SR 06:213 - Laserfiche WebLink

Council directed staff to pursue a combination of Options 3 and 4, and investigate the possibility of partnering with Livermore and other tri-valley cities in doing so. Council expressed less interest in Options 1,2 and 5 for a nurnber of reasons. Demonstration projects are costly and with the amount of funds set aside, the number ofprojects possible would be relatively few. In addition, the City has already invested in a significant demonstration project - Fire Station #4 was constructed with PV panels that generate energy used tor station operation. Increasing funds to GRID Alternatives was not pursued because they have not been able to use all of the funds that we've already provided. Creating and offereing City incentives seemed less productive than creating a program to help residents and others take advantage of the existing state and federal incentives (among the other support activities). With the goal of increasing PV projects in Pleasanton, Options 3 and 4 seemed to best leverage available city funds. Proposed Partnership City staff met with Livermore staff to discuss partnership options related to ajoint program in late Spring. Livermore was a little ahead of us in that they issued a Request for Proposals in early 2006, interviewed three companies, and selected Spectrum Energy, Inc., headed by Don Osbourne. While the approach under consideration by Livermore seemed a good match for us, we decided to interview Mr. Osbourne ourselves. That discussion was very positive and we agreed with Livermore's decision to select the firm for this project. (Because Livermore went through the same selection process that we would be required to use, we can join with them without repeating the effort.) Spectrum Energy prepared a proposed scope of work which staff from both Cities reviewed. In addition, staff from the City of Livermore asked the Local Government Energy Partnership (a subgroup of the Association of Bay Area Governments with energy expertise that provides energy related services to public agencies) to also review the scope of work. They did and offered comments and questions. Input from all three sources (City of Livermore staff, City of Pleasanton staff and Local Government Energy Partnership) was incorporated into the final scope of work. Currently, only the development of the program is under discussion and includes the following action steps: . Data gathering from the community, city staff, business leaders and professionals, solar industry representatives and others as identified by city staff via survey instrument and meetings . Analysis of data and feedback into a tailored program for our area . Presentation of a written report to the Cities that includes a detailed implementation plan, budget, and other requirements. Each participating City will receive a stand-alone document. Staff is pursuing a "turn-key" program that would require minimal ongoing staff involvement. The intent is to launch a new program without additional staffing and have the ability to modify the program should funding or interest change later. SR 06:213