing operations, future development, and broader energy sector objectives of the city." (E3 Draft Outline) "synthesize and critically review PWP's existing plans and workstreams to articulate a clear set of actionable next steps that will allow the utility to progress towards its goals." (E3 Memo to PWP)
"comprehensively identify the various concurrent workstreams and studies that have been completed and adopted or are in the process of being undertaken and to ensure that they are collectively aligned to support and advance adopted policy." (p. 3 ofPWP Memo). •
The E3 Draft Outline mentions that it will "also identify a clear set of concrete and actionable steps that PWP will take to advance towards the 2030 goals." The "goals" are not identified however and appear to relate to "several initiatives."
5;
The words "carbon free" do not appear anywhere in the E3 memo or Draft Outline of the proposed Scope of Work.
The proposed Scope of Work outline makes vague references to "new technology" without explanation and expressly states that the consultants will not do technical work. There is nothing in the proposed Scope of Work outline about rooftop solar, even though Glendale has recently engaged E3 to prepare a plan to increase rooftop solar to 10% of households.
According to the City Council, green energy experts are to be tasked with using their expertise to address opportunities, obstacles and options to achieve the 100% carbon free by 2030 policy goal. But the Proposed Scope of Work memo/outline doesn't even mention this policy goal.
PASADENA 100 Comments on 022624 MSC Agenda Item #11
Solution: Remove vague language about other policy goals and state in the Scope of Work that the consultants' work is to prepare what the City Council mandated: an Optimized Plan to explore how to achieve 100% carbon free electric power by 2030.
2. The contract deliverable is for a marketing document, not a plan.
The deliverable is a $180,000 marketing document for PWP that will project "key themes and messaging" (Task 1, p. 2 Schlag/Nguyen memo) and a "narrative arc" (Task 2) that is "accessible as possible to broad audiences." These E3 expert consultants are supposed to "prioritize succinct, direct explanations and thoughtful visualizations." They will produce a 30- 50-page document to "convey the amount of thought and effort that is reflected in PWP's plans but short enough to feel overly dense [sic] to PWP's diverse audiences." (Task 3).
E3, a team of world class technical experts, won't do any technical work or "original or new technical analysis."
We assume that this limited scope of work is not E3's preference but rather the result of negotiation with PWP.
This proposal to spend $180,000 of scarce city or ratepayer funds on a messaging document featuring "the amount of thought and effort" that PWP has put into its plans is unacceptable.
The proposed Scope of Work and draft outline refer to future studies and consultancies! PWP has already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on oil and gas industry consultant ACES to model boundary scenarios that were not intended to be realistic. PWP plans to spend more money on a Cost-of-Service study examining the cost implications of those poorly formulated scenarios and revisiting many of the issues that are supposed to be addressed in the Optimized Plan.
Instead effacing the opportunities and challenges of the transition to clean energy, PWP has now proposed another document that is not a plan to achieve the carbon free by 2030 goal or even an intelligent exploration of the obstacles to success.
Solution: Let E3's world class technical experts do what they capable of doing: develop an Optimized Plan that will optimize the incomplete 2023 IRP, taking into account the lessons learned from the building block scenarios, examining the planning variables, modeling refined scenarios, charting a plan to increase rooftop solar, addressing the phaseout of Glenarm, addressing the Goodrich problem, addressing contingencies, integrating new technologies, and creating a flexible plan with timelines and milestones for implementation.
3. The Memo and Proposed Scope of Work lack accountability measures required by the City Council and the transparency that is expected of aLLcity processes.
The proposed Scope of Work has E3 advising and consulting PWP and getting feedback only from the "PWP team" (Task 4). There is no mention of feedback from the MSC, the City PASADENA 100 Comments on 022624 MSC Agenda Item #12
Council, the EAC, and members of the now disbanded Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group or public advocates for clean electric power.'
The proposed Scope of Work was negotiated with E3 behind closed doors with no participation from the EAC or the environmental community.
Solution: Authorize E3 to prepare the requested Optimized Plan with input from PWP, and to submit it to the City Manager, the City Council, the EAC, and the members of the 2023 IRP Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group for review and possible adoption.
4. Climate Emergency Resolution Disregard
The proposed Scope of Work contains comments that appear to disregard the City Council's Climate Emergency Resolution 9977. The Scope of Work documents reference:
providing "natural gas generation resource options and strategy" as if Climate Emergency Resolution does not set a policy goal to eliminate the use of gas to generate electric power by 2030. (Exec. Summary p. 6. 4th bullet)
a roadmap that will "reduce utilization of fossil resources," apparently ignoring that the goal is to eliminate the use of fossil resources in our electric power sourcing. (#6 Draft Outline).
Solution: These references should be omitted from the Scope of Work. 1 The EAC delivered on February 15 2024 a memo to the City Council on the Optimized Plan recommending greater transparency in the process of developing the Scope of Work. This appears to have been ignored. PASADENA 100's former STAG members gave PWP a detailed memo of recommendations concerning the Scope of Work on February 20,2024,but none of the recommendations are included in the Agenda materials. We request that this document be shared with E3 as a resource from knowledgeable community members.
PASADENA 100 Comments on 022624 MSC Agenda Item #13
Kenebrew, Jerice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Stevenson, Garrett
Tuesday, February 27, 2024 7:36 AM
Kenebrew, Jerice
FW: MSC Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan's Scope ofWork Unacceptable
From: Jamie Scott
Sent:Tuesday, February 27, 2024 1:04 AM
To: Stevenson, Garrett <[email protected]>; Hampton, Tyron <[email protected]>; Williams, Felicia <[email protected]>; Jones, Justin <[email protected]>; Lyon, Jason <[email protected]>
Cc: Jamie Scott < Chapman, Justin <[email protected]>; Madison, Steve <[email protected]>
Subject: MSC Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan's Scope of Work Unacceptable Some people who received this message don't often get email from•hv this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know {he content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
Dear City Council Members of the MSC,
My name is Jamie Scott and I am a resident of Pasadena District 6.
I have reviewed the Optimized Plan's Scope of Work provided in the MSC Agenda for February 27th, along with the E3 proposal.
I have also read Pasadena 100's comments on these document, and am in agreement with them.
For all the reasons mentioned by Pasadena 100,1 find the PWP Scope of Work document unacceptable.
It does not set out to achieve the optimized plan the City Council requested - "to utilize the lessons learned from the 2023 IRP and develop and model scenarios to optimally achieve the 2030 carbon-free goal".
I urge the MSC to request revision to the scope of work to achieve the City Council's original direction, and to refer to PASADENA 100's letter sent to the Assistant City Manager on February 20th in revising the scope of work, Very importantly, nowhere in any of these plans is there mentioned a role for public review and feedback. That, by itself, makes PWP's Scope of Work and E3's proposal entirely unacceptable in my view.
I especially urge the MSC to devise a significant role for public feedback in the future development of the Optimized Plan, and in the plan itself.
Respectfully yours,
Jamie Scott
Jamie Scott, MD,PhD
(preferred pronouns: she/her/hers)
1 I gratefully acknowledge that my homeland is on the traditional lands of the Gabrieliho-Tongva peoples. 2 Kenebrew, Jerice
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Stevenson, Garrett
Tuesday, February 27, 2024 8:34 AM
Kenebrew, Jerice
FW: MSC Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan's Scope ofWork Unacceptable
From: Michael Robertson < - - u
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 8:31 AM
To: Stevenson, Garrett <[email protected]>; Hampton, Tyron <[email protected]>; Williams, Felicia <[email protected]>; Jones, Justin <[email protected]>; Lyon, Jason <[email protected]>
Subject: MSC Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 - Optimized Plan's Scope of Work Unacceptable Some people who received this message don't often get email from. Learn why this is important •^\] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. Learn more....
City Council Members, My name is Michael Robertson, I am a resident of Pasadena District 4 and a Professional Environmental Scientist. The Optimized Plan's Scope of Work is unacceptable. It does not set out to achieve the optimized plan the City asked for - to utilize the lessons learned from the 2023 IRP and develop and model scenarios to optimally achieve the 2030 carbon free goal. I urge the MSC to send PWP back to revise the scope of work to achieve the City Council's original direction, to refer to PASADENA 100's letter sent on February 20th in the development of the scope of work, and to include the public in the future development of the Optimized Plan.
Thank you!
1