^ Outlook
!! Dear Municipal Services: Stop delaying, meandering... You can't stall climate action.
From Teresa •
Date Tue 8/25/20264:10PM
To Gao, Beilei <[email protected]>
You don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [A] 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 (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB001 1474" on the DolT portal.
Hello,
I write with a heavy heart on one of the hottest weeks I've experienced in recent years.
I am dismayed to see that the project plan and corresponding update are insufficient in addressing KEY, essential issues in the transition to carbon-free electricity.
Tirelessly, I have seen how bureaucratic agencies will drag their feet, and I'm afraid I am witnessing this yet again.
If the city is truly committed to its stated goals, we need all hands on deck:
- More exposure and campaigning for municipal solar incentives - Data that is not convoluted
- Less excuses and worrying about the viability of municipal solar (why are we back here again?) - Genuine and proper consideration/integration strategies for providing municipal solar to low- income renters/residents. as opposed to simply using them as an excuse for the clean = costly narrative
I'm a student who has navigated the difficulties and bureaucratic loops that are politics. It frustrates me to no end that the phrase "all talk, no action" and "performative signaling" seem woefully applicable to the mentality surrounding mainstream decarbonization rhetoric.
Anyone can endorse and agree with the idea of "going carbon-free". We can create as many plans and action timelines, indulge in our accomplishments as we want. But it takes a rare one - a shift in our hearts - to truly commit to the cause.
Were we just being performative?
Was all of this a performance? Just to get it over with? We're not committed to decarbonization for ourselves. We're committed to the future lives who will reap the benefits that we sow.
Thank you,
Terry Wong /
3^ Outlook
MSC Public Comment - Agenda Item 3 - 8/25/26
From Sam Berndt
Date Tue 8/25/2026 4:15 PM
To Gao, Beilei <[email protected]>
Cc Lyon, Jason <[email protected]>,· Jones, Justin <[email protected]>; Hampton, Tyron <[email protected]>; Cole, Rick <[email protected]> [A] 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 (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB001 1474" on the DolT portal.
Hello,
First, I want to start off with the importance of Pasadena modeling a just transition to carbon-free electricity. People across the state and country are inspired by our goal - and they are watching to see not only IF we achieve it, but HOW we achieve it. The reality is that if we do not take the Glenarm workers into consideration, they will eventually be out of a job because of this plan.
One method often discussed, yet not mentioned in the update, is sourcing the labor for solar installations internally, specifically by training and utilizing Glenarm workers.
Not only would this reduce installation costs, but it would make sure that we leave no one behind. We should honor these workers' commitment to our city by ensuring they have a path to remain employed.
Next, I want to comment on the need to plan ahead on imported electricity. PWP is currently negotiating for 185MW of the needed 325MW of generation, leaving a minimum gap of 140MW. What we do not know is the mix of these resources, which is important because The OSP prescribes a particular mix needed to meet our resource adequacy requirements.
While an all-source RFP is valuable, all resources are not the same - each MW of geothermal, for example, can reduce our hourly resource requirements by up to 4x, easing our restriction on Goodrich, and reliance on Glenarm.
Because the delay between contract and delivery is so great, I would recommend that PWP release a resource-specific RFP as soon as possible to meet the minimum 140MW gap, and also leverage our membership within SCPPA to create greater demand for harder to obtain resources.
Finally, we are significantly behind on non-municipal solar installations for 2026.1 would like to see PWP's plan for meeting the yearly goal.
It is ambiguous whether PWP is counting CPPP collaborations as municipal or non municipal. These are clearly not municipal installations, and if treated as such would undercut our ability to achieve the 50MW non municipal goal, so I would recommend that they be counted toward non-municipal installations.
Thank you,
Sam Berndt