Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sam Berndt
Tuesday, November 4, 2025 8:41 PM
cityclerk
Hampton, Tyron; Jones, Justin; Lyon, Jason; Cole, Rick
Municipal Services Committee - 1 1/5/25 - Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 You don't often get email fromLearn whvJhis is JmDQrtant [ I ] 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 DolT portal.
Hi, my name is Sam Berndt and I support 1 00% carbon free electricity by 2030. The only scenarios that are carbon free are the hourly scenarios and will require that PWP exit their contract with the Magnolia Natural Gas Power Plant.
I urge the City Council to set the Local solar and storage goals to be in alignment with the hourly Accelerated Local Resources Plus scenarios which requires an additional 1 OOMW solar and 125MW of storage by 2030. To achieve the local solar goats, the City of Pasadena must not wait until 2028, and should immediately begin installing solar on all municipally owned parking Lots (52MW) & rooftops (12MW). Additionally, PWP must continue to offer NEM 1 and additional incentives to ensure we meet the projected 36MW of additional local solar from private investment and seek the remaining 20MW through collaborations with city institutions (PUSD, 16MW), PCC, Caltech, and commercial partners.
Finatly, achieving the 2030 goal will require a significant amount of external resources; aiming to solely achieve the annual metric by 2028 will Leave too Little time to acquire the remaining resources necessary to achieve 100% carbon free electricity by 2030.1 urge the City Council to seek to procure all resources necessary to achieve the hourly metrics beginning immediately.
In solidarity,
Sam Berndt
1 Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Jonah Kanner
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 7:01 AM
cityclerk
MSC Agenda 1: Please support clean power
You don't often get email from. Learn why this is important [ I ] 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. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear members of the Municipal Services Committee and staff, I am writing in support of the goal of 1 00% carbon-free power by 2030. With that goal in mind, I believe the current strategic plan could be improved by:
* Putting in place real incentives for solar power, not just "education" * A clear plan to end use of the Magnolia gas plant by 2030 Thankyou!
-Jonah Kanner
1 Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cynthia Cannady -
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 8:19 AM
Jones, Justin; Hampton, Tyron; Lyon, Jason; Cole, Rick; Gao, Beilei Reyes, David; Marquez, Miguel; PASADENA 100 Steering Committee Committee PASADENA 100 concerns about the OSP draft
[ I ] 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 DolT portal.
Dear Councilmembers,
We read over the OSP draft again yesterday-after Sam Berndt and I met with David Reyes, Kelly Nguyen and the 2 E3 consultants on Monday, they made a few changes to the OSP draft. We truly appreciate that PWP gave us this time to talk. The meeting was cordial and PWP made some changes to the draft, but our concerns are still there. We are so close to a successful carbon free plan with targets verified by E3. We have the pathway to success before us, but there are some obstacles and detours that need to be removed.
There are 3 big points and one overall concern about leadership:
1. MAGNOLIA GAS PLANT. Now at least PWP and E3 are not hiding this gas plant in a footnote. The draft clarifies that the hourly (carbon free) portfolios will free us from dependency on Magnolia, (see text below and also at page 42). That's good. And it's clear that the annual portfolios do the opposite: they assume that Magnolia will continue to supply dirty electricity until 2036. That's another reason why these "annual" portfolios do not implement Resolution 9977.
The revised draft says that PWP will figure out what to do about Magnolia and report backto Council "at the end of 2030"! (p. 42) That will be too late to do anything about it.
Also, the revised draft refers to it as a "commercial" matter. We are not sure what that means, but I think it means: Council and public, butt out and let us handle this until late 2030 when it will be too late to address the problem.
The draft continues the tine that exit from the contract requires "negotiation with counterparties" (p. 43), but it's not even clear that the old contract is still in force. It may be that there is no need to "renegotiate" an expired contract; This possibility is not considered and should be the subject of legal analysis by counsel with expertise in this field. The real solution to the Magnolia problem is to make sure that we have enough resources to assure resource adequacy; and that means we have to implement the MW targets of the hourly carbon free portfolios.
Transparency about Magnolia is essential. PWP has not been transparent about Magnolia and did not disclose the plan to expand the plant, a vote that happened just Last month. PWP has been on the SCPPA working committee on Magnolia since 2023 and has failed to acknowledge the problem, much less deal with it.
1 The ASKS: Include Magnolia on all quarterly reports. No waiting until it's too late. Determine whether the contract has expired. Hold firmly to the carbon free portfolios, which will remove our dependency on continued use of gas generated electricity from Magnolia.
2. The success of the OSP depends on adding local solar and storage to our imported resources.
This document needs commitment to achieving the MW goals for local solar that are set in the 2 carbon free portfolios. Local solar and storage are the difference between success and failure. That is why these portfolios are called "Accelerated Local Resources" and "Accelerated Local Resources Plus." We are grateful that E3 showed us these paths,but these are not paths for mosey-ing. These are accelerated. The OSP draft still treats them like a walk in the park. a. The OSP slow-rolls local solar on municipal property. They will take through 2026 just to "identify" municipal sites; then "up to 4" sites are to be on line by 2028 (only 4-8 MW). Then in the last 2 years, after the 2028 waypoint, PWP plans to develop "up to 1 0" sites (8-16 MW). That is a recipe for failure.
ASK: Identify municipal sites now. Don't Public Works and PWP know this already? Why would this take through 20267 P100 has been asking for this for at Least a year. Set MW targets and dates for implementation on a timeline that enables us to succeed, not condemns us to failure. b. It lacks any new incentives for residential and hides PWP's agenda to end NEM in the non-transparent rate process. Remove red tape and dysfunctional permitting/inspection processes that are impeding adoption of rooftop solar.
ASK: Design and plan new incentives, rebates, bulk purchase and loan programs to support all customers who want to use their own money to install solar. Definitely include programs to support purchase of batteries as well as solar, but don't link support for solar to mandatory investment in batteries. Many people cannot afford the investment in both. If PWP cannot develop this solar- supportive program, establish a new entity to handle this, as has been done in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
ASK: Hold on firmly to NEM 1, the only incentive that customers have. Don't submerge the NEM issue in the non-transparent rate process. Let the public see and hearwhatis happeningwith this major issue of statewide importance.
ASK: Recognize the value in demand reduction, resilience and equity that rooftop solar provides. It is the only way that low to mid income customers can invest and protect themselves against rapidly growing energy costs.
ASK: Convert to Solar App+ and immediately review the problem areas identified in the Appendix to the P100 briefing memo on the OSP.
c. The ideas for programs for commercial (including Feed in Tariffs and demand response programs) and for institutional property owners are excellent, but vague. PUSD collaboration is a win-win.
ASK: Begin immediately to work with PUSD on installing solar on PUSD property, especially unused property. Set a goal date for specific project design and implementation and put it in the OSP Action Plans.
The draft adopts the Investor Owned utilities narrative about "equity" and concern for the poor as if this is the reason why they stall residential rooftop solar. The real equity is for all ratepayers to be supported in planning for their energy futures by installing solar and storage.
3. Stop pushing RNG which is chemically and practically the same as methane. Same problem with Hydrogen which will not be "green hydrogen" in the foreseeable future. These are detours. 2 We are glad to see that PWP has deleted some of the hydrogen pipeline references in this document but they are still there. RNG is featured and to be considered at the 2028 Waypoint! ASK: Focus on implementing the carbon free portfolios in the OSP and future technologies that help us achieve and maintain our independence from dirty fuels.
OVERALL point. Now is the time for leadership. We have a path to success in front of us. Leaders lead the way, they address obstacles and avoid roadblocks and detours. Our mayor must speak out in support and encouragement. If he doesn't advocate forthis plan, we riskfailure. This is an ambitious but totally doable plan. It needs the support of all elected city officials and alignment of all staff.
A major criterion for the new City Manager will be commitment to our city's transition to clean electric power by 2030 and to the carbon free electric power portfolios set forth in this OSP.
Cynthia Cannady
Chairperson, PASADENA 100 Coalition
3 Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hall, Melanie
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 8:34 AM
cityclerk
Airitam, Derrick
Supplemental for MSC 11 .6 Item 1
FINALOSPLetter.pdf
Hello,
Please see the attached Letter from the Environmental Advisory Commission on the Optimized Strategic Plan. Can you please attach this to Item 1 for tomorrow's meeting? Thankyou,
Melanie Hall
Acting Sustainability Coordinator
City of Pasadena • Office of the City Manager
(626) 744-7480 • mhalKacityofpasadena.net
PASADENA
CALIFORNIA . WWW.CITYOFPASADENA.NET
www.citvof pasadena.net/sustainabilitv
|p^ please consider the environment before printing this e-mail 1 Memorandum
To:
From:
Date:
Re:
Pasadena City Council
Environmental Advisory Commission
June 10, 2025
Recommendations on Optimized Strategic Plan for Climate Resolution 9977 Executive Summary
After extensive review of available data from PWP, E3 aiid our research, we are convinced that these priorities will have the biggest impact on our ability to meet the Climate Resolution 9977. Although it was bold for Pasadena to adopt the Climate Resolution, we haven't seen bold policy being introduced to meet that goal. After two years of energy modeling, it is time to act.
City Council approved four scenarios that were determined as pathways to reach the Climate Resolution 9977. The EAC is strongly recommending that the City Council take more decisive action than adopting 4 scenarios from 7. We need to set actionable goals with finn quantitative actions. The EAC is recommending that the City Council take decisive action now by setting actionable goals and directing PWP to implement the following four policies:
1 75 MW Municipal Solar by end of 2030
2 125 MW Municipal Storage at Glenarm and Storage Rebate 3 Demand Response for Large Commercial Customers
4 Building Performance Standards for Existing Buildings Background
For the past two years, PWP has gone through two energy modeling exercises, one for the IRP with Sparks consultants, and now for the Optimized Strategic Plan (OSP) with E3. The Environmental Advisory Commission has participated by having a representative on both TAPs and regular updates from the consultants and PWP. At the conclusion of each energy modeling exercise, six to seven scenarios or portfolios were presented that would achieve the climate resolution. These scenarios were broken down into components such as external renewable and storage contracts, internal solar, short-term storage, long term storage, EV, and demand response. The EAC has researched other cities' initiatives that have proven to be effective in reducing demand of energy, adopting renewable energy, and ensuring a reliable energy system for their citizens and businesses.
We recognize that the City of Pasadena has several constraints including Goodrich Station energy intake at 280 MW, switching to Advanced Metering by 2028, Grid Updates specifically the East to West Line, and Glenarm Power Plant as a reliable back up. We also think that having municipal solar and storage infrastructure, and demand response of large accounts improves the reliability of our grid, especially during extreme heat days when we exceed Goodrich availability. Performance Standards for Existing Buildings starts building decarbonization program which increases energy efficiency and reduces energy demand. These recommendations are just part of the OSP, that includes NEM rates, residential and commercial solar and storage, EV charging and energy efficiency programs.
Municipal Solar: We recommend for Council to set an annual goal for solar installation, and especially for municipal. Local solar at minimum is 66 MW by 2030 therefore 11 MW per year for five years to meet our goal. In the solar study from E3 they showed there is potential for solar installation of 60 MW on municipal parkitig lots and 10 MW on municipal buildings. The largest solar potential by far is commercial parking caiiopy at 230 MW, tapping into this asset is imperative in meeting our goal (see Attachment 1). The natural adoption of residential solar is projected to increase by 36 MW by 2030 or 4MW per year.
To achieve this Municipal solar goal, we advise starting at the Sunset Reservoir and the Yards to feed into the Municipal Fleet EV charging stations. Working with Public Works to achieve the Fleet Management Plan should be intertwined with the OSP by installing solar and storage at the Sunset Reservoir and the Yards.
Example: City of San Diego has implemented the Zero Emissions Municipal Buildings and Operation Policy (ZEMBOP)' with a goal of zero emissions for buildings and fleet by 2035.
Example: Santa Monica City Yards Advanced Energy District incorporating solar, storage, EV Charging for Municipal Fleet.
Secondly, we suggest prioritizing parking lots with EV units to build out our existing infrastructure with solar and storage into microgrids. Choosing parking lots with EV units will serve multiple benefits:
powering the EV stations with solar, providing shade while residents are powering their cars, providing resiliency on our system. Microgrids are proven ways to optimize storage power and enhance grid resilience during peak times, improves energy efficiency, and provides power to critical resources such as police and fire stations as well as cooling centers during extreme heat days3. Adopting an energy demand map ofmicrogrids and critical resources is critical for climate resiliency and energy stabilization. Below is a list of each parking garage with the ainount ofEV units:
1. Victory Park 23 EV units
2. Hastings Village 20 EV units
3. Foothill Campus 1 6 EV units
4. Shopper's Lane 20 EV units
5. Pas Arroyo Parking 3 8 EV units
6. Del MAR Station 38 EV units
7. Marengo Charging 43 EV units
8. Glenarm 26 EV units
Example: San Diego Edison has linked microgrids of solar and storage to municipal critical resources to secure power for peak resilience . (See Attachment 2 of Map of San Diego Microgrids) Example: Santa Monica: Adopt Energy Master Plan that breaks down energy demand by district or neighborhoods to determine microgrids, community solar or district energy systems based on energy demand of that district.
Municipal Storage: Battery Storage is a critical piece of the OSP to store the solar energy either produced from external sources or internal solar energy installations. This is used at two critical times.
City of Pasadena's peak use is between 4 to 10 pm when solar starts to become unavailable and during high demand days. Therefore, storage is critical to get through nighttime hours to power with renewable and when demand from Goodrich is greater than 280MW. The 25 MW storage facility at Glenarm was recently approved in the Capital Improvement Program budget. An additional 100 MW energy storage is proposed in the PWP budget. We ask that City Council commit to this proposal and commit to 125 MW of additional battery storage at Glenann to optimize our grid, making it more resilient and reliable. 1 https://www.sandiego.gov/general-services/energy/muni-energy/mes 2https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/CEC-500-2019-032.pdf 3 CEC-500-2018-022.pdf
4https://www.sdge.com/sites/default/files/S2550013-EnergyStorageMap_FLY_Update.pdf Storage Rebate for Commercial and Residential Customers: Secondly, we recommend City Council adopt a storage rebate for commercial and residential customers, shitting energy use during peak times to storage batteries is key in reducing demand on the grid, as well as capturing solar energy. It allows customers to use stored energy during peak times from 4 to 10pm. or shift energy use during peak days.
PWP proposed at storage rebate at the Municipal Services Committee meeting that would be $4,500 rebate per storage unit with up to two storage batteries per customer.
Demand Response: During peak times such as heat waves, when Pasadena exceeds amount of energy demand available from Goodrich, it is critical for large customers either shed or shift energy. E3 instructed that the large commercial customers would have the biggest impact in demand response. In Pasadena, the 50 largest accounts demand over 50% of Pasadena's energy. In other words, asking for large customers to shed or shift energy demand during peak hours would be most effective in reducing overall energy use. Prioritizing installing advanced meters at large customers will have the least cost but biggest impact. We recommend that City Council advise PWP to set an actional goal of demand response for its large accounts and find new ways to educate and incentivize them to be active participants in flexible load programs.
Example: SMUD has goal to develop 165 MW of flexible load programs by 2030.
Performance Standards for Existing Buildings: We recommend mandatory building performance standards (BPS) for existing buildings to decarbonize buildings. Introduced by Chula Vista5, Santa Monica and recently passed by States of Washington, Colorado and Massachusetts, adopting these mandatory standards would be above the existing building code (See Attachment 3 for a nationwide map of current BPS). City Council would advise the PWP and Building Department to set mandatory standards by a certain year to decarbonize existing buildings of a certain size7.
Example: By adding the BPS for existing buildings, City of Santa Monica has a goal of reducing energy by 20% by 2030. Starting with buildings over 50,000 sf, this is aimed at large buildings reducing energy demand over a five-year period.
Example: Chula Vista adopted Mandatory Benchmarking and Conservation Requirements for Multifamily and Commercial buildings the exceeded a Gross Floor Area of 20,000 sq ft.
New Technology: We appreciate the difficulty of making energy investments in this climate of rapid change. Despite that we believe Council should act now and we believe that a municipal scale program will have the most impact. At the same time PWP should also be keeping an eye on developing new technologies that become commercially viable.
It is time to act now. It is imperative for the Council to set clear goals and directives to PWP. These recommendations are a start to a larger plan that includes residential solar and storage, commercial solar, EV charging, external contracts, and new tecl'uiology. It is critical for Council to set a Municipal Solar annual goal and for PWP to start a municipal solar program, set Demand Response goal for large accounts, and implement Building Performance Standards for Existing Buildings. City of Pasadena needs to lead by example to meet the Climate Resolution 9977. 5 https://www.chulavistaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/22730/637571124879800000 6 santamonica.gov - Green Building Incentives and Installation Resources Attachment .1
Solar Technical Potential within Pasadena Water and Power Rooftop. Parking Canopy, and Oround-Mountcd Solar
+ Despite land constrtiints. technical
for local solar within Pasadena
footprint exceeds 500\W-dc*:
Parking Canopy: 340 MW-dc
Pl Rooftop: 220MW.de
^| (iround-Mounlcd: lOMW-dc
+ Key insight: the amount otd is tributcd
solar included in the OSP will be primarily
determined by the needs of the grid and
economics rather than by constraints on
available space
<These values rcpa'srnt the maximum capacity available for develupmenl in a given reji!k)n and do not consider the economic or market viahiliiy. hi.storK'a! landinyrk •.talus. uroihfrph\r'iical conditions that niayrustnct uiiitalkilion,
150 MW
Residential Rooftop
["••
280 MW
Private Pai^uig Canopy
60 MW
Mua*c^a.tPAriuiBgC*»epy
M
60 MW
Commercial Rooftop
tv
'jt'BU )11 ll [—1 tM UUSJltIt^t !i
•iiiAii.'uiamin&iMii
Attachment 2
BESS and Microgrids map.1 "pa I utility-owned
energy storage and microgrids
Pal»-GomezCr<!6k i0 MW
Mofcomb
v«l»9«
\Twwcuia
Ortega 2 MW DinaPom
SanCtNnwtttFallbrook 70 MW
•inbow \
Faltbrook
Pall
COTPPalaMnoPatomar
P—nwMountain
Pftuma Vali^
BomllU.jollt
*™»>s. .
CmpMelrose ZO MW
sy>
VtSI
".' Ocnmwh
Mn«Gt«nito
C«f»b«l
Escondido 30 MW
Santa YsatxX
®\ "^"i7-^.-
Enc>n()ftA iia
Borrego 8 MW Mtcrogrld
dwt»go
Sptin)t
SanFtlip*
Ramona 500 KW Micrognd
P»n» Hrftt
Ranch«ia
Shrttw valt»y
Cdrmel Valley 1 MW Microgrid
D^ MarPowy*<"9'*'m'
Miramar (Top Gun) 30 MW
Elllott 10 MW Mlcrogrld
Clairemont 9 MW Microgrid
Kearny 20 MW
Santee 10 MW
SWIK
EICaion
LtfM—B
'^[I...IILJ.I.,^I
Owcawo
Laguna
El Caion 7.5 MW---Pint;
Miguel 2 MW Microqnd
We stside Canal 131 MW
JOTI).,*
Paradise 10 MW MlcrogridBoulevard 10 MW Microgridr
,.'' fionila
Energy Storage
Energy Storage + MicrogridImpKUlBMCft
"v.r-'.—v
Cameron Corners 500 kW Micrognd
8ou»nri
•noasd MC-
C«npo
O^—ttn
Tecsie
Appendix 3
The State of Building Performance Standards
The State of Building Performance Standards (BPS) in the U.S Membeis of th< National BPS Coalition ds of March 2025
»t»N»i«»t (c<)i.mNu>B(i«N,^rf»pa
»
».—,- »
-^.^ -=-% ^-.r^'""IS..T"~"'. —.<» '—"9 v - S"-^»n"r''^L>-—»" '""''"'^^..c—.- S-»,» » 9 ^T ~—'~«- —.—,- ^-.»,V—;cT- . ^^~ ?—^'' —.»-^-?^_^ ^. s--"""- -sara ,^^;^,.E:—<lb»S.~"^-1^ "° ' -=-^r ^-^srcA »—
^««»NNN^a»
{^
T
»°-~-'1
ss^.©
City of
Santa
Monica
Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Robert Haw
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 8:38 AM
Gao, Beilei
MSC meeting, Nov 5
[You don't often get email from
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification
Learn why this is important at
[ J ] 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 DolT portal.
Hello
I want to see sincere follow-through by PWP regarding Pasadena's clean energy goals. Climate damage is already occurring and will only increase in coming years. Address this crisis now.
Commit to the MW goals for local solar as outlined in the carbon-free portfolios in the OSP. Install rapid and simple rooftop permitting procedures for homeowners and businesses. Australians are doing this. Pasadena can show the way here too.
Regards,
Robert Haw
1 Gao, Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Colin Bogart •
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 9:53 AM
cityclerk
Agenda Item 1: MSC Special meeting November 5, 2025
IYou don't often get email fromi. Learn why this is important [ I ] 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 DolT portal.
Dear Municipal Services Committee,
I'm concerned that the OSP draft seems to have a bias against residential rooftop solar. We need to make it easier for residents to install residential rooftop solar, not harder. This draft threatens to end the only solar incentive that we have. My wife and I would like to add solar to our home and I would like for that to be an achievable option for us. The OSP should announce new rebates and loan programs to make it easier for all Pasadenans to enjoy the benefit of solar energy, which happens to be good for the resilience of our electric power system and for the future of human life on Earth.
Given that it's the goal of PWP to provide power for Pasadena and NOT to make a profit, PWP should be doing all it can to enable local solar power City-wide, and to do it as quickly as possible. Imagine what a huge difference it would make if every single building in Pasadena - residential, commercial, or public had rooftop solar. Really, that should be a key part of our sustainable energy goals.
It's been almost 3 years since the City Council unanimously passed Climate Emergency Resolution 9977 that mandated a transition to carbon-free electric power by 2030. It's time to implement what the City Council resolved.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Colin Bogart
Pasadena 91103
1 Gao. Beilei
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Rachel Kenney
Wednesday, November 5, 2025 10:04 AM
cityclerk
Tyler Kenney; Sam Berndt
Municipal Services Committee - 11/5/25 - Public Comment - Agenda Item 1 You don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [ l ] 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 DolT portal.
Dear All,
This isa Public Comment pertaining to the 11/5/25 Municipal Services Committee-Agenda Item 1:
Hi, my name is Rachel Kenney and I support 1 00% carbon free electricity by 2030. As a community member displaced by the Eaton Fire, it is very important for me to address this matter. The only scenarios that are carbon-free are the hourly scenarios and will require that PWP exit their contract with the Magnolia Natural Gas Power Plant. I urge the City Council to set the local solar and storage goals to be in alignment with the Accelerated Local Resources Plus scenarios which requires an additional 10OMW solar and 125MW of storage by 2030. To achieve the local solar goals, the City of Pasadena must not wait until 2028, and should immediately begin installing solar on all municipally owned parking tots (52MW) & rooftops (12MW). Additionally, PWP must continue to offer NEM 1 and additional incentives to ensure we meet the projected 36MW of additional local solar from private investment and seek the remaining 20MW through collaborations with city institutions (PUSD, 16MW), PCC, Caltech, and commercial partners. Finally, achieving the 2030 goal will require a significant amount of external resources; aiming to achieve the annual metric by 2028 will leave too little time to acquire the remaining resources necessary to achieve 100% carbon free electricity by 2030.1 urge the City Council to seek to procure all resources necessary to achieve the hourly metrics beginning immediately.
Thankyou foryour attention to this matter. The climate crisis is now and these changes will benefit us all.
Respectfully,
RachelKenney
MIT Class of 2016
1