03.04.10 VIEW Partnership Meeting Summary Notes

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW)

PARTNERS MEETING SUMMARY NOTES March 4, 2010 Attendees: Lou Camara, City of Hanford Barbara Marty, City of Hanford Valerie Williams, City of Lindsay Jim Perrine, City of Porterville Lew Nelson, City of Tulare Leslie Caviglia, City of Visalia Nathan Garza, City of Visalia Kim Loeb, City of Visalia Rhonda Mann, County of Kings Gail Henry, County of Tulare

Paul Johnson, SJVCEO Courtney Kalashian, SJVCEO Maureen Hoff, SJVCEO Chris Coronel, SCE Jesse Langley, SCE Cal Rossi, SCE

Location: County of Tulare RMA, RMA Main Conference Room, 5961 South Mooney Boulevard, Visalia, CA 93277 Time: 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Next Meeting: Thursday, April 1, 2010 Location: County of Tulare RMA, RMA Main Conference Room, 5961 South Mooney Boulevard, Visalia, CA 93277 Agenda Topics on February 4, 2010 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Strategic Plan Support (imbedded funds) 3. On Bill Financing 4. Energy Savings Goals for 2010 5. Marketing and Outreach 6. Old Business 7. Next Steps Summary of Discussions: •

Kim Loeb called the meeting to order at 10:01am

•

Welcome and Introductions ‐ Kim welcomed everyone and we went around table for introductions. Paul Johnson made the staffing announcement that Cynthia Downing is going to focusing on SJVCEO and Courtney Kalashian is be the point of contact for all VIEW related matters. Maureen Hoff has joined the SJVCEO/VIEW team.

1

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW) •

Strategic Plan Support (imbedded funds) – Jesse Langley began by announcing that there is a 30 ‐90 day return then we can move forward with different task items. It is smart to get the ground work going and we can go ahead and start with the first milestones associated with these items.

AB811 was discussed and it was determined that the imbedded strategic plan funds are not to be used for these programs. Jesse said he understands the arguments why they should be used and has been an advocate for it, but unfortunately he doesn’t make the decision.

As far as the solicitation, it was emphasized that we need a very, very valid reason but this is not being encouraged.

Kim brought up the portfolio manager; the portfolio manager is free, but the training and uploading of all buildings and facilities and software is not. These ‘operation costs’ are a sizable part of the budget. There have been different perspectives, but nationally this is the program we are going to use because there is already a benchmark associated with it. Jesse said this is what SCE will be pushing. He just went through a training session on the portfolio manager and thinks it really works and expressed that everyone should have the training. Gail Henry noted that the County of Tulare has purchased utility manager software already and asked if it can be integrated with the portfolio manager. Jesse clarified energy management software and noted that automated building software is different and not part of the strategic effort. Paul Johnson asked what immediate next steps would be, Jesse said the training. Jesse needs to have someone come up and speak in more depth than he can on how the portfolio manager works.

•

On Bill Financing (OBF) – Chris Coronel began the discussion by noting that last month Jesse sent out a notice for everyone to think of projects they would like to apply for. The scope and cost are what they are looking for. There does not need to be an application at this point in time, but we need to work proactively so that by June 1st we are ready to get applications in on their behalf. Originally the date was looking like March or April, however it was filed on Monday with CPUC, and now it appears that June 1st will be launch date for on bill financing. Now SCE is working on further development in terms of what the contract looks like; they are trying to make it simple on one template and working to develop proper internal support and an education unit so they can guide VIEW partners.

The take away from this is that jurisdictions need to continue to put together wish lists and a cost associated with whatever measure. Please send these to Courtney as soon as possible! Courtney thanked Lou Camara from Hanford because they have already sent in their first project. She asked if there was anything else they planned to submit because this is not necessarily a one project thing. The partners wanted to know if there are types of projects that are more eligible. It was briefly discussed what is and is not eligible (for example, package units are not eligible, solar is not ok, etc.). Anything in the Core Programs found in the Solutions Directory is okay. Hanford’s submission was used as an example.

Their project is a downtown street light retrofit. Downtown has an old style of lighting and they were looking to save about 60 percent using metered lighting. They are working with a distributor to install different type of light source and trying to test the waters to see if it is acceptable and then they will nominate the project for the program.

2

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW) Jesse wanted to clarify the financing and explained that it gets provided to the jurisdiction once the project is completed. Technically, the jurisdictions need to fund the project upfront and then the financing will be released when the project is complete. Edison would pay the total project cost minus the incentives, but the jurisdiction would get the full amount back. It was emphasized that the jurisdictions need to get the projects down on paper and turned in to Courtney as soon as possible. The reason the project is being pushed is because there is $12 million for OBF – this is for everyone but partnerships are getting the first shot. SCE needs to get concrete examples of what will be done so that our ducks are in a row when this hits and we will be ready to go when we get word. Kim asked what the duration of the project would be. This is a 3 year program. It was also asked if there will be additional funding in the future. That is the hope but we don’t know, so here is the chance to do it NOW! Discussion continued on how jurisdictions are identifying what projects they want done.

Again it was stressed that these need to be submitted to Courtney. Send your desires, estimated funding, and estimated kWh savings. Lew Nelson volunteered the City of Tulare’s recent idea that came up due to a parking problem. Employees of a restaurant do not want to use parking because don’t feel safe parking where the lighting is poor in other parking areas so they would like to patch pot holes, do retrofit lighting, etc. He will start getting numbers and send to Courtney. Leslie asked about the eligibility of other types of projects ‐ waste water treatment, lighting in the convention center? Both of these are okay for submission. Chris will mass email blast to everyone, including Courtney, a document that includes details as well as a website link because the information/guidelines are always changing. Christ said to always look at web for the most current info.

•

Energy Saving Goals for 2010 – Chris led the discussion and noted that forms came out late January but they are very different than anything used before. Training has been developed and SCE is now ready. At the next meeting Porterville will be added to the list for what they are doing. The rebate program in discussion is referred to as Express Solutions (aka Express Efficiency). There are no authorizations or pre‐submissions – everything must be turned in when the project is done. Chris will be working with Courtney and Mike Nemeth of SJVCEO. There seemed to be confusion as to what was on the list. Chris explained that you will not see on the list what has not been submitted. Jim Perrine asked why his project was not on list and Chris said he needs to check and get the updated version. Courtney asked when the partnership can expect to have a comprehensive list that is going to be a realistic to look at and Chris thinks he can supply this at the beginning of our next meeting. Great news! The new list may or may not have Porterville’s submission, however, because it was submitted through a third party. It was discussed in detail how the list could look because it is nice to see what is coming down the pipeline and what jurisdictions are doing. The list will be updated by next meeting by both Chris and Courtney.

There was also discussion and some confusion about inspections. This information will be shared and clarified at our next meeting by Chris.

3

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW) •

Marketing and Outreach – Courtney gave a report from the morning marketing meeting and stressed that it is important for all jurisdictions to come and express their opinions. She began the report by discussing use of the Mobile Education Unit (MEU) versus Self‐staffed events. Courtney mentioned that Valerie Williams will self‐staff for Lindsay’s Earth Day celebration. It is a small event so we don’t have to bring the MEU out. She noted that marketing materials can also be borrowed. In explaining self‐staffing, Courtney said that asking for volunteers for events is important; however, we all know volunteers are not always available and that is where staffing comes in (Courtney Kalashian and/or Maureen Hoff from SJVCEO).

Courtney reported that the partnership will need to supplement community events with AgTAC education. Jesse suggested that at some of the community outreach programs we need a 15 minute presentation for the education portion. Porterville was a great opportunity for the AgTAC to go out and get the education out! Courtney will be in contact to see how we can get this out in your community.

The ME&O task force is still trying to think of new and inventive ways to reach out, even into the future in 2011. In the individual areas we need to determine what is most appropriate. Jesse wants to make sure there is exposure to all of Edison’s programs and make sure there is education. The California Solar Initiative would most likely fund the marketing efforts, not the VIEW. Courtney reminded the partners that AgTAC has offered use of their electronic sign on CA99 for advertising events and classes.

Courtney also thanked those who participated in the Spring Fest Home Show. The report from the OSS concluded that the event was a success. In the marketing meeting we discussed the demographics that attended show and how materials should be tailored to audiences.

Jesse also added that jurisdictions need to please bear with us as we roll it out and figure out which events we do. If you haven’t submitted anything, please do!

•

Old Business – Paul Johnson gave an update on discussions related to strategic plan RFP and the $27.5 million dollars. Paul had a call hosted by the SJVCEO on Tuesday to see where jurisdictions were in identifying opportunities in submitting applications. The deadline of March 22nd is quickly approaching. Funding available is up to $1 million for each jurisdiction. We need to set parameters to help define how and what these opportunities might be for VIEW. Paul really appreciates Jesse Langley for being able to share as a point person. Efficiency and planning are the focus of what is and is not allowable for submission.

We will be sure to get a copy of this if you don’t already have it. SCE is looking for specific quality items that can be proposed and there are no regional criteria. If jurisdictions apply to do things it should be consistent and not duplicated. Pat Stoner with the Local Government Commission has been identified as a coordinator with NGOs and we should plug into this. They provide awards for jurisdictions that stick out. Paul noted that Pat will be a resource for us. The RFP provides information as far as what the utility is looking for.

4

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW) There are some jurisdictions that were not on the call where we discussed interest in moving forward. Because of the deadline we must act quickly so Paul wanted to get more information on who might want to move forward. Jesse thinks having Paul is an advantage for VIEW partnership and thinks it is a great opportunity but did note things not worth funding, won’t be funded! Please fine tune submissions. Paul was curious as to whether there was a disadvantage if a submission leaned more towards substance of work versus innovation. Jesse said there wasn’t a disadvantage to lean one way or the other; so long as it fits with the criteria it is ok.

Kim interjected and said he was still confused on the benchmarking on the use of the portfolio manager. He said it looked like we could use strategic funds for benchmarking implementation. Jesse noted that one of the key things about imbedded funds is to train VIEW partnerships on portfolio manager. As far as actually doing the benchmarking itself, they are not funding the efforts. Jesse said he can’t tell jurisdictions what they can and can’t propose – it is up to you as jurisdictions to decide. Paul asked Lew if there was any interest in Tulare to make a submission. In short, no. Hanford is thinking about it.

•

Next Steps. Before action items were discussed, Jesse interrupted with a discussion about tier levels and said that Tara Becnel, the guest speaker for next month, will go through all the various programs to take advantage of. For those who want to look more in depth at levels, we will need to look at each jurisdiction. Tulare County is very commendable because of their savings numbers – 63%! We want to collectively move everyone up in their tier level and bring the programs up here.

Discussion moved forward to the action items. Gail Henry announced she will not be attending the next meeting.

Action Items: 1. For the marketing items it needs to be determined what kind of representation is

needed for individual events.

2. Paul Johnson, Courtney Kalashian, and Kings County need to have a brief discussion to

clear up any confusion about pre and post‐inspections.

3. For those interested, Paul will get the Q&A’s on competitive bids.

4. The facilitator for the next meeting will be Lew Nelson.

PARTNERSHIP 2010 MEETING SCHEDULE: Thursday, April 1, 2010 Thursday, May 6, 2010 Thursday, June 3, 2010 Thursday, July 1, 2010 Thursday, August 5, 2010

5

San Joaquin Valley Energy Leader Partnership (VIEW) Thursday, September 2, 2010 Thursday, October 7, 2010 Thursday, November 4, 2010 Thursday, December 2, 2010

6