Motion to support the suspension and re-evaluation of DWP s FIT-100 program

Transcription

1 Mtin t supprt the suspensin and re-evaluatin f DWP s FIT-100 prgram Agenda Item: GB Date: 15 August 2013 Prpsed By: Terrence Gmes Dug Fitzsimmns President Brian Kite Vice-President Terrence Gmes Treasurer Beth Ryan Secretary Intrductin On January 11, 2013, the Bard f Water and Pwer Cmmissiners (Bard) apprved the 100 MW Feed in Tariff (FiT) Set Pricing Prgram as the first cmpnent f the 150 MW FiT Prgram. LADWP's 100 MW FiT Set Pricing Prgram seeks t encurage renewable energy develpment within the Ls Angeles Basin and help meet the 33% Renewable Prtfli Standard mandate by The FiT Prgram will allw the LADWP t partner with prgram participants t purchase, under a standard pwer purchase cntract, energy generated frm a participant's renewable energy generating system. These systems will be lcated within the LADWP's service territry and intercnnected t the LADWP electrical distributin system. All the energy generated by these systems will be purchased at a fixed price, subject t time-f-delivery multipliers, fr a term f up t 20 years. The prgram includes five 20 MW tranches (100MW) scheduled t be made available every six mnths thrugh The initial pwer purchase price will be 0.175/kWh fr the first 20 MW, with sequential price drps f 0.01/kWh scheduled t kick in fr each subsequent tier. Overall, LADWP aims t install 100 MW f slar and ther renewable energy prjects in the department s service territry by Hwever, already in the pening week f its new FIT prgram, the first 20 MW allcatin has been versubscribed t. Bth custmers and develpers have submitted applicatins ttaling 107 MW f slar prjects t be installed acrss the city and in the Owens Valley service area, including 2 MWs wrth f prjects 30 t 150 kw in size, and 76 MW wrth f prjects 151 kw t 3 MW in size. Csts fr the LADWP will include hiring 30 additinal administrative staffers t perate the prgram which is nt included in the fixed price. Full Prpsal At a recent meeting f the LA Neighbrhd Cuncil Calitin, Department f Water and Pwer Ratepayer Advcate Dr. Fred Pickel. He discussed the Feed-In Tariff Set Price (FIT-100). His PwerPint presentatin is attached. Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil PO Bx Ls Angeles, CA P: (310) F: (310) E: inf@srnc.rg srnc.rg City f Ls Angeles Certified Neighbrhd Cuncil Frm the LANCC minutes: Dr. Pickel accepts the FIT-50 prgram but nt the FIT-100. As explained in the pwer pint, ratepayers are nt getting a fair r reasnable prgram frm DWP n the FIT-100 prgram. The price that DWP is prpsing t pay fr slar pwer under the Feed-in-Tariff is ver market by abut $250 millin ver the next 20 years. Fr the first 20 megawatts f the 100 megawatt prgram, DWP is prpsing t pay 17 cents per kilwatt hur. This amunt declines by 1 cent fr the next 20 megawatts t 16 cents. Then 15, 14 and 13. But when these prices are cmpared t current market prices, we are paying $250 millin ver market. Dr. Pickel recmmends suspensin f the FIT-100 prgram until it can be re-evaluated.

2 Dr. Pickel asked fr a suspensin f the FIT-100 prgram until the end f September, by which time its ffering rate culd be reevaluated. His pint is that while the city is bligated t purchase renewable energy, it is nt bligated t purchase it at rates abve market price. He believes that ratepayers will be able t buy twice as much green energy fr the same mney they are nw pledging fr 20 years t vendrs under the FIT-100 prgram. The slar cmpanies and prperty wners wuld be directly benefiting frm what Dr. Pickel is essentially saying is a subsidy fr private businesses by the LADWP ratepayers. Prpsed Mtin I. T supprt the Rate Payer Advcate Dr. Fred Pickel s request that the FIT-100 Prgram be suspended and supprt the subsequent reevaluatin f the FIT- 100 Prgram as suggested by the Office f Public Accuntability. Cnsideratins Cmmittee review: (highly recmmended) Vtes Fr: n/a Against: n/a Amunt previusly allcated in Cmmittee's wrking budget: (applies t funding mtins nly) n/a Arguments fr: The mtin was passed unanimusly by LANCC Arguments against: The NC hasn t been briefed n the issue. Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil Mtin fr FIT100.dcx Page 2 f 2

3 Mtin t supprt the DWP s Feed In Tariff aka FiT-100 Prgram Agenda Item: GB (Substitute mtin) Date: September 17, 2013 Prpsed By: Green Team Cmmittee Intrductin On Jan. 11, 2013 the Bard f Water and Pwer Cmmissiners apprved the 100MW feed in Tariff Set Pricing Prgram as the first cmpnent f the 150 MW FiT Prgram. This prgram seeks t encurage renewable energy develpment within the Ls Angeles basin and help meet the 33% Renewable Prtfli Standard mandate by Dug Fitzsimmns President Brian Kite Vice-President Terrence Gmes Treasurer Beth Ryan Secretary The FiT Prgram will allw the LADWP t partner with prgram participants t purchase energy generated frm a participant s renewable energy generating system such a rftp slar. Energy generated by these systems will be purchased by the DWP at a fixed price, fr a term f up t 20 years. The prgram includes five 20 MW tranches ttaling 100MW f pwer, made available every six mnths thrugh The initial 20MW pwer purchase was at $0.175/kWh issued in January The secnd 20MW tranche was issued in July 2013 as $0.165/kWh with a sequential price drp f $0.01/kWh fr each subsequent tier and released every 6 mnths ver a ttal f 2.5 years. Overall, LADWP aims t supprt the installatin f 100MW f slar and ther renewable energy prjects in the department s service territry by In the pening week f the FiT prgram, the first 20MW allcatin was versubscribed. Bth custmers and develpers have submitted applicatins ttaling 107MW f slar prjects t be installed acrss the city and in the Owens Valley service area. Csts fr the FiT Prgram will include hiring 30 additinal administrative staffers t perate the prgram which is nt included in the fixed price. At a recent meeting f the LA Neighbrhd Cuncil Calitin, Dr. Fred Pickel, DWP Ratepayer Advcate shwed a pwer pint presentatin in which he utlined his bjectins t the FiT-100 Prgram. He feels the prgram is $250 millin dllars ver market price ver the life f the 20 year cntract. Dr. Pickel recmmends suspensin f the prgram until it can be re-evaluated. His bjectins are utlined belw under Arguments AGAINST the FiT Prgram.. Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil PO Bx Ls Angeles, CA P: (310) F: (310) E: inf@srnc.rg srnc.rg The Bard asked the Green Team Cmmittee t study Dr. Pickel s request t suspend the feed in tariff prgram. In rder t d this, the cmmittee asked Dr. Pickel s ffice t send them a detailed discussin f their bjectins t the prgram (See Arguments Against the LADWP s FiT 100 Prgram, Submitted by Camden Cllins. ) and asked the same frm supprters f the FiT Prgram and invited bth grups t attend tw cnsecutive cmmittee meetings. Attached are the salient dcuments used t d ur research. A summary f the prs and cns are listed under Arguments. Full Prpsal After cnsidering all the submissins fr and against the prgram, the cmmittee determined that the FiT 100 Prgram shuld nt be suspended. City f Ls Angeles Certified Neighbrhd Cuncil

4 Over a five year perid beginning in 2009, the prgram was researched by academic energy plicy experts resulting in a reprt published by UCLA in 2010 (See attachment: Designing an Effective Feed-In Tariff Prgram fr Greater Ls Angeles, UCLA Luskin Center fr Innvatin, cmmissined by the Ls Angeles Business Cuncil, Slar Wrking Grup. It was als vetted in multiple public wrkshps. The prgram fulfills the bjectives f specific public plicy mandates: reach 33% renewable energy by 2020, develp in-basin slar, and imprve LA s ecnmy by creating lcal, high-waged jbs. Dr. Pickel s prpsal, t buy ut-f-basin energy at less expensive rates, des nt specifically address these mandates. Larger imprted slar prjects such as the ne Dr. Pickel references in Pal Alt, put imprtant Federal tax credits, which end in 2016, at risk. This prject has yet t pass an Envirnmental Impact Reprt which culd take years. Furthermre, any jbs created, wuld prbably nt benefit LA residents. In additin, there are hidden csts t imprted slar pwer such as expensive transmissin lines, and substatins, and a c. 3% pwer lss when brught in frm distances. Single, large installatins are mre susceptible t weather cnditins. Pwer distributed thrughut the DWP service area is quick t install, easy t cnnect t the grid, and less vulnerable t clud cver. We asked bth sides t put the rate increases in perspective fr us by answering the questin f hw the cst f the Fit Prgram wuld impact the average ratepayer. The Ratepayer Advcate said that there were t many variables. (See a detailed respnse a the end f Arguments AGAINST) A DWP reprt stated that the Fit 150 MW prgram will add $ /kWh t the ratepayer s bill, resulting in an average mnthly electric bill increase f c. $0.04. In additin, 75 f 150 megawatts f the FiT prgram are mandated by the State. Therefre, if ne cnsiders nly the ptinal amunt that is being debated fr suspensin, ratepayers will be respnsible fr, n average, 2 cents mre per mnth. The Ratepayer s Advcate made a strng case fr establishing the price paid fr rftp slar by public bidding s that it reflects current fair market value. (See their discussin in Arguments AGAINST and Frequently Asked Questins attached.) Detractrs f this idea explain that an auctin methd was tried and failed. Bidding was used in a smaller 10MW prgram. The price came in higher than $.17 and the prgram was under subscribed. Amng the majr criticisms f the bidding methd are that it is harder fr small and midsized firms t arrange financing withut a prjected rate f return. The set price in the first issue f $0.175/kWh reflects this early bidding prgram and is an average f ther cmparable municipal prgrams within the US. (One shuld be reminded that 40% f the prgram has already been cntracted ut. The next tier will be issued at $0.155/kWh.) Finally, a survey f 400 DWP Ratepayers cnducted by Fairbank Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Assciates indicates that 57% f the respndents wuld pay $1.00 per mnth mre t expand in-basin slar. 76% felt that the DWP shuld d mre t expand use f lcal rftp slar. In summary, ding a cst/benefit analysis, the cmmittee felt that there was a negligible investment fr the substantially beneficial ecnmic, and envirnmental FiT 100 energy prgram. In defense f the Ratepayer Advcate, and cnsidering the immense csts assciated with climate change (such as fire and water scarcity), the cmmittee suggested that cheaper, ut-f-basin prgrams such as the ne Dr. Pickel sites in Pal Alt, shuld be pursued in additin t expanding rftp in-basin prgrams in Ls Angeles. Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil 010 Mtin t Supprt the Feed in Tariff.dc Page 2 f 3

5 Prpsed Mtin That the Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil supprt cntinuing the DWP s FiT 100 Prgram as currently structured. Cnsideratins Cmmittee review: Vtes Fr: 6 Vtes Against: 0 Arguments FOR the Fit See Attachment, p. 4. Arguments AGAINST the Fit Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil 010 Mtin t Supprt the Feed in Tariff.dc Page 3 f 3

6 Arguments fr the FiT Prgram FiT Prgram study was pub. in by tw respected academic rganizatins: UCLA and USC. DWP intrduced the prpsal in public wrkshps mnths befre DWP Bard apprved plan. Hence the Office f the Ratepayer Advcate had ample time t weigh in n the pricing recmmendatins. Accrding t the DWP, the rate increase frm the cmbined FiT150MW prgram will be $ /kWh, resulting in an average mnthly electric bill increase f $.04. An independent survey f 400 DWP ratepayers indicates that 57% wuld pay $1/m. r mre t expand in-basin slar. 76% felt DWP shuld d mre t expand use f lcal rftp slar. Prgram cvers nly100 MW f pwer, which is a small prtin f the 6000MW s f demand in LA. It fulfills the bjectives f its public plicy mandate: reach 33% renewable energy gal by 2020, develp in-basin slar, imprve LA ecnmy by creating lcal, high-waged jbs The starting tranche price f $.17 fr the first 20 MW f the 100MW prgram is an average f ther cmparable FiT Prgrams accrding t statistics supplied by UCLA Lwer prices can be acquired frm larger, imprted slar prjects such as the ne in Pal Alt ($.07 t $.09/kWH). Hwever there are prblems and hidden csts with these prgrams and they d nt fulfill all the requirements f the plicy mandate: require EIR s which can take years. If prjects fail t pass, Federal tax credits disappear in In-basin rftp slar installs quickly. imprting pwer requires building expensive infrastructure: transmissin lines, substatins ($50 millin each) and there s up t a 3% lss f pwer when brught in thrugh transmissin lines Arguments against the FiT Prgram The Office f the Ratepayer Advcate (begun in 2012) has bjected t this prgram since it was first aware f it and had less than ne day t cnsider the final terms f the prject befre it was cnsidered by the LADWP Bard in Jan It is nt a small prject. It represents $500 millin f pwer that is nt cmpetitively slicited but based n prices the industry claims it needs. Bidding is nrmal practice in this industry. The first tw runds (20 in Jan. 2013; $.16 in July 2013) f the FiT100 MW Prgram were versubscribed, indicating the price had been set t high and did nt reflect current market cnditins. Whlesale energy prices run $.03 t $.04/KWh. When yu include csts t maintain, distribute and transmit energy, embedded csts fr all pwer has been $.06 t $.07/kWh. The difference b/n the cst f retail and whlesale pwer generatin represents the funds used in maintaining aging infrastructure. Paying mre than twice that fr whlesale pwer cmprmises the stability f future slar prgrams and maintenance f the grid. The prgram shuld be fixed at the utset t insure that slar will cntinue t develp in LA and that future prgrams are nt hampered by knwn shrtcmings. Sme auctins can, and will fail due t unknwn variables causing lack f participatin, but this des nt mean the prcess is flawed. Auctins can be cnducted as desired, taking advantage f current market values.

7 Mney saved thru a bidding prcess can be used t fund additinal slar rebates fr net-metered slar (residential prgrams), r additinal runds f prcurement frm feed in tariffs. This in turn wuld generate mre slar prjects, and jbs ver a lnger perid f time. The reductin f the price frm $.17 t $.13 ver 2.5 years encurages efficiency and reduces csts quickly. Nt all FiT Prgrams are successful. Slar pwer is expensive. Successful prgrams have set tariffs based n installing & perating csts plus a reasnable prfit and include a gal f ecnmic develpment. Withut a guaranteed rate f return, it is difficult t get financing prjects are prjected fr lw incme LA areas where sun is ptimal fr slar, therefre creating jbs where they are mst needed. Prblems with the auctin mechanism: smaller cmpanies have truble cmpeting against larger, mre sphisticated cmpanies. The mre cmplicated the prcess, the greater the barrier t participatin. industry cllusin is pssible. industry prfessinals prefer cmpetitive bidding fr larger prjects and fixed pricing fr smaller (in-basin) prjects harder t arrange financing withut a prjected rate f return the auctin methd was tried and failed. Bidding was used t set the riginal price, which came in higher than the $.17 ultimately set, and the prgram was undersubscribed. slar pwer is affected by clud cver. Pwer is less vulnerable when distributed thrughut the DWP service area than if cming frm a single gegraphic surce. imprted slar creates fewer lcal jbs The disadvantages t setting prices instead f allwing cmpetitive bidding are: des nt allw the rate payer t have renewable resurces that reflect current market cnditins an verheated market can exhaust resurces set prices can make the industry reliant n subsidies lack f cmpetitin reduces incentives t efficiency tariff prfits benefit the installers and are nt passed n t the renters. excess FiT prgram csts are brn by the rate payer imprperly set fixed prices can lead t bm and bust cycles as in Spain Accrding t the Office f the Ratepayer Advcate, when asked their analysis f hw this wuld actually impact the cst per kwh f Tier #1 and Tier #2: OPA has nted that it is difficult t put a rate impact n such a bad precedent. It is hard t determine the full extent f unreasnable prcurement practices nce they start. This prgram csts abut $120 t $250 millin mre than it needs t, depending n many assumptins. One f thse assumptins has t d with market cnditins, which are better determined by bidding than estimating. Als, these cmmitments will be irrevcable fr 20 years. That financial inflexibility, at these whlesale price levels and this large size, cmbined with the many ther majr initiatives, has adverse cnsequences that are difficult t put int a rate impact analysis. 2

8 Synpsis f Articles and Submissins in Favr f the FiT 100 Prgram (as currently structured) FiT stands fr Feed in Tariffs which is the price the DWP is willing t pay fr slar energy supplied by businesses, schls, and multifamily dwellings frm panels installed n their buildings. On the website belw, are fact sheets, pwer pints, and articles n the disputed DWP s FiT 100 Prgram. Fr thse with limited time, I have tried t write a synpsis f the arguments s that we can vte this Wednesday night n whether r nt t supprt a suspensin f this prgram. SYNOPSIS:(FACT(SHEETS(((Cnsult(abve(website(fr(pwer(pint(discussins(and(DWP(websites)( I. LADWP(FIT(RATES COMPARABLE(PROGRAMS((See(attached(graph(frm(the(abve(web(site)( II. Clean(LA(Slar( Califrnia is required t get 33% f energy prtfli frm renewables by 2020N FiT Prgram develped by Ls Angeles Business Cuncil in cnjunctin with UCLA Luskin Schl f Public plicy, USC Prgram fr Envirnmental & Reginal Equity, & DWPN Prgram authrized by LA City Cuncil and DWP Cmmissin in January 2013 and will N OCreateN4500NjbsN OPwerN34,250NhusehldsN OGenerateN$500,000,000NinNprivateNinvestments,N$300,000,000NinNfederalNtaxNcreditsN OPlaceN½NfNtheNinstallatinsNinNslarN htnspts N(warmestNareasNfNLANwithNhighNslarNptentialNandNwhereN therenisnhighnecnmicnneed)n III.(((James(Brennan(:(Synpsis(f(talking(pints(in(respnse(t(Fred(Pickel s(presentatin(t(the(harbr( Alliance(f(NC s((items(2( (9(nly)( #2NAgreesNwithNFredNPickelNthatNFiTNPrgramNfavrsNvendrsNntNcustmersNbecauseNmultiOdwellingN prpertynwnersnarenntnrequiredntnpassnnnenergynsavingsntncustmers.nnthisnprblemnculdnben slvednbyn billncredits NandNtherNmeasures.( #3(LADWPNpurchaseNpriceNwasNbasedNnNanNaverageNfNanNauctinNbasedNpiltNprgramNwhichNwasN(40%N undersubscribed)nandnthenpurchasenpricendesnntnincludenthencstnnncnnectingninstallatinsntnthen grid.nnthesenrevenuesnwillncverndwp snprgramnadministratinnfees.( #4(FiTNenergyNpurchaseNratesNwillNntNriseNasNtheNcstNfNenergyNrisesN(5%/year).NNTherefreNtheseNratesN willnlknbetternverntime.( #5NFiTNPrgramNwasNfirstNsuggestedNinN2008NntNJan.NfN2013.( #6(and(8(Dr.NPickelNestimatedNfirstNthatNtheNprgramNwuldNcstN$100millinNverN20Nyears,NsixNmnthsN latenthenfigurenrsentn$230o300nmillinn(nwnitnisnatn$500millin).nnthendwpnandnanprivatenfirmnclaimn thatnthenfitnprgramnwillnbenanmneynmaker.nnfurthermre,nhisnfiguresndnntntakenintnaccuntn infrastructurensavingsnandnenergyndeliverynreliabilitynresultingnfrmninobasinnrftpnslar.nn (SubstatinsNareN$50millinNeach).NN( IfNheNisNwrriedNabutNratepayerNburdens,NheNshuldNbeNmreNcncernedNwithNtheNhighNcstNfNLADWPN salariesnttalingn$800millinnvernthennextn20nyears.( #7NDr.NPickelNclaimsNthatNweNcanNachieveNsameNcarbnNreductinNatN$.07NtN$.09/kWhNusingNlargeNscaleN prjectsnbringingnenergynfrmnexternalnsurces.nntherenareninherentnprblemsnwithnthesenprjects:(

9 \ theynarenriskynandnrequirenenvirnmentalnimpactnreprtsnwhichntakenyearsn \ requirenbuildingnexpensiventransmissinnlinesn \ 3%NfNpwerNlstNwhenNitNhasNtNbeNimprtedN \ pwernfrmnnengegraphicalnsurcenisnvulnerablentncludncver.nnsmallernarrays,n gegraphicallyndistributednthrughoutnthencitynarenanmrenreliablensurcen N ADDITIONAL(POINTS(SUBMITTED(BY(JOHN(BRENNAN( TheNFiTNprgramNisNtheNnlyNprgramNavailableNfrNcnd snandnmultiofamilynresidentsn SuspendingNtheNDWP snfitnprgramnisnntnnecessaryntnevaluatenthenprgram.n N SYNOPSIS:(REPORTS,(STUDIES,(ARTICLES( I.(( Survey(Cnducted(by(Fairbank(Maslin,(Maullin,(Metz(&(Assciates ( ( SampledN400NDWPNratepayersN 59%NwuldNlikeNtNseeNDWPNincreaseNelectricityNitNgeneratesNfrmNrenewablesN 76%NwantNDWPNtNexpandNrftpNslarN 57%NwillingNtNpayN$l.00/mnthNmreNtNincreaseNamuntNfNelectricityNLANgetsNfrNrftpNslarN 32%NwereNwillingNtNpayNmreNthanN$1.00/mnthNtNexpandNrftpNslarN II.(( Designing(an(Effective(Feed\In(Tariff(Prgram(fr(Greater(Ls(Angeles,((study(cnducted(by(UCLA(Luskin( Center(fr(Innvatin,(cmmissined(by(the(Ls(Angeles(Business(Cuncil,((Slar(Wrking(Grup.( ANFeedNInNTariffNisNaNplicyNthatNrequiresNaNutilityN(DWP)NtNbuyNslarNpwerNthatNresidents,Nbusinesses,NandNpublicN rganizatinsnprducenbyninstallingnslarnpanelsnnnrftps,nparkingnlts,nandnvacantnland. N ThisNstudyNbegunNinN2009NresultedNinNguidelinesNfrNtheNFiTO100NPrgramNDesign.( PurpseNfNtheNstudy:NNtNanalyzeNhwNbestNtNimplementNMayrNVillaraigsa snlngntermncmprehensiven slarnplannprpsingnanslarnfitnprgramnadministerednbynthendwpnfn150mwnandngv.nschwarzenegger sn executivenrdernmandatingnan33%nrenewablenstandardnbyn2020.nalsnsb1n70%nrenewablesngeneratedninn Califrnia.N SlarNpwerNfrmNFiTNprgramsNisNanNexpensiveNtypeNfNrenewableNenergy SNinN places wherenfeedoinn tariffsnarenadpted,nplicynmakersnplacenanpriritynnncreatingnlcalnhighowagednjbs,nsupprtingnlcalngreenn business,nandnexpeditiuslynmeetingnnrenewablenenergyngals.n SmeNprgramsNhaveNntNbeenNsuccessful SuccessfulNprgramsNhaveNset tariffsnbasednnnactualncstnfn installingnandnperatingnslar,nplusnanreasnablenratenfnreturn andnachieventhendualngalsnfnrenewablen energyngeneratinnandnecnmicndevelpment.n PliciesNenableNreginsNtNtakeNadvantageNfNtaxNbenefitsNandNsubsidiesNfrmNstateNandNfederalNslarN prgrams resultingninnanflwnfnfinancialnresurcesnintnthenregin.n TheNmstNsignificantNbarrierNtNslarNwnershipNisNecnmic TNfacilitateNwnership,NtheNrecurringNbenefitsN mustnbensufficientntnpaynbacknthensystemsncstsnandnprvidenanreasnablenreturnnnninvestment butnalsn predictablentnfacilitatenexternalnfinancing.n FiTNPrgramsNwrkNwellNbecauseNtheyN

10 N OAreNtheNfastestNwayNtNbringNcleanNenergyNnNlineNresultingNinNimmediateNenvirnmentalNandNecnmicN benefitsn N N N OExpandsNtheNslarNmarketN OReducesNecnmicNbarriersNtNwnershipNN OGuaranteedNtariffsNlwerNcstNandNaccessNtNfinancingN GermanyN:NprgramNbegunNinN1990.NNItNstalledNuntilN2000NwhenNlawsNallwedNtariffsNtNmveNwithNmarketN cnditinsnandnprductinncstsnandnrelaxednaccessntnthenprgram.nntariffsnwerenhighnenughntncvern installatinncstsnandnensurenanreasnablenprfit.nnrenewablesncstnhusehldsninn2008n$4.64/mnthnfn whichn6%nisnfrmnslar.nn117,000njbsnwerencreatednsincen2004ngeneratingn28.7nbillinneurninn2008.n (PpulatinNfNGermanyNisN81.8Nmillin,NCalifrniaN38Nmillin,N39,000Njbs)N Spain:NNprlyNdesigned,NinflexibleNFiTNPrgramsNledNtNaNbm/bustNcycleNmagnifiedNbyNtheNrecessin.N Sacrament:NNhasNaNcstNbasedNprgram/NecnmicNdevelpmentNntNaNcmpnentNinNgals.NNGalNwasNenergyN atnthenlwestncst.nnstartednjan.n2010.nnseemsnsuccessful.nnattractednlargernslarndevelpers.n IMPORTANT!NNPlicyNgalsNmustNbeNdecidedNfirst.NNFiTNprgramNdesignNfllwsNfrmNthisNdecisin.N CstNbasedNtariffsN(tariffsNbasedNnNtheNcstNfNinstallatin,NandNspecificNrateNfNreturn)NincentivizeNslarN energynandncreatenpprtunitiesnfrnlcalnemplyment.n ValueNbasedNtariffsNbasedNnNprevailingNmarketNpriceNfNelectricityNsetNbyNfssilNfuelNgeneratinN(negatives:NdN ntncverncsts,ndnntncnsidernreducednenvirnmentalncstsninnpricing,nlwnratenfnreturnnfrnprject sn risks psitives:nminimizenratepayernimpact,npricesnreflectncmpetitin,ncntributentnlngntermnstability)n CalifrniaNPublicNUtilitiesNCmmissin:NNRenewableNAuctinNMechanism:NdevelpersNsubmitNlngOterm,NnnN negtiablenbidsntnprcurednanmandatednquantitynfnenergy.nnbidsnmustncverncstsnandnincentivizedntnben efficient.n PrblemsNwithNAuctinNMechanism:N N OsmallerNcmpaniesNinNcmpetitiveNprcessNagainstNlarge,NmreNsphisticatedNcmpanies.NNTheNmreN cmplicatednthenapplicatinnprcess,nthengreaternthenbarrierntnparticipatin.n N OindustryNcllusinNisNpssible.N IndustryNprfessinalsNpreferNcmpetitiveNbiddingNfrNlargerNprjectsNandNfixedNpricingNfrNsmallerNinObasinN prjects.n CONCLUSION:NNIfNCalifrniaNisNtNrealizeNtheNaggressiveNgalsNestablishedNbyNplicyNmakers,NLANmustNhaveN aggressivenprgrams.nntherefrenthenpapernrecmmends:n ANCstNBasedNTariffNprgramNwhichNincludesNparticipatinNfrmNnnNprfitNslarNwners,NsmallNprjectN wners,nandnwhichncversncstsnandnprvidesnandependablenratenfnreturn.n III.(( Making(the(Market:(Multi\Family(rf\tp(slar(and(Scial(Equity(in(LA ((Visin(f(privately(funded,( publicly(incentivized(market(fr(multi\family,(rftp(slar,(reduces(wner/renter(utility(csts,(prvides( new(revenue(stream(fr(wners,(creates(jbs(fr(lcals.( Incentive:NANFitNprgramNpricedNatN24O26NcentsNperNKWhNwuldNcreateN300MWNfNpwerNtN30.000N husehldsnfnaveragensize.nnitnwuldncreaten4500njbsn(withnlcalnjbnrequirements)nandnreducednenergyn cstsntnrentersn(withnanrentersnbenefitnprgram).( IV.(( Slar(in(Suthland:(The(Benefits(in(Achieving(20%(Lcal(Slar(Pwer(by(2020 N ResultNinNcleanNairNandNreducedNglbalNwarming( SaveNwater:NreplacingN1200MWNfNpwerNgeneratedNfrmNnaturalNgasNplantsNsavesN435NmillinNgallnsNfN water.(

11 CreateNJbs:N1200NMWNfNpwerN=32,000NjbNyearsN(LAUSD sncurrentnprgramnsavesn$800,000/mnthnwhichn isnmneyntheyncannspendnnnmrenteachers)( V.(( In(L.A.(Getting(Paid(t(G(Green (by(catherine(green(((re:(the(clean(la(slar(aka( FiT(100(Prgram ( N N SlarNPrviderNGrupNplansNtNinvestN$50millinNinN17NprjectsNandNhireN30NmreNemplyeesNasNaNresultNfNtheN FiTNPrgramN PrgramNwillNhelpNmeetN25%NfNtheNstateNmandateNbyN2016.N TheNhpeNisNtNexpandNtheNprgramNfrmN150MWNtN600MWN 20O35NprjectsNareNinNlwNincmeN htnspts Nneighbrhds.N VI.(( KCET:(Expert(Gives(Thumbs(Up(t(LADWP s(clean(prgram (by(chris(clark( PrgramNwillNcverN100NMWNfNpwer,NsmallNprtinNfNttalN6000MW snfndemandninnla.nnapprvednbynjhnn Farrell,NfNtheNInstituteNfrNLcalNSelfNReliance.NN 17NcentsNisNaverageNfferingNcmparedNNtherNcitiesNandN states.nnusnttalnfitnindustrynisn132mwnwhichnisnequalntn1nfurohundrethnthensizenfngermany snprgram. ( N N

12 Arguments*Against*the*LADWP s**fit*100*prgram* Submitted*by* CAMDEN*COLLINS* Office*f*the*Ratepayer*Advcate* Frequently*Asked*Questins*Abut*The*FiT*100*Slar*Prgram* * Q:*What*is*the*FiT*100*prgram,*and*hw*des*it*differ*frm*residential*slar*net*metering?* A:#The#FiT#100#prgram#is#fr#the#sale#f#pwer#frm#intermediate#scale#prjects.#This#is#fr# prjects#up#t#600#times#larger#than#the#typical#single#family#residential#installatin.#the#fit#100# prjects#sell#their#entire#prject#utput#t#the#ladwp,#a#whlesale#transactin,#with#n#pwer#used# at#the#prject#site.# Q:*Why*des*the*ratepayer*advcate*recmmend*suspending*r*fixing*the*LADWP s*fit*100* prgram?* A:#It#is#ver#$500#millin#f#pwer#that#is#nt#cmpetitively#slicited,#but#is#being#awarded#based#n# the#prices#the#industry#said#it#needed#befre#current#market#cnditins#culd#be#evaluated.# Accepting#bids#is#nrmal#practice#in#bth#this#industry#and#in#public#cntracting.#LADWP s#prir# tw#runds#have#had#far#mre#participants#and#quantity#ffered#than#are#currently#being#awarded.## Giving#awards#t#thse#wh#bid#the#lwest#price#has#well#established#public#benefits.#Awarding#the# vlume#based#n#a#lttery,#because#the#industry#des#nt#like#and#des#nt#want#t#bid,#has#n# identified#ratepayer#r#public#benefits#when#participatin#is#this#rbust.# Q:*Was*nt*the*prgram*develped*with*this*in*mind?* A:#It#is#ften#said#that#many#stakehlders#spent#many#hurs#develping#the#FiT#prgram.#Wuld#yu# put#yur#huse#n#the#market#n#a#price#many#peple#discussed#last#year?#a#public#bidding#prcess# allws#the#ratepayer#t#have#renewable#resurce,#as#defined,#in#a#way#that#reflects#current#market# cnditins.## The#Office#f#Ratepayer#Advcates#has#bjected#t#this#prgram#since#it#was#first#made#aware#f#it.,# The#Ratepayer#Advcate#was#infrmed#f#the#final#versin#f#the#prgram##which#was#less#than#ne# business#day#befre#the#ladwp#bard#was#asked#t#cnsider#it.## Q:*This*prgram*is*s*small,*why*nt*just*let*it*finish*and*then*fix*it?* A:#Prjects#belw#150#kw#are#small,#and#it#is#a#plicy#ptin#t#allw#prjects#that#are#small#t#finish# as#initially#intended.#but#prjects#ver#150#kw#are#nt#small#and#spending#$500#millin#is#excessive.# The#principle#f#cmpetitive#awards#is#imprtant#if#slar#is#ging#t#cntinue#t#develp#in#Ls# Angeles#withut#fits#and#starts.#Prgrams#that#are#new#and#experimental#in#nature#shuld#be#fixed# as#sn#as#pssible,#s#that#subsequent#prgrams#are#nt#hampered#by#knwn#shrtcmings.## Q:*Wn t*ladwp*make*mney*selling*this*pwer*later?*

13 A:#N.#This#prgram#is#nt#like#net#metering,#where#a#retail#custmer#is#using#the#pwer.#Every#time# LADWP#pays#retail#prices#fr#whlesale#pwer,#they#erde#their#financial#capability#t#maintain#the# distributin#and#transmissin#wires#that#all#prducers#and#cnsumers#need.#whlesale#prices#in#the# shrt#run#have#been#3#t#4#cents/kwh,#dwp s#embedded#csts#fr#all#pwer#has#been#6#t#7# cents/kwh.#paying#mre#than#twice#that#fr#whlesale#pwer#further#cmprmises#the#stability#f# the#slar#prgrams#and#the#maintenance#f#the#grid.#the#difference#between#retail#and#whlesale# generatin#is#an#essential#gap#which#is#used#t#fund#the#aging#wires#infrastructure#bth#buyers#and# sellers#need.## Q:*Bidding*failed*when*it*was*tried.*Why*try*it*again?* A:#Because#the#DWP#FiT#100#prgram#has#successfully#attracted#a#large#amunt#f#participatin.# There#are#many#prly#designed#auctins#that#fail#fr#lack#f#participatin.#But#that#des#nt# necessarily#mean#that#bidding#des#nt#wrk#in#general.##many#ther#factrs#can#lead#t#failed# auctins.#finally,#it#shuld#nt#be#cnsidered#a#failure#if#30mw#was#put#ut#t#bid#and#nly#5mw#is# awarded.#such#an#auctin#can#be#dne#as#ften#as#desired,#t#ensure#reasnable#csts#f# prcurement#fr#the#ratepayers.# #Is#it#really#a# success #t#prtect#larger#prjects#frm#the#discmfrt#f#having#t#cmpete,#if#the# mney#saved#culd#have#been#used#t#fund#additinal#slar#rebates#fr#net#metered#slar,#r# additinal#runds#f#prcurement#frm#feed#in#tariffs?#that#wuld#generate#mre#slar#prjects#and# slar#jbs,#fr#a#lnger#perid#f#time.#the#mre#ften#bidding#is#used,#the#mre#all#can#bserve#the# price#trends#allwing#uncertainty#t#fall.## Since#there#is#nt#an#unlimited#amunt#f#funds,#why#nt#give#the#cheapest#prjects,#with#the#best# rf#tp#pprtunities,#a#merit[based#allcatin#f#the#feed#in#tariff#quantities#made#available?# # Other*arguments*fr*suspensin*taken*frm*UCLA*Luskin*Center:Reprt,#.** Designing*an* Effective*FeedUIn*Tariff*Prgram*fr*Greater*Ls*Angeles # Setting#prices:# 1.##can#exhaust#resurces# 2.##can#make#the#industry#reliant#n#subsidies# 3.##reduces#incentives#t#efficiency# 4.##tariffs#benefit#the#installers#and#are#nt#passed#n#t#custmers# 5.##cst#f#FiT#Prgrams#are#brn#by#the#ratepayers# 6.##can#lead#t#bm#and#bust#industry#cycles#as#in#Spain# #

14 Mtin t supprt a system-wide NC grievance and cmplaint prcess Agenda Item: GB Date: 17 September 2013 Prpsed By: Dug Fitzsimmns & Terry Gmes Full Prpsal The City Charter requires that NCs have a prcess fr hearing cmmunity grievances, but des nt specify what that prcess shuld be. As a result, each NC has develped its wn prcedures withut any right f appeal t a higher bdy. Unfrtunately, thse hme-grwn prcesses vary widely in effectiveness and fairness. There is als general cnfusin abut what cnstitutes a grievance (directed t an NC abut their actins and decisins) and what cnstitutes a cmplaint (directed t the Department f Neighbrhd Empwerment [DONE] abut a Charter vilatin that may result in NC decertificatin). Dug Fitzsimmns President Brian Kite Vice-President Terrence Gmes Treasurer Beth Ryan Secretary On the ne hand, grievances and cmplaints arguably are an imprtant public check n the actins f the NCs. Having a prcess that is unifrmly fair can strengthen the entire system. An appeal prcess wuld give Stakehlders an pprtunity t be heard in cases where an NC is unwilling t make acceptable changes. On the ther hand, the system is als plagued by serial grievers wh ften tie up NCs with endless spurius cmplaints. After much wrk and public cmment, DONE and the Bard f Neighbrhd Cmmissiners develped a prpsal fr reginal appeal panels. Each NC wuld have the pprtunity t first reslve its wn grievances. There wuld be n further appeal allwed beynd the reginal panels. Their system wuld als have DONE pre-screen grievances t make sure they are legitimate (see attached wrkflw). The NC Plan Review cmmittee and LANCC have als endrsed the plan. Prpsed Mtin That sectins f the City s Administrative Cde which tuch upn Neighbrhd Cuncil grievances and cmplaints prcedures be amended as fllws: I. That the grievance prcedure and the cmplaint prcess be merged int ne system; Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil PO Bx Ls Angeles, CA P: (310) F: (310) E: inf@srnc.rg srnc.rg II. III. That the Department f Neighbrhd Empwerment (DONE) establish a single set f prcedures with a reginal grievance panel empwered t render a final decisin n a grievance withut further right f appeal, which shall be based n the grievance plicy recmmendatins already made by DONE as reflected in its reprt dated Nvember 22, 2011, and cntained in Cuncil File Number ; That BONC and DONE develp a set f ptential cnsequences fr NCs wh d nt cmply with the reginal panel s recmmendatins (up t and including decertificatin) and that when applied, thse penalties be recmmended by DONE and apprved by BONC; City f Ls Angeles Certified Neighbrhd Cuncil

15 IV. That the reginal panels be cnducted in accrdance with the Brwn Act t ensure a public prcess, but that since they are nt curts f law, attrney representatin shuld nt be allwed; V. That stand-alne elements f the new prcedures that d nt require Administrative Cde changes be implemented within 90 days f this mtin. Cnsideratins Cmmittee review: (highly recmmended) Vtes Fr: 0 Against: Amunt previusly allcated in Cmmittee's wrking budget: (applies t funding mtins nly) $ Arguments fr: Helps reinfrce a sense f fairness, predictability and legitimacy within the grievance prcess and NC system as a whle. Will limit the number f nuisance cmplaints that seek nly t derail the prper functining f an NC. Arguments against: Fr prblems shrt f fraud r fiscal malfeasance, the prper crrective t Bard issues is an electin. The filters fr stakehlder grievances may be t restrictive; why limit the ability t petitin fr redress f grievances? Suth Rbertsn Neighbrhds Cuncil 05 Grievance system.dcx Page 2 f 2

16 Agenda Item 10b j/-/{)fi EDUCATION & NEIGHBORHOODS MOTION When a stakehlder files a cmplaint against the actines) taken by a Neighbrhd Cuncil, there is n system-wide standardized prcess fr handling that grievance. Furthermre, prcesses that d exist are established by the Neighbrhd Cuncil against which a grievance is filed, which leads many stakehlders t questin the validity f Neighbrhd Cuncil actins when it cmes t cntrversial issues. In thse circumstances, it is critical fr the integrity f the Neighbrhd Cuncil system that the cmplaints be handled swiftly, transparently and fairly. I THEREFORE MOVE that the Cuncil DIRECT the Department f Neighbrhd Empwerment, the City Attrney, City Administrative Officer and Chief Legislative Analyst t reprt back t Cuncil in 90 days with a plan fr the implementatin f a system f reginal cmplaint panels cmpsed f bard members f varius Neighbrhd Cuncils frm similar regins that will cnvene t address stakehlder and bard member grievances as-needed, and at the request f the General Manager fr the Department f Neighbrhd Empwerment. The reprt shuld cnsider guidelines fr panel selectin, implementatin and range f authrity. ~ Presented by: J~(tvv»> /.' f' //),'I. L" n ~!\:--\); 0()--tU'-\ PAUL KREKOluAN Cuncilmember, 2nd District Secnded by: ---'4-~~'Z...~------

17

18

19

20

21

22

23