McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Michael Robertson
Sunday, April 5, 2026 8:18 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Monday City Council Meeting Agenda Item 9 Captial Improvement Budget Some people who received this message don't often get email from)m. 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.
Hello, my name is Michael Robertson, I am a Pasadena resident, a professional Environmental Scientist and survivor of our most recent local climate disaster, the Eaton Fire.
To echo Pasadena 100's sentiments, Pasadena declared a climate emergency in 2023 and paid over $2 million for plans to achieve the 2030 carbon free goal. The City Council approved a specific plan for achieving the goal and instructed PWP to prioritize the plan's implementation in December 2025. If local democracy means anything, PWP staff must be required to follow the City Council's instructions. Local climate action is an urgent priority.
Pasadena Water and Power (PWP) has chosen not to fund 2 critical elements of the plan for carbon free electric power: a battery storage plant and solar on public buildings.
They have however prioritized a new $34 million "headquarters" for PWP, with a $600,000 design study next year.
And 65 other priorities including $15million in improvements for the Glenarm Gas Plant.
Pasadena must force its water and power department to take action and implement decarbonization plans now! 2030 is less than four years away and the impact could not be more desperately needed as the situation the world is facing and the impacts to our beloved community could not be more dire. 1 4/6/2026
ltem9
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Wesley Reutimann
Monday, April 6, 2026 6:56 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Comment - Agenda Item 9 - CIP - Please Prioritize Municipal Solar [ 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 Council and staff,
The City's draft CIP is not aligned with the City's goal of producing 70MW of local clean power by 2030.
This is something you have full control over. Your peers in Glendale are currently investing in local solar, with phase 1 of their implementation plan now underway. Pasadena should do so too.
In two short years the City will host visitors from around the world. The Council has an opportunity to highlight Local leadership amidst federal inaction by adding solar to high- profile municipal facilities that are also Olympic venues (e.g. asphalt Rose Bowl Parking Lots.
The window of opportunity to do so is narrow but still feasible. Construction on such facilities must be completed in 2027.
Investing in distributed solar, battery storage, and microgrids will also provide long-term benefits to the City, reducing exposure to volatile energy prices, lowering utility costs over time, reducing air pollution from the City's gas power plant, and better preparing Pasadena for future emergencies such as extreme heat events.
Other budget items such as a new headquarters for PWP are not as time sensitive as this issue. Those projects can be postponed until after the City has met its 2030 goals.
Please show the world — and your constituents — that local clean power is a priority by including solar investments in the 2026-27 CIP.
Thankyou,
1 4/6/2026
ItemS
Glendale: The six solar installations included in Phase 1 of the program:
Brand Landfill Ground Mount Solar
Sports Complex Carport Solar
Glendale Community College (GCC1 Lot 34 Carport Solar
Utility Operation Center fUOCI Carport Solar
Central Library Rooftop Solar
GWP Perkins Building Rooftop Solar
GWP's City-Owned Solar Program update page:
GlendateCA.eov/CitvOwnedSolar.
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cynthia Cannady
Monday, April 6, 2026 8:55 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
PASADENA 100 Steering Committee Committee; Pasadena 100 Organizers Agenda item #9
[ 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 Councitmembers,
You all know that climate change is dangerous and the danger is escalating. It already has harmed Pasadena and is predicted to impact all of us in serious ways. The Eaton fire hit us hard and caused terrible human and economic cost. No serious person questions that this was a climate disaster and that the risk of more fires is great. March broke heat records. Our present quality of life and our children's future is at stake. Thank you for your fortitude in making a plantogetourcityoff of dirty electric power. Many other cities are watching us.
Let's not sabotage this important initiative by failing to fund critical elements of it. The draft CIP Budget omits critical elements essential for the achievement of the carbon free by 2030 goal. The main storage project is unfunded! Without storage our whole effort to increase local solar is not workable.
The project defunds and lists solar installation on city property as the LAST priorities (67, 68 and 69) in a list of 69 line items. We need 20 MW of municipal solar in order for the OSP to succeed but the CIP budget funds only 2 MW!
City owned solar is important for many reasons. It is an electricity resource in a time when buying electricity is increasingly expensive. It is an asset that we own will provide energy for years to come. It is important for resilience. It sets an example for private investment in residential, commercial and institutional investment in solar and storage. It is our form of community property, serving all ratepayers. How can the City ask businesses and residential property owners to invest if we are not willing to do so?
The City Council passed the Climate Emergency Res 9977 in Jan. 2023. Then after the bungled RFP you insisted on a real plan to implement 9977 and engaged experts to develop the Optimized Strategic Plan (the OSP). We spent more than $2m on the IRP and the OSP. The Council approved a specific pathway in the OSP to achieve the goal in December 2025. The Council reiterated its commitment by stating at the December budget workshop that 1 00% by 2030 must be a top priority.
And yet the PWP line items ignore the Council's direction! This is part of a history of PWP resistance to Council direction.
Not only is this inappropriate as a matter of governance, it is economically imprudent. It is penny wise and pound foolish not to invest in storage and in City owned solar. We are investing in assets that will 4/6/2026
1ltem9
save money for years to come. It's not as if we can do without electricity; weeitherhavetobuyitat great cost from developers or we must generate it ourselves.
The CIP budget funds 64 other items but defunds critical elements NECESSARY for the success of the Optimized Strategic Plan. What is being funded:
A new "headquarters" for PWP at $34 million. $600,000 in consulting and design fees for 2027 for the building. $15 million for the GLenarm gas plant which is set to be phased out in early 2030s. Many software Licenses that PWP makes no attempt to justify or priortize. Many physical renovation projects thorughout the city that
A new headquarters for PWP is not an asset; it is a cost. Artificial turf is not an asset; it must be replaced.Glenarm gas plant is a stranded asset. It must be maintained for safety and its current peaker plant function, but it's not an asset for our future. We must invest in the future, not the past.
Glendale has realized this and is building solar projects all over the city, living up to its commitment to double Local solar.
No effort made to examine the priorities vis a vis other departments. $2.8 million for petroleum based artificial grass the production and Life cycle of which is a major greenhouse gas emissions source. Despite the MSC's direction just last week to find another way. Also, lots of software projects and site renovation projects with no effort to justify prioritization.
It appears that no effort has been made to prioritize items without the entire budget based on investment value, necessity and priority.
The tactic of putting off funding of the OSP is a transparent effort to blame rate increases on the transition to clean electric power. The vast majority of the 60 or so funded PWP Line times have nothing to do with the transition to carbon free electric power; these are investments in electric power infrastructure that are agnostic as to the source of the electricity. The multiple notes in the CIP item details that claim that the item is "consistent" with Climate Emergency Resolution 9977 are misleading.
By pushing off funding for critical elements of the OSP (storage and municipal solar) until 2027-2028, when PWP admits it will insist that these items require rate increases, this is a political action that is inappropriate. The truth is that PWP has a Lot of expenses, many of which are operational expenses. TheCIP items include mostly items that have nothing to do with clean energy. So the rate increases are not caused by the clean energy transition, but the optics will suggest this.
In conclusion, we askthatyou send the draft CIP budget back for re-prioritization by all departments. If PWP management is unwilling to do this, an interim manager should be appointed pending the arrival of the new City Manager.
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Denise Robb
Monday, April 6, 2026 9:19 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Solar
Some people who received this message don't often get email from-earn 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 DotT portal.
Dear City Councilmembers,
I wish I could be there tonight, but I cannot.
I just wanted to askyou to send the draft CIP budget back for re-prioritization. If PWP management is unwilling to do this, an interim manager should be appointed pending the arrival of the new City Manager.
Also, Glendale seems to have figured this out how to get solar all over the city. There's a lot we can learn from them.
Sincerely,
Denise
Sent from my iPhone
DeniseRobb, Ph.D.
Professor of Political Science,
Pierce College; and
Joshua's Mommy
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities.ff
(Possibly Voltaire)
1 4/6/2026
ItemS
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
gfoster
Monday, April 6, 2026 11:09 AM
Gordo, Victor; Hampton, Tyron; Rick Cole; Jones, Justin; Masuda, Gene; Rivas, Jessica; Madison, Steve; Lyon, Jason
Gao, Beilei; PublicComment-AutoResponse
Agenda Item 9. Budget Workshop
[ 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.
The FY 2027-2031 Electric System CIP budget submitted to Council fails to fund solar generation on municipal buildings as needed to achieve 100% carbon-free electric power, one of highest priorities identified in city council's December 2025 Budget Workshop. It ignores the goals and timelines of PWP's own Optimized Strategic Plan (OSP) which City Council adopted by unanimous vote. Although the budget makes frequent reference to City Council Resolution 9977 as justification for expenditures, only 2MW of the OSP's required 20MW of solar generation on municipal properties are funded. The Broadway BESS, announced with great fanfare and critical for meeting city goals, is largely unfunded with a 5-year deficit of $286.4 million. Unfunded Electric System projects for solar generation on municipal buildings and battery storage (Broadway BESS), result in a 5-year unfunded gap of $392 million.
In contrast to the Lack of funding for renewable power projects in the City of Pasadena,the 5-year budget designates $33.28 million for a new PWP Headquarters building, a non-critical project. (Note:
Whereas modest funding for preliminary planning was shared equally by the Water and Power departments in prior budgets, the recommended FY2027-2031 Water System budget designates only $17.92 million for PWP Headquarters.) The biggest expenses in the Electric System capital improvement budget were shifted from FY2027 to FY2028 and beyond.
ELECTRIC SYSTEM CIP FY2023 - FY2030
FY2023FY2024FY2025FY2026FY2027
Recommended
FY2028
Proposed
FY2029
Proposed
FY2030
Proposed
Total$27,084,360$56,847,800$76,128,718$163,971,500$112,401,000$224,023,225$278,510,275$271,113,052 Unfunded00000($45,690,000)($135,054,000)($172,490,000)
Net$27,084,360$56,847,800$76,128,718$163,971,500$112,401,000$178,333,225$143,456,275$98,623,052 1 4/6/2026
Item 9
ELECTRIC SYSTEM CIP R^023-FY2030
$350.000.000
$300.000.0)0
S250,000.(X)0
$200.000.000
$150.000.000
S100.00 0,000
teo.ooo.ooo
^)
($50.000.000)
($100.000.0001 ^
($150.000.000) . -
(S200.000.000)
^^
^^^
^^^
• u" U 1
'" ^"/AA
^^
•TOTAL 1UNFUNDB3 • NET
^^^^
Electric System capital improvement budgets have increased dramatically since FY2023. The FY2024 CIP was more than double the amount for FY2023 and the FY2026 CIP was more than double the amount for FY2025. The "recommended" FY2027CIP appears smaller than the previous year only because expenses were shifted from 2027 to 2028 and beyond. Even after deducting unfunded items, the FY2028 CIP sets a record high cost with $1 78 million in proposed expenditures while ignoring stated city priorities and the urgency of a rapid transition to carbon-free electric power.
Pasadena City Council members were elected by residents to represent their interests, not to defend an entrenched bureaucracy. City Council must assert its funding authority by requiring revisions to the recommended FY2027-2031 Capital Improvement Program budget in order to implement policy and funding priorities as directed by City Council. 2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Claudia Funke
Monday, April 6, 2026 12:04 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Lyon,Jason
Agenda Item #9
Some people who received this message don't often get email from.earn why this is important [ t ] 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 Mayor Gordo and Council Members,
Governments exist to guarantee the safety of their citizens. If a government can't guarantee the safety of its citizens, it should get out of the business of governing.
When the City Council took the bold action of passing Resolution 9977, it recognized the climate crisis's existential threat to Pasadena's residents.
Despite the Eaton Fire just over a year ago,and the recent scorching winter weather (which should have been an effective reminder), the proposed budget shows a city department willfully ignoring the Council's mandate of local municipal solar to achieve the resolution's 100% carbon-free electricity goal. Renewable Energy costs are left unfunded in this proposed budget.
Instead, Pasadena Water and Power (PWP) ranks a new building for its administration as a higher priority. I can imagine no justification for its prioritjzation, unless that building is a plus-energy edifice with a cooling and heat emergency center for Pasadena residents who cannot afford air conditjonjng.
The Summer Olympics are happening in just two years, and Pasadena will be visited by scores of foreigners whose governments have prioritized renewable energy. As they arrive in the dog days of summer, some will surely wonder what is the matter with a city that has 300 days of sunshine and isn't blanketed in solar panels.
I realize that this is a difficult budget year, but the city must act now. You are our elected officials, and the climate crisis threatens our health and safety and—yes—our lives. I respectfully ask that you follow through on your directions to PWP for Local municipal solar in this year's city budget.
4/6/2026
1 Item 9
Sincerely,
Claudia Funke
Voting Resident, District 7
Member, PASADENA 100
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Chelsea Glauber
Monday, April 6, 2026 3:29 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Resident input re PWP priorities
Some people who received this message don't often get email from.earn 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 City of Pasadena Councilmembers:
Pasadena declared a climate emergency in 2023, has paid more than $2 million for expert plans to achieve the 2030 carbon free goal, that the Council approved a specific plan for achieving the goal and instructed PWP to prioritize the plan's implementation in December 2025. If local democracy means anything, PWP staff must be required to follow the City Council's instructions. Local climate action is an urgent priority.
Please do not approve the new PWP headquarters, or their $600,000 design study, unless and until PWP funds a battery storage plant and solar on buildings.
Thankyou very much foryour attention to this matter.
From a proud Pasadena homeowner-
Chelsea Glauber
1 4/6/2026
ltem9