San Joaquin Valley Energy Watch Collaborative SUMMARY NOTES March 10th, 2016 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. SJVCEO Offices, 4747 N. First St., Suite 140, Fresno, CA 93726 Attendees: Erica Cabrera, PG&E Dave Christensen, PG&E Samantha Dodero, SJVCEO Becky Estrella, SCG (Phone) Kimberly Fleming, Kern County Jose Gonzales, City of Fresno
Courtney Kalashian, SJVCEO (Phone) Margo Lerwill, Fresno EDC Steve Newvine, PG&E Daphne Ng, SCE Jeremy Terhune, Valley Vision (Phone)
ACTION ITEMS: 1. Dave Christensen to set-up a call with Daphne NG, Greg Haney, Becky Estrella and Gustavo Sevilla to go over collaborative. 2. Courtney Kalashian to have a call with Daphne Ng on VIEW meeting items. 3. All implementers to bring goals from their business plans to the April meeting. 4. All implementers to bring their top 3 award name ideas to April meeting. 5. Complete: Samantha Dodero to email Jose regarding being facilitator of April meeting. 6. Complete: Samantha Dodero to send out poll regarding meeting time change. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Margo Lerwill, Fresno EDC, welcomed the group and introductions were made. Business Items Review of Summary Notes from 02/23/16 Samantha Dodero, SJVCEO, stated that the summary notes from the last facilitator meeting were attached. She stated that she would like to give the group a few moments to look over the notes and let her know if there are any discrepancies. That way she can go back to the facilitator to make the changes. No changes were mentioned. Public Sector Business Plan Updates Courtney Kalashian, SJVCEO, went over this item to make sure that everyone is active and involved in the group. CK stated that for the first ever the PA’s are allowing the public to help shape programs and the focus of the public sector business plan. She stated that she sent out an email to all of the collaborative member’s yesterday with information and past meeting information as well. She stated that those in the group will stay on her email distribution list since she wants everyone’s opinion. CK would like all of the implementers to spread the word to necessary parties in the community and municipalities. She also stated that she will keep everyone in the loop as things progress. SEEC Conference June 15 & 16, 2016 in Riverside SD & CK reminded the group of the upcoming SEEC conference that will be happening on June 15th and 16th in Riverside. They both encouraged those involved in the collaborative to attend, since you walk away with great information. CK also mentioned that this year the conference will take on a different look. This year it will be a two day meeting with the LGP meeting happening on June 14th. She stated that we should all be sharing the save the date with our city and county partners and encouraging them to attend. CK also mentioned that there are scholarships from the IOU’s that will help to cover the cost of the travel.
SJV Award Development Agree on Purpose Dave Christensen, PG&E, kicked off the discussion on the proposed award. Dave asked the group if they were still on board with the idea as well as if they may have any questions. Everyone agreed on being on board with the award, but Jose Gonzales, City of Fresno, had a few questions. JG wanted to know if participating in the award would mean that there would be a financial addition to what is already being spent for work on the collaborative as well as would the award appeal to business customers. DC stated that there would not be any additional funding that would be asked of the implementers. He also stated that the award would not address business customers, since LGP’s have a focus on local governments. DC thinks that focusing on local governments for the time being is the best course of action. He also stated that he made sure the Erica Cabrera, PG&E, from LPA was in attendance today to lend a hand on framing things. EC stated that she is happy to help with the award and thinks it is a great idea. She thinks that cities will easily be on board once they realize the many benefits outside of EE savings. Determine Criteria With everyone in agreement on moving forward with the award DC moved to discussing the criteria of the award. DC referred to the handout from last month’s meeting that laid out the five (5) pillars of participation. He covered each item to make sure the group was in agreement on the requirements. The first item was for the cities/counties to complete an electric EE project through an IOU program. JG asked if just completing an EE project would suffice. The group discussed and came to an agreement that it would need to be an IOU program, since the partnerships are funding the award. The second item was that the cities/counties would need to complete a gas EE project with an IOU program. The group was easily in agreement on this item. Becky Estrella, SCG, stated that with gas savings are few and far between. We may want to encourage participants to look at lumping together electric and gas projects. The third item was that the cities/counties will need to complete a community outreach event that touches upon EE and 811 “Call Before You Dig”. Everyone was in agreement on this item as well, but there was a question on what counts as an outreach item. DC stated that the usual fall outreach events would count as long as EE and 811 information was passed out to attendees. The fourth item listed in the criteria was completing one outreach program with cities/counties employees to promote EE and 811. This item was easily agreed upon with the group. The fifth and final item was for cities/counties representatives to attend at least 3 Government Partnership meetings. This item stirred a large conversation on requirements on the labeling of a LGP meeting. DC and Steve Newvine, PG&E, stated that the meetings would need to include discussion of EE, energy watch programs, projects as well as roundtables. They also stated that someone from the LGP area needs to be present in the meeting and or presentation. CK also wanted to clarify what attendance at these meetings meant. Did it mean in person or calling in? The group discussed and came to an agreement that attendance would count as someone being in person at the meeting. Once that item was agreed upon CK brought up the idea of having a concession award around innovative excellence. She thought that this might be a good idea since some cities/counties will not be able to have the opportunity to fulfill all of the requirements. The group agreed upon this item and said that they will keep it in mind. Name The IOU’s originally gave the award the placeholder name of SJV Local Government Leader Award. They stated that it was just a holder for the time being so they opened the name up to discussion. BE started the conversion stating that SCG and SCE requested that the words ‘energy’ and ‘leader’ not be used in the name of the award. They both believe that those words tie too closely to the SCE ELP model. So with time running short in the meeting DC asked that each implementer think about the name and come back with their top 3 name ideas to the April meeting.
Timeline for Roll Out The last item of the award criteria is the timeline. The group needed to agree on if this award was to run calendar year or fiscal year. DC brought up that the partnerships run on a calendar year while cities/counties budgets are on a fiscal year. After everyone agreed that having the award run on fiscal year would be better for project opportunities they decided to set the timeline to be June through July. That meaning that kickoff would not be for a few months. Other Business Open for Member Comment DC stated that he would just like to take a few moments to remind the implementers to bring their goals in their business plans to the April meeting. Also he stated that he would just like a quick overview of the goals and not all of the 25 pages involved. Select Facilitator for Next Meeting The group agreed that they would like to ask JG to be the facilitator of the April meeting. SD was asked to send JG an emailing asking him to do so. Conclude Next Meeting: April 14th, 2016 at 9:30am.