From: Cynthia Cannady
To: Gao, Beilei
Cc: Jones, Justin; Hampton, Tyron; Lyon, Jason; Rick Cole; Márquez, Miguel; Reyes, David Subject: Agenda item #3
Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2025 2:49:28 PM
[ ] 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. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DoIT portal.
------------------------
June 24, 2025
Agenda item #3
Dear Councilmembers of the MSC:
City staff have spent the last 2.5 years and $2million + telling us why they can't take climate action until they have a plan.
As a member of the Stakeholder Technical Advisory Group, I worked and watched as the first group of experts hid cost data and ultimately said that their 300+ page Integrated Resource Plan was "not really a plan but rather a "compliance document." After you sent that fat and worthless document back to the drawing board twice, the clock ran out and you had to accept it. But you instructed PWP and a new set of consultants to develop a plan. And then I worked and watched as a member of the Technical Advisory Panel for the OSP.
Now after more than a year they have given you an outline of what is essentially an essay.
It is not an outline for a plan.
The good news is that E3 did provide you with an avenue for success: the 2 hourly matching 100% carbon free with Glenarm as limited back up portfolios.
We urge you to instruct PWP that these two are the portfolios that you have decided upon. This is the goal.
And under each of the 4 elements of that goal (imported resources, local solar, storage, demand response/reduction/grid optimization), the OSP should define multiple action items (e.g. public education about the benefits of solar, reducing soft costs, maintaining NEM 1, low interest loans). Then PWP will be able to make cost estimates and Council can decide which to commit to and how to allocate budget.
The plan must have a timeline by year at least, with deliverables, and evaluation metrics.
By a plan we do not mean a project plan for each action (e.g. where to locate batteries on the Glenarm acreage). That will have to come later for each action item, but as soon as possible.
We hope that PWP is capable of making and implementing the OSP. There is an excess of consultants, a practice which uses ratepayer money and also externalizing the task. If PWP is not capable, it is your duty as elected officials to make changes so as to not waste the money of hardworking Pasadena residents.
We don't have forever to get this done. Your constituents need you to define the goal in no uncertain terms and require a plan. Put an end to this cycle of promising words, hiring consultants to write plans with neither substance nor follow up, and then delaying and forgetting why the process started. In this case, because we have a climate emergency that is a burning reality.
Cynthia Cannady