 Good afternoon vice mayor Rogers. Good afternoon vice for council member Rogers. Mayor Rogers, I'm sorry. Hi there. Looks like we are still waiting for council member Alvarez. All right. We'll give them another second here. Hi, this is Mr. Stockham, AECOM. Hi there. Thank you so much. This is Marshall Noble with AECOM. Perfect. Your microphones are both working well. Good to hear. Well, I do know that we have a little bit of a time constraint later in the meeting. So let's go ahead and get started. I call the meeting to order and let's take a roll call. Council member Alvarez, Vice Mayor Rogers. Present. Mayor Rogers. Here. Let the record show all council members are present with the exception of council member Alvarez. Great. We'll keep looking for council member Alvarez to see if we can get them on the Zoom. In the meantime, let's go to our public comment for non-agenda items. If you're interested in providing comment tonight, go ahead and hit the raise hand feature on your Zoom. And I am not seeing any hand. Do we have any pre-recorded public comments? We did not. Okay. Let's keep moving on to our department report. Do we have anything to report out today? Thank you, Mayor Rogers and Vice Mayor Rogers. Just a quick department report. And I think we'll probably talk more about this later, but I just wanted to mention that the staff supporting the Climate Action Subcommittee directly will be changing after today's meeting and we'll move over to some of our colleagues over in the water department. So I just wanted to mention that and planning staff will still actively participate in each of these meetings and we'll get report outs as well. But I just wanted to say thank you. It's been a very enjoyable experience. And I look forward to continuing to work with the subcommittee. Great. Thank you, Amy. And we really appreciate all the work that planning has done. And I know that we'll be seeing you pretty frequently even if you're not the lead staffer at the moment. Thank you for that. Are there any questions or comments on the staff update? See if there's any public comment on the departmental report. All right, I'm seeing none. We'll go on to our new business for the day starting with item 4.1. That's the introduction to the Citywide Energy Efficiency Renewable and Microgrid Feasibility Study. Doug Williams is gonna present for us. Good afternoon, Mayor Rogers, Vice Mayor Rogers. My name is Doug Williams. I'm the Facility Maintenance and Operations Coordinator for the Transportation and Public Works Department. First of all, I just wanna thank you for allowing us to bring this to your attention. And I wanna thank you for allowing us to pursue this energy audit in the first place. It's giving us a lot of really good data. And we're using the data that we got from our facility assessment about three and a half years ago. So this is some good information. I wanna start off by talking about the fiscal impact that we put in the staff report. The truth of the matter is is the fiscal impact is gonna be whatever council decides it's gonna be. It could be $0 if you don't want to invest in facilities right now if there's other more important issues. But it could be twice as much as what we put in. We took a shot. You'll have to take it with a grain of salt that I am the Facilities Maintenance and Operations Coordinator, but I was also wearing my Climate Action Plan implementation team hat. When I looked at the mechanical issues that we have, the reason why I chose the mechanical issues to bring to you and show you was a three-fold. First of all, the Climate Action Plan, a part of it is that the mechanical issues are old, HVAC issues or assets are old. So they're energy hogs. So if we were to replace those with the energy efficient HVAC units, we would lower our carbon footprint. The other issue we have with our mechanical assets is two-thirds of them use a refrigerant called Freon. The industry calls it R22. California ban putting HVAC units in 2010. The EPA banned importation and production of R22 in the United States, January of 2020, which brings us to some costs. The mechanical issues, the mechanical assets are old and it's costing more and more to maintain them. We would also save money by using less electricity. It would cut down on our electric bill. I did not do a breakdown on the difference of energy costs with the units that I included in one of the attachments. The truth of the matter is, is you could decide to pull some of those units on, add some units off, and then we would do a deep dive. I'm guessing that energy costs will rise. Just looking at some of the global issues we have with energy, I would imagine that we're looking at a higher percentage than normal. One of the other issues financially speaking is the R22 itself. We're able to still utilize this refrigerant, but once the product is used up, once the shells are cleared of it, it'll be gone. So as we get a smaller and smaller supply of R22, the price due to supply and demand will necessarily increase the cost of the refrigerant. And third is that, I mean, essentially the mechanical issues are the lungs of the building and with COVID and wildfire smoke, we wanna make sure that we're keeping these buildings well ventilated. Before I turn this over to AECOM, Mush Talk and Marshall to go over the slides, do you have any questions about what I just brought up? Nope, I think we're all good, let's keep moving. Okay, perfect. Mush Talk and Marshall, if you could start with the slides, that would be amazing, thank you. Marshall, why don't you start and then I'll jump in as needed. Yeah, sure thing, sure thing. So my name is Marshall, I work for AECOM and we were contracted by the city to put together this citywide energy efficiency renewable to microgrid study. And we're gonna be presenting this in three parts. The first part will be the energy efficiency portion of it. And the second part will be renewables. And then the last part will be the microgrid feasibility study. And I'll be talking about the energy efficiency and renewable portion. And then I'll pass the mic over to Mush Talk for the microgrid feasibility study. So the original scope for this included 47 facilities and 29 unique address throughout Santa Rosa. And for the energy efficiency portion of it was to provide these upgrades for the city that kind of addressed three goals, improving energy efficiency to reduce energy consumption at the building, addressing some of the deferred maintenance items on Doug's list here, since as he mentioned, they are the lungs to the building and it's very good to have a good HVAC system to support the people that work in those facilities. And three, there are some electrification goals set out by the city and some of the energy efficiency measures that we had provided in the report support those goals. So there's a slide that didn't make its way in here, but at the end of the day here, we kind of broke down into three categories. There's lighting across 40 plus facilities, lighting upgrades that directly improves energy efficiency of the buildings and reduces energies. And then there were a bunch of HVAC upgrades for about eight of the main facilities that addressed these deferred maintenance costs and there was different options to provide just a straight energy efficiency upgrades to it and the electrification goals of it. And then in addition to that, there was an option to throw on a more effective energy management and control system so Doug could service his buildings remotely for 10 of the buildings. And at the end of the day, the one thing that we observed throughout the building is what Doug had said. A lot of the HVAC equipment at the facilities were over 15 years old. And for these type of equipments, the standard is 15 years of life for these things. So Doug and his team have been doing a lot to keep these things going and then a majority of them are operating with R-22 refrigerant, which is it's an ozone depleting substance which Doug mentioned. It's no longer being produced, it produced so therefore it's getting more expensive to maintain these equipment. And then the next part of the scope that we did was to develop these renewable aspects of it. And in this case, it was a solar PV. So for that particular scope, we were asked to look at 107 sites that was mixed between the actual facility or city-owned buildings and then city-owned parks. And we evaluated solar application based on the space availability. Was there shading that was going to limit the production of the system? Was there electrical infrastructure to tie in the system? And was it easy to construct? I mean, you don't wanna put a PV system somewhere where you can't build the thing. Next slide. And then the results of that study was we were able to identify a maximum potential of 7.2 megawatts dispersed over 17 sites. And what was provided to Doug and his team were these conceptual layouts that depict how much module, the details of these systems at each of the facilities. And we broke it down into two tiers. So tier one, if you look at the tier one recommendations, they had the adequate space, there was no shading or obstructions, they had optimal orientation. And those last two bullet points, there was an electrical load to offset and we were able to identify a point of connection to feed into the building. So what that means is that the tier one measures, you know, if you were to pour money into these projects and prioritize the projects, you would look at the tier one measures first because of those last two bullet points, the electrical load to offset and a clear point of connection identified. And then the second tier of it, I mean, it had, and these are mostly the parks, these did not have the clear electrical load to offset and the clear point of connection to identified. So if you were to implement these facilities, you'd have to do a little bit more digging on where that point of connection is and maybe get with PG&E and your utility provider to see if there's any additional programs to maybe feedback into the grid and get reimbursed for that production. And for those tier two, I guess, sites, if you will, we identified a max solar potential of four megawatts at six sites. And those were mostly at those parks on that table there. And with that, I'll turn over the microgrid section to Muschak and he'll go over those details of the scope and our results. Thanks, Marjul. So before I start on the microgrid, any questions so far or should we continue? Not a question per se, but if we can get Council Member Alvarez promoted from attendee to panelist so that he can participate. Let's do questions and comments at the end, if you would. Okay. So in terms of microgrid, when this RFP was issued and they were basically the way it was structured, they were basically a total of 25 different sites clustered into two parts. So when we started this study, our aim was to look at these two different clusters and figure out whether two microgrids would be feasible. However, when we went on site and started looking at the available infrastructure, the actual construction of the facilities, the available space, we basically ended up with a total of seven different microgrids for these two clusters. So if you go to slide number 14, one, two down. So rather than looking at all these facilities and combining them into like two microgrids based on what we found out, our final recommendation was basically that in order to provide the resiliency and continuous operations of your city, and especially during a power outage, you would need these seven different microgrids. Now, one thing to note here is that not all these microgrids would have solar PV associated with them, only four of them do. The three which won't be able to have solar PV are the city hall and the public safety building. And there, the microgrid will be basically a combination of batteries and backup generators. And one other thing to note here is that, and it is elaborated a little bit more in the report, that all these microgrids, they do not show very well in terms of financial calculations. So they do provide the sustainability and they do provide resiliency. But if you are just looking at specifically based on on kind of a financial calculation or an ROI, they might not provide you the best case scenario. But again, where Santa Rosa is and what Santa Rosa has faced in the past many years in order to provide the resiliency, the added resiliency for your operation, these are the seven which you would need to keep serving your inhabitants. So that was basically the microgrid piece. And at this point, if you have any questions, both Marshall and myself, we are available to answer. Now, thank you so much. Council members, are there questions? Vice Mayor, you look like you might have something. It probably would take all day for me to really have a very clear, concise understanding of all of that. So, but I have the gist of it, I will say. I think my question, and I think it's directed at Doug, is the report is great. It helps to lay out a roadmap for council. Where do we start? And I think what we'll hear from the public is, how do we fund all of it? And how do we get this implemented as quickly as possible? I mean, ultimately, that's the question, right? How do we start? Where do we start? When you look at the facility assessment and you look at the energy audit, you realize that there's a lot of work that needs to be done into our facility assets. We've got not just mechanical issues, we've got several other issues. We decided to start here using the energy audit so we could not only invest in our assets, but we could also help the environment. Ultimately, the reason why we chose to do the energy audit this way is we decided we wanted to be able to control what we invested in. So we may choose not to do a major capital improvement invested in one building because we expect to not be in that building in the future. So these are some of the considerations. This is one of the reasons why it was so difficult to on that staff report put in what the fiscal impact was gonna be because what is it that we wanna invest the money into which buildings? And ultimately, that's one of the questions that we have for you. And council as a whole, which buildings do we wanna invest in and which buildings do we want to try and divest from? And whether that's building a new building, I know I believe that the P3 for a city hall is still in the conversation. So if that is something that we were gonna move forward with, we probably don't wanna invest a lot into city hall, for example. But ultimately that's what we're here to do today is to ask you, where do you want us to really look? The energy audit shows good potential for some sites for solar panels and battery backups. Some don't. Again, ultimately that's the million dollar question. Where do we start? And I guess another question that I have is, you know, that the city is currently, and we had kind of a little bit of this conversation when we did this, but the city is currently on the Evergreen program with Sonoma Clean Power, meaning that even for these buildings, the energy uses that we have is at least renewable energy that we're purchasing to make sure that we have it covered. I'm never gonna say no to creating additional renewable energy period. But how do we, I guess the two questions are, one, how do we partner with Sonoma Clean Power on this project? Because I imagine that they would be interested in helping us to create renewable energy. And then the second part of that component is for the cost. And if I remember correctly, I think it was about a million dollars, maybe a little bit more for us to do Evergreen. That seems when I look at what it would take to move these facilities in this direction, it seems like that's a good investment because it gets us the biggest bang for our buck. And if I'm wrong, can you correct that assumption? And perhaps is that funding better used on the infrastructure to build the renewable energy over the next two to three years? From looking at the report and wish talking and Marshall can correct me, I have just enough information to be dangerous. So you'll have to forgive me. It looks like MSC North is the best bet for putting solar panels in. And having the battery backups specifically since we want to electrify our fleet and we've already got four electric buses that will be coming on. And we want to be able to have that ability in the yard. MSC North is one of the sites that it has really good potential for microgrid as well. Marshall, can you add to that or take away from it? You know, what you've said Doug is absolutely true. MSCN has a large potential for solar canopy PV systems and it really supports, you know, if you're going to electrify your fleet, you know, right now, then your future load from that fleet electrification can be handled by, you know, the addition of solar overtime. So that's absolutely correct Doug. Just to be clear, so the assessment that we have, and I think if I'm looking at it correctly on slide eight, it looks like it is roughly $3 million to implement for the two breakout categories for MSC North, if I'm looking at it correctly. That assumes that we have electrified our bus fleet or will we need to bump this up in order to be able to cover that? So that's, go ahead Doug. No, that's all right. I was just suggesting I've seen. I was going to say that's the max potential that can be potentially is installed at MSCN North. Right now, if you were to like put that 1.6 megawatt system for $3 million, that's way more production that you would be using there right now. But if you were to put a future load on the building or whatever, then you'd have to reevaluate how much would go based on, you know, your future load. Understood, okay. And there, this was talking and there will be some back and forth with PG&E too, because the PG&E infrastructure upstream would have to be adjusted to take that load as well. So we have to take that into account as well. Yeah, and Doug, remind me, hasn't PG&E already started the infrastructure work associated with electrifying the bus fleet? They have not broken ground yet, but we do have an agreement. I believe that the last time I heard of it, the issue was getting a PG&E, a... Access to the site. So that was the last time I heard. Okay, and then obviously as we have conversations about either a countywide or a city climate measure or ways to fund our climate goals, I think this data is really helpful for helping to explain to the public how much need there is and how we could potentially get there. Does this also or are you using this to try to amplify our ability to pull in grants as well? Well, that's one of the things that we could look at. I would look at Sonoma Clean Power. We could look at a private public partnership as well. Ultimately, that would save us money upfront but we would not own the assets. We could also look at an ESCO, but the reason why we did the energy audit and the way we did was so that we had control of the data, typically with an ESCO or P3, they would do the energy audit and then they would decide which assets that they would upgrade. And then it would be kind of a payment plan. So it wouldn't be out of pocket up front money, but it would be taken out over time. So kind of like a loan. Right, would that require an RFQ? Yes. Okay. Okay, we'll go ahead and take public comment on this item. If you're interested in giving comment, go ahead and hit the raise hand feature on your Zoom. All right, I'm not seeing any hand. Did we have any prerecorded voicemails? We did not. Okay, any last thoughts from council members? Last thoughts. I was just gonna say that looking at where to start, I would just, I would think, Doug, that we would probably start in buildings that we know we're going to keep because it sounds like it's a pretty costly investment to put into buildings that we're not going to keep. I agree 100% of, sorry. Oh, no. So that, I mean, just me thinking, like I would want to invest in buildings that I think that we know we're going to keep and moving forward if we're going to build or move somewhere else that we just make sure that we build that around. That's 100%, 100% agree with you on that. I would push to get rid of the R22 out of our inventory. We can retrofit units, but units that are at the end of their useful lifespan, we're still gonna have those maintenance costs and we're still gonna have the higher energy costs on those. But I agree, we don't wanna buy expensive assets that we're just going to get rid of in five, 10 years. Yeah, and I totally agree with that also because I think that one, it's really bad for the environment too, we're not gonna be able to run it. So if it breaks down or something, we're not gonna be able to find it. And then we find ourselves in an even bigger emergency, right? That we're not gonna be able to fix it right there. We don't have the parts, we don't have what we need in order to make it run. So it's more proactive if we fix it now, instead of being reactive where we don't have what we need in order to support the team and getting it handled now. So I agree with that part also. Thank you for pointing that out. Thank you. And so if you're done with questions for us, I talked with Tasha Wright this morning, she's coming up next, but one of the things that we discussed is if the direction we go is mechanical or the direction we go is another route as far as investing in our infrastructure, we would like to work together on an RFP and utilize economies of scale to be able to lower the price on any asset. The city buys regardless if it's an enterprise fund or the general fund. Obviously, general fund money would go to general fund buildings and enterprise fund money would go to enterprise fund buildings. But if we work together, we could save the city some money. Yeah, and that was gonna be sort of my comment is I wanna make sure we take this report and immediately start putting it into action. And so if that's an RFQ or an RFP, whatever we need to do to actually get it out there to see what our options are. So the point that you made, I can't focus with some of our funding that's available or in our budget next year, how to make some of these investments where we own the infrastructure. But there are also opportunities that you mentioned where we don't own the infrastructure but we can get it out there faster and get those reductions sooner, which is what the community is expecting us to be able to do in addressing our greenhouse gas emissions. So I'd be interested to see how those two work in tandem and how we get some of this actually implemented whether by our own buck or somebody else's. Okay, so just to clarify, for direction from this committee, you want us to look at the cost of P3, what that means as far as it's similar to a rent-to-own kind of program, the ESCO. And working with a Sonoma Clean Power reaching out to them to see what that would look like. Yeah, Vice Mayor. I was also gonna say, so yes, grants a plan and what are the pros and cons, Doug? So I always like to see sitting on council, what are the pros and cons of things? So yes, you can tell me, well, yeah, we won't own it, right? But in my mind, when I'm looking at my home, for example, it could be a lot different than the city not owning something, right? So really what are the pros and cons of the city not owning something versus me personally not owning something? So when you bring it to council, what are the pros and cons of not owning something? So I would like to see that in the plan when you bring it. But also a plan of how much time do we have and if we take it into pieces, what if we did just wanna not finance it, but can we actually go through and pay for it? Cause I believe if you can make payments on something, then maybe there's a way that you can also pay for it, right? Cause I don't know if you can make payments on something, then you have money to pay for it. So what does that look like also? That's exactly what we're thinking. When we bring in an ESCO, or you bring in a public-private partnership, all the low-hanging fruits gonna get picked first. The lighting upgrades that we're looking at mostly can be done in-house. We have an electrical department and we have maintenance folks that can chip away at that. The mechanical is obviously a heavy lift and we would need help with that. Again, if we were to bring in an outside agency or a group, they would wanna pick all the low-hanging fruit, including assets that we don't really want to invest in. So, and we would be on the hook for an extended period of time if we wanted to invest in that asset. Yeah, well, I think what I heard was we select from our list which things we wanna put out in our PR and our Q4. So that way that doesn't happen. The low-hanging fruit doesn't happen. Overall though, I suspect if we put it to the vote of the public who's been participating, I suspect that they would say if we have to pay for it down the road but we get an upfront benefit that it's a moment that's a cost they're willing to bear. And again, it's not an either or to me, it's a both. Let's figure out how we both can have partnerships, the P3s, as well as get investments from the city and ultimately, and I guess I'll report out on this a little bit. We have been having conversations about a county-wide climate measure. And so even being a part of that conversation, bringing some of those dollars to make these infrastructures long-term or to pay off investments long-term, I think this is gonna be a really useful tool. Perfect, thank you very much. All right, do you need any other direction, Doug? No, I'm ready to go. Perfect, all right, well, thank you so much. I can take this to council too, yes? Yes, absolutely. Thank you. All right, let's go on to item number 4.2 that's the update to the implementation of the Santa Rosa Water Energy Optimization Plan. Tasha, I think this is you. Hello, Climate Action Subcommittee Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Member Alvarez. So today I'm here, my name is Tasha Wright. I am the Energy and Sustainability Coordinator for the Water Department. And I would like to discuss with you the energy optimization plans that we have completed and go over both what the project and the goals were and then also briefly review with what it included and the findings and then we'll talk about next steps and wrap up with any questions you might have. Next slide. So here's a snapshot of the background of the EOPs. We got started with going to the BPU in August of 2013 and at that time, Kennedy Jenks was selected to work with city staff to go through this energy optimization plan. The whole point for the plan was really to and I'll go over this a little bit as we get ahead was to really memorialize, evaluate and identify various projects that we had in the water department that could provide opportunity for energy efficiency, renewable energy and the SOAR. So I think another important point of this is that we work really closely with the Board of Public Utilities to make sure that they really supported this and saw the value in it. So we would go back continually. There was basically three parts to this kind of a quick overview, working with staff, getting ready to go and then you see the different amendments. So we had both the water operations piece, the sub-regional, so water reuse and then we went into just a general items to pursue as far as projects and various measures. So then and each time we went back we would give them an update or it was really a desire to be tracking this process all the way along, making sure that it was effective for us to do this and it made sense when we were getting somewhere with it. So that was really, really important to staff. In August, 2019, we had wrapped everything up and we provided an update on the findings and received direction from the BPU on the measures to pursue. So that's where we are now. And of course, you see a couple of years and a gap in there and that was because this was a very, very robust project. They, what ended up happening with Kennedy James is the water reuse final paper was 213 pages, very technical. Even the executive summaries can be a lot to process and the executive summary for that one was 11 pages. So I'm happy to share both of those with you. And then as well as the operations side, it was 161 pages and the executive summary is seven pages. So next slide, please. So as I mentioned, going into this a little bit more, what was the goal of the EOPs? And it was really a roadmap to strategically and systematically, those are very important words, optimize energy use and then to look at renewable energy opportunities. So, and of course the council has a lot of goals. We want to make sure that we have a lot of energy and a lot of goals. We wanted to support the city council and promote our leadership in energy and sustainability. And so obviously with energy and sustainability, we really do want to protect the environment. The city has been working at that for quite some time. In January of 2020, the council passed resolution 2020 dashed 002. And that was the climate emergency. And in that resolution, the city committed to a carbon neutrality by 2030 goal. So that's very robust. And we really want to make it there. So that's why this leads into that next slide, please. So as I mentioned, it really was to memorialize what we've done and get it into, get it on paper, because there had also often been questions about, well, what have you done? And we said, well, we've done the low front hanging fruit. And we're moving on to the next phase, but to show that and be able to quickly refer to that. Memorialization of those items was really, really key for us, especially as new council members and be few members come in over years. We can say, yes, we've done our due diligence to get that foundation laid. Next piece was to evaluate what our systems programs, how we used our various status systems, what processes we had, what projects we have. As you know, we have incredibly complex systems. So we really want to evaluate to a level that we could really show where our biggest things for a buck, et cetera were. So then we also, as part of this, this is the big piece was to identify the various measures and to look at cost effectiveness, feasibility. Of course, we want energy efficient, we want to reduce our energy demand and we want to increase our renewable generation and to allow us for energy independence. So we looked at operational changes. We looked at behavioral changes. And then we looked at these capital improvement projects. Next slide, please. So as mayor Rogers, I would like to share with you, what I have on this slide is the current. Mix of renewables. Both in clean start. And then in evergreen. So we move forward to the next slide, please. Next slide, please. So as mayor Rogers discussed earlier, one of the pieces for us that was very important. And it was the council approved us going to evergreen. So what I have on this slide is the current. So we moved to the evergreen. And as you mentioned, yes, it was a million dollars a year. The lion share of that was in water. So obviously we get the biggest bang for our buck by doing efficiencies, et cetera. So as part of that, I also have a little update for you on what that looks like with our evergreen. So we adopted in late June of 2020. The accounts were split switch from clean start to evergreen. And the service began to roll out between July and August. So it took, you know, a couple months for us to get all the accounts switched over. Meters are read throughout the month. And so we have 900 various accounts in the city. So it was quite a process. So at this point, we are just getting to one year of data. So in 2020, that end there, because of the multiplier and the mix in 2020, we reduced by switching to evergreen. So that's a total of 248,632 pounds of CO equivalent CO2 per megawatt hour. And then in 2020, our forecasted is 369,840 pounds of ECO2 per megawatt hour. And then so that's a grand total at this time as an estimate would be 618,472 pounds of ECO2. And if any of you watch the presentation for evergreen initially, they talked about the various comparisons between the two, and then how much the city would reduce. So talking about these pounds of GHG reductions, but then no matter what there is, even with evergreen, there is still embedded energy. It's very difficult to get to absolute zero. We have a lot of transmission loss in the lines as we are importing that energy. So we still need to keep working at not only getting to complete renewables, but it's important for us to continue to do what we need to do and not just go, okay, we're done. We have evergreen, but we actually want to produce more for our own to compensate and to mitigate that, that rest of that emissions that we produce. So next slide, please. So here we have the first of the EMPs I'm going to go through. This is just a basic idea of what we did. It was a lot of work. We had the four system audits that were LTP, biosolids, compost, reclamation and geysers. Those were all broken down. Then we talked about five deeper investigations, which will lead me into the end of my presentation. And then we looked at the various measures. So pursue, complete our own planning, not pursue at this time and not recommend it. Now the reason why we would consider some of these not to pursue is because of operational infeasibility, increased risk of permit violations. And then items that we had tested and they didn't work for us because of our process or whatever that might be, but there was a lot of different factors. And then as far as the not recommended items, either the capital costs outweighed the cost of the savings and then operationally infeasible or impractical. Next slide, please. So here is a highlight of some of the items that we had complete or we identified as complete or in progress. So you can see the status here in progress, complete or complete and ongoing. So that's just a basic look. And I want to highlight a couple of items that were complete or in progress. And we, Doug had also mentioned this as a low hanging fruit, but we took the same idea, the same process that they looked at, which was implementing building and lighting energy efficiency measures. We actually had PG&E come in and do an audit of all of our lighting out at the Laguna treatment plant, because that was actually one that is an older facility that had some opportunities. As you know, UFO is new, the building was built to lead standards. And so at LTP that showed the biggest opportunities. As Doug had mentioned, it didn't make sense for us to finance any of these things because really it would take more work to do something like that and go through that process as opposed to just having it on our own for the remaining lights that need to be replaced. So we did what we could and then the rest is being incorporated to any re-models retrofitting. It's about 60% done at this time. So we'll continue to do that. The other couple of things, one was the continued pump testing program. PG&E offers a program where they will come in and test our pumps. Now, as a side note, I want to let you know that our staff has been, our water and wastewater folks have been fantastic about making sure that their pumps are running at the best efficiency. There is a program from PG&E that offers variable frequency drives. We have, I should say, staff has worked hard to make sure that they have gone ahead and installed those variable frequency drives. And I think that there's only a small percentage of pumps that don't have it at this point. And we also are engaged in a program through PG&E as well for pump testing. So every two years we go through and we test our pumps to see where their efficiency is at. And then we are provided with those testings and any recommendations from the program. PG&E for different pumps to be replaced. And then we put them in CIP or confirm that they're already on the list to be replaced. So once again, it's just great to be able to highlight that we as a city, as a water department, have worked really hard already to catch that low, hanging fruit and then to continue to do what staff has done. And that's to make sure on their side that their efficiency is there. And then also I want to highlight too, and this is both for water and for the reuse system, is that we're continuing to monitor the time of use and the rate and rate changes as they come about, new peak periods, you know, we all switch to the four o'clock to nine o'clock as being the peak period. We adjusted our pumps so that they are running during those off peak hours. So that's already been done. And each year and often more often more than that, we continue to track the time of use. And we look at our PG&E rates on an annual basis. And we look to see if there are better rates for us to take advantage of in order to see savings, just by being on a different rate. Next page, or next slide, please. So here's the big thing for us, measures to pursue. Now, you may ask, well, why would you hire a consultant to do all of this work and then not have all the absolute answers after this? Well, they really did a macro look into these items to pursue and recommended that we look deeper into them. They did, you know, a back of the envelope type of calculation. So there are several things on here that we would like to put into a PSA for a consultant to take a deeper dive into some of these items, much like what Doug and his team has done as part of that process, which would really go down to a micro level, granular level to see if these things are honestly feasible. And as you can see on the REM 9-4, it talks about our power purchase agreement. So we want to look at solar, but what we would also want to do is to look at purchasing with our own capital improvement money versus doing a power purchase agreement. And Vice Mayor Rogers had asked a little bit about that as far as bringing, well, what's the pros and what's the cons. We would have that opportunity. That's one of the part of the scope that we would put into a PSA and power purchase agreements and also have a buyout option. So you don't end up with upfront costs, but there could be the opportunity where over time we could save up or put in the annual budget for a little, put a little bit of money away, and then we purchase it. So here are at the bottom, you'll see other measures recommended by the consultant, the valuation of waste heat uses out at the treatment plant, mechanical digesting for our anaerobic digesters, and then an irrigation system optimization. So that would be taking a deeper dive into the pump system and what our opportunities would be there. Next slide, please. So now going into water operations. So as you, as I mentioned, so this was a system audit, which is what we did. We went through each part of the system. So water and wastewater, seven investigations came out of that and the various measures, pursue complete or I'm planning not pursue it this time and then not recommend it. We went again through that same process as we did with the reuse system. So next page, please. So once again, here's our complete or ongoing items. And you can see there, there's quite a few in there with, that are just basically behavioral changes at the UFO. And as you can see, that's all been complete. Taking a look at what opportunities, window blinds, natural lighting. Again, we did go through that with PG&E and took a look at, if there were any opportunities to upgrade even since the, the building was built. And then finally at the bottom, you'll see the other measures recommended for further investigation. I want to highlight pump efficiency testing. We've done that. We continue to commit to every two years working with PG&E. I'm hoping to have that. The next round of testing. We've done that in the, in the wintertime, maybe at the beginning of February. And then I mentioned variable frequency drives and then optimizing time of use rates. Next slide, please. Measures to pursue. So the major ones here were, was solar systems again with the opportunity of a power purchase agreement. And then we had to, we had the opportunity to be at the UFO. So Doug and I might have to battle, you know, do get out for it. But actually, you know, really, we would coordinate and look at the opportunity there and take, take advantage of efficiencies. And we mentioned the EV buses. So we've had PG&E come out to the site and take a look at what it would require. And we've had a lot of, a lot of, a lot of people have been talking about the power purchase agreement. And then when you're talking about really large systems here, they need to be able to take that power in. When it's being produced. And the system, their infrastructure, the grid needs to be able to handle that amount of power. So a substation would probably need to be built in. There's cost involved in that. All right. So next slide, please. Okay. So we've had a lot of people come from, so you see, we're here. Our next desire is to procure a consultant. Then we would return to the BPU with findings and recommendations to take forward. And then we would incorporate any measures we did decide to take advantage of that are part of this deeper dive that we would do with a consultant. We would incorporate that into the CIP process. Next slide, please. So these further investigation items, again, what would be next for us? We really want to go out for a PSA and hire an engineering consultant to do that micro deeper dive that I had mentioned and take a look at the things to pursue. And then what's the fiscal impact of that? Well, you know, we're not, we don't quite know that that's part of what we want to find out, but we would roll the consultant into our water budget, which we have, and we would expect to be completed by summer of 2022. And at that time, if there are opportunities for us, we decide to pursue, we would take advantage of coordinating with TPW and the EV bus infrastructure that it would be available there if we decided to go with large solar. And we would also work with Doug to make sure that we all work together, collaborated, took advantage of saving money by working together. And then of course the last piece of that is the environmental piece, which is incredibly important to us, wouldn't be doing, I wouldn't be here if that wasn't important to us. And we all wouldn't be here today. So essentially, we would put together a scope of work with the final projects to pursue in that deeper dive. We would always also want to quantify energy, efficiency, reduction of energy, and feasibility, and also our greenhouse gas emissions reductions and what that looks like. And of course, that would get us closer to the council goals of carbon neutrality by 2030. So next slide, please. So there we are. And that's our solar panels on that last page out at the Laguna treatment plant. That was the very, very first solar panels that were installed back in, even before my days, I think it was 2003. So we started a long time ago and we continue to go forward and do the best that we possibly can. And that's it for me. All right. So I know the vice mayor has to jump off and go to work. Did you have any questions before you leave? I do not, but thank you for the presentation. All right, council member Alvarez. All right, I'm just really impressed and I appreciate it. I didn't know until I was on council, just how much energy it takes to move water. And definitely for, for us, it's been a huge priority to find every, even the behavioral changes that we could implement that are going to move us towards carbon neutrality are really important. I'll go to public comment and then we'll bring it back. I've got RJ with a hand up. Here we go. I have enabled your speaking permissions. Can you see the timer on your screen? Yes, I can. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Your time begins now. Yes. It's actually a question is right. Thank you for your presentation. I just had a really quick question about the geysers, which you referred to in your fifth slide under the fourth system audits. My understanding and it may be completely erroneous. And perhaps you can educate me that the city of sense. Santa Rosa sells reclaimed water to the geysers to use to generate electricity. And the question basically is, is once that electricity is generated, where does it go? Is that coming back to the city of Santa Rosa or is it going somewhere else? All right. Thank you, RJ. We'll ask that question for Tasha in just a second. See if there are any other hands. All right. I'm not seeing any. Do we have any pre recorded voicemail? We do not. Great. Tasha, do you want to take a swing at that one? Thanks RJ. Great question. So when we deliver our water to the geysers, it's used to, as I think you might know, replenish the steam fields. Calpine cell sells their power. And actually one of their largest purchasers is a Sonoma clean power. So the beauty of it is that we have our water here. We utilize it in our community and then treat it and send it up to the geysers. It is a. Top tier three. In compliance with. The treatment process. And so. Essentially it's the perfect circle. We. Utilize it in this community. Sonoma clean power. That's part of their mixture. And we get to use a lot. Utilize the energy produced here in Sonoma County. That's perfect. Thank you. So council member Alvarez. I think we had a pretty straightforward direction from, from Tasha of what she's looking for. Do you have any comments on it or thumbs up? Definitely thumbs up. And I'm really excited about the direction that we're moving. And in fact, the last slide on the presentation. With the, with the original solar panels. And we definitely identified somewhere in the city that we can definitely apply the, the, the renewable energy that we just spoke about in our last presentation, which actually came to mind. But no, I love what the Laguna treatment facility does. I've definitely witnessed it grow throughout the years. And I'm very happy to see the direction that it's taking. Thank you. And again, my thumbs up for me. Yeah, me too. You all are doing great work. I think it's pretty impressive to see. So let's keep moving on it. And I don't know, do you need to bring this to council or can you just start implementing and then bring it during the capital improvement project. Discussion next year. I believe our next step as well would be to discuss with BPU. But it is our intention to go ahead and start working on a PSA. Very soon. And I just want to acknowledge too. We had. All of our staff. Participated in this process. And I am just incredibly grateful and blessed to work with. Such. Forward thinking. Part of the project. We're just incredibly grateful and blessed to work with. Such forward thinking. Hardworking staff that were really willing to get into the trenches and go through all of this. It wasn't an easy thing to do. And it took us a while, but I think we have a great product out of it. And it just. I just want to say thank you. It takes a village. I didn't do this. So is everybody. So. Well, we look, we look forward to seeing what BPU has to say as well. And thank you to everybody on the team. It really is moving things forward. All right, council member next on our agenda is subcommittee reports. I don't have a report. Do you have anything you want to throw on the table as a report? Nothing to report. Amy, do we have anything additional to report from staff? No, we do not. Okay. Go ahead and adjourn today's meeting. Thank you, everybody.